Got it, thanks. Guess they wouldn't have cared for my former Sig 225 .45's grip either then...which is too bad, i've only owned four handguns, but that was by far the favorite.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGjethro
Printable View
Got it, thanks. Guess they wouldn't have cared for my former Sig 225 .45's grip either then...which is too bad, i've only owned four handguns, but that was by far the favorite.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGjethro
What do you chaps think of this:
http://www.tech-sights.com/AK%2029.jpg
Tech Sight rear aperture sight for Yugo AK-47
I've been considering one of these. It nearly doubles the sight radius.
Get both.
If that’s not possible, my vote is the Kimber. Both are great but the Les Baer to me is like a collector’s handgun. I’d hate to take it shooting, camping, etc. It wouldn’t be my daily shooter, I’d want to pass it on to my great grandchirren. I will own their 1911 some day.
Jer, nice sights. I have pop-up rear flip sights on my ARs but never thought about mounting such a thing on my AK.
To the gun show! This weekend at the South Towne Expo Center!
Helping a friend through the 1911 dillema. We're looking at the STI series at www.dawsonprecision.com If you want a hi-cap .45, the STI 2011 line will get you there. Fair warning, must have big hands.
Also looking at the Ed Brown guns and Wilson Combat.
Saw a Kimber Elclipse Custom II yesterday that was very nice. Too bad they are made in New York.
Is even a single stack Kimber outlawed in Cali? Figured the double stack, hi caps 2011 series was, but a traditonal 1911??
http://www.kimberamerica.com/images/..._custom_II.jpg
front serrations look whack imo... and do you ever really need them?
Actually, some instructors teach a technique to move the slide to see if the gun is loaded using the front serations. If you are right handed, the left hand comes under the gun in front of the trigger, and with the thumb on the left side, index and middle fingers on the right, move the slide back a half-inch or so to check the weapon.
Personally, I've never used it, but some do. All but one of my 1911's are slick on the front.
Favorite serrations are on the S&W Performance Center .45's. They are cut in like fish scales.
Ken
Lots of bucks for a 1,500 round gun with finish wear. Look around on www.gunbroker.com and www.gunsamerica.com and see what you find.
Right now is a buyer's market on used guns. Lots of folks parting with stuff to make ends meet.
If you get that, post your opinion. I have an ad for that ripped from a magazine but I have not ordered one yet. I really need a tool to drift the front sight as I am off about 4" to the right at 100 yards. Hopefully the new sight has windage also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jer
They have windage only and windage and elevation. I ordered the windage adjustable only since I can always adjust elevation up front. It should be getting here in a couple days.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGjethro
I also want to get an actual flash suppressor for the AK. I've got a Vortex on my .308 which reduces the flash down to zero, but I can't justify blowing $90 for one to put on an AK. Looking at a YHM Phantom instead.
I have the vortex on my AK, but I felt it was worth it since it is a nice machined receiver model, and not stamped metal. Looking at the photo more closely, does the rear sight mount to the dust cover? I hope not since they are kind of loose on top of the gun.
Interesting, the AK sight replaces the rear guide rod assembly, then adds a dust cover. Not sure it's that stable.
do shotguns count???
Unless they are .410's!!! Anything that goes bang counts.Quote:
Originally Posted by bitchtits
particularly with your face right behind the assembly and dust cover... unless you spray semi-automatic gunfire from the hip like they do in Hollywood.Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen
Parvo, I do not get your point. Is it about safety, accuracy, or hip shooting?Quote:
Originally Posted by Parvo
The rod guide seems more stable than the dust cover. I used to have a red dot zero magnification sight on my gun. I removed it because the scope mount wrapped around the dust cover and had to be removed to remove the dust cover.
Jer, if you get the rear sight, please post your opinion of it. This has kind of renewed my interest in my AK.
Just got the Tech Sight install done.
Minus:
-it's not "drop in". I had to grind the reciever cover a bit to get it to fit. You also have to remove the original rear sight which is a pain in the ass.
-instead of pushing one pin and depressing the little lever at the back of the reciever cover, you now have to push in two opposing pins. They are small and you can't push them both in with just your fingers. So field stripping is a bit more difficult, tho probably not as as bad as a side-mount scope base. You can do it - it's just a little more of... a pain in the ass.
Plus:
-the sight is solid. If there is any woble, there is a set-screw to snug everything up. I didn't have to use the set screw. The sight is separate from the dust cover.
-I like the aperature (I usually prefer aperatures to blade-type sights).There are two aperatures you can flip between: short range and a higher long-range.
Iffy stuff:
- I think if you were a really tall gangly guy (long LOP) your eye would end up too close to the aperature. Fits me fine. This is on a Yugo M70AB2 underfolder.
