View Single Post
Old November 11, 2019, 17:48   #44
W.E.G.
FAL Files Administrator
Silver Contributor
 
W.E.G.'s Avatar
 
FALaholic #: 1211
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 41,055
Little range report.


I shot the PA-10 with Federal Gold Medal 168.
I’d say it shot the FGM a little bit better than my TAC 41.1 / 168SMK.
But not by much. Definitely not enough to commend the Palmetto barrel.
I’ll post a couple of those targets shortly.

But first, I want to show y’all something about that TAC handload of mine fired from a different rifle.
Again, all firing at 200 yards, prone, sling-support only.

DPMS LR-308-T, unmodified except Geissele trigger and the UBR buttstock. Service rifle sling not shown in this pic.



This pic shows the 10-shot target.
I bracketed the actual target with a paper target that is the correct 600-yard-reduced-for-200, and
the Shoot-N-C target that has appeared in some of the previous target pics I’ve posted.

This is the kind of accuracy to which I’m accustomed, and which I require of any rifle I will use in competition.
The two lowest shots, were called low when fired. No crazy off-call shots like the PA-10 routinely sends.
The TAC load wasn’t “developed” for that rifle unless roughly matching 41.5 IMR4895 velocity constitutes “development.”



Some folks have commented that I should look at the l
oad. “Develop” a load that the gun likes. Sometimes it really is the load. I get that concept.

Can we agree that sometimes the barrel (or something else with the gun) is the root of the problem,
and not the ammunition? I truly believe it’s THE GUN in the case of the PA-10.
__________________
.
.
.

Ask me about the Mason-Dixon FAL Collectors Association.
W.E.G. is offline   Reply With Quote