AR Accuracy Expectations

[BamaMike]

The best groups I've been able to get out of a chrome-lined "milspec" barrel was 0.50" average at 50 yards using Black Hills 77 gr HP and a 9x scope. Bipod on the front, sandbag under the rear. Rifle in question was a BCM RECCE 14 which is a 14.5" barrel with a Troy TRX free-float rail.

In my experience XM193 is good for 2" groups at 100 in chrome-lined barrels. Some folks report getting tighter groups down to 1.25" or so but I have not found this in the guns I've tried it with.

While the AR has certainly come a long way, and can be made to shoot extremely accurately with the right ammo, barrel, and shooter, if your intent for the gun is to shoot gnat's-ass groups I think you bought the wrong one. The setup you describe may be capable of the kind of groups I got with the BCM, but I don't frankly know why you'd bother worrying about it. If your intent is to sit in a static position and try to make holes as closely as possible to one another I think there are probably better choices out there, if you stick with the AR at all.

Thanks for the input Rob. I do understand what you are saying and also the limitations of the platform. Like everyone else, well at least some, I am just trying to hit the target. Of course I would like my rifle to be capable of making a doughnut out of a quarter on the moon, but that would be as unrealistic as the analogy. On the other hand I hear feats claimed where people make 500m shots with an iron sights using milspec ammo. Then I look at my target at 100 yds. and just shake my head in shame. Again, not really (not shame), but I do wonder why my weapon seems to send rounds all over the place and question if something is wrong. I also know that these claims are the exception (I think) to the rule, but I would like to improve the score, so to speak.

Again, I’m not whining about the accuracy of the weapon, ammo, myself, or the fairness of life in general; I am just soliciting input from those of you with much more experience behind the weapon. My round count is around 900, so I am a real greenhorn when it comes to this and I know it. I will hopefully laugh at this post when I am down the road (experience wise) but I honestly hope that this kind of discussion can also help someone who is asking the same kind of questions.

From what you state and the other opinions heard here, I have concluded that my accuracy is attributable to the ability of the gun, ammo, and the shooter. All of them can be improved to some degree but there is no magic answer. I suppose I was looking for something that was not there and you can attribute it to hearing all those claiming they have “tack drivers.” I am starting to hate that term… LOL!

Thanks for the comments; I really do appreciate the input.

-Mike

[rob_s]

Most shooters, like most fisherman, golfers, etc., are liars. Not necessarily maliciously or even consciously. Ask a hunter the distance to his last kill and he'll tell you "X yards". Ask his guide and he'll tell you "x/2 yards". I have heard some crazy claims out of people re: their gun/ammo/shooting ability only to find it fall far short on the range (this applies to both accuracy and speed, BTW).

I think a lot of guys go through something like this.
They buy an AR. They're not really sure why other than "I always wanted one". Maybe they go on a forum and post "which AR should I buy" but with zero qualifiers and so everyone suggests an M4. The thing is, if you want to shoot dimes at 200 yards, the M4 ain't the right tool for it. The other thing is, many guys have no idea what they want to do with the gun, and even if someone replies to their query with "what do you want to do with it and how much do you want to spend?" they get vapor-locked and respond back with something like "uhhh, shoot stuff?"

so then the guy gets his gun, goes out and shoots it, and how he feels about it is going to depend entirely on what kind of shooting he's now doing and his prior frame of reference. I came to the AR from handguns, so for me the trigger was a dream, the accuracy was unbelievable, the speed at which I could shoot was amazing, etc. A guy with a bolt-action rifle and hunting background may hate the trigger and believe the gun to be inaccurate. An IPSC grandmaster may find it agonizingly slow compared to his race gun. etc. If the IPSC guy buys a 24" stainless bull barrel and then tries to run & gun at short range he's likely further hampering his use. If the hunter/benchrest guy buys a 16" M4 he's probably not maximizing the platform's potential.

The modularity of the AR is one of it's greatest strengths, but it also makes choices when you're starting out extremely difficult. You CAN buy an AR, even a relatively short/compact one, that will shoot sub-1 MOA with good ammo and a good shooter. The M4 isn't it, generally speaking, but it's a smoking fighting gun, and works really well at CQB-type competitions.

Something else that I've seen in the past is the "hunter" that buys the M4 and then takes it out and benches it to "see what it can do". He feeds it Wolf ammo, rests the plastic handguards on a tree limb, and gets upset at the accuracy compared to his hunting rifle. While this is rife with issues, what I've found more than once is that the guy never has really sat down and benched his hunting rifle, and if he does he's supremely upset that Grandad's Remington 700 does 2" groups at 100 too!

Not saying any of this applies to you, just rambling I guess. Anytime accuracy issues/discussions with the M4 come up it's important for the respondents to take the pulse of the original poster to figure out their frame of reference as well as their desires and needs.

