Shooting 338 past 1000 yards (PICS)


PDA






Zak Smith
January 23, 2006, 12:27 AM
Spent a great Colorado winter day shooting with R-, P-, and J-. It started out about 30F at 8AM and warmed up to 50F & sunny. Around noon, the winds picked up.

J- was totally new to long range shooting, so after hitting the 10" @ 350 got boring, we had him hitting the 10" square @ 975 yards in no time with the AWP. That's less than a 1 MOA target size!

We also set an IPSC steel quite a ways past 1000..

Here's R- engaging the super-far target with his TRG42-
http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/small/A100_2055_img.jpg (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?medium=A100_2055_img.jpg) [ link to LARGER image ] (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?medium=A100_2055_img.jpg)

Our goal was to do some load testing on paper at around 500-600 yards, and then shoot steel at about 1000, and further. We set a 10" square steel plate hanging diagonally at 975 yards, and a steel "IPSC" target somewhere beyond 1000 yards.

Can you figure out the distance by "milling" it? (We know the distance per GPS data and dope back-calculation.)
http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/A100_2062_img_c.jpg (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?large=A100_2062_img_c.jpg) [ link to LARGER image ] (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?large=A100_2062_img_c.jpg)
http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/A100_2061_img_cc.jpg (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?large=A100_2061_img_cc.jpg) [ link to LARGER image ] (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?large=A100_2061_img_cc.jpg)

http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/small/A100_2075_img.jpg (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?medium=A100_2075_img.jpg) [ link to LARGER image ] (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?medium=A100_2075_img.jpg)
AWP, AWSM, TRG, TRG, LTR, HD. 4 USOs, 1 S&B, and 1 IOR. The two AR's on the ground in front both have TA11 ACOGs.

http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/small/A100_2073_img.jpg (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?medium=A100_2073_img.jpg) [ link to LARGER image ] (http://apollo.demigod.org/~zak/DigiCam/PAWNEE/?medium=A100_2073_img.jpg)

If you enjoyed reading about "Shooting 338 past 1000 yards (PICS)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
rero360
January 23, 2006, 01:56 AM
wow, I am completely amazed. and I wish I was in your shoes, those are some amazing rifles and I would be happy with any one of them. you are a lucky man how consistantly were you guys hitting the plate at 1000 yards?

wow

swingset
January 23, 2006, 02:01 AM
Just curious, did you finish your day by partying at Hefner's mansion with some centerfolds?

I spent my day cleaning the basement. :mad:

Zak Smith
January 23, 2006, 02:02 AM
Hi,

With regard to hits @ approx 1000 yards-- with a good 308 load or 338, we can usually keep it on the 10" plate 75% of the time or better. On an IPSC target at the same distance, it is "boring."

The reticle pictures show a target well beyond 1000 yards (mil it to figure out how far it it-- it's about 17.5" wide and 29" tall). Our hit percentage on that one with the 338's was about 25%, mainly due to strong and erratic wind. One miss would be right off the RH side, and the next would be 4 MOA left.. that kind of thing.

-z

Infidel
January 23, 2006, 02:42 AM
.... mil it to figure out how far it it-- it's about 17.5" wide and 29" tall ....

I get 1280 - 1340 yards, depending on how I squint. Is that close?

That's some great shooting!

Boe
January 23, 2006, 05:44 AM
simply spectacular. Great rifles. Its always a good idea to test rifles at different altitudes. I will send you my shipping address and I will make sure they are properly tested here in MN :)

Bridger
January 23, 2006, 11:58 AM
I'm jealous! I also realize I am absolutely horrible at this mil ranging thing. I've tried it before theoretically and done OK, not as good as my brother, but now I'm just doing something wrong.

Zak Smith
January 23, 2006, 12:06 PM
I get 1280 - 1340 yards, depending on how I squint. Is that close?

Still quite a bit off...
:neener:

This is a VERY difficult ranging exercise, especially from a picture.

Mute
January 23, 2006, 01:10 PM
Still quite a bit off...
:neener:

This is a VERY difficult ranging exercise, especially from a picture.

You didn't say what reticle, but based on the picture, I'm assuming MOA Reticle, which leads to to approximately 1680 yards. :what:

Zak Smith
January 23, 2006, 01:19 PM
Sorry, it's a S&B P4 with hash marks at 1/2 mil. The very fine tick marks on the far left, right, and top are 1/5th mil. The center "floating" crosshair has legs of approx 0.7 mil.

Sergeant Sabre
January 23, 2006, 01:41 PM
1473.2 meters. (1611.1 yards)

Zak Smith
January 25, 2006, 02:31 AM
The actual distance is 1514 yards +/- 8.

