98Z5V

At public speaking engagements, I pull double-duty as his translator...

I think those are both 2 3/4" OAL. Somewhere in the build thread on my gun, I listed that brake, long as hell. Just barely for the 13.5" to a hair over 16". 30-cal PWS CQB Comp is 2.48" OAL. 30-cal KX3 is 3.28" OAL; KX5 is 3.25" OAL. Those two will do it. That's the reason you see so many .308 barrels that are 13.7". Something 2.5" long will get it legal. Gotta be careful with this 13.5" barrel.

I think that brace is gonna go on my Shockwave, though. Fired a Shockwave with a brace this morning... MAN! What a difference!...

He can't turn it into a pistol now, brother - it's already a rifle. A new lower would do the trick, though. Once a pistol, always a pistol.

Put the zero on this optic this morning - man, did I ever. Primary Arms 1~6 scope, Griffin Mil reticle. I picked that scope up because the user's manual has instructions to zero the Grendel. 3/4" high at 100 is supposed to zero the rest of the BDC reticle. I don't know if that'll really work out, until I can stretch it out to 500 and 600, but i usually trust what they say. NO COFFEE this morning. Damn near killed me. Didn't want any caffeine in me, making me shaky. I did get into the Copenhagen, though. Several weeks ago, I saw a utility van with a roof rack on it, down the street. Hit it with the range finder, and the corner of that roof rack was 101 yards. I used that to boresight the scope. Went over it and over it,until I was happy. That paid off... I got out there today, set the paper zero target out at a paced-100 yards. Come back to the table and hit it with the range finder. Damnit, 105 yards. Moved the table forward until it was dead-on 100 yards to target. The NO COFFEE this morning really pis$ed me off, but man, did it pay off. I zero'd this thing in 8 rounds. Got a 3-round shot group off to see where it was, and I was surprised. Tight group, left of center by about 2.5". Made a windage change, shot 2 into what I thought was one hole - pulled out the spotting scope, and it was 2 real close. Cool, made another windage change, and let 3 go. Spotting scoped it, and I was done. If it needs to be 3/4" high at 100, I can't make it better than this. I'm shocked at the accuracy of this barrel, and I'm certain it's not even broken in yet. Faxon Match Series 18" Grendel, Gunner profile. These were the first 8 rounds out of it. Oh, and I'm not giving up coffee, either. No way, no how...

^^^ I bet around 25 yards, that thing will be dead on.

If you look at the Armalite website, it indeed does states that specific barrel is 1:8" twist. https://www.armalite.com/product/ar10-308-13-5-target-barrel/ The website is wrong. I've got that barrel, and it's a 1:10" twist. I've contacted them about the website error, and they don't seem to care. Word of caution on that barrel: Do you plan to Tax-Stamp SBR this rifle, through the AFT? If the answer is no, then you will have to use Armalite's Competition Brake, pinned/welded, in order to bring this barrel to the 16" minimum length. Other brakes, comps, muzzle devices won't get it to 16".

That beast maintains the tension VERY well!

7" internal depth AR15 carbine receiver extension, mil-spec, from a reputable vendor, Armalite EA1095 spring, 2.5" buffer with a stainless steel body. We'll see what it looks like on Monday, when I get to work and get hands-on. I'm hoping the stainless body adds alot of weight, over the traditional aluminum body. I'm hoping this little 2.5" buffer is pretty close to 5.4 oz, like an H3 buffer. I'll slap it on the gram scale and find out.

Ladies and gentlemen (honorific term used quite loosely)... WE HAVE CANT!

This falls into the pertinent category here. This is pure stupidity that caused this death. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/20/mississippi-k-9-officer-dies-from-heat-stroke-after-deputys-car-engine-shuts-down-authorities-say.html

The Obutthead Administration was certainly trying to tie ITAR to much, much more - even these message boards. Those fuktards were trying to say that "technical information" posted on "firearms-related message boards" were ITAR violations, and any technical information found on message boards were subject to prosecution under the ITAR... Yeah, it was going that far, here, brother... There are news articles out there on that very thing... It was at that point, that I realized that the US was seriously under attack by liberal gun-grabbers, the US Constitution was seriously in jeopardy, and Australians had more gun rights than US Citizens. You know what I mean, with that.

Yes, I would. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/20/teen-accused-vandalizing-memorial-slain-navy-seal-and-medal-honor-recipient.html

There will be some liberals shiiting themselves in the MSM come Monday morning - all over this... Wait for it...

