My redneck SPR story

[ekaphoto]

Here is the story of my redneck/cheapskate SPR Not saying you have to do the same this is just what I did and the results.

It did not start as an SPR build. I ran across a stripped brownells lower for cheap. So I got it with no idea what I was going to do.

Fast forward several months perhaps a year. I decided to make a coyote/hunting rifle. Since I was not using it for CQB etc I got a cheap A2 stock and inexpensive lower build kit. I did get a CMC trigger, more on that later.

Well for the upper. I wanted a 20 inch barrel free floated. Why? Because I wanted the velocity and free floated barrel.

After looking around I got a Bear Creek upper with 18 inch barrel. Why 18? Because they didn't have a 20 in stock. This was supposed to be MOA guarantee. The barrel came in and it looked fine with a bolt carrier stamp MPI.

Now people will hammer me for getting a Bear Creek but I got a complete upper for less than I could get all the parts etc minus the barrel and put it together. If it shot like crap I could pull the barrel off accurate the upper with my tool and get a better barrel.

Optics. I had an old Leupold VX2 3-9x 40 laying around. Slapped it on. Good enough for what I was going to do.

I had it a few months and realized I had built an SPR rifle aka cheap skate version. Remember folks SPR/MK-12 is a concept not a parts list. If you are a clone type good for you. Go for it. I was just throwing together an AR for yots and the range not a combat tour.

Results. Its been a couple years. It will keep 1-1.5 MOA with good match ammo. You cant expect to put crap ammo through any barrel and get good results. Oh yea this thing has NEVER jammed on me. More than I can say for the M-16s I had in the Army.

The CMC trigger went to crap. It became soft and mushy and occasionally would not reset. I contacted them and they immediately sent me a return order. I got busy and pulled it out slapped in a stock trigger that came with my kit.

Its been a few months and I did not get around to sending it in yet and lost the paperwork. That is on me, I can not fault them. Now that I have it out I might call them and explain I am a dumb ass. I find it comical the one high quality part I put in failed. Again They were very responsive I don't want any misgivings to come across about them.

Lessons-

1. I am a cheap bastard. No secret there.
2. Your best accessory is ammo and trigger time.
3. Sometimes good enough is good enough. My complete build was around $500 if my memory serves me correctly.
4. You don't need a sub MOA rifle for everything. Yea I have a couple built rifles including a tac ops. Think of it this way. A human head is about 6 inches. A crap 2 MOA gun is a head shot at 300 yards. Be realistic. Very few true sub MOA rifle exist meaning they will do it consistently ie every time with the right ammo.

Anyway if you want to build a rifle but cant afford a top end perhaps you can get something cheaper that will get the job done. A lot of people here will disagree and say you have to put a mortgage payment or two for a gun then the same for the optic but just get something and get to shooting. Enjoy what you got instead of dreaming about something. The shooter is the most important part of the equation start building your skills now not in 10 years.

Well that's it from me. Hope I didn't hurt any feeling. No wait, I don't care. Just some feedback from an old man that may get some young guys out shooting instead of dreaming and and away from the keyboard.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

"Very few true sub MOA rifle exist meaning they will do it consistently ie every time with the right ammo."


Just stop..

I tried to hang in there with you, but that statement is utterly ridiculous..

 

[ekaphoto]

"Very few true sub MOA rifle exist meaning they will do it consistently ie every time with the right ammo."


Just stop..

I tried to hang in there with you, but that statement is utterly ridiculous..

It wasn't to cause a stir but your telling me of all the millions of rifles made over say the last 30 years more than 1% are sub MOA? Grandpas old 30-06 Springfield is sub MOA? Really think about it. Or you could just be that guy that likes to argue. Either way you agree or disagree I don't care either way.

The post is just my experience with 1 rifle build along with over 50 years of shooting. I was taught by my dad who was on a few shooting teams in the Army along with my uncle that was on the Army shooting team in the 70's.

 

[Kamerad]

Well done, run what you’ve got. Thanks for sharing! My budget for shooting has gotten smaller now with young kids, so this is refreshing to read.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

It wasn't to cause a stir but your telling me of all the millions of rifles made over say the last 30 years more than 1% are sub MOA? Grandpas old 30-06 Springfield is sub MOA? Really think about it. Or you could just be that guy that likes to argue. Either way you agree or disagree I don't care either way.

