Ridgeline Defense RD-15 LPR
- Thread starter B4forever
- Start date
Mine really seems to be about an moa shooter. I tried two aac match loads which were all above an inch. Also used fgmm 77 grn smk which printed just around an inch with a group right over and most right under. Little disappointed in that. May try a few more loads and see what I get. Have several non precision oriented ar15s that will hang with this rifle accuracy wise.
try razor core and bh mk262 normal and tmk.
May just be the proof barrel they vary it seems.
Maybe it’s all in my head but going from a normal can to a low back pressure can and adding a Jp scs buffer seemed to help mine. Maybe just shooter comfort helping
Tried with and without the can with same results. All 5 shot groups.
And what did their test group for the rifle look like? While given some of the test groups Ridgeline has shown, I would be very tempted to be disappointed given some of their other specimens.
However, practically speaking, I"m not so sure I wouldn't rather a gun like yours that would just be MOAish across the board with everything...as pretty much all of my scoped AR15's have a "pet" factory match load that's 0.75ish MOA and will accept other match ammo no better than 1.25-1.5 MOA.
I also don't know YOU, but I would say for ME... getting the contact I would require to eek the most accuracy capable out of this system on a consistent basis would not be realistic with merely the bare CTR stock on the gun as is.
Last edited:
I shoot tons of gas gun and am a pretty capable shooter In general. Was shooting with a rear bag as well but put it up already when I took the picture.
Test target was .556 (lol) but haven’t gotten anything close to that. Not saying it isn’t capable but I’m not seeing it so far.
For reference here’s a 6x5 I did in one sitting with an sr25. If anyone’s shot gassers then they know this isn’t easy with a large frame.
Here’s a bolt gun group from just the other day
Test target was .556 (lol) but haven’t gotten anything close to that. Not saying it isn’t capable but I’m not seeing it so far.
For reference here’s a 6x5 I did in one sitting with an sr25. If anyone’s shot gassers then they know this isn’t easy with a large frame.
Here’s a bolt gun group from just the other day
My LPR came with a test target that said 0.824". It looked really big to me so I measured it and the smallest I can make it was 0.894". Whatever potato, potato right? That barrel would shoot anything between .7 and 1.3". I pulled it off and put a 20" WOA in it and now it shoots .3 - .4". That proof barrel had a rough looking bore for a cut rifled barrel. If you scroll up and see the groups that people post they generally look between 3/4 and 1" with all the normal caveats: "I'm not a good group shooter", "If I had taken my time", "I only shot 3 RDS", "I was in a hurry". From everything I've seen, what you see on the last couple pages is what you're going to get out of an LPR. It wouldn't be the first time that the first batch or prototype rifles shot really well and the manufacturer switched to a large run of contract barrels for production and had an unexpected change in accuracy.
The magic in the LPR is not in the barrel they ship the gun with. It is in the upper receiver and handguard. Other than that the gun is pretty ham and eggs. Unfortunately, the barrel plays a pretty big part in accuracy.
Johndeer, It might be worth trying to look at your gas block and see if it's hitting the handguard. When I removed my barrel, the production gas block had a few marks on it but I didn't pay enough attention to see if that was from me sliding the handguard off or if it had been making contact while shooting. The handguard is pretty slim and it is a pretty beefy gas block.
The magic in the LPR is not in the barrel they ship the gun with. It is in the upper receiver and handguard. Other than that the gun is pretty ham and eggs. Unfortunately, the barrel plays a pretty big part in accuracy.
Johndeer, It might be worth trying to look at your gas block and see if it's hitting the handguard. When I removed my barrel, the production gas block had a few marks on it but I didn't pay enough attention to see if that was from me sliding the handguard off or if it had been making contact while shooting. The handguard is pretty slim and it is a pretty beefy gas block.
I appreciate the insight. I have had really good luck with proof barrels. I don’t really understand why these wouldn’t be just as good. I love the profile as well. Who were they using before switching to proof?
