-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
- Thread starter toshu
- Start date
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
instead of that get access to the online videos on this site MUCH better info
instead of that get access to the online videos on this site MUCH better info
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Didn't shop around much, but got our copy through Amazon. Thought it was well made and had some good info. I also do the Hide's on-line training. Have picked up good info from both.
Didn't shop around much, but got our copy through Amazon. Thought it was well made and had some good info. I also do the Hide's on-line training. Have picked up good info from both.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I'm about halfway through it myself, it has some good info. I'm definitely a beginner, so I probably get a bit more out of it than most on here. Still have to re-watch a few portions, to really understand what all is going on. If you can get it for a decent price, I'd do it. If you're fairly experienced however, it may not be worth the money (full price, that is).
I'm about halfway through it myself, it has some good info. I'm definitely a beginner, so I probably get a bit more out of it than most on here. Still have to re-watch a few portions, to really understand what all is going on. If you can get it for a decent price, I'd do it. If you're fairly experienced however, it may not be worth the money (full price, that is).
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
If you are brand new to precision shooting, there will be many, many times when you will say, "huh?". The video assumes you already know some basic-intermediate stuff. I found myself taking notes while pausing and rewinding. Overall, it is a great video.
If you are brand new to precision shooting, there will be many, many times when you will say, "huh?". The video assumes you already know some basic-intermediate stuff. I found myself taking notes while pausing and rewinding. Overall, it is a great video.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: QuietM4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you are brand new to precision shooting, there will be many, many times when you will say, "huh?". The video assumes you already know some basic-intermediate stuff. I found myself taking notes while pausing and rewinding. Overall, it is a great video. </div></div>Overall, it's a good idea poorly executed in order to satisfy a contract.
If you are experienced in precision shooting there will also be many times that you will say "Huh?!"
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: QuietM4</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you are brand new to precision shooting, there will be many, many times when you will say, "huh?". The video assumes you already know some basic-intermediate stuff. I found myself taking notes while pausing and rewinding. Overall, it is a great video. </div></div>Overall, it's a good idea poorly executed in order to satisfy a contract.
If you are experienced in precision shooting there will also be many times that you will say "Huh?!"
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen.
Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mkollman74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen. </div></div>
This/\ you can skip disc 1 and 2 and go straight to disc 3
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mkollman74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen. </div></div>
This/\ you can skip disc 1 and 2 and go straight to disc 3
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mkollman74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen. </div></div>This/\ you can skip disc 1 and 2 and go straight to disc 3 </div></div>Agreed. Caylen knows what he is doing.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mkollman74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen. </div></div>This/\ you can skip disc 1 and 2 and go straight to disc 3 </div></div>Agreed. Caylen knows what he is doing.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mkollman74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen. </div></div>This/\ you can skip disc 1 and 2 and go straight to disc 3 </div></div>Agreed. Caylen knows what he is doing. </div></div>
are you guys saying that Hodnett doesn't know what he is saying? I guess I don't get why even is hating on the man so much on here. Was there alot of entertainment value in the videos... of course there was. You paid 40 something bucks for them. If there wasnt you'd be bitchin about that. Was there some different techniques that maybe are not taught on here...sure, he is his own instructor with his own techniques, some of which are controversial. You dont like it, go make your own videos. But dont say the man doesn't know what he's talking about, like he's some kinda amateur or something.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Niles Coyote</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: mkollman74</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Best part of the whole DVD is Caylen. He became the precision rifle instructor for Magpul after the DVD set was basically finished. I was in the PR1 class when the film crew came and got some additional footage with Caylen. IMHO its too bad he wasn't involved from the beginning.
Perhaps one day they will try again with a more prominent focus on solid instruction from Caylen. </div></div>This/\ you can skip disc 1 and 2 and go straight to disc 3 </div></div>Agreed. Caylen knows what he is doing. </div></div>
are you guys saying that Hodnett doesn't know what he is saying? I guess I don't get why even is hating on the man so much on here. Was there alot of entertainment value in the videos... of course there was. You paid 40 something bucks for them. If there wasnt you'd be bitchin about that. Was there some different techniques that maybe are not taught on here...sure, he is his own instructor with his own techniques, some of which are controversial. You dont like it, go make your own videos. But dont say the man doesn't know what he's talking about, like he's some kinda amateur or something.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Not saying he can’t shoot as its clear he can, BUT, he does a great job at being a salesman for Horus/Larue and that comes across quite clearly and turned me off. There just was not enough emphases on the fundamentals that make or break long range shooting with consistency. And then there was the whole shooting through ground cover issue but that has been talked to death in another thread...
It reminded me of watching those infomercials that looked like a real hunting show called "Best of the West" where they tried their best to sell you a ultra super deer sniper scope the Huskurmama or whatever it’s called.
Not saying he can’t shoot as its clear he can, BUT, he does a great job at being a salesman for Horus/Larue and that comes across quite clearly and turned me off. There just was not enough emphases on the fundamentals that make or break long range shooting with consistency. And then there was the whole shooting through ground cover issue but that has been talked to death in another thread...
It reminded me of watching those infomercials that looked like a real hunting show called "Best of the West" where they tried their best to sell you a ultra super deer sniper scope the Huskurmama or whatever it’s called.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I don't like the title, never mind the content. What's important to good shooting has nothing to do with art. But art, when tied to shooting, is a concept perceived by the novice shooter to mean good shooting comes about from the exclusive designs or notions promoted by a particular shooter. This is nonsense. What's important to good shooting was realized centuries ago. These facts are applicable to experts, as well as beginners.. It's why most any book or learning text on marksmanship has the same content. It's also why there are no revolutionary books on the matter of shooting methodology in general. But the most onerous thing about tying art to shooting is that it suggests enlightenment is the key to success with it all. The title of the DVD implies, buy and be enlightened like never before. The truth is that discipline is the key to success with it all. I think I will call my book on marksmanship "The Disciplined Marksman in an Undisciplined World".
One more thing, there are at least two contributors to this forum who have stated that wind reading is an art. I'm not sure if they are alluding to being wind reading artists or not. These contributors did not summarize the artistic application a shooter must make to effectively counter for the effects of wind; but, at any rate, that's a subject for another thread.
I don't like the title, never mind the content. What's important to good shooting has nothing to do with art. But art, when tied to shooting, is a concept perceived by the novice shooter to mean good shooting comes about from the exclusive designs or notions promoted by a particular shooter. This is nonsense. What's important to good shooting was realized centuries ago. These facts are applicable to experts, as well as beginners.. It's why most any book or learning text on marksmanship has the same content. It's also why there are no revolutionary books on the matter of shooting methodology in general. But the most onerous thing about tying art to shooting is that it suggests enlightenment is the key to success with it all. The title of the DVD implies, buy and be enlightened like never before. The truth is that discipline is the key to success with it all. I think I will call my book on marksmanship "The Disciplined Marksman in an Undisciplined World".