The post is just my experience with 1 rifle build along with over 50 years of shooting. I was taught by my dad who was on a few shooting teams in the Army along with my uncle that was on the Army shooting team in the 70's.

You said "very few sub-moa rifles exist".

Not "very few rifles made prior to color television are sub-moa".

Here is the truth: it's hard to buy a rifle these days that isn't a sub-moa rifle. Machining has gotten so good that with the automated processes, everyone's barrels are that good, and almost all decent ammo is that good. That statement just isn't accurate. It's a declaration based on the 50 years of what you've experienced, but that's not what's hit the shelves in the last decade or so. This isn't about arguing for the sake of arguing, it's just cold fact. There may not be a firearms manufacturer left out there without a sub moa accuracy guarantee, and that's because the rifles they are turning out will do it. Otherwise, rock on..

 

[Jmccracken1214]

You said "very few sub-moa rifles exist".

Not "very few rifles made prior to color television are sub-moa".

Here is the truth: it's hard to buy a rifle these days that isn't a sub-moa rifle. Machining has gotten so good that with the automated processes, everyone's barrels are that good, and almost all decent ammo is that good. That statement just isn't accurate. It's a declaration based on the 50 years of what you've experienced, but that's not what's hit the shelves in the last decade or so. This isn't about arguing for the sake of arguing, it's just cold fact. There may not be a firearms manufacturer left out there without a sub moa accuracy guarantee, and that's because the rifles they are turning out will do it. Otherwise, rock on..

You speak truth. You can almost be certain that a psa rifle with good ammo will be moa or better everytime.

Shit, my Ruger 300blk shoots subsonic handloads at .9-1” at 100 yards

 

[ekaphoto]

Not "very few rifles made prior to color television are sub-moa".

Here is the truth: it's hard to buy a rifle these days that isn't a sub-moa rifle. Machining has gotten so good that with the automated processes, everyone's barrels are that good, and almost all decent ammo is that good. That statement just isn't accurate. It's a declaration based on the 50 years of what you've experienced, but that's not what's hit the shelves in the last decade or so. This isn't about arguing for the sake of arguing, it's just cold fact. There may not be a firearms manufacturer left out there without a sub moa accuracy guarantee, and that's because the rifles they are turning out will do it. Otherwise, rock on..

Yea you just like to argue to garner attention and feed your ego.............

 

[Jmccracken1214]

Yea you just like to argue to garner attention and feed your ego.............

No, I think you’re just wrong in what you said is all.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

Yea you just like to argue to garner attention and feed your ego.............

If I wanted to feed my ego, I wouldn't state facts to irrelevant anonymous online dipshits. I stated a cold hard fact. Go play with your poverty ar.

 

[ekaphoto]

If I wanted to feed my ego, I wouldn't state facts to irrelevant anonymous online dipshits. I stated a cold hard fact. Go play with your poverty ar.

Ahh yes Mr toxic strikes again. Always have to have the last word, add to that you have to attack my rifle and me.

Now your in a pickle. I called you out so if you post again it proves my point. If you don't post again it going to piss you off because you didn't get the last word. Hummm what to do what to do................

For the other folks watching this thread sorry for the off topic. It was meant to encourage people that do not have the money to put down 1K dollars or more for a rifle alone to get something and enjoy it instead of thinking you "need" something better. You don't, get something and enjoy it for what it is.

As for Mr. Toxic.......... we will just let him be his own unhappy self and ignore him from now on.

 

[ut755ln]

Here is the truth: it's hard to buy a rifle these days that isn't a sub-moa rifle.

No it isn't, buy any milspec AR and there you go.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

No it isn't, buy any milspec AR and there you go.

Any you say? Hmmm.

Isn't an H&K 416 milspec?

I mean, it definitely is.

 

[Trigger Monkey]

The SPR is a concept, the Mk12 most certainly has a parts list, that's why there's a whole subset of obsessive compulsive shooters dedicated to cloning them.

I don't see eye to eye with everything in your post but I can get behind that 1.5-2.0 MOA rifle will get it done for most applications under the sun, do we want better, of course, but it'll still get it done.

 

[ut755ln]

Any you say? Hmmm.

Isn't an H&K 416 milspec?

I mean, it definitely is.

And I own one, not an MR556 but an actual 416 and it is not 1 MOA.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

And I own one, not an MR556 but an actual 416 and it is not 1 MOA.

Might be with a better shooter.