And that article above ^^^, is because of this down here... 3D-printed gun blueprints can be downloaded starting next month, ending lengthy legal battle By James Rogers | Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2018/07/20/3d-printed-gun-blueprints-can-be-downloaded-starting-next-month-ending-lengthy-legal-battle.html Blueprints for 3D-printed guns can be downloaded starting next month, following a landmark Department of Justice settlement with Second Amendment advocates. Defense Distributed, a non-profit defense firm, will offer the blueprints for download starting Aug. 1 following a multiyear legal battle with the federal government. “It’s personally satisfying,” Defense Distributed director Cody Wilson told Fox News, adding America’s gun culture has been “guaranteed safe passage” into the modern era. Defense Distributed and the Second Amendment Foundation were co-plaintiffs in a 2015 lawsuit against the government, which had forced Wilson’s firm to take blueprints for the “Liberator” 3D-printed gun off its website. More than 100,000 copies of the controversial blueprint were downloaded before the government’s clampdown. The settlement paves the way for Defense Distributed to again offer the Liberator files, and others for 3D-printed guns, on its website. “Under terms of the settlement, the government has agreed to waive its prior restraint against the plaintiffs, allowing them to freely publish the 3-D files and other information at issue,” explained the Second Amendment Foundation in a statement released July 10. SAF Founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb heralded the settlement as a victory for free speech, and “a devastating blow to the gun prohibition lobby.” The organizations had filed their suit against the State Department under the Obama administration. In May 2013, the government had cited International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) when clamping down on Defense Distributed. In its statement SAF described ITAR is a Cold War-era law designed to control export of military items. The settlement has sparked anger from gun control advocates. “We're extremely concerned about a sudden settlement by the DOJ allowing blueprints for 3-D printed guns to be posted online, and we're looking forward to learning through our FOIA request exactly how this came to be,” tweeted the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence on July 13. The Brady Campaign filed its Freedom of Information Act request on Jul. 12. “During the Obama years, the government thought that 3D printed guns posed a serious threat to national security. I'm not aware of anything that has changed except who sits in the White House,” Avery Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, told Fox News in an emailed statement. “Untraceable and undetectable guns that bypass our bipartisan background check system put us all at risk. The country deserves answers from the Trump Administration about why it thinks this is a good idea. Making it easier for dangerous people to get guns is reckless and stupid, and this is going to make Americans less safe." Advocates for gun control have argued that 3D-printed guns could also pose security challenges as they pass through airport X-ray machines. Wilson, who describes current 3D-printed guns as “mostly curiosities,” said that the “big” and “bulky” characteristics of the weapons would help identify them. “I doubt seriously that it’s a real problem,” he added. “If it is a problem, then the [security] norms will have to change.” The State Department has also provided some context on the settlement. “This was a voluntary settlement entered into following negotiations between the Department of State and the plaintiffs,” said a State Department spokesperson, in a statement emailed to Fox News. “The court did not rule in favor of the plaintiffs in this case. In other contexts, courts have upheld ITAR controls on technical data.” “The settlement in this case comes as the U.S. Government is reviewing comments on new proposed regulations to transfer oversight from the U.S. Department of State to the U.S. Department of Commerce of exports of firearms and related items that do not provide the United States with a critical military or intelligence advantage or, in the case of weapons, are not inherently for military end use, including many items that are widely available in retail outlets in the United States and abroad,” the spokesperson added. “These proposed regulations are part of an ongoing effort to create a simpler, more robust export control system that eases industry compliance, enhances enforceability, and better protects truly sensitive technologies.” The State Department says that, in addition to reducing regulatory burden on U.S. industry, the proposed regulations would eliminate the ITAR requirements at issue in the Defense Distributed case. “In the course of formulating these proposed regulations, the U.S. Government conducted a national security analysis in the context of the rulemaking effort,” the spokesperson added. “Based on this analysis, it was determined that certain firearms and related items that are widely available for commercial sale, and technical data related to those items, is of a type that does not offer a critical military or intelligence advantage to the United States.”

