View Full Version : RANGE REPORT! SUIT cam shoot out. (w/ Pics.) *Updated* 600Yd info now.

March 25, 2006, 21:12
I finally got to the range with 2 SUITS (1 British & 1 Izzy), 2 cams, actually 3, and all the other "stuff" I needed to do the comparison between the ".308" & the ".223" cams!
First the course of fire.
The only rifle was my frankenFAL, so there is no fire with the .223 round.
The same batch & type MilSpec ammo was used turing the test ( Lake City standard loads, not match).
All tests were done at 100 Yds. but with the SUITS zeroed to strike high at that distance for a 250/300 zero with the cam in the rear (short range) position, set from the ballistics tables for those rounds (55gr. 223 & 150 Gr .308)
2 rounds were fired to foul & warm the barrel.
5 rounds were fired slow, aimed fire from sandbags.
The SUIT was removed & re-installed.
5 more rounds were fired for a 10 round group. This was done to account for having to remove the SUIT to switch cams, & to eliminate failure to return to zero when re-mounting the SUIT.
The cam was then switched to the foreward (long range) position & the 5 round fired, remove & re-install, 5 more rounds fired drill was repeated.
I switched from the British (supposedly .308 cammed) sight to the Izzy (supposedly .223 camed) sight & repeated all of this including a quick clean of the barrel & 2 warming/fouling shots.
At the end of this part of the test I switched the Izzy & Brit cams to the opposite sights.
Both sights were zeroed again (for the high strike of the rounds at the 250/300 distance but shot @ 100 yds). Exactly the same as the first time.
The whole test, shooting, removing, re-installing cleaning Etc was repeated with the switched cams.
All round were fired with the same aiming point (the red marks) on the appropriate side of the target.
The raggedy hole way off to the left is from a tie wrap used to secure the target.

OK now the target explaination.
A large sheet of cardboard (roughly 3 feet square) was marked on the 2 halves.
There was an aiming point (the red square)
2 POI's again calculated to be the high strike of the .308 & .223 rounds with the differing zeroes, with the cams in the rear position, but calculated for 100 Yds.
2 more, this time the calculated POI's for the front settings of the 2 different rounds at the 450/500 distance.
The left offset for the SUIT was included in the POI/POV's for the 2 rounds.
A scale in inches was included, both Horizontal & vertical.
As each set of 5 rounds was fired the targets were marked with the groups produced.
There were 2 sets of targets used, and as both produced virtually identical results I've only included 1 pic of 1 target. The other one was with the cams switched between the Brit & Izzy sights, but there was no difference in the results.

OK what happened, you ask?

Well the vertical displacment of the 4 X 5 round groups was identical! There was no measurable difference between the 2 "different" cams!
The Izzy ".223" zeroed at 250/450 printed identically to the Brit ".308" zeroed at 300/500.
Just for kicks & giggles I put the 3 rd cam (unmarked, so I have no idea what it supposedly callibrated for) onto the Izzy sight & repeated the whole shebang, and again, there was no difference!

The weather was cool with a 0 to 20 mph wind gusting from about my 5 o'clock, I waitred for lulls in the wind before firing any rounds, so wind should not be a major factor in the grouping.
I had 3 "flyers" which I called during the test. these are marked with the "F" on the target. ( as if you can't find my goofs just by looking!:eek: )
A total of 95 round were fired, using 2 sights, 3 cams, and 1 rifle. 3 targets were produced, all of which are identical to the one in the pic attached.

CONCLUSION: Ther is no such thing as a ".223" or ".308" cam. They are all exactly the same & fully interchangable. The only difference is the way the zeroes are calculated for the differing trajectories of the 2 rounds. Actually, as I had the 3 Rd. cam installed & zeroed in the Izzy SUIT I prefer, I just left it in there! What more can I say. other than:
"MYTH BUSTED" There is only one cam!

March 25, 2006, 21:29

A commendable effort, much appreciated. I've often wondered about the cam issue. Perhaps there *is* a calculated ballistic difference; but for all practical purposes, they are the same.

Well Done, Sir;

March 25, 2006, 21:46
Next: The Carl Gustav SUIT cam test!
:eek: :devil: :? :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

March 26, 2006, 03:03
Originally posted by brownknees
Next: The Carl Gustav SUIT cam test!

There are untold millions of us out here awaiting those results with baited breath!:rofl: :rofl:

In all seriousness: If you have proved that there is no difference between the cams used for .308 and .223, you will have put that BS issue to rest, for good.

The next challenge will be to convince everyone that has been looking for the "correct" cam (as opposed to the "correct" decal) to quit tilting at windmills.

Thank you for your efforts.

March 26, 2006, 09:55
good work! thanks for adding to the knowledge base.

March 26, 2006, 10:21
New marketplace thread?
"WTB Carl Gustav sticker for SUIT":shades:
I wonder what zero they have printed on that?:rofl:
Seriously I think the truth is out there. Now I'm thinking maybe I'll just play with the 2 zeroes to get the SUIT to print on at 100 yds (where I shoot a lot, & then find out where the other zero ends up. When I get that figured out I'll do a follow up.

March 27, 2006, 09:14
Great work!

We really appreciate the time and resources you spent in this evaluation.

Now I'm really wanting SUIT of my own. Maybe I can dig up the $$ soon...

Thanks again,


March 30, 2006, 23:30
Nicely done , thanks.

April 26, 2006, 21:25
Just for the sake of being complete.
If you are curious how the external ballistics of this work out try this thread.

January 12, 2007, 16:43
That's a well designed experiment. Nice work.

I think that most bullet trajectories are very similar, regardless of calibre. This is why scopes that have "ballistic" reticles work so well. For example, Swarovski has the TDS, Burris has the "ballistic plex", and even Zeiss has a similar range compensating reticle. Each line on the reticle compensates for bullet drop at 100 yard increments, regardless of caliber, bullet weight, etc., and each caliber is within a couple of inches of the others. I have the Burris and have used it for .308 and .223, and it is dead on at least out to 300 yds.

Check this link for better explaination:

May 15, 2007, 17:05
Update to the cams information.
I finally got to get to a 600Yd range.
Checked zero at 200 & 300 Yds with the cam in th rear (short range) position.
Flipped the cam to the front (long range) position & engaged steel plate targets at 600 yds. There was no correction applied after the short range zero was checked.
Dead bang on.:biggrin:
This thing really does work.
I know it should in thoery, but now it's tested in practice and I have high confidence in it.
Sorry it took so long, 600Yd shoots are getting harder & harder to come by.

Load was a 165Gr Sierra HPBT at 2650FPS.

December 08, 2008, 03:12
BK thanks for the info. I had to get a SUIT just cuz it makes my B.U.G. look even more menacing! But along the same SUIT info do you know of a source for a LED replacement for the Tritium? There is supposed to be one out there that fits into the light tube to illuminate the reticle in low light conditions.

December 08, 2008, 03:15
If you need 600+yd ranges come to WY. Lander has a gong @ 700yds &1K; Cody has gongs at 700, 1K and farther. Advantage of no people.

December 08, 2008, 11:32
Originally posted by chiefd
BK thanks for the info. I had to get a SUIT just cuz it makes my B.U.G. look even more menacing! But along the same SUIT info do you know of a source for a LED replacement for the Tritium? There is supposed to be one out there that fits into the light tube to illuminate the reticle in low light conditions.
Candlepower Forums has them infrequently.
2mmX11mm is probably the best compromise size. The original 5mm "teardrop" is no longer available. If you can find a 3mm diameter that's even better.