Jump to content

dadioles

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    286

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by dadioles

  1. dadioles
    CQB = Close Quarters Battle I learn something new every day....... Will be fully prepared when the rats and rabbits fight back.
  2. dadioles
    Never use a scope with turret adjusted all the way to the extreme of movement. Do a bit of research on how a scope works mechanically and you will understand why. Start by setting both turrets to their mid point by winding gently to one extreme, count the clicks as you wind it to the other extreme and then wind it by half as many clicks back to the middle. The scope is now mechanically centred which is a good starting point. Now at, say, 15 yards (closer if you want to) shoot at a big cross marked on a large piece of paper or the side of a big cardboard box, not an X but more of a
  3. dadioles
    No argument in principle with that, but for the difference it makes at .22lr hunting distances the debate isn't worth the ink! I have had enough, it is getting boring. You do not disagree in principle with Bunny Boiler who, as I read it, was providing erroneous reasons based on false assumptions against short barrels, it was that simple. The facts, not hearsay and gossip, show that a short barrel is generally as accurate as a long barrel (sometimes more accurate). I shall leave others to form their own conclusions and as I mentioned, the recent article (link below) does m
  4. dadioles
    So you agree with me then. Short barrelled rifles are easily as accurate as those with long barrels.
  5. dadioles
    Are you correct in linking velocity/energy to accuracy? I don't think so. Sorry Deker but you are falling into the same language trap that I fell into. The relationship between velocity/energy and accuracy is not absolute. The point I am trying to make is that the choice of short barrel or long barrel is a personal decision, there are no practical differences in accuracy and velocity to affect that choice. FACT - short barrelled rifles are easily as accurate as those with long barrels. Shorter barrels will, in certain circumstances, produce less velocity because the bullet leave
  6. dadioles
    Conflict.... Ha!! I didn't fight in two world wars in order to engage in verbal fisty cuffs. No.... I didn't fight in two world wars (or at all.... ever.... ) but I did see a film once....... Enjoy your shooting shropshire dan P.S. Keep it to yourself - remember walls have ears......... there is a rumour that Deker, on the other hand, flew choppers in 'nam........ shhhhh don't tell anyone that I mentioned it......
  7. dadioles
    Ok Deker... I am tired, it's been a long day....... Lots of clumsy wording on my part but.... You are nit picking and not really adding anything constructive. The OP is talking about .22lr and I do not want him to be persuaded that a long barrel is good and a short barrel is bad based on irrelevant nonsense. "Barrels are made long for accuracy" This implies long is accurate, short is less accurate. In the real world that most in this forum occupy the statement is misleading and trying to persuade the OP that by shortening his barrel it will make it less accurate, that is simply not t
  8. dadioles
    I have to disagree with pretty much every word of that statement. It is VERY out of date. A long barrel can aid accuracy if you are using iron sights. The further the front sight is from the back sight, the easier it is to focus the eye and more accurately aim at the target. This does not apply if a scope is fitted. A barrel needs to be long enough to ensure that there is enough volume capacity in the barrel to allow all the powder to burn and maximise the speed of the bullet. In the case of rimfire, tests have shown this to be as short as 12 to 14 inches after which the friction o
  9. dadioles
    Hi Shropshire Dan You mentioned Winchester Subs. Don't make the mistake of buying loads of them. Just because they work well in one gun it does not mean they will work well in yours. They probably will but don't make assumptions. Buy a box of 50 each of whatever your dealer keeps in stock and try them out on targets at 50 yards to see which gives the tightest group. It does not matter where the fall on the target, you are looking for a tight group. Having tested the ammo and made a choice, stock up on that one and set your zero and you are away. Too many people walk away fr
  10. dadioles
    Isn't it back to the same old thing..... A .17hmr is not suitable for fox if that is the stated reason for wanting a .17hmr (other than in exceptional circumstances). The "reason" for justifying an hmr will be, basically, for rabbits. Obviously it is an excellent weapon against foxes in the right circumstances but that is not generally acceptable as the primary "reason" for having it. Just get the "any other lawful quarry" condition added and you are set for anything legal and humane.
  11. dadioles
    Whether or not screw tension is one of the issues remains to be seen but sooner or later those screws are going to have to be removed. They may be slightly corroded or just over tightened but you really do need to get them out. Make sure the screwdriver is a perfect fit for the screw and try and hold the gun in a vice to leave both hands free to hold the screwdriver. Using the correct size screwdriver for the screw head is half the battle. Unfortunately using penetrating oil to try and help release the thread might stain the wood. If you were to damage the screw, they can be replaced with
  12. dadioles
    An awful event but one that will inevitably be used against us by the anti gun lobby even though it happened in Russia and the instructor was grossly negligent.
  13. dadioles
    I think that statement could cause a bit of confusion..... The DM80 is so named because it was made by a delightful chap called David Mercer. A DM80 can be made to suit several different calibres and the main difference is the size of the hole through the middle of it that allows the bullet free passage. Think of DM80 as a "make" rather than a specific moderator, they are not all identical. I have DM80 moderators on all of my guns but they are all different. I could, al least in theory, fit my .22 calibre DM80 onto my .17 calibre HMR as the "hole" is bigger. Incidentally, the mu
  14. dadioles