One more thing, there are at least two contributors to this forum who have stated that wind reading is an art. I'm not sure if they are alluding to being wind reading artists or not. These contributors did not summarize the artistic application a shooter must make to effectively counter for the effects of wind; but, at any rate, that's a subject for another thread.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Munson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">are you guys saying that Hodnett doesn't know what he is saying? </div></div>He knows what he is saying. But he's repeating what he heard. And he's saying it incorrectly: Not all of it, but he gets enough of it wrong. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Munson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was there some different techniques that maybe are not taught on here...sure, he is his own instructor with his own techniques, some of which are controversial.</div></div>I dispute that. What I see of these so-called 'new' techniques are ones he borrowed from others, like Jacob Bynum, and that what makes them 'controversial' is that he is not fluent in the techniques that he borrowed.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Munson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You dont like it, go make your own videos. But dont say the man doesn't know what he's talking about, like he's some kinda amateur or something.</div></div>There is big money behind the production of those videos, and a contract, and a deadline, and when you watch them you can easily tell who paid the bills. I guess that makes him a professional, because he did it for money. But many of us remember him from not so long ago when he was known as 'Cowboy Doc'. A nice guy. And a smooth talker. But, yes: Otherwise an amateur at the precision rifle stuff. If you know his credentials with a precision rifle, as compared to Caylen's for example, then please share them with us.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Munson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">are you guys saying that Hodnett doesn't know what he is saying? </div></div>He knows what he is saying. But he's repeating what he heard. And he's saying it incorrectly: Not all of it, but he gets enough of it wrong. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Munson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was there some different techniques that maybe are not taught on here...sure, he is his own instructor with his own techniques, some of which are controversial.</div></div>I dispute that. What I see of these so-called 'new' techniques are ones he borrowed from others, like Jacob Bynum, and that what makes them 'controversial' is that he is not fluent in the techniques that he borrowed.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Munson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You dont like it, go make your own videos. But dont say the man doesn't know what he's talking about, like he's some kinda amateur or something.</div></div>There is big money behind the production of those videos, and a contract, and a deadline, and when you watch them you can easily tell who paid the bills. I guess that makes him a professional, because he did it for money. But many of us remember him from not so long ago when he was known as 'Cowboy Doc'. A nice guy. And a smooth talker. But, yes: Otherwise an amateur at the precision rifle stuff. If you know his credentials with a precision rifle, as compared to Caylen's for example, then please share them with us.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I think the videos had alot of good content in them for anybody that wants to watch them, be it beginner or expert. I didnt see anywhere where he was pushing a single piece of equipment that would make you a better shooter or trying to be a salesman, I suppose if you look hard enough I could see him trying to be football lineman to. I see him showing and talking about what he prefers on his rifle and what he would spend his own money on. I think the videos are well worth what you pay for them. There are always going to be people that disagree with what is shown and this video is nothing more then one guys prospective on how he does it, and quite well I might add. He has some pretty good formulas for wind on there as well. Watch it you wont loose any shooting skills because of it like some that I have seen.
I think the videos had alot of good content in them for anybody that wants to watch them, be it beginner or expert. I didnt see anywhere where he was pushing a single piece of equipment that would make you a better shooter or trying to be a salesman, I suppose if you look hard enough I could see him trying to be football lineman to. I see him showing and talking about what he prefers on his rifle and what he would spend his own money on. I think the videos are well worth what you pay for them. There are always going to be people that disagree with what is shown and this video is nothing more then one guys prospective on how he does it, and quite well I might add. He has some pretty good formulas for wind on there as well. Watch it you wont loose any shooting skills because of it like some that I have seen.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didnt see anywhere where he was pushing a single piece of equipment that would make you a better shooter or trying to be a salesman,</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I see him showing and talking about what he prefers on his rifle and what he would spend his own money on.</div></div>Don't be naiive; it's the same thing. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are always going to be people that disagree with what is shown and this video is nothing more then one guys prospective on how he does it, and quite well I might add.</div></div>He's a good shooter, there's no disputing that. But the video is not about his perspective on his own shooting, it's meant to be - and sold as - instruction and education for others. That's where I begin to have problems with the material. Because it is meant as a method, but it's not his proprietary method and he gets some of it wrong according to its originator(s).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didnt see anywhere where he was pushing a single piece of equipment that would make you a better shooter or trying to be a salesman,</div></div><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I see him showing and talking about what he prefers on his rifle and what he would spend his own money on.</div></div>Don't be naiive; it's the same thing. <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nuclabuyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There are always going to be people that disagree with what is shown and this video is nothing more then one guys prospective on how he does it, and quite well I might add.</div></div>He's a good shooter, there's no disputing that. But the video is not about his perspective on his own shooting, it's meant to be - and sold as - instruction and education for others. That's where I begin to have problems with the material. Because it is meant as a method, but it's not his proprietary method and he gets some of it wrong according to its originator(s).
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Graham, what parts did he get wrong. Does Caylan, or Bynum have any good info I can read. No need to learn me, but can you point me in the right direction? Thanks.
Graham, what parts did he get wrong. Does Caylan, or Bynum have any good info I can read. No need to learn me, but can you point me in the right direction? Thanks.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DFOOSKING</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...The guys with modest experience will tell you the vast majority of the dvd isn't really all that helpful. Its the small bits of gold that you have to sift to get to that were helpful.....</div></div>
^^agreed. I thought some of the wind call info was good.
Hoping the video that Frank is putting together is better.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DFOOSKING</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...The guys with modest experience will tell you the vast majority of the dvd isn't really all that helpful. Its the small bits of gold that you have to sift to get to that were helpful.....</div></div>
^^agreed. I thought some of the wind call info was good.
Hoping the video that Frank is putting together is better.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Glocksteady</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Graham, what parts did he get wrong. Does Caylan, or Bynum have any good info I can read. No need to learn me, but can you point me in the right direction? Thanks. </div></div>At last count I had almost a page of things wrong. Frank got more, but he knows more than I do about teaching marksmanship. A course at Rifles Only, or with Caylen at Cascade, or the online training here will yield better results without all the marketing, the implied 'originality' claims and the BS.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Glocksteady</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Graham, what parts did he get wrong. Does Caylan, or Bynum have any good info I can read. No need to learn me, but can you point me in the right direction? Thanks. </div></div>At last count I had almost a page of things wrong. Frank got more, but he knows more than I do about teaching marksmanship. A course at Rifles Only, or with Caylen at Cascade, or the online training here will yield better results without all the marketing, the implied 'originality' claims and the BS.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
LOL. Thanks home slice. I bought the Magpul DVDs several months ago. I will buy the online training next. I would take a course but want to spend my next wad on a .338 and high end optic. You're always helpful. Thanks for the info. I will Google Bynum. I hope the online training here is truthfully as full of info as everyone says. I can't imagine everyone saying it's great when it isn't. Too many people on here speak too highly of it.
LOL. Thanks home slice. I bought the Magpul DVDs several months ago. I will buy the online training next. I would take a course but want to spend my next wad on a .338 and high end optic. You're always helpful. Thanks for the info. I will Google Bynum. I hope the online training here is truthfully as full of info as everyone says. I can't imagine everyone saying it's great when it isn't. Too many people on here speak too highly of it.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I had 3 pages of legal size paper I presented as information that was <span style="font-style: italic">"off " </span> or just flat out wrong, and the final video was heavily edited to actually <span style="font-style: italic">remove</span>, much more of the sales pitch aspect of his <span style="font-style: italic">"instruction"</span> for lack of a better word.
We are taking a different tact in our video, presenting the instruction from the beginning to inform the shooter. The more you know about shooting a precision rifle the better armed you will be to recognize the issues. We encourage people to ask, "why" and we have straight forward answers to "why" we do things a certain way. We don't' walk around a circle for 8 minutes dodging the issue when called on it, or it turns out to be wrong. <span style="font-style: italic">(good example is the bs presented when the humidity was not as important as noted)</span>
The Online training here has over 60 lessons posted, 10 minute videos of actual instruction down to the fine detail. We try to answer the question completely and not leave it hanging out there. Here is the teaser for "trigger school" noted it was posted in 2009...
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R_1wG7iANNI&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R_1wG7iANNI&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
Understand this is a "teaser" and the actual lesson is twice as long and is just about Trigger Control... gives you can idea of the time spent instructing versus giving you the pitch.