I haven't shot it yet. I hate the original blade sight. It's not so much that it's a blade sight - I've got a blade on my K-31 and like it fine - it's the ultra-short sight radius. I don't like electronic do-dads, so the Tech Sight seems like a good alternative. Like I said - it's solid. Zero play. It looks at least as durable as the original sight.
Thanks for the info. I will look at this sight soon. I am with you about the short sight radius. Even though these guns a sloppy in their tolerances compared to bolt guns, their intrinsic accuracy probably is better than most shooters can do with open sights, me included.
Another question. Have you heard of under or side folding stocks for milled receiver guns? Whenever I see them they are for stamped receivers.
My Yugo has a milled reciever. I'm sure Tapco sells a folding stock (or at least a telescope) for pretty much any fixed stock AK. I've seen a lot of nicer stock options from other companies as well.
Besides the short sight radius, I think one of the reasons AKs have a rep for inaccuracy is the steel cased ammo most guys shoot. Brass makes quite a difference (or maybe it's that Wolf is sloppy in their metering). Plus a lot of people who just don't know how to shoot own AKs. I suppose that could be said of ARs as well.
Finally got a "real" scope on my sig 556, a IOR 2.5-10 with the mildot based reticle, pretty cool how the ranging and everything works with the mildot system, although I'm still learning it.
250 and 300 yard targets can be seen if you look close. Fun shit.
http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z...s/IMG_2220.jpg
Oh and jer, i think ak's rep for inaccuracy comes from combat in 3rd world countries where the guys with ak's haven't cleaned them since before the guy's with ar's (or their rifles) were born.
not to mention most people who shoot ak's don't know how to shoot.
But we all agree that the AK is not as accurate as the AR15/M4, right?
No guns in my house other than air rifles and paintball guns, but how many of you have fired a Browning 50 cal from the waist of a WWII B17 bomber?
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1271856378
My "war face"
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1271856552
In reality it was non firing, but it was a mind blowing experience imagining what it must have been like.
Lots of big guns on a B17:
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1271856749
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1271856883
http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n...g?t=1271856955
AR's > AK for accuracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
I don't care for AK's that much, but they are very dependable and low maintenance. I'll still go with my AR's due to the flexibility of the platform and adding furniture and such.
I shot the AK with the new Tech Sight mounted toady. Way better than the stock blade. I'm very glad I went this route instead of the Ultimak rail/Aimpoint route. This is plenty accurate and way cheaper. AKs may not be as inherently accurate as ARs, but they are more accurate than many give them credit for.
Yes. For the most part the AR shoots better than the AK. Given that the open sights limit the bench rest long range of both guns, the difference becomes less obvious. How many AK's have you seen with a scope like Leroy's? If you found an accurate AK, it might warrant such good optics, but is that why you would buy such a gun? As a type, AK's are passable, but I am sure there are exceptional shooters in that group. I have bolt and falling block single magnums for long range accurate shooting and an AK and mini 14 for fun in the desert. The Mini 14 does not warrant the 3x9 nikon on it though. The next gun on the list is a Sig 556, A Para or maybe the new Ruger. Not sure the Ruger is worth the big price.Quote:
Originally Posted by zion zig zag
Jer, I went to the Tech-sight website today. Do you get the ribbed dustcover shown on their guns and is the sight all metal?
Mini 14 and accurate do not need to be used in the same sentence. Best I ever got out of mine was about a 6" group at 100 yards.
Mine is not that bad, but 2.5-3" @ 100 yard groups with a high magnification scope is disappointing. Take it to 200 yards and a hit on a clay pigeon target is chance. I like my bolt and single shot guns which group around a quarter or smaller.Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen
Back to the real thing.
The Plinkers. Top to bottom
Sako TRG-42 .338 Lapua Magnum, Leupold 8.5x25 Optics
Remington Police Sniper Special .308 Winchester, Leupold 6x12 optics, tuned by Robar
Socom AR-15 custom Build, JT Distributing 1" bull barrel, match trigger
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...g?t=1272139498
1911 Collection
Top left then clockwise.
STI 2011 Custom build in .38 Super, Robar tuned, BarStow barrel & bushing, STI custom sights, Dawson Precision front sight,
Remington Rand 1911, US Property Marked WWII original.
Kimber Custom Royal, custom tuned, checkered front strap,
Wilson Combat, custom build, lightened frame and slide, bobbed grip, three dot sights
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...g?t=1272139686
Down the tube.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...g?t=1272139881
[QUOTE=TNKen;2843720]Back to the real thing.