A ranging error of 20 yards will result in a miss, if a center hold is used.

ny32182
January 25, 2006, 06:52 PM
Wish I had a range like that on which to shoot... :(

Very impressive.

Infidel
January 25, 2006, 07:08 PM
Still quite a bit off...
:neener:

This is a VERY difficult ranging exercise, especially from a picture.

Well, it is for me, for sure. I seem to almost always underestimate using mil scales. Need practice.

The actual distance is 1514 yards +/- 8.

A ranging error of 20 yards will result in a miss, if a center hold is used.
One of the perverse laws of Nature,-- at long ranges, where accurate distance is increasingly imperative because of the trajectory, it's increasingly hard to get an accurate distance measurement.

Is that in the Pawnee Grasslands? Is that where you hold your long-range clinics?

trueblue1776
January 25, 2006, 07:12 PM
ohhh, more pornographic pictures

Zak Smith
January 25, 2006, 08:03 PM
Is that in the Pawnee Grasslands? Is that where you hold your long-range clinics?
We were shooting at the Pawnee in these pics, but that is NOT where we are going to hold the clinics. We are working on a special spot for those which has a 360* potential field of fire, and lots of neat terrain features.

Rob1035
January 25, 2006, 08:35 PM
any interesting anecdotes about the poodle shooters and long range?:cool:

Zak Smith
January 25, 2006, 08:37 PM
I have made first-round hits on IPSC steel @ 550 yards using a TA11 ACOG (3.5x) and a 17-18" AR15...

warth0g
January 25, 2006, 08:42 PM
Zak, did you special order that reticle? Looks exacltly like the one I want!

BTW Nice rifles, nice shooting.

warth0g

Zak Smith
January 25, 2006, 08:47 PM
Zak, did you special order that reticle? Looks exacltly like the one I want!
No, it's one of the "stock" reticles (P4) in the 5-25x56mm S&B PMII. I would prefer if it had a windage mark at 1/2 mil near the primary crosshairs.

Stinkyshoe
January 25, 2006, 09:36 PM
Zak,
Your 550 yard AR hits are with a 223? What load did you use?
Thanks
Ss

sumpnz
January 25, 2006, 10:51 PM
What's these long-range clinics y'all are alluding to, and how can I sign up?

Zak Smith
January 26, 2006, 02:06 AM
Zak,
Your 550 yard AR hits are with a 223? What load did you use?
I have done so with 55gr XM193 and Black Hills 75gr. 55gr requires more windage.

What's these long-range clinics y'all are alluding to, and how can I sign up?
See http://coloradomultigun.com Dates are still TBD but we should know within a month.

-z

waterhouse
January 26, 2006, 12:36 PM
Great pics and thanks for sharing. The farthest I've ever ranged anything in real life was about 600. I had no idea how much error was possible at that distance. I got around 1590 and then saw the answer, and tried to figure out what I did wrong, but there is a very small difference in mil measurement that gets your from 1590 to 1514.

Did that LTR do anything at the longer distances?

Zak Smith
January 26, 2006, 12:45 PM
I don't think anyone shot the LTR past 350 that day. Just didn't get around to trying it.

Katigroszek
February 24, 2007, 06:39 PM
Zak, that might be a stupid question, but - since You seem to like the AI AW much more than Sako TRG - may I ask why exactly? The action? The stock? The trigger? Something else? (the looks perhaps?)

Zak Smith
February 24, 2007, 07:43 PM
The 338 Lapua versions of the two rifles perform almost identically, and have very similar construction. There are small differences which could tip the scales one way or the other for a person. The SAKO is about 20% cheaper when you factor in the same accessories. I did a side by side review of the two which will be in the Combat Arms annual in April.

Katigroszek
February 25, 2007, 04:25 AM
But it is still not na naswer to the question why AI? For me a bolt on the AI is perfect, but the triggerguard is unacceptable (aesthetical reasons-which is stupid. I know).

I'm more interested in Your opinion on .308 versions of both rifles, since where I live some 800 m is max range.

benelli12
February 25, 2007, 12:14 PM
Awps are cool and very accurate, they use them in counterstrike to:D

Zak Smith
February 25, 2007, 10:44 PM
IMO and in no particular order: more durable; less things to come loose; faster on mag changes; affordable magazines and accessories (ironic-maybe, but I have 10+ AW magazines); simpler and more robust optics mounting solutions; reliability features; user-changable barrel; superior bi-pod for practical shooting; more readily available for purchase. I do think the AW is the best 308 sniper rifle out there today, when looking at the entire package, its field-worthiness, servicability, etc. It's all business.