[BamaMike]

Most shooters, like most fisherman, golfers, etc., are liars. Not necessarily maliciously or even consciously. Ask a hunter the distance to his last kill and he'll tell you "X yards". Ask his guide and he'll tell you "x/2 yards". I have heard some crazy claims out of people re: their gun/ammo/shooting ability only to find it fall far short on the range (this applies to both accuracy and speed, BTW).

I think a lot of guys go through something like this.
They buy an AR. They're not really sure why other than "I always wanted one". Maybe they go on a forum and post "which AR should I buy" but with zero qualifiers and so everyone suggests an M4. The thing is, if you want to shoot dimes at 200 yards, the M4 ain't the right tool for it. The other thing is, many guys have no idea what they want to do with the gun, and even if someone replies to their query with "what do you want to do with it and how much do you want to spend?" they get vapor-locked and respond back with something like "uhhh, shoot stuff?"

so then the guy gets his gun, goes out and shoots it, and how he feels about it is going to depend entirely on what kind of shooting he's now doing and his prior frame of reference. I came to the AR from handguns, so for me the trigger was a dream, the accuracy was unbelievable, the speed at which I could shoot was amazing, etc. A guy with a bolt-action rifle and hunting background may hate the trigger and believe the gun to be inaccurate. An IPSC grandmaster may find it agonizingly slow compared to his race gun. etc. If the IPSC guy buys a 24" stainless bull barrel and then tries to run & gun at short range he's likely further hampering his use. If the hunter/benchrest guy buys a 16" M4 he's probably not maximizing the platform's potential.

The modularity of the AR is one of it's greatest strengths, but it also makes choices when you're starting out extremely difficult. You CAN buy an AR, even a relatively short/compact one, that will shoot sub-1 MOA with good ammo and a good shooter. The M4 isn't it, generally speaking, but it's a smoking fighting gun, and works really well at CQB-type competitions.

Something else that I've seen in the past is the "hunter" that buys the M4 and then takes it out and benches it to "see what it can do". He feeds it Wolf ammo, rests the plastic handguards on a tree limb, and gets upset at the accuracy compared to his hunting rifle. While this is rife with issues, what I've found more than once is that the guy never has really sat down and benched his hunting rifle, and if he does he's supremely upset that Grandad's Remington 700 does 2" groups at 100 too!

Not saying any of this applies to you, just rambling I guess. Anytime accuracy issues/discussions with the M4 come up it's important for the respondents to take the pulse of the original poster to figure out their frame of reference as well as their desires and needs.

Funny when I read your comment; “…many guys have no idea what they want to do with the gun, and even if someone replies to their query with "what do you want to do with it and how much do you want to spend?" they get vapor-locked and respond back with something like "uhhh, shoot stuff?"”

Frankly, I have no purpose to have the weapon beyond just going out and enjoying the act of shooting it. To be honest punching holes in paper is boring and I have to discipline myself to spend the time to do it. The boy does come out and I start picking of targets on the berm behind the targets (yes, just to see if I can hit them). These departures of discipline are the most enjoyable aspects of shooting and imagine if there was a range with multiple dynamic targets at various ranges I would lose much more money in the form of ammunition. So, my answer to the question of why - to have fun.

Nevertheless, whether my stint in the military or the years spent trying to become mature are responsible for my discipline at the range, it exists and I chase the little bull’s-eye at 100 yds relentlessly. The simple fact that I chase it is the crux of this conversation and my desire to understand what variables I need to focus on. More to the point is to what variables I can tweak to find the best marriage of technology to technique. I am almost afraid that I would lose interest when (or if) I master the art of hitting that elusive bull’s-eye! LOL.

The comments here have really helped me to understand that my situation and experiences are not unique and that really has helped greatly. For your responses and those who have offered similar advice I cannot thank you enough as it really signifies the difference in mentality of those who frequent this board. I find the respect exhibited here to be refreshing.

As far as my desires go, I must admit that I am as much a fan of the machine as I am what it can do. Perhaps it may sound strange but I really love the aesthetics of the rifle in almost all its different forms and functions. I have different weapons and many favorites but there has always been something special with the AR and have been hooked since I built my first one in the early 80’s. I just love em…

Okay, now you got me rambling.

- Mike

[ICANHITHIMMAN]

If you just spend more time with the IRONS you may get the hang of them. Its hard if you have the wrong form and getting the right site picture is esential to shooting good groups. 2" at 100 yards is real good shooting as the other guys said.
I had a wilson combat ut15 that would shoot 1/4" at 100 yards with black hills ammo but my current rifle a LMT MRP will only hold 1" on avarage at the same distance with SS109. If you have a friend in the MIL have them show you the basics they
tought in the service.