Here are two pics from my 243 large frame I built for thermal hunting. Used v seven receivers. First 2 groups I shot with it. Although it’s a carbon proof barrel not steel.
I put that same barrel in a SOLGW receiver set and have had really good luck with it. Everything has been sub moa and 75gr Hornady match is sub 1/2”. I will post pictures tomorrow
Whats the handguard flex on the RD15 like?
My SOLGW Broadsword Builder kits are Bolt Gun rigid. Surprisingly my Radian's have the most Handguard flex out of all my rifles.
My SOLGW Broadsword Builder kits are Bolt Gun rigid. Surprisingly my Radian's have the most Handguard flex out of all my rifles.
By feel, just applying pressure to the barrel from left to right.
When comparing to other (Standard) design Handguard and Upper Receivers that attach the handguard directly to the barrel nut, Geissele, SOLGW Broadsword, the Radian has the most flex compared to the above.
I have three total, 2 Builder kits that have custom barrels with oversized Barrel extensions requiring mandatory thermal fitting and a 16" Factory complete.
POI Shift is a completely different animal for testing flex, but I can tell you even though the SOLGW Broadsword Builder kits are a Standard design compared to Semi-monolithic uppers like Seekins, Mega, LaRue, JP they're just as rigid if not even more so.
Last edited:
The misunderstanding here is that no two barrels (even out of the same production lot) are never same in regards to the velocity, accuracy or precision that they will produce. I know this is something that conceptually people say they know here on the hide but there is also a massive cognitive dissonance present that is absolutely maddening at times. So please don’t take the following as personal, you just happened to have proposed the seemingly paradoxical problem of producing barrels in meaningful quantities.
So let’s rehash for everyone’s sake, how closely a barrel from one to the next (within a single production lot) will preform is mostly a factor of:
A. the established tolerance set forth (if you ask for lose tolerances that’s what you get).
B. the actual tolerance the barrel is actually machined to (a function of skill and equipment).
C. the tolerance AND PERCENTAGE of quality control to which the barrel is assessed post production.
A good example of (A) is low end budget barrel companies. Barrels (particularly barrel extensions) in this range are typically held to classic M16 TDP standards. Yes you will have companies that will change a dimension here and there to make it their own but because it’s tried and true departure from TDP is rare and of course this mean it’s cheaper to produce because you’re simply copying a vast degree of someone else’s homework. The thing is those original TDP specifications range widely for several reasons. Commonality chiefly is the purpose but the most importantly you have to remember that the M16/AR15 was never designed with the original intention of being a precision platform and the commonly industry wide accepted tolerances reflect that.
Follow the use of TDP specs, and moving on to addressing (B), another way to save money in production is to run machines as long as you can. This is counterproductive for the most part in regards to precision machining, even with the modern wonder of CNC it takes time to do it right. Time equals money in this case and you get what you pay for.
Lastly (C) quality control is the final component and control measurement. Industry standards range but the typical quality control measurement of components tolerances is done in “batch” testing. Common practice in batch testing is usually about 10% of the give production lot is tested. At Ridgeline Defense every single LPR barrel proceeds through quality control for tolerance confirmation. This QC process actually accounts for 23% of total LPR production timeline. We could honestly save so much money but it’s a practice that besides insuring correctly tolerance parts end up at assembly, this also holds our barrel manufacturer (Proof) in integrity, whom to date has only let a single barrel slip out of hundreds. Actually the barrel was fine it was a barrel extension and honestly I don’t mind having a 0.2% failure rate on a critical component.
Now to tie this all back together, the established tolerances, actually machining practice and attention to details in the accepted run out will produce barrels with a range of performance.