Graham is also correct, Todd's initial instruction into precision rifle was from Jacob Bynum @ Rifles Only. The concepts that seem unique originated there, with Jacob and are not new or unique to the the Magpul video. Knowing the history helps understand this, because many don't' know the history, and can't find the resume, they assume they're hearing it from the source. The running joke in certain circles is, <span style="font-style: italic">"Todd never heard someone else's good idea he didn't like for himself". </span>
With the SH Video we are taking like a Day at Class, starting with Day One which focuses on the fundamentals and moves forward from there. I am not looking to cram as much in as possible, but to give the viewer an actual instructional video they can use. Lesson are broken down and I try to answer the "why" behind successful shooting. Many of these concepts are not new, in fact they are very old, just open to interpretation which has caused distortions of the elements tied to good shooting. We attempt to bring it back to its foundations. Not our ideas, just tried and true methods of good shooting.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MY8rwJYX8pg&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MY8rwJYX8pg&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
There are some good elements in the Magpul video and Caylen's contribution is definitely the highlight and the part I recommend people focus on. The rest is pure entertainment, and much of it to be taken with a grain of salt.
80 - 40 - 20
I had 3 pages of legal size paper I presented as information that was <span style="font-style: italic">"off " </span> or just flat out wrong, and the final video was heavily edited to actually <span style="font-style: italic">remove</span>, much more of the sales pitch aspect of his <span style="font-style: italic">"instruction"</span> for lack of a better word.
We are taking a different tact in our video, presenting the instruction from the beginning to inform the shooter. The more you know about shooting a precision rifle the better armed you will be to recognize the issues. We encourage people to ask, "why" and we have straight forward answers to "why" we do things a certain way. We don't' walk around a circle for 8 minutes dodging the issue when called on it, or it turns out to be wrong. <span style="font-style: italic">(good example is the bs presented when the humidity was not as important as noted)</span>
The Online training here has over 60 lessons posted, 10 minute videos of actual instruction down to the fine detail. We try to answer the question completely and not leave it hanging out there. Here is the teaser for "trigger school" noted it was posted in 2009...
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/R_1wG7iANNI&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/R_1wG7iANNI&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
Understand this is a "teaser" and the actual lesson is twice as long and is just about Trigger Control... gives you can idea of the time spent instructing versus giving you the pitch.
Graham is also correct, Todd's initial instruction into precision rifle was from Jacob Bynum @ Rifles Only. The concepts that seem unique originated there, with Jacob and are not new or unique to the the Magpul video. Knowing the history helps understand this, because many don't' know the history, and can't find the resume, they assume they're hearing it from the source. The running joke in certain circles is, <span style="font-style: italic">"Todd never heard someone else's good idea he didn't like for himself". </span>
With the SH Video we are taking like a Day at Class, starting with Day One which focuses on the fundamentals and moves forward from there. I am not looking to cram as much in as possible, but to give the viewer an actual instructional video they can use. Lesson are broken down and I try to answer the "why" behind successful shooting. Many of these concepts are not new, in fact they are very old, just open to interpretation which has caused distortions of the elements tied to good shooting. We attempt to bring it back to its foundations. Not our ideas, just tried and true methods of good shooting.
<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MY8rwJYX8pg&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MY8rwJYX8pg&feature=share&list=UUwHsnyWOaQNtrGjJKsTgegg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>
There are some good elements in the Magpul video and Caylen's contribution is definitely the highlight and the part I recommend people focus on. The rest is pure entertainment, and much of it to be taken with a grain of salt.
80 - 40 - 20
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Yeah Lowlight, I have really enjoyed your stuff on YouTube. I'm sure I will enjoy the official online training even more so. I just got a PayPal account and will sign up. Thanks for your help. Same to you Graham. I have learned TONS of stuff just reading these forums for free. Can't wait to delve into 8 pages of in depth goodies.
Yeah Lowlight, I have really enjoyed your stuff on YouTube. I'm sure I will enjoy the official online training even more so. I just got a PayPal account and will sign up. Thanks for your help. Same to you Graham. I have learned TONS of stuff just reading these forums for free. Can't wait to delve into 8 pages of in depth goodies.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I am a beginner in the precision shooting community with less 500 rounds down a bolt action rifle but that is rapidly increasing as I just got my first Budget precision rifle finally put together this past week. I have how ever been lurking here in the hide for almost 2 yrs studying and learning from the likes of you all. That being said I bought the magpul Videos with intentions of them being instructional and to an extent they were but not to the level I expected them to be. At first I thought they were good then quickly realized that it was the entertainment of watching people shoot what I couldn't that I liked. when I went through them the seconded time I realized I wasn't getting as much out of them as I expected . Mind you I bought these because I couldn't afford a training course at the time and now if I was to do it again I would not buy them and put that money towards the online training here on SH which i still have not signed up for yet and that is only cause I found a local 1 day beginners training course put on by one the members here and spent my money on that instead. I thought it would be better since it is hands on. So next month I will be joining the online training. After watching the day one teaser Frank I think that is exactly what I was looking for the first time and wait anxiously for them to be completed so I can learn more.
Now This is my opinion as a beginner and probably not worth much, but it is what it is, just an opinion
I am a beginner in the precision shooting community with less 500 rounds down a bolt action rifle but that is rapidly increasing as I just got my first Budget precision rifle finally put together this past week. I have how ever been lurking here in the hide for almost 2 yrs studying and learning from the likes of you all. That being said I bought the magpul Videos with intentions of them being instructional and to an extent they were but not to the level I expected them to be. At first I thought they were good then quickly realized that it was the entertainment of watching people shoot what I couldn't that I liked. when I went through them the seconded time I realized I wasn't getting as much out of them as I expected . Mind you I bought these because I couldn't afford a training course at the time and now if I was to do it again I would not buy them and put that money towards the online training here on SH which i still have not signed up for yet and that is only cause I found a local 1 day beginners training course put on by one the members here and spent my money on that instead. I thought it would be better since it is hands on. So next month I will be joining the online training. After watching the day one teaser Frank I think that is exactly what I was looking for the first time and wait anxiously for them to be completed so I can learn more.
Now This is my opinion as a beginner and probably not worth much, but it is what it is, just an opinion
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Online training, lesson one, straight back, Jacob Bynum. Google, LinkedIn, Jacob Bynum, Director of Rifles Only. Only 5 min and already learning. I like the .pdf files, nice large print for aging eyes. Nice pics, video is great to, not crappy, compressed, fuzzy video. Also audio sounds very clear as well. 12:48 AM and can't seem to put it down and go to bed. Thanks for the sleepless nights. Money well spent. Maybe you could get Graham one of those Rifle Only T-shirts for recruiting me!
Online training, lesson one, straight back, Jacob Bynum. Google, LinkedIn, Jacob Bynum, Director of Rifles Only. Only 5 min and already learning. I like the .pdf files, nice large print for aging eyes. Nice pics, video is great to, not crappy, compressed, fuzzy video. Also audio sounds very clear as well. 12:48 AM and can't seem to put it down and go to bed. Thanks for the sleepless nights. Money well spent. Maybe you could get Graham one of those Rifle Only T-shirts for recruiting me!
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I have a copy of the Magpul video- if you want to borrow it and watch it, that's cool- just pm me and I will send it to ya- just send it back when done-
I have a copy of the Magpul video- if you want to borrow it and watch it, that's cool- just pm me and I will send it to ya- just send it back when done-
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I would like to watch it. this is a generous offer and thank you
I would like to watch it. this is a generous offer and thank you
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
So after writing all that last night I bit the bullet and signed up for the online training just now. I figured it was a worthy investment and i needed to stop making excuses and just pull the trigger on it because I am not going to be able to attend a rifles only class for at least a year and this I guess is the next best thing so I hope it is every thing I've heard and more.