[BamaMike]

If you just spend more time with the IRONS you may get the hang of them. Its hard if you have the wrong form and getting the right site picture is esential to shooting good groups. 2" at 100 yards is real good shooting as the other guys said.
I had a wilson combat ut15 that would shoot 1/4" at 100 yards with black hills ammo but my current rifle a LMT MRP will only hold 1" on avarage at the same distance with SS109. If you have a friend in the MIL have them show you the basics they
tought in the service.

I practiced a bit with the irons, and while I can hit targets out to 100 yds (range limit), I do not like them. I am comfortable using them, but they are less precise than I would like. Now don't get me wrong, they have their place and if I was practicing close quarters I would use them (probably along with a red dot). However, I am interested in more precision type shooting and I know I am pushing the limits of the weapons capability. As far as stance, I am shooting from a bench and have a good sight picture, so doubt that is an issue. Not that I cannot learn anything new about proper posture, just doubt it is a major contributor.

What I find interesting in these conversations is how much I am learning or more accurately (no pun intended), how different the perspective is for different types of engagement. Like the use of a red dot and sights for close quarters. I have always thought an ACOG would be great for close and far, but now can understand where one could be less than ideal. I also see that my 16" does not seem to fit too well in the big picture, as it is not a great SPR or that great of an M4 clone. Kinda seems overdressed for a street party, yet not quite dressed enough for the formal affair. Of course, I am not employing it as a battle rifle but I can see why some choices are made for the field. Interesting...

- Mike

[Aragorn]

I also see that my 16" does not seem to fit too well in the big picture, as it is not a great SPR or that great of an M4 clone. Kinda seems overdressed for a street party, yet not quite dressed enough for the formal affair.
- Mike

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Even if accuracy is your main goal, there are people out there getting .75" groups at 100 yards with 12.5" and shorter barrels (think Noveske's). Also bear in mind that the SEALs came up with the 16" recce for a combination of increased lethality over the standard M4 and better handling characteristics than their Mk 12 SPR's.

I don't think you're giving up anything with your 16". As for me personally, I wouldn't go any shorter unless I was building a dedicated room clearing rifle. Also IMHO, I think if you need more range/accuracy/stopping power than you can get from a 16" barreled AR, you're getting into territory where a larger caliber may possibly serve you better.

[Paulo_Santos]

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Even if accuracy is your main goal, there are people out there getting .75" groups at 100 yards with 12.5" and shorter barrels (think Noveske's). Also bear in mind that the SEALs came up with the 16" recce for a combination of increased lethality over the standard M4 and better handling characteristics than their Mk 12 SPR's.

I don't think you're giving up anything with your 16". As for me personally, I wouldn't go any shorter unless I was building a dedicated room clearing rifle. Also IMHO, I think if you need more range/accuracy/stopping power than you can get from a 16" barreled AR, you're getting into territory where a larger caliber may possibly serve you better.

I took my LMT 14" 6.8 SPC (Chrome lined barrel) that was shooting 1.5 MOA AT BEST, to a class in NC last year and I kicked butt with it out to 400 yards using a 1x6 scope. There is PRACTICAL ACCURACY and there is BENCHREST ACCURACY.

[BamaMike]

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Even if accuracy is your main goal, there are people out there getting .75" groups at 100 yards with 12.5" and shorter barrels (think Noveske's). Also bear in mind that the SEALs came up with the 16" recce for a combination of increased lethality over the standard M4 and better handling characteristics than their Mk 12 SPR's.

I don't think you're giving up anything with your 16". As for me personally, I wouldn't go any shorter unless I was building a dedicated room clearing rifle. Also IMHO, I think if you need more range/accuracy/stopping power than you can get from a 16" barreled AR, you're getting into territory where a larger caliber may possibly serve you better.

My assertion was the same (when I was shopping) and I settled on a 16" mid length for the added barrel. I know there is not much gain except a little bit of velocity but it seemed reasonable at the time. I know I can get more accuracy if I upgrade the barrel to something like a Noveske, Lothar, Rainier, Krieger, etc... and I probably will for another build. I suppose I am just looking to find the sweet spot for this barrel and if it is 1 or 2" MOA then at least I will know... Thanks to the advice from you folk I have at least a plan to explore the limits of the machine, the ammo, and the shooter. Not real sure the sequences but I intend to cycle some different ammo through in similar conditions. I have even entertained the idea of buying a "Lead Sled" type aid but probably could handle bracing just fine with sandbags.

As far as my needs, I do not need what I have as far as accuracy, range, or stopping power. I just want to shoot better...

- Mike

[Aragorn]

There is PRACTICAL ACCURACY and there is BENCHREST ACCURACY.

My point was essentially that barrel length isn't necessarily the deciding factor when it comes to accuracy. Practical OR benchrest.