A cheaper production model will have a wider range of performance across barrels and a more costly production model (assuming they’re actually doing the work and not just over charging) A good way to think about it is to use standard deviation model to establish the statistical probability of getting a good barrel. As a theoretical exercise let’s say we have a company that produced barrels capable of a 1 MOA medium (this is under the assumption we have a shooter of proven skill and ammunition of capable of producing resolution) as is so commonly claimed as a “guarantee” in today’s industry. So using a model of standard deviation, which I’ll be the first to admit is somewhat simplified, you got a 50/50 chance of purchasing a 1 MOA or better shooter and actually almost 2 out 10 of you all will be getting 0.75 MOA. Not bad …but remember 4 or so out of those 10 is getting a 1.25 to 1.5ish shooter and that’s exactly what these companies are literally banking on because realistically out of those 5 shooters with 1MOA+ barrels, 3 will convince themselves its a 1 MOA gun with 3 shot cherry picked groups, 1 will say “it’s probably just me” and accept it and maybe, maybe 1 will send it back but even if they do, it’s still profitable to the budge barrel company.
Now to date the average or medium recorded group size from live fire proofing every single LPR is just a hair under 0.65 MOA (I don’t have my work computer at hand). So using a standard deviation, and normal distributions which again isn’t exactly perfect for managing data due to some probability of asymmetrically distribution but gives a rough prediction that almost 7 out of every 10 LPRs are going to be roughly between 0.32 to 0.98 MOA (pre-barrel break in). This actually lines up pretty close with what we see with outliers as well, 1 in 10 off the line turns out to be absolutely phenomenal and shoots 0.2-0.3s and 1 in 10 is at the other end need a little more barrel break into settle below 1 MOA. And of course there is the occasional LPR that will not preform to standard and gets completely rebuilt, which is an unfortunate cost factor but necessity of keeping a standard.
Bottom line is this that roughly some 50% of the LPRs out there are going to be hovering in that 0.7 to 1 MOA range, I am sorry but it’s just statistical probability. Yes your other Proof barrel might have been better or you might even have a PSA that legitimately does 0.25 MOA (I hate it but I’ve seen it with my own eyes) but remember that’s a sample size of less than a handful of barrels and while understandable significant to individual is statistically insignificant across the board. With all things being equal (shooter/ammo/optic) we are making sub-MOA rifles by the hundreds that shoot before they ship. That’s the magic.
Original bolts and BGCs were OEMed through Toolcraft. While we enjoyed them we had a rash of issues with left over stainless steel tumbling media being left in places like under the extractor which began to exceed QC thresholds. Additionally there seemed to be a growing occurrence of documented premature wear/failure of the gas-rings (if you have the OG Toolcraft BCG contact costumer service and we will replace the rings free of charge) and have since switched to Microbest.
Utilizing LAMs mount to the rails, we have seen an approximately 0.2-0.3 Mil shift in the laser between bipod/tripod/barricade positions. Near inconsequential for traditional LAM applications and WMLRF within 600-800 but potentially an issue with WMLRFs when at extreme ranges or very small targets. I would still strongly recommend a diving board mount, fact is AR sized aluminum rails are always going to have some flex, plus diving boards keeps the LRF from bumping and grinding on barricades.
I understand all that completely. No personal shot taken. I do feel like though many people shoot a sub moa group and automatically call a rifle a sub moa shooter and that’s just not the case. I have a 16 inch sr15 that will routinely produce 3/4 moa groups but I know it’s more of a 1.2 moa rifle with match ammo.
I’m gonna keep messing with the lpr and get more rounds through it and see if I can get those groups to shrink. Question though ? Would it be possible to purchase another barrel to try if I can’t get the results I’m looking for? Obviously if it passes ridgelines criteria on accuracy id be happy to pay for it. This is gonna be my main go to precision ar15 and my ocd will bother the shit out of me if I’m just shooting moa +\-
There are 2 divergent paths of the ARC, we have investigated and prototyped the first and simplest route which what a lot of manufacturers have presented. I think is viable for the hobbyist, but the reality is to build a truly functional ARC platform that can handle the riggers of combative engagements there is a serious amount of work to be done. We are entering into that stage currently.
As for stripped uppers, it’s coming this year.
Thank you for the reply.
I'm still planning on testing one of the complete RD-15.