So after writing all that last night I bit the bullet and signed up for the online training just now. I figured it was a worthy investment and i needed to stop making excuses and just pull the trigger on it because I am not going to be able to attend a rifles only class for at least a year and this I guess is the next best thing so I hope it is every thing I've heard and more.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FamilyMan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So after writing all that last night I bit the bullet and signed up for the online training just now. I figured it was a worthy investment and i needed to stop making excuses and just pull the trigger on it because I am not going to be able to attend a rifles only class for at least a year and this I guess is the next best thing so I hope it is every thing I've heard and more. </div></div>
Be prepared not to sleep for a while. I spend a lot of time watching and rewatching the videos here. It is great. You'll get a lot out of it.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: FamilyMan</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So after writing all that last night I bit the bullet and signed up for the online training just now. I figured it was a worthy investment and i needed to stop making excuses and just pull the trigger on it because I am not going to be able to attend a rifles only class for at least a year and this I guess is the next best thing so I hope it is every thing I've heard and more. </div></div>
Be prepared not to sleep for a while. I spend a lot of time watching and rewatching the videos here. It is great. You'll get a lot out of it.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Hey All -
Its been awhile since I checked in with this thread. Intersting to read through the posts. To Munson, nuclabuyer, and anyone else who may have thought I was criticizing Mr. Hodnett - I was not. I was pointing out that IMHO the DVDs were a bit light on instruction and that (again IMHO) the footage with Caylen was the best part of the set. The rest was worth watching (once) but not what I was hoping for. That's less a criticism of Mr. Hodnett and more a criticism of the content.
Others here are in a far better position to explain what may or may not be accurate in terms of the Hodnett instruction. I don't really feel qualified to weigh in there. But I do know that Caylen knows how to present accurate material in a way that students (regardless of level of experience) can make use of. In other words, my comments were really about complimenting Caylen - not about criticizing Mr. Hodnett.
I say all of this as a guy who owns an OBR with a HDMR sporting a H59 reticle, so I am not a Hodnett/Horus/Larue hater. I just think that the DVDs weren't as useful as I'd hoped they would be.
After viewing LL's teasers, it seems that the Sniper's Hide training videos are likely to be more along the lines of what I was hoping for with the Magpul DVDs.
To each his own... different strokes... much love... I'm OK, you're OK... Do whatcha wanna do... etc.
Hey All -
Its been awhile since I checked in with this thread. Intersting to read through the posts. To Munson, nuclabuyer, and anyone else who may have thought I was criticizing Mr. Hodnett - I was not. I was pointing out that IMHO the DVDs were a bit light on instruction and that (again IMHO) the footage with Caylen was the best part of the set. The rest was worth watching (once) but not what I was hoping for. That's less a criticism of Mr. Hodnett and more a criticism of the content.
Others here are in a far better position to explain what may or may not be accurate in terms of the Hodnett instruction. I don't really feel qualified to weigh in there. But I do know that Caylen knows how to present accurate material in a way that students (regardless of level of experience) can make use of. In other words, my comments were really about complimenting Caylen - not about criticizing Mr. Hodnett.
I say all of this as a guy who owns an OBR with a HDMR sporting a H59 reticle, so I am not a Hodnett/Horus/Larue hater. I just think that the DVDs weren't as useful as I'd hoped they would be.
After viewing LL's teasers, it seems that the Sniper's Hide training videos are likely to be more along the lines of what I was hoping for with the Magpul DVDs.
To each his own... different strokes... much love... I'm OK, you're OK... Do whatcha wanna do... etc.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Everyone keeps talking about the pages they have of the stuff he said wrong, but noone has shown them. I couldn't find them atleast. Can someone point a link? I would love to see it, just for educational purposes.
I think most of what todd said in the videos is synonymous with what is taught in the online training, but just in less depth. So thats why I'm so surprised he is getting ripped apart. Its all the same. Get behind the rifle, set up the rifle to fit you and not other way around, follow through,make sure your not canting the rifle etc.. Nothing too crazy. I actually enjoyed the video because his teaching style kept stressing how actually simple stuff and its not magic.. If I remember correctly, he even said a couple times that he didn't make this stuff up.. That its just the fundamentals and what he and his team found to work best for them.
So what if he tried to push larue in it. Its a magpul video, what did you expect? Atleast its a quality brand and not something like NCStar. Magpul and himself didn't make it as charity work, they made it to make money. Frank makes money off his online training videos as well. And you know what, thats great! He provides value (his knowledge) and we buy it. Now I do understand that 'brand name dropping' is a bit more annoying than just charging more for videos.. But its magpul that sponsored these videos, thats how most big companies make money.
Everyone keeps talking about the pages they have of the stuff he said wrong, but noone has shown them. I couldn't find them atleast. Can someone point a link? I would love to see it, just for educational purposes.
I think most of what todd said in the videos is synonymous with what is taught in the online training, but just in less depth. So thats why I'm so surprised he is getting ripped apart. Its all the same. Get behind the rifle, set up the rifle to fit you and not other way around, follow through,make sure your not canting the rifle etc.. Nothing too crazy. I actually enjoyed the video because his teaching style kept stressing how actually simple stuff and its not magic.. If I remember correctly, he even said a couple times that he didn't make this stuff up.. That its just the fundamentals and what he and his team found to work best for them.
So what if he tried to push larue in it. Its a magpul video, what did you expect? Atleast its a quality brand and not something like NCStar. Magpul and himself didn't make it as charity work, they made it to make money. Frank makes money off his online training videos as well. And you know what, thats great! He provides value (his knowledge) and we buy it. Now I do understand that 'brand name dropping' is a bit more annoying than just charging more for videos.. But its magpul that sponsored these videos, thats how most big companies make money.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: timelinex</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Everyone keeps talking about the pages they have of the stuff he said wrong, but noone has shown them. I couldn't find them atleast. Can someone point a link? I would love to see it, just for educational purposes.</div></div>http://boardreader.com/thread/Todd_Hodnett_Magpul_video_Snipers_Hide_F_owghgX1on8x.html
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: timelinex</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> think most of what todd said in the videos is synonymous with what is taught in the online training, but just in less depth. So thats why I'm so surprised he is getting ripped apart. Its all the same.</div></div>It's not the same. For example, he gets the position of the support hand/fingers wrong when using Jacob's technique.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: timelinex</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Everyone keeps talking about the pages they have of the stuff he said wrong, but noone has shown them. I couldn't find them atleast. Can someone point a link? I would love to see it, just for educational purposes.</div></div>http://boardreader.com/thread/Todd_Hodnett_Magpul_video_Snipers_Hide_F_owghgX1on8x.html
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: timelinex</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> think most of what todd said in the videos is synonymous with what is taught in the online training, but just in less depth. So thats why I'm so surprised he is getting ripped apart. Its all the same.</div></div>It's not the same. For example, he gets the position of the support hand/fingers wrong when using Jacob's technique.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
It's a bit more than just listing things wrong... it's more of:
80 - 40 - 20
An instructor can impart 80% of what they are teaching effectively, the student at the time of the instruction will get 40% of that instruction, and then be able to successfully recite 20% of that after leaving. So if you have 20% of what is being told as "right" is he really wrong ?
Well yes, and no... so it is a bit more complex.
It's been a year since I reviewed the video <span style="font-style: italic">(privately)</span> before it was released. I don't have the exact pages, so most of it is from memory.
Many of it was like I said, the <span style="font-style: italic">"why"</span>... why didn't the scope zero at 100 yards when you added the STOMP, simple you put a 20MOA based on a 20 MOA Base giving you 40 MOA, hence you lost your 100 yard zero. That would have taken all of 1 minute to say, instead it was a commercial for Horus and the poor man's hold over reticle. Zero at the top dot, really, that is the answer. How about get rid of the STOMP Mount it had no reason to be there.
Why was the shooter with the 300WM / XM2010 losing his firing hand during recoil... ? Was it canting when he missed or was it trigger control because he was not supporting the rifle with the firing hand?