This marks the end of gun control (I want to highlight the author:) By John R. Lott | Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/07/20/this-marks-end-gun-control.html The federal government has finally recognized the obvious – that sharing instructions on how to make guns with 3D printers counts as constitutionally protected speech. Despite little fanfare, this is an important victory for First Amendment rights. It also represents a real blow to the increasingly futile cause of gun control. The U.S. Justice Department announced a legal settlement and its surrender to the First Amendment arguments July 10 made in a case brought by Cody Wilson, founder of Defense Distributed. Wilson, 25, created a ruckus in May 2013 when he announced his successful design of a plastic gun. In just two days, 100,000 copies of the handgun blueprint were downloaded from Wilson’s website. The most downloads came from Spain, followed by the U.S., Brazil and Germany. The heavy downloading in Spain, Brazil and Germany likely reflected attempts to evade extremely restrictive handgun regulations in those countries. People are going to download these files whether they're legal or not. As we've seen with movies, file sharing is unstoppable. The most pirated TV program in 2017 was the seventh season of “Game of Thrones,” with well over 10 million illegal downloads in most weeks. Within days of the gun file being uploaded, the Obama State Department served Wilson with a letter threatening criminal prosecution for violating federal export controls. Wilson immediately complied with the order, but there was no way to stop further downloading. Within a week of the initial uploading, the file could be downloaded on the Internet from over 4,000 different computers around the world. The Justice Department’s recent settlement with Wilson is very favorable to him, allowing Wilson to provide the printing instructions “for public release (meaning unlimited distribution) in any form.” The government also compensated $40,000 of Wilson’s legal costs. Someone has just as much right to release the instructions in a computer file as in a book or newspaper article. The groups that submitted arguments on Wilson's behalf were ideologically diverse, ranging from conservative self-defense advocacy groups to the Reporters’ Committee for Freedom of the Press and Electronic Frontier Foundation. Anyone with access to a metal 3D printer can make guns functionally and aesthetically indistinguishable from any gun that can be bought in a store. Such metal printers are available for less than $2,000. How the government will stop people from obtaining these printers isn’t exactly obvious. Proposals to require background checks, mandatory serial numbers and even a registration process for printers are easily defeated. Even if printers are registered with the government, what is going to stop gangs from stealing them? And the designs for making your own printer have been available on the Internet for years. 3D printers make the already extremely difficult job of controlling access to guns practically impossible. The government is not going to be able to ban guns, and limits on the size of bullet magazines will be even more laughable than before. Many parts of a gun can be made on very inexpensive, plastic 3D printers or even from simple machine tools. It will be even more difficult to impose background checks, which have proven quite useless anyway. The government has been no more effective at stopping criminals from getting guns than at stopping them from obtaining drugs. That isn’t too surprising, as drug gangs are the source of both illegal drugs and guns. The goal of eliminating guns is ultimately a fool’s errand. Every place in the world that we have crime data for that has banned all guns or all handguns has seen a subsequent increase in murder rates. Even island nations such as Ireland and Jamaica – with coastlines that are more easily monitored and defended than land borders would be – have faced five- or six-fold increases in murder rates after guns were banned. It is understandable that governments want to regulate 3D printing, but gutting the First Amendment is too high a cost. This settlement may bring some awareness to the futility of gun control regulations that only disarm the law-abiding.

NICE!@!!!!!!!

@Gopher this is the graphic I talked to you about, on the barrel length versus gas system, depending if you want to run subsonic, supersonic, or both. FOr the hogs your after, I wouldn't even worry about the subsonic stuff, unless you're running a suppressor in the future, brother. Down the road, if you do that, just change out to an adjustable gas block... In a nutshell, 16" with a Carbine Gas System does it all, unless ALL you do is subsonic shooting, without the suppressor on...

Here's the data from the MicroMOA site, which is down now: (BIG KUDOS to @survivalshop for grabbing this info before it went down!!! ) AR-15 Platform 300 BLK Conversion Subsonic Ammo 16" car 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.12 16" car 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.125 16" car 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.106 16" car 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.11 16" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.067 16" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.086 9.5" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.093 9.5" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.093 8.1" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.104 8.1" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.12 8.1" pistol 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.086 8.1" pistol 300 BLK SUPRESSED 0.093 AR-15 Platform 300 BLK Conversion Supersonic Ammo 16" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.0625 16" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.059 16" car 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.099 16" car 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.093 9.5" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.073 9.5" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.067 8.1" pistol 300 BLK UNSUPRESSED 0.076 8.1" pistol 300 BLK SUPPRESSED 0.067 The 300 Blackout data has been compiled from Micro MOA