Switching between the TRG and the AI, the thing I miss going from the TRG to the AI is the drop-pistol-grip stock, which allows bolt operation without removing the thumb from the thumbhole.

scrat
February 25, 2007, 10:52 PM
all i can say is wow. just like everyone else i wish i had one of those rifles

The Deer Hunter
February 25, 2007, 11:11 PM
The actual distance is 1514 yards +/- 8.

A ranging error of 20 yards will result in a miss, if a center hold is used.

I so guesses 1500 yards before reading that

Zak Smith
February 25, 2007, 11:28 PM
I encourage anyone in the CO area to come LR shooting with us.. it's a blast.

http://demigodllc.com/~zak/DigiCam/CGMG-2006.11-misc/smaller/D100_3195_img.jpg (http://demigodllc.com/~zak/DigiCam/CGMG-2006.11-misc/?small=D100_3195_img.jpg) [ link to LARGER image ] (http://demigodllc.com/~zak/DigiCam/CGMG-2006.11-misc/?small=D100_3195_img.jpg)

(Above at the CMG multi-gun match at Camp Guernsey ARNG base)

Zak Smith
April 12, 2007, 05:18 PM
Review of the AI-AWSM and TRG-42 is in the current Combat Arms magazine.

General Geoff
April 12, 2007, 07:29 PM
Zak,

The AI-AWSM is your preferred weapon of choice, chambered for .338 Lapua Magnum, correct? Do you have any experience with the Armalite AR-30M (in .338 Lapua) or Remington M24A3 (or are they even available for sale to civilians)?

I'm sort-of "window shopping" for a friend of mine who wants to get into long range shooting; I recommended .338 Lapua since his stated goal is to be a proficient shot at 1000+ meters, and .308 isn't really up to snuff at ranges in excess of a kilometer.

I'll definitely let him know that the AI is a very good gun though.

ArchAngelCD
April 12, 2007, 07:52 PM
Do you have any experience with the Armalite AR-30M in .338 Lapua
I'm very interested in that answer too.

Zak Smith
April 12, 2007, 08:03 PM
At the conclusion of the AI AWSM vs. SAKO TRG testing (about a years worth), we concluded that the rifles shoot almost identically, even performing about the same with the same loads. I bought the AI for rifle-system continuity with my short-action long-range bolt guns (which are AWs chambered in 260 and 308).

The AR-30 is a good rifle and a great deal. You may have to handload to get the best accuracy, but don't let the skinny barrel fool you- they shoot good. Their brake is effective and recoil is mild. It's not really an integrated SWS like the SAKO and AI, but perfectly fine for range shooting.

For an introduction and advice on long-range rifles, read this article
PRACTICAL LONG-RANGE RIFLE SHOOTING - PART I: THE RIFLE & GEAR (http://demigod.org/articles/practical-long-range-rifle-shooting-equipment/)

Most people cannot logistically shoot to even 800 yards on a regular basis; 1200 is even worse and a mile is worse still. Many of the skills gained shooting to 600, 800, or 1000 with a 308 will translate into ability at 1000-1700 with an appropriate caliber, but that experience will be gained at a quarter of the cost of jumping into a 338.

General Geoff
April 12, 2007, 08:42 PM
Thanks for the article(s), Zak. I've been trying to tell him that .308 will cost FAR less if he actually plans on getting good at it. Plus we'll be able to share ammunition supply/logistics (I'm building up a precision long range M1A rifle myself). I've actually been trying to source a Leupold Mark 4 scope for awhile now, but can't seem to find anything under $800. I was hoping to keep the cost of glass at $500 or $600, but it seems like a fruitless cause if I want really good glass.

Zak Smith
April 12, 2007, 08:56 PM
Over here http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=268529
I wrote the following:

Arguments for 308:

1. can shoot an approx 0.5 BC bullet at 2700-2900fps
2. very long barrel life
3. mild recoil
4. factory match ammunition available from many vendors, at many retail outlets
5. reloading easy due to multitude of great components and well-known and proven "recipes"

.. basically what Nightcrawler said.

To get a noticable step up in long-range performance, the costs associated with impinging on items #2-5 increase rapidly.

For example, if we compare a great LR 308 load to an "objective" LR load (300gr SMK fired from a 338 Lapua):

The 338:
* has 38% less wind drift at 1000 yards
* has 12% less drop at 1000 yards
* has 2.8x the energy at 1000 yards, but
* has 3.4x the recoil
* has approx 3-4x the dollar cost per round fired (not including barrel wear)
* has approx 35-50% the barrel life

arctictom
April 13, 2007, 07:37 PM
looks like you had some fun , thanks for the pics.

If you enjoyed reading about "Shooting 338 past 1000 yards (PICS)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!