Why is your LOP a bit shorter, maybe because of positional shooting, and potentially other things a tactical shooter will encounter. A tactical shooter wants to take between 1/4" and 1/2" off the measured LOP as this helps with alternate positions.
Why does competition shooters like David Tubb Cant their rifles ? And why does it matter, or does it.
Why are we treated to 8 minutes of talking in circles when the humidity doesn't show a big difference in the software. Does 1/12th or 1/6th of a mil really matter, wasn't it something like 8.61 mils vs 8.69 mils ? (I don't have the disc anymore )
Wrong can certainly be debated if you aren't familiar with the original concept, as well that lack of detail matters. It's the difference between success and failure when employing the technique as clearly demonstrated. <span style="font-style: italic">(watch the shooter with the magnum closely)</span>
Would you have included the infomercial on the QD mounts then have it noted as being loose the next day leading you into that monkey drill ? Swapping scopes and getting on steel at 300 yards is not magic and was nothing more than cover for what I have been saying about certain QD mounts on precision rifles. Monkey drills are fun, we used to do them in boot camp, but with an instructional dvd, not so much.
A lot of the points of issue were the deflections, the misdirection when things didn't exactly line up. I am sure there more issues, but like I said, a year ago and I don't have to the discs to review. Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
Use your common sense, if it makes you tilt your head and go huh, you're probably on the right track. Especially if you hear a lot of talking without much being said.
It's a bit more than just listing things wrong... it's more of:
80 - 40 - 20
An instructor can impart 80% of what they are teaching effectively, the student at the time of the instruction will get 40% of that instruction, and then be able to successfully recite 20% of that after leaving. So if you have 20% of what is being told as "right" is he really wrong ?
Well yes, and no... so it is a bit more complex.
It's been a year since I reviewed the video <span style="font-style: italic">(privately)</span> before it was released. I don't have the exact pages, so most of it is from memory.
Many of it was like I said, the <span style="font-style: italic">"why"</span>... why didn't the scope zero at 100 yards when you added the STOMP, simple you put a 20MOA based on a 20 MOA Base giving you 40 MOA, hence you lost your 100 yard zero. That would have taken all of 1 minute to say, instead it was a commercial for Horus and the poor man's hold over reticle. Zero at the top dot, really, that is the answer. How about get rid of the STOMP Mount it had no reason to be there.
Why was the shooter with the 300WM / XM2010 losing his firing hand during recoil... ? Was it canting when he missed or was it trigger control because he was not supporting the rifle with the firing hand?
Why is your LOP a bit shorter, maybe because of positional shooting, and potentially other things a tactical shooter will encounter. A tactical shooter wants to take between 1/4" and 1/2" off the measured LOP as this helps with alternate positions.
Why does competition shooters like David Tubb Cant their rifles ? And why does it matter, or does it.
Why are we treated to 8 minutes of talking in circles when the humidity doesn't show a big difference in the software. Does 1/12th or 1/6th of a mil really matter, wasn't it something like 8.61 mils vs 8.69 mils ? (I don't have the disc anymore )
Wrong can certainly be debated if you aren't familiar with the original concept, as well that lack of detail matters. It's the difference between success and failure when employing the technique as clearly demonstrated. <span style="font-style: italic">(watch the shooter with the magnum closely)</span>
Would you have included the infomercial on the QD mounts then have it noted as being loose the next day leading you into that monkey drill ? Swapping scopes and getting on steel at 300 yards is not magic and was nothing more than cover for what I have been saying about certain QD mounts on precision rifles. Monkey drills are fun, we used to do them in boot camp, but with an instructional dvd, not so much.
A lot of the points of issue were the deflections, the misdirection when things didn't exactly line up. I am sure there more issues, but like I said, a year ago and I don't have to the discs to review. Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
Use your common sense, if it makes you tilt your head and go huh, you're probably on the right track. Especially if you hear a lot of talking without much being said.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. </div></div>I can't resist one-upping you on this one: At least your administrative assistant doesn't get interstate telephone threats.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. </div></div>I can't resist one-upping you on this one: At least your administrative assistant doesn't get interstate telephone threats.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
</div></div>
I can't believe that you received an e-mail from the FBI about loophole shots...surely that was a joke? It's simple math!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
</div></div>
I can't believe that you received an e-mail from the FBI about loophole shots...surely that was a joke? It's simple math!
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
No Joke,
I received more than one email and after laughing at it and playing dumb, within 24 hours I got a phone call that certain "friends' of the subject from the Spec Ops Community were complaining about it.
Lobbyist have their influence and will press on people when things are not going their way. The Politics of the gun world is a bit deeper and sharper than people might believe.
No Joke,
I received more than one email and after laughing at it and playing dumb, within 24 hours I got a phone call that certain "friends' of the subject from the Spec Ops Community were complaining about it.
Lobbyist have their influence and will press on people when things are not going their way. The Politics of the gun world is a bit deeper and sharper than people might believe.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JPipes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
</div></div>
I can't believe that you received an e-mail from the FBI about loophole shots...surely that was a joke? It's simple math! </div></div>
It is even simpler with commercially available ballistic software...sshhh
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JPipes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
</div></div>
I can't believe that you received an e-mail from the FBI about loophole shots...surely that was a joke? It's simple math! </div></div>
It is even simpler with commercially available ballistic software...sshhh
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JPipes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
</div></div>
I can't believe that you received an e-mail from the FBI about loophole shots...surely that was a joke? It's simple math! </div></div>
It is even simpler with commercially available ballistic software...sshhh</div></div>
Mechanical offset is magical!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: JPipes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Not to mention I tend to get phone calls from people that i am being too mean, so I have decided to tone down my criticism as someone gets butt hurt by my assessments of what is out there. Wouldn't want to get another email from the guy at the FBI that my site is posting classified math. Cause we all know math is a secret and can be dangerous, especially when combined with a bullet's trajectory.
</div></div>
I can't believe that you received an e-mail from the FBI about loophole shots...surely that was a joke? It's simple math! </div></div>
It is even simpler with commercially available ballistic software...sshhh</div></div>
Mechanical offset is magical!
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
This thread makes me think about copyright infringement. I'm writing a manual on M4 Marksmanship and very little I've written is original. I'm not real concerned about it, nevertheless, in the arena of ultra long range shooting, made possible by the ubiquitous muzzle brake, there are techniques for success at these unheard of distances which seem to cover new ground. My advice is if you think such techniques are original and are ones which you had a hand in creating, you might want to seek copyright protection, making a claim that the work is your intellectual property. This might prevent others from presenting such techniques without license from you.
This thread makes me think about copyright infringement. I'm writing a manual on M4 Marksmanship and very little I've written is original. I'm not real concerned about it, nevertheless, in the arena of ultra long range shooting, made possible by the ubiquitous muzzle brake, there are techniques for success at these unheard of distances which seem to cover new ground. My advice is if you think such techniques are original and are ones which you had a hand in creating, you might want to seek copyright protection, making a claim that the work is your intellectual property. This might prevent others from presenting such techniques without license from you.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
That is actually part of the problem Sterling,
There are certain people <span style="font-style: italic">(or persons)</span> who are claiming IP on things that were being used long before they stepped outside their own pond in terms of shooting.
It's like they are saying,<span style="font-style: italic"> "well everyone uses 2 + 2 and we all know it equals 4, but I use 3 + 1 and therefore 4 is covered by my IP claim"</span>. Or the idea that <span style="text-decoration: underline">"math"</span> is some how patentable in this case. There is even an on going discussion that these parties who are clearly late to the game are laying claim to Density Altitude in terms of deriving a ballistic solution. They will tell people that competing Product "B" is using the <span style="font-style: italic">"wrong math"</span> because they have the IP on the right math with their Product "A". And people buy it, meanwhile there is no such claim, just people with a captured audience who buy into bullshit.
