1,000 Yard Shooting (M1D Garand Sniper Rifle)

[Ramboueille]

Here is a higher quality (HD) version of the same video.
(HD) 1,000 yards, open sights, Swiss K31 7.5x55 Schmidt-Rubin 7.5x55 rifle

Mag,

Thank you, nice demo and nice shooting.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[JustPassingThrough]

And a final side-note, the calculations you sent me were set at sea-level.

Try recalculating the 168 at 3200 feet, with a 105 degree temp. I live (and shoot) in the upper end of Mojavie desert, not Ohio. You will notice that the 168 round, under these conditions, only drops to 1,352 FPS at 1,000 yards.

Hi Mag,

Love those videos. I ran your numbers through Hornady's ballistic calculator using THEIR ballistic data for the round with your velocity. The results are very close to what you've previously posted. Hornady's Humidity is higher then you see in the desert which is working against the calculated final velocity. Even with that factor working against the final answer you're still supersonic. (Your muzzle velocity is probably a tad higher since you probably chrono'd the speed at some distance down range from the muzzle.) So your actual velocity will be slightly higher then reported here.

Hornady's basaltic calculator using your previously posted data.

1316 FPS @ 1000 yards



Here is the speed of sound calculations based on your 105F

1165.374 FPS



1316 > 1165.374 Therefore your still supersonic.

As far as I'm concerned your round is still super sonic at 1000 yards, the video was great and nice shooting.

Here is a snippet from NASA's website. Based on the velocity give by hornady for your load at 1000 yards and your altitude.



So your round is going Mach 1.194

su⋅per⋅son⋅ic
 
–adjective
1. greater than the speed of sound waves through air.
2. capable of achieving such speed: a supersonic plane.

-- Let me propose a real simple video test the next time you shoot at 1000 yards.. Put a camera next to the target (make it a paper target so the impact sound doesn't mask what we're looking for) and record the audio. If the round makes that tell tale "crack" as it passes the camera its supersonic.

[Mag30th]

-- Let me propose a real simple video test the next time you shoot at 1000 yards.. Put a camera next to the target (make it a paper target so the impact sound doesn't mask what we're looking for) and record the audio. If the round makes that tell tale "crack" as it passes the camera its supersonic.

Thank you! Outstanding idea, I will try to make it out there in the next few weeks and do exactly as you have stated with the recording device. That clearly would reflect one way or the other.
Thanks again,
Ernest.

[mdoerner]

Hardware ALWAYS trumps software.

If the shot is a true 1000 yard shot, that's kinda the end of the argument, right? It's all about putting rounds on-target whether the round is supersonic, trans-sonic, or sub-sonic.

Although software vendors may use different equations to simulate bullet flight, the true test is the PHYSICAL ACT of getting them on target, regardless of the range.

There is also a difference between hitting a metal plate and keeping them in the x-ring (unless the plate is the size of a 1000 yrd x-ring), which is also beyond the scope of the original post. Plus bipods aren't match legal anyhoo.

Mike Doerner

[dryheat]

A bumblebee shouldn't be able to fly either....

[John Kepler]

The issue has devolved into perceptions/expectations of what constitutes an accurate rifle/load at 1000 yds. Your plate is roughly an NRA LR Target 10-ring. With the Swiss, you were hitting 2 out of 6 for 33%....with the scoped Garand you shot 2 out of 8 for 25%. Last year at Camp Perry, to make the shoot-off in Service Rifle took a 193-14X, or 96.5% with high x-count (and it wasn't enough to win the sausage!). Sure....you can shoot 33% with a load that's dropping sub-sonic....but you almost certainly can't shoot 80% (which will buy you an NRA LR "Marksman" classification....the lowest classification BTW) with it! If 1 outta 3 is your criteria....then you are a steely-eyed hardholder with a perfect rifle/load....if your criteria runs to something a bit more in line with current competition standards, then it isn't. Set the bar low enough, and anything looks good! Frankly, and with nothing pejorative intended, the results on target shown in your video is about what I'd expect out of a LR Novice in benign conditions with a bad load.

PS-In your Swiss...try a 178 gr Hornady A-Max on top of 44.5 gr of Vihtavuori N550...then you'll see what the rifle is REALLY capable of (all the usual loading caveats apply)!

[Mag30th]

the results on target shown in your video is about what I'd expect out of a LR Novice in benign conditions with a bad load.

