98Z5V

Right - is it bottoming out like it's supposed to, or is coil bind stopping it now. that would be my concern as well. Coil bind will lead to a broken spring, in short order.

Minor update - I got effed in the aaaay by a "UPS Mechanical Failure." everything is pushed by a day. It's now, "gets delivered on Friday, assembled Friday night, test fired in my work parking lot Saturday night after we close, and range fired on Easter Sunday, with the hot chick from work... :hethan:

But... ALL WOMEN are at least a 4 crazy. Period. Thus endeth the sermon.

How's this for one effed up UPS tracking status... i'm so pissed off... 04/02/2015 4:00 A.M. A mechanical failure has delayed delivery. We're working to resolve the problem and deliver your package as soon as possible. / Delivery will be rescheduled.

Not for the Germans - when they produce both rifles from the same factory. The G36 barrels have always sucked. The operating system is ingenious, though, and the 33 smokes this rifle, badly.

Why do you need the scope that far back? Is the eye relief that bad on that thing, that you have to have it buried at the back of the rifle? I have scopes all over on rifles, but that seems "pretty far back," IMHO. Every rifle is different, every scope is different, I get that. Here's an example of the scope placement on my MK12 build: I will get the glass as low as I can on a rifle. This was as low as I could go on this one. Different rifle, ADM Recon mount with a Millett DMS-1 scope, 30mm. As low as I could make this one, but as far forward as I could push it and still get proper eye relief. It's damn near a true 1x, and I can use the back up sights through it, roughly. It's not right on, but they work through the scope on 1x, but not at longer ranges. If your eye relief requires you to have the scope THAT far back, then consider shortening up the length of pull to move YOU forward, and move the scope forward. If you're a giant like Larry, this might not help you... <lmao> Let's see how long it takes for Larry to see this... :banana:

Oh, you'll find something, Chase, and it'll be FIVE years old. You'll get all giggitty and respond to it, in a fret. At that point, I will club you like a baby seal. :bat:

The real question that I want an answer to is.... When the fuk did they open a Cabela's on the Tulalip Indian Reservation?! That schit wasn't there when I lived there!

^^^ <lmao> Water was too deep for you last time - you even had Jon skeered to make the drive... Shepp, FAT IRMA gets delivered tomorrow. She get's test fired in my work parking lot Friday night after we close, range fired on Easter Sunday, and then I've got exactly one week to get her sandblasted and painted up for ya. :hethan:

I also DO know that I can go up on the powder - i'm nowhere near flattened primers, or any other pressure signs on this load. New Hornady brass and CCI Large Rifle Primers. I can go up - but I damn sure don't want to... Max listed in some references I've found is 55.0gr of 3031. No fucking way am I gonna do that...

It should be around 1750fps - I haven't chrono'd it. I don't want to know the numbers. I don't want to try to calculate the felt recoil. I don't want to come to the realization that i shouldn't be beating the schit out of myself like that... <lmao> I do know that at 50 yards and 100 yards, the point of aim/point of impact is damn near the same - it's flat for those distances. At 150 it drops a little, at 200 it drops a little more. At 500 yards, it's about 10 feet low, and it throws one HELL of a mound of dirt in the air... :hethan:

What P223 do you have that's 4~14 magnification? Or, are you talking about setting a P223 at the same magnification, and comparing?

You never know, man. You might be hunting with that rifle, drop that bastard out of a treestand, and eff your scope all up. In that case, remove the scope, continue the hunt with your iron sights, which are zero'd for 300 (if they are). No need to come home "empty," just because of a broken scope. There are many reasons to have to remove it - mostly, none are good, though. Don't totally ditch the option of having back ups. just set it up right, brother.

Chase, they almost banned your account today - big discussion about it. I talked them out of it. <thumbsup>

This isn't bad - it's only TWO YEARS old. Some of these 4-year old threads are getting to me, though... People need to READ what they are responding to...

He text me the answer - this is gonna be sWEEEEEt!!! :hethan:

Paso, before you buy any mount or rings, run the math. You need to keep the scope as low as possible. As close to bore centerline as you can. I don't run a single set of extra high rings on any AR. You don't need extra high rings to clear a rear sight - if you do, then look for a smaller profile rear sight, and set the rifle up differently. On very few rifles, will you ever be flipping up a rear sight and running it through your scope anyway - if your scope isn't a true 1x magnification, then your iron sights will never properly focus through it anyway. On anything 3x minimum magnification, you can't see the front sight post through the magnified optic anyway. In almost all circumstances, if you have to resort to removing the optic, and going to back up sights, then you're removing the magnified optic to do that. That's where QD attachment comes in handy. On that very note, if you're removing your magnified optic to resort to your back up sights, then something bad happened anyway, and the scope is now a throw-away - most of the time, in most reasons when you'd need to remove it. Measure, run the math, and get the lowest rings you can get away with. Warne lists their method of measurement right on their website.

Thanks, to the one who did the deed - I don't want that searchable through the interwebz, that this company is producing tight chambers - if they're not producing tight chambers. i didn't suspect that they were, and would be shocked if they did. OP, glad it's resolved. <thumbsup>

I think Adam either broke the bolt catch, or he broke the pin/screw that secures the bolt catch in the lower.

Nope, not in the least. Any scope with at least 3x magnification will already be focused further out than the front sight post. In short, the magnified optic blows right past it, and you don't even see it. This happens in some brands of scopes, at even lower magnification. Fear not. Mount up your magnified optic.

NOW you went and did it, Shib!... <lmao> IMHO, they're both stock triggers that are SUPPOSED to be mil-spec patterned. Lots to be desired in that trigger system. it wouldn't matter if one brand felt smoother in your rifle than the other, because someone else could buy those same two brands and find the opposite result. Because? They are both mass-produced, made from a minimum standard on materials, and produced in mass quantity with machine bits that wear - thus you won't wind up with two that are exactly, in every dimension, the complete same. In a nutshell, they suck. They have their battlefield place, but they suck.

Don't be surprised - you should see how I roll...

OP, your receiver extension is the right depth for the recoil system you have. So is your buffer. That last pic of your BCG, and it's distance to the bolt catch - that's where you want to be. If that's 2 quarters, run it. If it's 6 quarters - run it. whatever that is, that's what you're stuck with. What this comes down to is machining. Not good, but workable. Just have to live with it. EDIT - this is the reason you're seeing the issues that you are. No need to look any further, test any other components, etc. This is the issue, and it happens more often than you think.

19 left? Is that correct?

I'm with all the others, Rob... :fawkdance: