How well do Tac Ops rifles shoot FGMM 175gr? I know the rifles will shoot lights out with 168 FGMM, but I was interested in hearing from some Tac Ops owners who have experience shooting these rifles with other loads. I hope to be receiving my Kilo 51 soon and with the good deal Palmetto Sate Armory has on their FGMM 175 ammo I wanted some input before I purchased some. If you guys have had luck with any other factory loads, I would love to hear about them also as I dont reload. Thanks.
Tac Ops FGMM 175?
- Thread starter ogonzalez13
- Start date
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
most all barrels got some little quirk....yours should digest them 175's real well....dope should be real close till about 600yd or so.....
most all barrels got some little quirk....yours should digest them 175's real well....dope should be real close till about 600yd or so.....
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
Both shoot the same. Like Boltripper says, the 175's will work better further out. I haven't used 168's in years.
Both shoot the same. Like Boltripper says, the 175's will work better further out. I haven't used 168's in years.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
Great, thanks for the replies. As for as asking Mike, I know he is a very busy guy and try to keep the questions I ask him to a minimum. We have spoke on several occasions and sometimes I fear calling him, as many of you know he can talk your head off, LOL. I feel the that the less I call him, the more time he has to build mine and others rifles.
Great, thanks for the replies. As for as asking Mike, I know he is a very busy guy and try to keep the questions I ask him to a minimum. We have spoke on several occasions and sometimes I fear calling him, as many of you know he can talk your head off, LOL. I feel the that the less I call him, the more time he has to build mine and others rifles.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that?
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that? </div></div>I can't wrap my head around it either, how a round will "tighten up" at range, but I am told that is the case.
To clarify- a .75 inch at 100 yard ammo will not tighten up to 5/8 inches at 200, more along the lines of a .75 moa group at 100 yards will tighten up to 5/8 moa at 200. The group is still increasing in size, just not in an angular fashion.
Why that is? I don't know. It doesn't make sense to me, but I have seen it on paper and others have confirmed it as well.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that? </div></div>I can't wrap my head around it either, how a round will "tighten up" at range, but I am told that is the case.
To clarify- a .75 inch at 100 yard ammo will not tighten up to 5/8 inches at 200, more along the lines of a .75 moa group at 100 yards will tighten up to 5/8 moa at 200. The group is still increasing in size, just not in an angular fashion.
Why that is? I don't know. It doesn't make sense to me, but I have seen it on paper and others have confirmed it as well.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
I have been shooting almost exclusively 175 and 180's. The 175 is FGMM. The 180's are Federal Hi Power... not available anymore. Today, I shot a 5-shot group at 300 yards that measured .93". That is just under .3 MOA, which seems to be a good 5-shot group for me with 175's. I also posted a target on one of my other threads at 100 yards and one at 600 that had a 5-shot group that was just under .6 MOA.
I will have to shoot a little more to figure out what is truly representative at 300 and 600 yards, but 175's seem to shoot pretty well. I will need to try out some 168's when I get the chance. I just happen to have a lot of 175's on hand. 168's just have a tough time staying accurate at 1,000 yards.
BTW... I have a 1:10" twist barrel, so I always planned on shooting heavier bullets, not that a 1:12" won't stabilize a 175 gr... it should.
I have been shooting almost exclusively 175 and 180's. The 175 is FGMM. The 180's are Federal Hi Power... not available anymore. Today, I shot a 5-shot group at 300 yards that measured .93". That is just under .3 MOA, which seems to be a good 5-shot group for me with 175's. I also posted a target on one of my other threads at 100 yards and one at 600 that had a 5-shot group that was just under .6 MOA.
I will have to shoot a little more to figure out what is truly representative at 300 and 600 yards, but 175's seem to shoot pretty well. I will need to try out some 168's when I get the chance. I just happen to have a lot of 175's on hand. 168's just have a tough time staying accurate at 1,000 yards.
BTW... I have a 1:10" twist barrel, so I always planned on shooting heavier bullets, not that a 1:12" won't stabilize a 175 gr... it should.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that?</div></div>
The bullet travels in a helical (corkscrew) pattern. At long range, it doesn't really matter where the bullet is in the helix. At short range, it actually makes a difference.
Long range shooters use much higher twist rates than short range benchrest folks do and the reason is that the higher twist rate gives you better stability at long range, while giving you more "wobble" (basically, a bigger helix) at short range.
This is a great article by German Salazar where he tested heavy bullets with low twist rate. Interestingly, he found that heavy bullets undertwisted were much more accurate at short range, but destabilized and made poor groups at 600.
Dan Lilja also had an interesting article here where he talks about twist rate and accuracy. He came up with a theoretical model that shows how much accuracy you lose through greater twist. It is all theoretical, but again, the basis of the theory is that a greater twist rate amplifies any imbalance in the bullet.
It is a miracle that Mike is able to get his rifles to shoot as tight as they do at 100 yards with boat tail bullets. Boat tails are really meant to be accurate at 300 yards and beyond. Given all of this, you can see how accuracy in a 308 using boat tail bullets will not degrade very much in the first 300 yards, and in fact, it is possible that groups as measured in MOA (not in absolute terms) will tighten up.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that?</div></div>
The bullet travels in a helical (corkscrew) pattern. At long range, it doesn't really matter where the bullet is in the helix. At short range, it actually makes a difference.
Long range shooters use much higher twist rates than short range benchrest folks do and the reason is that the higher twist rate gives you better stability at long range, while giving you more "wobble" (basically, a bigger helix) at short range.
This is a great article by German Salazar where he tested heavy bullets with low twist rate. Interestingly, he found that heavy bullets undertwisted were much more accurate at short range, but destabilized and made poor groups at 600.
Dan Lilja also had an interesting article here where he talks about twist rate and accuracy. He came up with a theoretical model that shows how much accuracy you lose through greater twist. It is all theoretical, but again, the basis of the theory is that a greater twist rate amplifies any imbalance in the bullet.
It is a miracle that Mike is able to get his rifles to shoot as tight as they do at 100 yards with boat tail bullets. Boat tails are really meant to be accurate at 300 yards and beyond. Given all of this, you can see how accuracy in a 308 using boat tail bullets will not degrade very much in the first 300 yards, and in fact, it is possible that groups as measured in MOA (not in absolute terms) will tighten up.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that? </div></div>I can't wrap my head around it either, how a round will "tighten up" at range, but I am told that is the case.
To clarify- a .75 inch at 100 yard ammo will not tighten up to 5/8 inches at 200, more along the lines of a .75 moa group at 100 yards will tighten up to 5/8 moa at 200. The group is still increasing in size, just not in an angular fashion.
Why that is? I don't know. It doesn't make sense to me, but I have seen it on paper and others have confirmed it as well. </div></div>
Ive never seen it with .308 175 SMKs and the like, but I have damn well have seen it with the big 7mm Berger VLDs.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: bm11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In all three of my .308's, 175's don't group as tight at 100 yards as 168's do. It seems they need a little distance to "settle in."
Obviously they are the superior projectile at distance, however. </div></div>
I'm definitely not doubting you on that, but I never understood how any round gets tighter on the way out. Anyone know the physics behind that? </div></div>I can't wrap my head around it either, how a round will "tighten up" at range, but I am told that is the case.
To clarify- a .75 inch at 100 yard ammo will not tighten up to 5/8 inches at 200, more along the lines of a .75 moa group at 100 yards will tighten up to 5/8 moa at 200. The group is still increasing in size, just not in an angular fashion.
Why that is? I don't know. It doesn't make sense to me, but I have seen it on paper and others have confirmed it as well. </div></div>
Ive never seen it with .308 175 SMKs and the like, but I have damn well have seen it with the big 7mm Berger VLDs.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body">good post Carter.
Thanks for breaking it down so I can understand it. </div></div>
Excellent explanation!!! Easiest to see with a .50 Cal, as with my McMillan BMG!
rasheed
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body">good post Carter.
Thanks for breaking it down so I can understand it. </div></div>
Excellent explanation!!! Easiest to see with a .50 Cal, as with my McMillan BMG!
rasheed
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body">good post Carter.
Thanks for breaking it down so I can understand it.</div></div>
Thanks. I am just trying to get my post count up so I can sell something.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body">good post Carter.
Thanks for breaking it down so I can understand it.</div></div>
Thanks. I am just trying to get my post count up so I can sell something.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body">good post Carter.
Thanks for breaking it down so I can understand it.</div></div>
Thanks. I am just trying to get my post count up so I can sell something. </div></div>lol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: medic103</div><div class="ubbcode-body">good post Carter.
Thanks for breaking it down so I can understand it.</div></div>
Thanks. I am just trying to get my post count up so I can sell something. </div></div>lol
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
Thanks for the replies guys. I have placed an order for the FGMM 175's. Cant wait to run them through my rifle and start shooting in the local matches.
Thanks for the replies guys. I have placed an order for the FGMM 175's. Cant wait to run them through my rifle and start shooting in the local matches.
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ogonzalez13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the replies guys. I have placed an order for the FGMM 175's. Cant wait to run them through my rifle and start shooting in the local matches. </div></div>
While the specified ammo for Tac Ops rifles .25 MOA guarantee is FGMM 168 and Mike Rescigno uses FGMM 168s' to "certify" each Tac Ops rifle prior to shipment, FGMM 175s' shoot extremely well. It is <span style="font-style: italic">really</span> close, and it could be me, but I seem to shoot the FGMM 168s' a little tighter. Maybe its' old age creeping up on me - a .308 has mild recoil anyway - but the FGMM 168s' have <span style="font-style: italic">very slightly</span> less recoil than the FGMM 175s' and its' easier for me to keep the reticle centered when shooting them.
Both will shoot sub-.25 MOA groups at 100 yards with the right driver and light wind. I've shot my X-Ray in Mid-Range (600 Yard) F-Class matches in it's F-T/R trim (front Harris bipod, rear Red Tac Gear Bag) using FGMM 175s' against OPEN CLASS 6.5-47s' shooting pet handloads, sitting in flat-bottom stocks, and riding mechanical front and rear rests. Last time I shot against two 6.5-47s' I finished a very close third, so IMHO the FGMM 175s' shoot great. Of course, maybe I had a good day and both of those guys had bad days.
Keith
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ogonzalez13</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for the replies guys. I have placed an order for the FGMM 175's. Cant wait to run them through my rifle and start shooting in the local matches. </div></div>
While the specified ammo for Tac Ops rifles .25 MOA guarantee is FGMM 168 and Mike Rescigno uses FGMM 168s' to "certify" each Tac Ops rifle prior to shipment, FGMM 175s' shoot extremely well. It is <span style="font-style: italic">really</span> close, and it could be me, but I seem to shoot the FGMM 168s' a little tighter. Maybe its' old age creeping up on me - a .308 has mild recoil anyway - but the FGMM 168s' have <span style="font-style: italic">very slightly</span> less recoil than the FGMM 175s' and its' easier for me to keep the reticle centered when shooting them.
Both will shoot sub-.25 MOA groups at 100 yards with the right driver and light wind. I've shot my X-Ray in Mid-Range (600 Yard) F-Class matches in it's F-T/R trim (front Harris bipod, rear Red Tac Gear Bag) using FGMM 175s' against OPEN CLASS 6.5-47s' shooting pet handloads, sitting in flat-bottom stocks, and riding mechanical front and rear rests. Last time I shot against two 6.5-47s' I finished a very close third, so IMHO the FGMM 175s' shoot great. Of course, maybe I had a good day and both of those guys had bad days.
Keith
Re: Tac Ops FGMM 175?
My Tac Ops has a 20" 1/10 Kreiger and shoots the 175's just as well as the 168's. Out to 800 I am very happy with my groups. 900 and 1000 are still kicking my but for wind calls.
I am using hand loads with 175 SMK, Once fired FGMM 168 brass, 210 primers and Varget. It was an absolute tack driver at 44.0 grains but did not have enough oomph at 1000 in cold weather. 45.0 grains is shooting well but a wee bit sticky if I let a round sit in a hot chamber for a bit. I am still trying to narrow it down a bit more...
My Tac Ops has a 20" 1/10 Kreiger and shoots the 175's just as well as the 168's. Out to 800 I am very happy with my groups. 900 and 1000 are still kicking my but for wind calls.
I am using hand loads with 175 SMK, Once fired FGMM 168 brass, 210 primers and Varget. It was an absolute tack driver at 44.0 grains but did not have enough oomph at 1000 in cold weather. 45.0 grains is shooting well but a wee bit sticky if I let a round sit in a hot chamber for a bit. I am still trying to narrow it down a bit more...