It's not that this stuff is new, it's just expanding on the definitions of what was shooting gospel for the last 100 years. It's basically trying to erase the <span style="font-weight: bold">Game of Telephone</span> that has been played on the average shooter for so long. Most people copy what they see without any real instruction, so they have added their own definition to fill the void. Basically most of us are just bringing it back to the essentials in very detailed way so you can't say, <span style="font-style: italic">"straight back is what you believe", instead we say, "straight back really only works like this" </span>.
Take the wind formulas, Caylen in the video can't even talk about the one discussed as part of a Magpul Class because of the IP Claim. Take the British Method, the Rule of Nines, the Hoffman Formula, any of them, but not the one in the video... which is really just a different number saying the same thing. Instead of using 10 MPH they use the MPH based off the 1st number of the BC... so most use 4MPH. It's not streamline or ground breaking, it's just math, 3 +1 = 4 and it's now off limits to the other Magpul guys. Really you can take any ballistic calculator and assign a short cut to the math, voila you have IP... sure the ballistic program does the same thing, but I write it out long hand, so I win.
Trust me it is very complicated due to the parties trying to secure a name for themselves. Many of us were using a Mil Dot Reticle before they ever heard of the term "mils" and yet the overly complex screen door reticles are patented and protected. Nothing new, just more lines exactly like the iron anti aircraft reticles of the First and Second World Wars. At the end of the day this is the problem and why many of us take issue.
That is actually part of the problem Sterling,
There are certain people <span style="font-style: italic">(or persons)</span> who are claiming IP on things that were being used long before they stepped outside their own pond in terms of shooting.
It's like they are saying,<span style="font-style: italic"> "well everyone uses 2 + 2 and we all know it equals 4, but I use 3 + 1 and therefore 4 is covered by my IP claim"</span>. Or the idea that <span style="text-decoration: underline">"math"</span> is some how patentable in this case. There is even an on going discussion that these parties who are clearly late to the game are laying claim to Density Altitude in terms of deriving a ballistic solution. They will tell people that competing Product "B" is using the <span style="font-style: italic">"wrong math"</span> because they have the IP on the right math with their Product "A". And people buy it, meanwhile there is no such claim, just people with a captured audience who buy into bullshit.
It's not that this stuff is new, it's just expanding on the definitions of what was shooting gospel for the last 100 years. It's basically trying to erase the <span style="font-weight: bold">Game of Telephone</span> that has been played on the average shooter for so long. Most people copy what they see without any real instruction, so they have added their own definition to fill the void. Basically most of us are just bringing it back to the essentials in very detailed way so you can't say, <span style="font-style: italic">"straight back is what you believe", instead we say, "straight back really only works like this" </span>.
Take the wind formulas, Caylen in the video can't even talk about the one discussed as part of a Magpul Class because of the IP Claim. Take the British Method, the Rule of Nines, the Hoffman Formula, any of them, but not the one in the video... which is really just a different number saying the same thing. Instead of using 10 MPH they use the MPH based off the 1st number of the BC... so most use 4MPH. It's not streamline or ground breaking, it's just math, 3 +1 = 4 and it's now off limits to the other Magpul guys. Really you can take any ballistic calculator and assign a short cut to the math, voila you have IP... sure the ballistic program does the same thing, but I write it out long hand, so I win.
Trust me it is very complicated due to the parties trying to secure a name for themselves. Many of us were using a Mil Dot Reticle before they ever heard of the term "mils" and yet the overly complex screen door reticles are patented and protected. Nothing new, just more lines exactly like the iron anti aircraft reticles of the First and Second World Wars. At the end of the day this is the problem and why many of us take issue.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
It is my understanding that you can't copy right or patent a mathematical formula. You can possibly patent an application of that formula though, if it were unique. I don't think calculating density altitude is unique though.
It is my understanding that you can't copy right or patent a mathematical formula. You can possibly patent an application of that formula though, if it were unique. I don't think calculating density altitude is unique though.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
So I guess this means FamilyMan and I will get visits from the FBI for using secret math harmful to national security after signing up for online training? Great. I take it back about giving Graham a t-shirt. Give him wrist bracelets!
JK
I, for one, have always been a firm believer in using multiple sources for information (training). mkollman74, your observation wasn't taken as an attack and I would agree with timelinex's assessment of the Magpul DVDs. I learned a lot of basics from them but it was not in depth and specific. As Lowlight pointed out, it is over simplified. Basic. Since signing up for the SH online training, I can attest that for information about shooting, it is by far, more in depth and specific. It covers much more than the Magpul DVDs. I am glad I bought the DVDs as it was great for a beginner. I would have been disappointed to have done things the other way around. Having seen both, I can attest that the online training is WELL WORTH THE INITIATION FEE. I have found, through 51 years of life, you get what you pay for. It couldn't be more true in this instance either. At least with Magpul, you get the tough music and the retard rules of the range disclaimer. Wouldn't have guessed it is not safe to put the muzzle in my mouth.. JK again.
Seriously, the online training here as probably 99 percent more instruction, 99 percent less pushing product (which was obvious looking back at Magpul DVDs). However, had I not seen Graham's rant with Lowlight's follow ups, I might not have signed up. I live in Oklahoma and can barely afford this hobby, let alone, a trip to Michigan or any other long range shooting course i guess we all need our dreams I HATE liars more than anything. These guys are NOT just tooting their own horns. Sign up for the online training. YOU WILL BE MORE THAN GLAD YOU DID AND WONDER WHY YOU HESITATED. Due to my current employment situation, it was extremely difficult to come up with the initial money. I'm glad I did. It will keep me busy until I turn things around....again! Until then, it was a GREAT investment with HOURS (weeks) of reading, of invaluable information.
Thanks for the input from everyone (mkollman74, timelinex)
Thanks for the nudge (Graham, Lowlight)
For Christ's sake, give the man a t-shirt!!!
Steve
So I guess this means FamilyMan and I will get visits from the FBI for using secret math harmful to national security after signing up for online training? Great. I take it back about giving Graham a t-shirt. Give him wrist bracelets!
JKI, for one, have always been a firm believer in using multiple sources for information (training). mkollman74, your observation wasn't taken as an attack and I would agree with timelinex's assessment of the Magpul DVDs. I learned a lot of basics from them but it was not in depth and specific. As Lowlight pointed out, it is over simplified. Basic. Since signing up for the SH online training, I can attest that for information about shooting, it is by far, more in depth and specific. It covers much more than the Magpul DVDs. I am glad I bought the DVDs as it was great for a beginner. I would have been disappointed to have done things the other way around. Having seen both, I can attest that the online training is WELL WORTH THE INITIATION FEE. I have found, through 51 years of life, you get what you pay for. It couldn't be more true in this instance either. At least with Magpul, you get the tough music and the retard rules of the range disclaimer. Wouldn't have guessed it is not safe to put the muzzle in my mouth.
. JK again. Seriously, the online training here as probably 99 percent more instruction, 99 percent less pushing product (which was obvious looking back at Magpul DVDs). However, had I not seen Graham's rant with Lowlight's follow ups, I might not have signed up. I live in Oklahoma and can barely afford this hobby, let alone, a trip to Michigan or any other long range shooting course i guess we all need our dreams I HATE liars more than anything. These guys are NOT just tooting their own horns. Sign up for the online training. YOU WILL BE MORE THAN GLAD YOU DID AND WONDER WHY YOU HESITATED. Due to my current employment situation, it was extremely difficult to come up with the initial money. I'm glad I did. It will keep me busy until I turn things around....again! Until then, it was a GREAT investment with HOURS (weeks) of reading, of invaluable information.
Thanks for the input from everyone (mkollman74, timelinex)
Thanks for the nudge (Graham, Lowlight)
For Christ's sake, give the man a t-shirt!!!
Steve
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is actually part of the problem Sterling,
There are certain people <span style="font-style: italic">(or persons)</span> who are claiming IP on things that were being used long before they stepped outside their own pond in terms of shooting.
It's like they are saying,<span style="font-style: italic"> "well everyone uses 2 + 2 and we all know it equals 4, but I use 3 + 1 and therefore 4 is covered by my IP claim"</span>. Or the idea that <span style="text-decoration: underline">"math"</span> is some how patentable in this case. There is even an on going discussion that these parties who are clearly late to the game are laying claim to Density Altitude in terms of deriving a ballistic solution. They will tell people that competing Product "B" is using the <span style="font-style: italic">"wrong math"</span> because they have the IP on the right math with their Product "A". And people buy it, meanwhile there is no such claim, just people with a captured audience who buy into bullshit.
It's not that this stuff is new, it's just expanding on the definitions of what was shooting gospel for the last 100 years. It's basically trying to erase the <span style="font-weight: bold">Game of Telephone</span> that has been played on the average shooter for so long. Most people copy what they see without any real instruction, so they have added their own definition to fill the void. Basically most of us are just bringing it back to the essentials in very detailed way so you can't say, <span style="font-style: italic">"straight back is what you believe", instead we say, "straight back really only works like this" </span>.
Take the wind formulas, Caylen in the video can't even talk about the one discussed as part of a Magpul Class because of the IP Claim. Take the British Method, the Rule of Nines, the Hoffman Formula, any of them, but not the one in the video... which is really just a different number saying the same thing. Instead of using 10 MPH they use the MPH based off the 1st number of the BC... so most use 4MPH. It's not streamline or ground breaking, it's just math, 3 +1 = 4 and it's now off limits to the other Magpul guys. Really you can take any ballistic calculator and assign a short cut to the math, voila you have IP... sure the ballistic program does the same thing, but I write it out long hand, so I win.
Trust me it is very complicated due to the parties trying to secure a name for themselves. Many of us were using a Mil Dot Reticle before they ever heard of the term "mils" and yet the overly complex screen door reticles are patented and protected. Nothing new, just more lines exactly like the iron anti aircraft reticles of the First and Second World Wars. At the end of the day this is the problem and why many of us take issue. </div></div>
A lot like the Martial Arts world. MANY different practitioners and/or styles try to lay claim to a particular technique or movement.
The human body is a machine limited by range of motion... it's retarded to think that only one person or group of people would not stumble upon the same information independently.
Maybe he DID discover it on his own, but that's not to say someone else didn't discover it first or at the same time.
In the world we live in though, it's not who invented it that always gets credit... it's the one who MARKETED it first!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is actually part of the problem Sterling,
There are certain people <span style="font-style: italic">(or persons)</span> who are claiming IP on things that were being used long before they stepped outside their own pond in terms of shooting.
It's like they are saying,<span style="font-style: italic"> "well everyone uses 2 + 2 and we all know it equals 4, but I use 3 + 1 and therefore 4 is covered by my IP claim"</span>. Or the idea that <span style="text-decoration: underline">"math"</span> is some how patentable in this case. There is even an on going discussion that these parties who are clearly late to the game are laying claim to Density Altitude in terms of deriving a ballistic solution. They will tell people that competing Product "B" is using the <span style="font-style: italic">"wrong math"</span> because they have the IP on the right math with their Product "A". And people buy it, meanwhile there is no such claim, just people with a captured audience who buy into bullshit.
It's not that this stuff is new, it's just expanding on the definitions of what was shooting gospel for the last 100 years. It's basically trying to erase the <span style="font-weight: bold">Game of Telephone</span> that has been played on the average shooter for so long. Most people copy what they see without any real instruction, so they have added their own definition to fill the void. Basically most of us are just bringing it back to the essentials in very detailed way so you can't say, <span style="font-style: italic">"straight back is what you believe", instead we say, "straight back really only works like this" </span>.
Take the wind formulas, Caylen in the video can't even talk about the one discussed as part of a Magpul Class because of the IP Claim. Take the British Method, the Rule of Nines, the Hoffman Formula, any of them, but not the one in the video... which is really just a different number saying the same thing. Instead of using 10 MPH they use the MPH based off the 1st number of the BC... so most use 4MPH. It's not streamline or ground breaking, it's just math, 3 +1 = 4 and it's now off limits to the other Magpul guys. Really you can take any ballistic calculator and assign a short cut to the math, voila you have IP... sure the ballistic program does the same thing, but I write it out long hand, so I win.
Trust me it is very complicated due to the parties trying to secure a name for themselves. Many of us were using a Mil Dot Reticle before they ever heard of the term "mils" and yet the overly complex screen door reticles are patented and protected. Nothing new, just more lines exactly like the iron anti aircraft reticles of the First and Second World Wars. At the end of the day this is the problem and why many of us take issue. </div></div>
A lot like the Martial Arts world. MANY different practitioners and/or styles try to lay claim to a particular technique or movement.
The human body is a machine limited by range of motion... it's retarded to think that only one person or group of people would not stumble upon the same information independently.
Maybe he DID discover it on his own, but that's not to say someone else didn't discover it first or at the same time.
In the world we live in though, it's not who invented it that always gets credit... it's the one who MARKETED it first!
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is actually part of the problem Sterling,
There are certain people <span style="font-style: italic">(or persons)</span> who are claiming IP on things that were being used long before they stepped outside their own pond in terms of shooting.
It's like they are saying,<span style="font-style: italic"> "well everyone uses 2 + 2 and we all know it equals 4, but I use 3 + 1 and therefore 4 is covered by my IP claim"</span>. Or the idea that <span style="text-decoration: underline">"math"</span> is some how patentable in this case. There is even an on going discussion that these parties who are clearly late to the game are laying claim to Density Altitude in terms of deriving a ballistic solution. They will tell people that competing Product "B" is using the <span style="font-style: italic">"wrong math"</span> because they have the IP on the right math with their Product "A". And people buy it, meanwhile there is no such claim, just people with a captured audience who buy into bullshit.
It's not that this stuff is new, it's just expanding on the definitions of what was shooting gospel for the last 100 years. It's basically trying to erase the <span style="font-weight: bold">Game of Telephone</span> that has been played on the average shooter for so long. Most people copy what they see without any real instruction, so they have added their own definition to fill the void. Basically most of us are just bringing it back to the essentials in very detailed way so you can't say, <span style="font-style: italic">"straight back is what you believe", instead we say, "straight back really only works like this" </span>.
Take the wind formulas, Caylen in the video can't even talk about the one discussed as part of a Magpul Class because of the IP Claim. Take the British Method, the Rule of Nines, the Hoffman Formula, any of them, but not the one in the video... which is really just a different number saying the same thing. Instead of using 10 MPH they use the MPH based off the 1st number of the BC... so most use 4MPH. It's not streamline or ground breaking, it's just math, 3 +1 = 4 and it's now off limits to the other Magpul guys. Really you can take any ballistic calculator and assign a short cut to the math, voila you have IP... sure the ballistic program does the same thing, but I write it out long hand, so I win.
Trust me it is very complicated due to the parties trying to secure a name for themselves. Many of us were using a Mil Dot Reticle before they ever heard of the term "mils" and yet the overly complex screen door reticles are patented and protected. Nothing new, just more lines exactly like the iron anti aircraft reticles of the First and Second World Wars. At the end of the day this is the problem and why many of us take issue. </div></div>
Interesting problems, Lowlight. Does Magpul have a patent covering this? The patent number would be interesting to look up. Thanks,
John
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is actually part of the problem Sterling,
There are certain people <span style="font-style: italic">(or persons)</span> who are claiming IP on things that were being used long before they stepped outside their own pond in terms of shooting.