I wasn't trying to knock anything, be it shorter or longer. Sincere apologies if it came across that way. A skilled shooter such as yourself, rolling a setup such as your LMT is definitely a combination I want on MY side.

[Paulo_Santos]

My point was essentially that barrel length isn't necessarily the deciding factor when it comes to accuracy. Practical OR benchrest.

I wasn't trying to knock anything, be it shorter or longer. Sincere apologies if it came across that way. A skilled shooter such as yourself, rolling a setup such as your LMT is definitely a combination I want on MY side.

No offense taken at all. I was actually backing up what you said about the short barrels being accurate in practical/real world accuracy.

[federalist22]

All of my carbines run about 2" on my good days at 100yds, but if you wan tpintpoint accuracy with an AR for longer range and smaller targets, get a bull barrel like the ones in the pictures above, or an bull barrel flattop upper from Rock River Arms, a drop-in 3, 3.5, or even a 4-lb single-stage trigger (Chip, Wilson, Timney, etc.), or even a Rock River 2-stage. Then put a nice scope on it. My wife's 24" RRA 1:8 free floated bull w/ RRA 2-stage trigger holds consistent nickel-sized groups at 200yds with 69gr Sierras using a Nikon optic. Another good choice is a Rem700 in 223 or 22-250.

[BamaMike]

All of my carbines run about 2" on my good days at 100yds, but if you wan tpintpoint accuracy with an AR for longer range and smaller targets, get a bull barrel like the ones in the pictures above, or an bull barrel flattop upper from Rock River Arms, a drop-in 3, 3.5, or even a 4-lb single-stage trigger (Chip, Wilson, Timney, etc.), or even a Rock River 2-stage. Then put a nice scope on it. My wife's 24" RRA 1:8 free floated bull w/ RRA 2-stage trigger holds consistent nickel-sized groups at 200yds with 69gr Sierras using a Nikon optic. Another good choice is a Rem700 in 223 or 22-250.

Thanks for the tips! I am getting the distinct feeling that my accuracy is at least on par with the average 16" chrome barrel, and maybe even above average. I shot some on Friday and had a couple of really great groups and some so-so. The only variable I can see (besides the shooter) is perhaps with the ammo (XM193). There did not seem to be any reason why some missed the mark and others did not. The gun was on a shooting bag and I put every effort into making the shots count. I will try to post some scans of the targets tonight but suffice it to say some went on either side of the target and I am guessing that could attributed to the shooter or the ammo? I am thinking the former though as there was consistency to what side the groups landed on the target (some right/some left).

Regardless, it is a great learning experience and is forcing me to become a better shooter. I do want to get another trigger and a better barrel and that sounds like another rifle... I also see the value in a SBR for learning quick and close shooting but I need to take baby steps first and get this gun (or me) tuned. Again, I thank everyone for inputs as they are really helping, if nothing else it gives me incentive by telling you all what is working for me - kind of like homework assignments... I know -

- Mike

[rob_s]

The 16" carbine is great for what it's great for, and that's all-around use. It's not too short, not too long, not super accurate but not too heavy to carry either, etc. It is, to an extent, a series of compromises. It doesn't do any one thing fantastically but it doesn't totally suck at any one thing either. If you're going to have just one AR,t he 16" chrome-lined barrel is it for anything other than benchrest shooting IMHO (and I wouldn't buy an AR at all if my only goal was to put holes in paper as close as possible to one another). Adding an SBR, or SPR, later on as needs change and specific applications crop up may be beneficial. I like my SBR for running the line at drills and other times when I'm primarily slung. I'd like to have an SPR for attending precision matches and not having to learn a different manual of arms. etc.

If you're working on becoming a "better shooter" with a chrome-lined barrel AR ans surplus ammo you may be fighting a losing battle, depending on how you define "better"... hell, depending on how you define "shooter"!

[BamaMike]

If you're working on becoming a "better shooter" with a chrome-lined barrel AR ans surplus ammo you may be fighting a losing battle, depending on how you define "better"... hell, depending on how you define "shooter"!

Perhaps, but it is good to understand the limitations of your tools - whatever they may be.

- Mike

[gunbuilder]

The first thing I do with any gun and tuning is throw on a high power target scope and test loads. It becomes plainly obvious when you flinch, pull or otherwise pooch the trigger. If you are trying to zero in on the best load using the irons then move up your paper to 25 and 50 yards and you can get a better idea of when it is your error and not the ammo's. Sandbags can suffice down to 1/4 - 1/2" range at 100 no need for a sled. Maybe you really haven't settled into that rear peep yet or are "over-thinking" it? Between it and the AR's stock weld it can be a challenge for someone used to bolt gun ergonomics. It was for me.