The Plinkers. Top to bottom
Sako TRG-42 .338 Lapua Magnum, Leupold 8.5x25 Optics
Remington Police Sniper Special .308 Winchester, Leupold 6x12 optics, tuned by Robar
Socom AR-15 custom Build, JT Distributing 1" bull barrel, match trigger
/QUOTE]
Wow, you have some serious money invested in those rifles. Very nice
Hell, that's an easy $10k worth of 1911s sitting there.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGjethro
Dear Ken,
Thank you.
Love,
TGR Gun nuts
How do you like the Sako?Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen
I'm in the market for a .338 Lapua, and would be interested to hear your opinions.
What ammunition do you use?
Yep and yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGjethro
Ken - I thought you were selling the TRG 42? Man that's a lot of magnification - did that scope come with the rifle?
Shot a Barrett m99 the other day - those aren't as bad as I thought they'd be. Still would go for a .338 Lapua mag if I had the $$ tho. There are tons of guys around here with .50's - the longest I ever see most of them shooting is 300 yds.
I'm aslo putting a no-mod recoil pad on the K-31. That thing's killin' me.
The Sako is probbly the nicest, most well built rifle I have ever owned. I have only fired it once, and it was very nice. Just haven't found the time yet to get it out. Between ski season and coaching club volleyball, not many weekends. But, both are over here in the south, so it will get some exercise shortly. I got the gun, bipod, muzzle break, scope and scope rings, range finder, cleaning supplies, together with the drag bag and about 250 rounds of ammo in a pack for a little over $6k. There was over $1,000 of custom loaded ammunition.
Go over to the snipe's hide website to read about guys playing with the .338. Most use the 250 grain Scenar bullets. It seems that depending on the twist of the barrel, the 300 grains don't stabalize that well.
The scope is pretty cool. Crank it up and you can watch your heart beat by the jump of the reticle.
Bad thing on the .338 LM, it is very, very expensive unless you are going to reload. If you aren't going to shoot it a lot, not much problem. I got the ammo with the gun, but did pick up 20 rounds of Lapua, which was $95. It is a compromise between the .308 and .50 BMG. Rated at a 1,600 yard gun. Same problem here, I only have nearby access to about 300-400 yards. Closest 1,000 yard range is 2 hours away. It does pack a punch on the receiving end, so if you get a light, hunting type gun, make sure you are well protected on the shoulder when you shoot it. Make sure you get a good muzzle brake as well.
I had a Barrett 82-A1 for a while. Bought it used as a complete package that was a refurb from guns delivered to Norway for demo. Lot of fun, very poor accuracy with ball ammo. I took it out to the range once and put a few shots down range. Spent 2 weeks at the chiro trying to get the range of motion in my shoulder back. And I'm over 200lbs. There are better muzzle brakes than Barrets that tame the recoil better. Traded it to get a 1919 Browning.
Don't tell the wife about the 1911's!!!!
New question. I have a P14 and Remington 1100 for home defense. I leave the assault rifles in the safe for PR reasons. We have a bear problem here, with a lot of house break ins, and I am upping my ammo. I cut a marred 3" 1100 barrel to 18.75, and want to use 3" slugs and OO buck. I have not shot the barrel yet. Any opinions on the reliability of the short barrel? I regret not cutting it to 21".
As a 30", 3" magnum barrel, it used to cycle all loads down to 1 1/8 OZ field loads reliably. I am also putting a mag extension on it giving me 6-7 of 2 3/4 or 3" shells.
holy crap what a quiver Ken, geez you need to go someplace really open with thing to explode. I have some ideas...
Thanks. Yeah, outta move west, but Tennessee does have pretty liberal gun laws and a mandatory "shall sign" law for Class III stuff.
I may do a set on the wheelies next.
I didn't mean the .50 guys around here can't find the range - I mean they don't fire longer than 300 yds. They have the range available to them - they just don't use it. The only guys who are ever on the 600 meter range are shooting .308.Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen
The .50s are fun just from a pure destruction standpoint, but other than that I can think of about a hundred rifles I want more (one of them being a Sako 85 G Wolf). They wieght 25 lbs, they're super expensive to shoot and they're not really that accurate. Granted the only guys I've talked to own Barretts, Armalites and one guy had a Bohica, but they can only get them to shoot 1.5 MOA at best. For $3000 + just for the rifle it doesn't make sense. I've been drooling over the TRG 42 for awhile, but I keep telling myself it's something I don't need at all (which is true). My .308 is fine out to about 800 meters and I'm working on a load with a 175 gr SMK to maybe push it out to 1000, but that's it for around here. Plus 1000 + meters is a lot of walking and I'm not even sure you can hear steel smack at that range. Actually the rifle I've been having the most fun with lately is the Swiss K31 I picked up a month ago (except for the steel buttplate kicking my ass).
Do you actually shoot that?Quote:
Originally Posted by TNKen