It's like they are saying,<span style="font-style: italic"> "well everyone uses 2 + 2 and we all know it equals 4, but I use 3 + 1 and therefore 4 is covered by my IP claim"</span>. Or the idea that <span style="text-decoration: underline">"math"</span> is some how patentable in this case. There is even an on going discussion that these parties who are clearly late to the game are laying claim to Density Altitude in terms of deriving a ballistic solution. They will tell people that competing Product "B" is using the <span style="font-style: italic">"wrong math"</span> because they have the IP on the right math with their Product "A". And people buy it, meanwhile there is no such claim, just people with a captured audience who buy into bullshit.
It's not that this stuff is new, it's just expanding on the definitions of what was shooting gospel for the last 100 years. It's basically trying to erase the <span style="font-weight: bold">Game of Telephone</span> that has been played on the average shooter for so long. Most people copy what they see without any real instruction, so they have added their own definition to fill the void. Basically most of us are just bringing it back to the essentials in very detailed way so you can't say, <span style="font-style: italic">"straight back is what you believe", instead we say, "straight back really only works like this" </span>.
Take the wind formulas, Caylen in the video can't even talk about the one discussed as part of a Magpul Class because of the IP Claim. Take the British Method, the Rule of Nines, the Hoffman Formula, any of them, but not the one in the video... which is really just a different number saying the same thing. Instead of using 10 MPH they use the MPH based off the 1st number of the BC... so most use 4MPH. It's not streamline or ground breaking, it's just math, 3 +1 = 4 and it's now off limits to the other Magpul guys. Really you can take any ballistic calculator and assign a short cut to the math, voila you have IP... sure the ballistic program does the same thing, but I write it out long hand, so I win.
Trust me it is very complicated due to the parties trying to secure a name for themselves. Many of us were using a Mil Dot Reticle before they ever heard of the term "mils" and yet the overly complex screen door reticles are patented and protected. Nothing new, just more lines exactly like the iron anti aircraft reticles of the First and Second World Wars. At the end of the day this is the problem and why many of us take issue. </div></div>
Interesting problems, Lowlight. Does Magpul have a patent covering this? The patent number would be interesting to look up. Thanks,
John
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
No, there is no patents, that is my point, lots of claims with nothing to back it up.
This is an internal issue with them, I am sure they can't speak on it themselves, and I hesitate to expand. I have probably added a bit much here already.
Let's just say, some people are just great salesmen, in this regard I give props, I couldn't have made the sale to this degree.
Take it for what it is worth and let me end it here by saying it is complicated.
No, there is no patents, that is my point, lots of claims with nothing to back it up.
This is an internal issue with them, I am sure they can't speak on it themselves, and I hesitate to expand. I have probably added a bit much here already.
Let's just say, some people are just great salesmen, in this regard I give props, I couldn't have made the sale to this degree.
Take it for what it is worth and let me end it here by saying it is complicated.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, there is no patents, that is my point, lots of claims with nothing to back it up.
This is an internal issue with them, I am sure they can't speak on it themselves, and I hesitate to expand. I have probably added a bit much here already.
Let's just say, some people are just great salesmen, in this regard I give props, I couldn't have made the sale to this degree.
Take it for what it is worth and let me end it here by saying it is complicated. </div></div>
Fair enough...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, there is no patents, that is my point, lots of claims with nothing to back it up.
This is an internal issue with them, I am sure they can't speak on it themselves, and I hesitate to expand. I have probably added a bit much here already.
Let's just say, some people are just great salesmen, in this regard I give props, I couldn't have made the sale to this degree.
Take it for what it is worth and let me end it here by saying it is complicated. </div></div>
Fair enough...
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take it for what it is worth and let me end it here by saying it is complicated. </div></div>Maybe you should change your Facebook status to: 'It's complicated'.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take it for what it is worth and let me end it here by saying it is complicated. </div></div>Maybe you should change your Facebook status to: 'It's complicated'.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Good discussion. I'm not real experienced but was sorry I spent my money on the Magpul video. Their handgun and carbine info was good so I thought the rifle would be as well....not!
IMO there is a market for a rifle video with solid instruction, I know I would buy as I would like my boys to learn how to do it right and not have to overcome all the "training scars" of learning to undo old habits.
Really wish the on-line training would have had better "how to" in the early going. I could see the rifle not jumping in recoil but to save my life I could not take the material and get the same results. Also it was very difficult to get questions answered so I let it go. Hopefully the video will start and build a very detailed path of what the fundamentals are and how to do them all correctly together.
Good discussion. I'm not real experienced but was sorry I spent my money on the Magpul video. Their handgun and carbine info was good so I thought the rifle would be as well....not!
IMO there is a market for a rifle video with solid instruction, I know I would buy as I would like my boys to learn how to do it right and not have to overcome all the "training scars" of learning to undo old habits.
Really wish the on-line training would have had better "how to" in the early going. I could see the rifle not jumping in recoil but to save my life I could not take the material and get the same results. Also it was very difficult to get questions answered so I let it go. Hopefully the video will start and build a very detailed path of what the fundamentals are and how to do them all correctly together.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
Not sure what you mean, "difficult to get questions answered" we answer every question, it's a forum like this and answering questions is part of it.
Maybe we could not answer your specific question without actually seeing what you are doing, but we do answer every question posted.
Not sure what you mean, "difficult to get questions answered" we answer every question, it's a forum like this and answering questions is part of it.
Maybe we could not answer your specific question without actually seeing what you are doing, but we do answer every question posted.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
The question comment was not a knock on the current operation of the on-line training. I've heard good things more recently and have considered looking into the cost of signing back up.
I joined very early on when there were probably less than 5 lessons posted and back then it did not seem the follow up type of question (why is this not working for me type of stuff) got much of a response.
Looking back, some of that type of question would be pretty hard to answer without seeing what the person was doing. I understand now there is a lot more to recoil control and maintaining sight picture than being just straight behind the rifle and pulling straight back on the trigger. The position of your shoulders, elbows, grip, etc, etc, all come into play in the end result.
I have a lot to learn, hence my interest in training material. The fundamentals in the MP video were so basic and vague that I could have taught them. Shoot movers, distance and all that is cool but if you don't master the fundamentals you really will not ever do it well consistantly. Really hoping the video you are working on covers the fundamental bases very well.
The question comment was not a knock on the current operation of the on-line training. I've heard good things more recently and have considered looking into the cost of signing back up.
I joined very early on when there were probably less than 5 lessons posted and back then it did not seem the follow up type of question (why is this not working for me type of stuff) got much of a response.
Looking back, some of that type of question would be pretty hard to answer without seeing what the person was doing. I understand now there is a lot more to recoil control and maintaining sight picture than being just straight behind the rifle and pulling straight back on the trigger. The position of your shoulders, elbows, grip, etc, etc, all come into play in the end result.
I have a lot to learn, hence my interest in training material. The fundamentals in the MP video were so basic and vague that I could have taught them. Shoot movers, distance and all that is cool but if you don't master the fundamentals you really will not ever do it well consistantly. Really hoping the video you are working on covers the fundamental bases very well.
Re: Magpul= Art of the Precision Rifle
I find that i get my questions answered faster and more accurately in the training section then anywhere else, that alone would have been almost worth it but then you add in the awesome training and it is a steal of a deal. My eyes have been opened immensely to my bad habits/lack of fundamentals and my shooting started improving on the the first range session out since signing up and I only signed up on Monday.
I totally agree with you though on the Magpul instruction.
I find that i get my questions answered faster and more accurately in the training section then anywhere else, that alone would have been almost worth it but then you add in the awesome training and it is a steal of a deal. My eyes have been opened immensely to my bad habits/lack of fundamentals and my shooting started improving on the the first range session out since signing up and I only signed up on Monday.
I totally agree with you though on the Magpul instruction.
