Zebulon Vitruvius Pike (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
dime_novel_hero) wrote2025-11-10 11:31 am
dime_novel_hero) wrote2025-11-10 11:31 am
Entry tags:
Bullpup Range Day
I was able to get my bullpup project out to the range this past weekend to break it in. Foxtrot Mike, the manufacturer of my upper, recommends 500 rounds to break in their rifles. I was only able to get about half that much shooting done in one sitting and I will be able to do as much next weekend (after I buy some more ammo) but it was a good start.
“Remember kids, the only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down”
I did write down quite a bit but I wouldn’t exactly call it science. I took notes and did some math. I won’t be sharing all those details here but I will share some of the highlights and what I have learned about this new platform. Bullet points, if you will.
The first is a ME thing. With one set of shooting glasses (sunglasses, side-shields, newest prescription) I don’t think I had the clearest image. That, and my lenses were fogging up. I swapped to a second pair of glassed (amber wrap around lenses, 2 year old prescription). They didn’t fog but I can say they were much better. In the end, I shot with my regular, daily wear, outside prescriptions. They afforded me the best view even though they were not my newest prescription.
My grandfather was a trophy-winning trap shooter and he would have his optometrist set his prescription focus to 30 or 35 yards. I don’t think I will go as far as that but I may need to get better glasses.
I need to add a microfiber lens cleaning cloth to my range bag.
It is recommended that one get a scope for the 80% of shooting that they do. If one is going to be doing most of that shooting at ranges of under 100 yards there isn’t much call for magnification, which is why I have a 1x prism. But, getting back to that glasses thing, looking out to 100 yards is a challenge for my aging eyes. Reaching out further than that will be even worse, even if only a rare occurrence. I have decided that I will get a magnifier (probably a 3x) and set it (probably) in front of my prism rather than getting a dedicated magnified optic. Firstly, it will be cheaper to do it that way since I’ve already bought the one optic. Also, the magnifier can be flipped out of the way when I don’t need it for the close stuff.
I need to add some extra batteries to my range bag.
When I was shooting 50 yards at first to sight in the scope, I used sight in targets with a red diamond and a 1 inch black grid. When I moved out to 100 yards, I also switched over to 8 inch black bullseye targets and my sight picture improved dramatically because (duh) I had been trying to sight a red dot scope on a red dot target. Only with that realization did I remember that my prism scope also has a green dot. That would have made my attempts to sight in the scope so much easier.
At the start, the bolt would not stay back as it should on the last round of a magazine. By the end, though, the recoil spring had broken in enough that the bolt was locking back on the last round.
Getting the “Paratrooper” charging handle was a wise decision. Especially when, early on, the bolt wasn’t staying back on the last round so I was racking the bolt a lot. Was a bit tough on the hands but it would have been more unpleasant without the larger handle. It has me wondering if, in competition, I might want gloves.
I moved the cheek riser forward a little. My face doesn’t rest where it is most comfortable but having it back as far as it was ended up hitting my ear muffs.
I shot both 223 Remington and 5.56 NATO rounds. I am told that, because the 5.56 ammo is more popular, it tends to be less expensive but the ammo I bought was the same price for either. I am also told that the 223 ammo, with its lower chamber pressures, tends to be more accurate. My shooting experience didn’t reveal a significant difference.
The 223 Remington smelled differently from the 5.56 NATO.
Out of about 250 round I had three feed jams. These jams left significant dimples in the brass. Online research returned, of course, a variety of diagnoses. One was that it was “definitely” the magazine. I have two mags and two of those jams happened on the same 5-round mag string. The third happened on the other mag later in the session. With only those, I don’t think it was the mag. Nor do I think it was the ammunition, two happened with the 5.56 NATO rounds and one with the 223 Remington ammo.
Another online suggestion was that the gas blowback wasn’t pushing the bolt back far enough. “Could also be under-gassed or over-gassed. I had this same issue and after going through the magazine spring, buffer spring, and buffer weight I found that my gas block was off centered so the gas flow was disrupted. The blowback didn't push the bolt back far enough to chamber another round “
This looks like my answer as, I have already noted, the bolt wasn’t coming back far enough to lock open on the last round of the magazine so, in my case, the issue was the buffer spring. Again, by the end of the session it had loosened up enough that it was locking back consistently so I’m expecting that will also end the jamming issue.
“The Rifleman is a person capable of hitting 20 inch targets from 500 meters with standard, rack grade equipment and ammunition.”
That means that one should be printing 4 inch groups at 100 yards or 2 inch groups at 50 yards. For consistency, call it 3.5 Minutes of Angle. An M16/M4/typicalAR shoots between 2 and 3 MOA. NRA competitions have a “clean” group at 200 yards of under 3 MOA. From varying sources and conversions, the Marines expect to qualify with a 4 MOA standard.
I am not that guy.
My groups at 100 yard were “on the paper” but that was only because I was shooting from a sandbag. Good enough for Brutality CQB where you are shooting at man-sized steel plates but certainly not “rifleman.” The Cabin Fever Challenge is generous with an 8 in target at 100 meters or 7 MOA but has one shooting standing, kneeling, prone, and sitting. Shooting offhand, my grouping would be even worse. But that’s part of the point of this whole endeavor, isn’t it. To do more shooting so that I can become a better shot.
My father, my grandfather, even my grandmother, were naturals. I need to work at it. I have a day off this week so I may be able to go to the range but that will likely be an introduction to the bullpup for my partner. Once the weekend comes around again I will be again out to the ranger to properly put a another few hundred rounds through it.