It'll work like a champ, man. I've got at least one perfectly functional large-frame with that combo, maybe two. I'd really have to look at them to tell. I damn sure didn't need to cut any of those Armalite EA1095 spring to make the guns work. The VLTOR A5 extensions (either 6 or 7 position) and the Armalite AR-10 Carbine extension are truly interchangeable on large frame ARs. You can even intend to put a full VLTOR A5 recoil system on your AR15, and use the Armalite AR-10 Carbine extension instead - fully functional. I've done this on a Grendel build: Armalite AR-10 Carbine extension, VLTOR A5 H1 buffer, DSG M16A2 recoil spring. Flawless operation on the Grendel, operating as an A5 recoil system. So, use either of those extensions, any AR15 H3 carbine buffer, and the Armalite EA1095 spring. If you have issues with that, its not because of an issue with your recoil system, I'll guarantee that or buy the parts straight from you for what you had to pay. One caveat, though - show me receipts, I trust no one... I'm getting into a new-ish type of recoil system for these things. I'll report on that shortly. I received all the parts today - at work. I don't work on Fridays, so it has to wait until Monday night for initial inspection. Details coming soon. Word of caution on VLTOR parts - receiver extensions, specifically. They are making some longer (A5-length) pistol extensions now. Obviously, you don't want that for a buttstock - it won't go on there. However, if you're building a pistol large-frame... that will be the ticket. They only make the AR15-lengthed extension in a FIVE-POSITION. That's the one with the 7" internal depth, for the AR15 Carbine recoil system, only... That one doesn't work on large-frame ARs. They make a 6-position (RE-10/A5SR) and they make a 7-position (RE-A5). Either of those two have an internal depth of 7 5/8" and will work just fine on the large-frame ARs, when you're looking at the 3.250" H3 buffer. Always use the EA1095 spring from Armalite in these combos. I can't comment on the flat-wires and all that fancy jazz, because I found out what works (really well), and I stuck to it. VLTOR receiver extension options: https://www.vltor.com/product-category/ar/receiver-extensions/

Armalite EA1095 spring with that combo, and it doesn't have to be cut at all. Where ever that info came from, it's pure BS. I'd like to see who's saying that, though...

For the iron sights on the 16" Grendel M4, I came up with this data, and made my iron-sight zero to this last weekend. Ran out all the math for the 16" best iron-sight zero distance, and came up with this, for 25 yards. This looks the best, of everything I made as inputs. I'm talking individual yards for different charts. Max of less than 7" at a 25-yard zero, out to 300 yards. Even one yard either way (off 25) opened that up. Knocked out the zero this morning on the gun. Functionally, it ran like a champ, with zero functional issues whatsoever. The first few rounds got kinda scratched up brass, but that smoothed out in the next 10 or so rounds. Sharp edges on the barrel extension? Probably was, until it got beat on a little. Since the dope chart above works out to 0.2" low at 300 yards, with a 25-yard zero, I set the MaTech rear sight at 300 yards to dothis 25-yard zero. It adjusts from 200 to 600 in 100-steps, and it's got a 350 step in there, too. I know if I don't touch anything, I'm 5.2" high from point of aim at 100 yards, 6.6" high at 150 yards, and 6.3" high at 200 yards. I have the option to drop that sight back to the 200-yard setting, and it'll get better. I didn't do that today, and check what kind of an effect it had, because I only set out targets at 25 yards (for zero) and 100 yards to see how it does on steel. At the 25 yard target, it was only paper zero target. I came up with this for a zero, on a clean target, and I gave it one more click right after this group, then cluttered the target all up with another mag. I'll take it. At 25 yards, I would have liked to see them all touching, but I was literally a combination of hungover, jacked on coffee this morning, shooting iron sights on a table with a front bag and no rear support. In that trajectory chart above, I'm a max of 1.4 mils high at 100 yards, 1.7 mils low at 450 yards, and dead-on at 300 yards, as far as holdovers. Out to 300 yards, it's at 6.6" high at 150 yards at is highest flight path, and 0.2" low at 300 yards, giving me a 6.8" trajectory spread out to 300 yards with irons. I'll take that.

Didn't expect this one. The 9th Circus backed a lower court’s decision to suspend California’s ban on the possession of large magazines. Shocking. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/20/liberal-9th-circuit-surprises-with-pro-2nd-amendment-decision-blocking-california-ammo-ban.html

Can't find that model on Windham's website - can you put up a pic? Cone with a collapsible stock setup on it? If the answer is yes to that, how long is that buffer? I think you'll be able to reduce recoil greatly, quickly, if that buffer is what i think it is. Disregard, on the pic, man - found one out there on the www. Please measure that buffer length, weight of it if you can. Measure the relaxed length of the recoil spring, and count the number of coils on it. Lastly, measure the internal depth of that receiver extension (tape measure bottomed out in it, how long is it internally, to the top edge of the extension). According to the web, you have this one: I can probably tell you what those parts are, dimensionally, because it's identical to all the newer Bushmaster stuff (made by the Bushmaster employees that didn't move out of the state). Just looking for confirmation...

I know!!!