    It is a personal view, and I have never owned a rifle with interchangeable barrels, but I fail to see the point of them. If you want a .22lr then buy a .22lr. If you want a .17hmr then buy a .17hmr. The chances are that the cost of two rifles will, surprisingly, be less than the cost of one rifle with two interchangeable barrels. Different ammunition requires different scope setups, different zero points and so on. Why make life hard for yourself. A shorter barrel - 16" - may be more convenient with no loss of power or accuracy, don't forget you will be adding a moderator whi
  15. dadioles
    The only way to sort out problems is slowly and methodically, checking one thing at a time and then moving to the next. When you shoot a fox you don't really know where the bullet has hit relative to a target, it could be different by 6" and you would not know. It is quite normal for your zero point to change quite considerably mod on or mod off because of the weight of the mod and / or barrel harmonics. The size of the group should not change, it should shoot just as accurately, only the position on the target "the zero point" may change. I have suggested testing your cleaning re
  16. dadioles
    I think we have all got the idea now and it is getting a bit boring. If you think about it EVERYTHING is the shooters fault / responsibility because the shooter is the only person involved and controlling the shot (or no shot), everything else is inanimate, apart from the rabbit. We could blame the rabbit but that would be a tad unfair. You cannot even blame the ammunition manufacturer because we all know how variable .22lr can be so the shooter needs to allow for that. There are lots of things to take into account when shooting and all we can do is make sure, to the best of our a
  17. dadioles
    Not quite three different answers. What I should have said is that I have, and do use, bronze brushes. I use them sparingly and only when required. Most of the time patches are sufficient. I was trying to avoid the scenario where people scrub vigorously up and down with a bronze brush on the assumption that brass is soft and can do no harm, use it carefully and infrequently. When using a bronze brush I wet it with solvent but be aware that solvents that eat copper will also eat bronze so be sure to clean your brush after use. If you are using copper solvents that change colour to indicat
  18. dadioles
    Oh, and back to the original post..... You purchased the rifle new - do you mean brand new? If it was brand new I hope you spent some time cleaning out the gunge and muck left in the bore by the manufacturer to protect the barrel in storage. Unless it was un "upmarket" rifle that has been hand finished (and even then....) the bore will be quite rough from the initial machining and in particular the chamber or throat where the bullet is inserted and the head of the bullet engages with the start of the rifling will also be relatively rough. That needs a bit of running in and will benefit
  19. dadioles
    I am totally with Deker on this one. Every word!! Must start a fan club...... The only way to properly and safely clean a rifle is with a properly fitted bore guide, a good quality single piece rod, a jag and patches with an appropriate solvent. A fresh patch every push. From time to time a brush may be required but not routinely. A .22lr firing subsonic lead bullets is not the same as a .17hmr firing copper jacketed bullets. After thoroughly cleaning my .22lr the first bullet always fires about 0.3 to 0.5 inches low and left at 50 yards. The second and subsequent bullets a
  20. dadioles
    Personally I would avoid using a brass brush. The theory is that brass is softer than steel and therefore will not damage the steel barrel but the rifling is extremely fine and hard particles may get trapped in the brush. I use a bore guide, rod, jag and patches to remove carbon and copper fouling. A new patch with every stroke pushed from chamber to muzzle. The first couple of "push throughs" can be quite tight and the rod sometimes needs to be firmly tapped through by hitting it with the palm of my hand but it soon becomes easier as the deposits are cleared. I carried out some tests
  21. dadioles
    I don't use a lamp and tend to shoot alone on foot. I use a night vision scope dedicated to one of my CZ .22 rifles using subs. My main concern at night is noise and the hmr is just too noisy. Range when using a dedicated night vision scope is not too much of an issue as the magnification is low (about 5x) which really restricts the distance that I can head shoot rabbits to about 50 yards so again the .22 is the winner. If I was shooting in a less noise sensitive area and particularly if someone else was holding the lamp then maybe the added range of the hmr would be useful but distance
  22. dadioles
  23. dadioles
    Sorry riflehunter583 but although you are stubbornly sticking to your point of view, you are wrong about the requirement for proof testing. The "two rifle shops and the smith before" that you refer to are also wrong. The law is quite clear and there are some interesting articles on the internet that are also worth reading. One article on the ChuckHawkes web site does raise some serious concerns about the worth of the test http://www.chuckhawks.com/big_deal_about_proof.htm but that is another story. More specifically, addressing the issue you raised (Deker mentioned Jacksons), is the
  24. dadioles
    Goodness me riflehunter, you sound like a right old jobsworth. the requirement to submit a barrel for re-proof only arises if the barrel has been "unduly reduced in Substance or Strength".' Shortening and re-threading a barrel does not unduly reduce it either in substance or in strength. If you were to widen the bore or re-cut the rifling that would be another thing but let's get real here. My 16" .22 CZ is as accurate as my 21" .22 CZ and they are both beaten by my 14" Anchutz HMR but that is more down to .22 v hmr and not barrel length. For "normal" shooting (rats and rabbi
  25. dadioles
    As dedger says. Only you can find out. Ignore anyone who has a recommendation of which ammunition to use, it is irrelevant. You have to try several different makes of subs and see what suits your gun best then buy a big batch and stick to it. If you still get such a high percentage of stray shots then look elsewhere for the problem as it may be something other than the ammunition.
×
×
  • Create New...