What is your issue, my goodness?!?! Personal attack after personal attack, gezz, let it go...

I’m not beating my chest looking for some type of "internet recognition" as it seems you are. Again, please stop the ongoing belittling remarks.

I’ve stated repeatedly, I collect antique military rifles, the purpose behind the 90 videos I have posted on YouTube, is to profile the rifles. This is not a contest between you and me and our shooting abilities. But, since you continually push the issue, I would love to go head to head with you with open sights, using the same rifle and the same loads.

I continually attempt to draw you back to topic yet you post remarks like the one above. Again, the issue here is and has always been, am I shooting at 1,000 yards or have I created a fraudulent video. You no longer seem interested in discussing whether or not my videos are legit. You have gone from initially stating that it couldn’t be done, to now stating that the results are what you would expect for a novice shooter.

I really hope that you do not carry yourself in this manner in person with other shooters; it’s much easier when someone is 1000 miles away over the internet I suppose. Again, give it a rest.

[John Kepler]

[

What is you issue, my goodness?!?! Personal attack after personal attack, gezz, let it go...

Sir, it wasn't a "personal attack", it was simply an observation and competent evaluation based on shooting and coaching Long Range for a lot of years. That you don't like the evaluation doesn't make it any less valid.

But, since you continually push the issue, I would love to go head to head with you with open sights, using the same rifle and the same loads.

That would be like arguing with an idiot...they drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience! In case you missed it....your loads SUCK! I quit being dumb enough to shoot 168's at 1000 yds 20 years ago...a pity you aren't wise enough to do like-wise. BTW, THAT'S what a "personal attack" from me looks like!

But hey, even with your idiotic set-up, sure, but you wouldn't be all that happy at the end of the day! BTW, I don't shoot off a bench, I don't shoot with any kind of artificial support, and I don't shoot with a scope....no one in Long Range Service Rifle does.

I continually attempt to draw you back to topic yet you post remarks like the one above. Again, the issue here is and has always been, am I shooting at 1,000 yards or have I created a fraudulent video.

A fraudulent video....I really can't say, but I do have doubts. A video displaying considerable ineptitude attempting to masquerade as competence...absolutely! My 17 year-old son, a real Long Range shooter himself, found your video of 6 misses out of 8 shots hysterical...he didn't shoot that bad his very first time at 1000 yds with a Garand, and was still embarrassed by it...worked his *** off to make sure he never shot that bad again.....and you made a video of your train-wreck and posted it on YouTube like you actually did something important! Remember....you wanted this here!

I was told by others that this kind of obfuscatory ranting was something you have a bit of a "name" for over on YouTube...a pity you decided to bring it here.

[Mag30th]

[ I was told by others that this kind of obfuscatory ranting was something you have a bit of a "name" for over on YouTube...a pity you decided to bring it here.

Yes and no, I’ve been involved in several heated political discussions where I have made comments that I have later regretted, not that I regretted the subject, but I have regretted the childish manner that I acted. And on occasion during these debates, I have been drawn into the personal attack game, also of which I’ve regretted.

But these have been political in nature and topics and/or related to the JFK assassination. I am a proud conservative, anti-statist, and I feel there was not a Govt conspiracy in the JFK assassination. These stances I’ve taken in numerous, sometimes regrettable, debates-disputes.

Regarding any ranting on any subject matter regarding my rifle collection videos?? Off the top of my head I cannot recall anything that would fall under that category, with the exception of AKA 1884... Outside of that silly event, there is nothing.

You know someone that claims I was abusive towards them??? Only AKA 1884, if it were anyone else, then you and you informant are mistaking me for someone else.

Okay Mag, let it go. MODERATOR

[Mag30th]

if your criteria runs to something a bit more in line with current competition standards, then it isn't. Set the bar low enough, and anything looks good!

The video you are criticizing, I’m shooting an original, 1950’s rifle, with the original USGI 1952 barrel. Again, I’m demonstrating the rifle, “IT IS A PROFILE ABOUT THE RIFLE.”

I’m not trying to prove to the world what an awesome guy I am, nor am I attempting to make myself the worlds 2nd best shooter (clearly, reading the comment you have posted about yourself, you are the world’s greatest LR shooter).

If you are not interested in discussing whether or not the distances are factual or not, please, again, move on. I’m not into the internet insult back and forth stuff.