The Radian MOD 1 has a surprisingly compact Handguard inner diameter that restricts the ability to run a .875 Adjustable Gas Block. I recently finished a 6ARC Radian build with a 22" Bartlein, +2 Gas with a .800 Gas Block Journal that has provided a clean fitting compromise between the two most popular Gas Block Journals .750 and .875
The RD-15 appears to have larger inner diameter that can comfortably run .875 AGB, is there a chance you could confirm that?
Great news on the stripped uppers! Will they be held to the same dimensions and thus
require induction fitting?
Thanks
Rudy, How many rounds do you shoot before printing the test target? Is it the first 5rds out of the gun? Or do you have a standard "break in" before going for record on the test target? Or is it as you say, barrel dependant and once a particular barrel starts shooting like you'd expect, you just pull one of those groups as the test target?
That's good to know. I had a BCG that was struggling to unlock and when I took it apart, some debris fell out they looked like metal or carbon. I will check the gas rings. It was completely blocking the firing pin channel at the end of the bolt. Seems to be resolved now.
Are you able to say roughly when that switch was made? Feel free to PM if that is preferred.
Currently we run an 0.83ish, so there is more room than some but it’s kinda dependent on the external dimensions of the gas block.
After a battery of testing different after market barrels i think most will be able to fit with a little freezer action, generous lubricant and persuading mallet…but like the upper receiver lugs there are going to inevitably be combinations that don’t work without something like conduction heating.
Typically if everything goes right, first round is in the berm, coarse adjustment to zero board, two rounds plotted, fine adjustment to the record target, 5 rounds fired.
Now if my memory is correct I think I wrote about this before but sometimes rifles shoot great right out of the gate, but sometimes you can literally watch the rifle settle in those 5 rounds, usually down and to the right. If that’s what I am seeing (or if a pull a shot
) I’ll give it another go, but after that its back to the shop and having done this a bunch I usually know what the problem is already.The easiest way to tell the difference is the logo on the bolt, the Toolcraft is a little bigger and pretty much fills the ejection port.
Yes to LMT and Vltor..
Aero anything! is the equivalent to the Syphilis, Herpes infested Barracks Rat that no one wants to touch until they're 6 months into a Deployment and so broke they can't afford a halfway decent Hooker.
Well what were the LMT and Vltor poly results ?
And aero enhanced is the same pattern as Seekins which both accept sgt of arms with integrated arca
This set up is awesome you don’t know what your missing
And aero enhanced is the same pattern as Seekins which both accept sgt of arms with integrated arca
This set up is awesome you don’t know what your missing
I can tell you Seekins and Aero adjustable .750 gas block do not fit if that gives you an idea. I am using a BRT lo profile fixed .750".
I thought I had posted this earlier but I don’t see it anywhere so I’ll I throw it up here again as these two targets are a good visual representation of barrels “breaking in” and what I mean by that is even high quality barrels are going to need a few bullet pushed through them before they settle in. Sometimes there’s little burs that are going to round off or lubricants that need to burn up.
A2 is an example of the “walk in” where you can track the POI shift (usually down and a little right) until it settles in. B7 is an example of the “Jump in” where the POI will be kinda loosey - goosey and then suddenly shift down and right and just start knotting up. Most of the LPR are sorted out in the first 8 rounds but sometimes they need few more, rarely more than 15 or 20. If it’s not shooting by then there is usually something else at play and I will enough data to diagnose.
Note this is a little different than what most people are referring too as “break in”, where in which people are commonly see velocity stabilizing and accuracy/precision tightening. 100-200 rounds is a pretty safe threshold for that full break in.
Yeah the shift occurred around midway through FDE. The simplest way to tell the logo.
The Toolcraft BCG is the front one, larger logo and slightly lighter coloration. The Mircobest in the back has a smaller logo and has a slightly subdued coloration.
If anyone needs replacement gas-rings hit me up at [email protected] and get you going with Blake to send you new ones ASAP.
Edit: apparently it’s [email protected] sorry for the confusion.
Last edited:
