5.56 ammo for sighting in

[Magnumite]

Of standard loads, a couple of my AR’s shoot bulk 223 better than 5.56. Badically Federal against the rest. Rem is decent…Winchester about the same.

 

[Ponder_MD]

Of standard loads, a couple of my AR’s shoot bulk 223 better than 5.56. Badically Federal against the rest. Rem is decent…Winchester about the same.

Huh, that's wild. Well, there is no such thing as 5.56 FGGM, only .223 so I guess I'll see what happens tomorrow if I can get to the range. We're putting a scope on it today.

 

[outrider58]

Huh, that's wild. Well, there is no such thing as 5.56 FGGM, only .223 so I guess I'll see what happens tomorrow if I can get to the range. We're putting a scope on it today.

Once you see how the gun performs with good ammo, you'll have a base line from which you'll be able to grade all other brands and types of ammo.

Eventually, you may end up reloading. It's the best way to assure an endless supply of ammo your gun shoots best. It is a fun journey.

 

[Biggfoot44]

To do it any other way is only testing your ability, not the rifle's.

As I'm reading the OP's OP , the primary issue is verifying if the Rifle & Ammo is capable of * meaning precision * to be able to attain a meaningful zeroing .

Just for Devil's Advocate , a sufficiently skilled shooter , using proper prone techniques , might indeed be sufficiently capable to draw meaningful comparison of gun/ ammo capabilities .


But all ties into eliminating as many variables as possible .

Basic approach :

Shooter of known abilities
Using techniques of known potential
Using ammunition of known accuracy potential .

FGMM is the yardstick for widely available , consistent ammo of expected accuracy . For purposes of this discussion , I'll arbitrarily say that ( properly matched to rifle ) , if groups are larger than 0.5 MOA , it's probably not the ammo being the limiting factor .

Expectations of Rifle ? A zillion discussions everywhere . But for arbitrary rule of thumb - Mass production bbl & gun , 5.56 chamber , Chrome bore , Milspec lead core projectiles , 3 to 4 MOA would be within expectations . ( Yes , some better , but 3-4 is generally accepted as within expectations .)

 

[Ponder_MD]

Ok, here's what happened today:

Using a (borrowed) 1-6X scope, I used M193 and PMC M855 (because it's what I had on hand) to get the scope zeroed in as close as possible. Then I finally shot 20 rounds of FGMM.

I'm pleased to report that the human behind the trigger is the biggest problem and not a crappy rifle. The second biggest problem is needing a better trigger. With the scope, I can tell that I need to work on my breathing and the trigger is very heavy, gritty but also not consistent. I had trigger breaks that felt noticeably lighter than other breaks.

Admittedly, towards the end I kind of lost track of where I was on the paper. The last group that I shot at 6X with FGMM, It looks like I achieved 1.98 MOA if I count 4 holes. I'm pissed off that I can't remember if that 4th hole is part of that group. If it's not part of that group, I shot 1.165 MOA.

Anyway, the rifle shoots decent groups. Fix the trigger, work on my breathing and that'll fix 60% of my problems. I'm going to try contact lenses and yellow lens shooter's glasses to see if that helps my eyes.

Also, the rifle doesn't seem overly picky about ammunition. I rank M855 as the least consistent, M193 as better and the FGMM as the best that got me a tiny bit tighter.

My mentor also brought his own carbine with a good trigger in it. I shot 10 rounds and it made a world of difference.

 

[Bountied]

Trigger make a huge difference. Larue MBT, CMC, POF, Geissele, etc all make very good triggers. I like the CMC 4.5lb single stage flat face triggers for around $125.

AR15/10 Single Stage Trigger – Flat – CMC Triggers

cmctriggers.com