“Remember kids, the only difference between screwing around and science is writing it down”
I did write down quite a bit but I wouldn’t exactly call it science. I took notes and did some math. I won’t be sharing all those details here but I will share some of the highlights and what I have learned about this new platform. Bullet points, if you will.
The first is a ME thing. With one set of shooting glasses (sunglasses, side-shields, newest prescription) I don’t think I had the clearest image. That, and my lenses were fogging up. I swapped to a second pair of glassed (amber wrap around lenses, 2 year old prescription). They didn’t fog but I can say they were much better. In the end, I shot with my regular, daily wear, outside prescriptions. They afforded me the best view even though they were not my newest prescription.
My grandfather was a trophy-winning trap shooter and he would have his optometrist set his prescription focus to 30 or 35 yards. I don’t think I will go as far as that but I may need to get better glasses.
I need to add a microfiber lens cleaning cloth to my range bag.
It is recommended that one get a scope for the 80% of shooting that they do. If one is going to be doing most of that shooting at ranges of under 100 yards there isn’t much call for magnification, which is why I have a 1x prism. But, getting back to that glasses thing, looking out to 100 yards is a challenge for my aging eyes. Reaching out further than that will be even worse, even if only a rare occurrence. I have decided that I will get a magnifier (probably a 3x) and set it (probably) in front of my prism rather than getting a dedicated magnified optic. Firstly, it will be cheaper to do it that way since I’ve already bought the one optic. Also, the magnifier can be flipped out of the way when I don’t need it for the close stuff.
I need to add some extra batteries to my range bag.
When I was shooting 50 yards at first to sight in the scope, I used sight in targets with a red diamond and a 1 inch black grid. When I moved out to 100 yards, I also switched over to 8 inch black bullseye targets and my sight picture improved dramatically because (duh) I had been trying to sight a red dot scope on a red dot target. Only with that realization did I remember that my prism scope also has a green dot. That would have made my attempts to sight in the scope so much easier. At the start, the bolt would not stay back as it should on the last round of a magazine. By the end, though, the recoil spring had broken in enough that the bolt was locking back on the last round.
Getting the “Paratrooper” charging handle was a wise decision. Especially when, early on, the bolt wasn’t staying back on the last round so I was racking the bolt a lot. Was a bit tough on the hands but it would have been more unpleasant without the larger handle. It has me wondering if, in competition, I might want gloves.
I moved the cheek riser forward a little. My face doesn’t rest where it is most comfortable but having it back as far as it was ended up hitting my ear muffs.
I shot both 223 Remington and 5.56 NATO rounds. I am told that, because the 5.56 ammo is more popular, it tends to be less expensive but the ammo I bought was the same price for either. I am also told that the 223 ammo, with its lower chamber pressures, tends to be more accurate. My shooting experience didn’t reveal a significant difference.
The 223 Remington smelled differently from the 5.56 NATO.
Out of about 250 round I had three feed jams. These jams left significant dimples in the brass. Online research returned, of course, a variety of diagnoses. One was that it was “definitely” the magazine. I have two mags and two of those jams happened on the same 5-round mag string. The third happened on the other mag later in the session. With only those, I don’t think it was the mag. Nor do I think it was the ammunition, two happened with the 5.56 NATO rounds and one with the 223 Remington ammo.Another online suggestion was that the gas blowback wasn’t pushing the bolt back far enough. “Could also be under-gassed or over-gassed. I had this same issue and after going through the magazine spring, buffer spring, and buffer weight I found that my gas block was off centered so the gas flow was disrupted. The blowback didn't push the bolt back far enough to chamber another round “
This looks like my answer as, I have already noted, the bolt wasn’t coming back far enough to lock open on the last round of the magazine so, in my case, the issue was the buffer spring. Again, by the end of the session it had loosened up enough that it was locking back consistently so I’m expecting that will also end the jamming issue.
“The Rifleman is a person capable of hitting 20 inch targets from 500 meters with standard, rack grade equipment and ammunition.”
That means that one should be printing 4 inch groups at 100 yards or 2 inch groups at 50 yards. For consistency, call it 3.5 Minutes of Angle. An M16/M4/typicalAR shoots between 2 and 3 MOA. NRA competitions have a “clean” group at 200 yards of under 3 MOA. From varying sources and conversions, the Marines expect to qualify with a 4 MOA standard.
I am not that guy.
My groups at 100 yard were “on the paper” but that was only because I was shooting from a sandbag. Good enough for Brutality CQB where you are shooting at man-sized steel plates but certainly not “rifleman.” The Cabin Fever Challenge is generous with an 8 in target at 100 meters or 7 MOA but has one shooting standing, kneeling, prone, and sitting. Shooting offhand, my grouping would be even worse. But that’s part of the point of this whole endeavor, isn’t it. To do more shooting so that I can become a better shot. My father, my grandfather, even my grandmother, were naturals. I need to work at it. I have a day off this week so I may be able to go to the range but that will likely be an introduction to the bullpup for my partner. Once the weekend comes around again I will be again out to the ranger to properly put a another few hundred rounds through it.
The first bullpup firearm (that we know of) was heavy bench-rest target rifle manufactured around 1860 in London for a Professor Richard Potter. In 1866, William Joseph Curtis patented a repeating rifle design that sat on top of the shoulder. He also described using exhaust gas to cycle the action. There was the Thorneycroft carbine of 1901 and the French Faucon-Meunier semi-automatic rifle of 1918.