 

[ut755ln]

Might be with a better shooter.

You can pick any shooter you want, it isn't 1 MOA and your accuracy claim is borderline retarded.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

You can pick any shooter you want, it isn't 1 MOA and your accuracy claim is borderline retarded.

Really? Read the op's claim, read my response, and then go fuck yourself.

 

[Drew890]

Many rifles are sub MOA, many shooters are not.

 

[Hecouldgoalltheway]

I've owned literally hundreds of rifles. At any given time I have about 40 these days. There was a lengthy period of time that number was double, and for no reason I can explain today, I likely tipped past 100 rifles at different points. I have an addiction. Of the 40ish rifles I keep now, I cycle in and out about 10 per year. I buy cheap rifles like ruger Americans for my nephews to deer hunt with, weatherby vanguards, so I can have a 1-8 twist 270wby to shoot 175's with, and I have $7,000 rifles. I have $1,000 AR barrels, and I have a closet full of $200-$300 ar barrels.

I buy 10-12 rifles a year these days, and trade or sell away roughly the same number, so I have found some equilibrium.

I can count on one hand the number of those rifles that I could not get moa or better accuracy out of. Some of them were failures from the factory, and they were documented batch issues. Some of them just couldn't quite do it, but easily less than 5 in the last 15 years.

I have a Christensen Ridgeline FFT in 300wsm that had intermittent accuracy issues. I fought it for months, shot 150rds +/-, all sorts of different loads trying to figure out the problem, and it would shoot a .5moa group, then a 2.5 moa group 5 minutes later. I swapped scopes, triggers, stocks, etc. I was so arrogant about my infallible process of scope mounting I use that I never even allowed myself to consider that I had made a mistake. Finally, I pulled the scope, pulled the rings, and I had never tightened the rail screws. I had even hit them with locktite, and left them finger tight. I corrected the issue, and now it's a .5moa rifle.

Modern rifles that don't shoot moa or better are rare. Bad shooters are everywhere, but they can't let go of their egos long enough to correct the issue. I have a 390y range in my backyard. It's 50y from my reloading bench to my 200y bench. I shoot thousands of rounds a year through dozens of rifles. I'm not just running my mouth. In the case of most modern rifles, if it won't shoot moa or better, it's ammo, a setup issue, or it's you. 90%+ of the time, it's you.

 

[stanley_white]

For the other folks watching this thread sorry for the off topic. It was meant to encourage people that do not have the money to put down 1K dollars or more for a rifle alone to get something and enjoy it instead of thinking you "need" something better. You don't, get something and enjoy it for what it is.
on.

Mission accomplished.

Thank you.

-Stan

 

[Ronws]

I've owned literally hundreds of rifles. At any given time I have about 40 these days. There was a lengthy period of time that number was double, and for no reason I can explain today, I likely tipped past 100 rifles at different points. I have an addiction. Of the 40ish rifles I keep now, I cycle in and out about 10 per year. I buy cheap rifles like ruger Americans for my nephews to deer hunt with, weatherby vanguards, so I can have a 1-8 twist 270wby to shoot 175's with, and I have $7,000 rifles. I have $1,000 AR barrels, and I have a closet full of $200-$300 ar barrels.

I buy 10-12 rifles a year these days, and trade or sell away roughly the same number, so I have found some equilibrium.

I can count on one hand the number of those rifles that I could not get moa or better accuracy out of. Some of them were failures from the factory, and they were documented batch issues. Some of them just couldn't quite do it, but easily less than 5 in the last 15 years.

I have a Christensen Ridgeline FFT in 300wsm that had intermittent accuracy issues. I fought it for months, shot 150rds +/-, all sorts of different loads trying to figure out the problem, and it would shoot a .5moa group, then a 2.5 moa group 5 minutes later. I swapped scopes, triggers, stocks, etc. I was so arrogant about my infallible process of scope mounting I use that I never even allowed myself to consider that I had made a mistake. Finally, I pulled the scope, pulled the rings, and I had never tightened the rail screws. I had even hit them with locktite, and left them finger tight. I corrected the issue, and now it's a .5moa rifle.

Modern rifles that don't shoot moa or better are rare. Bad shooters are everywhere, but they can't let go of their egos long enough to correct the issue. I have a 390y range in my backyard. It's 50y from my reloading bench to my 200y bench. I shoot thousands of rounds a year through dozens of rifles. I'm not just running my mouth. In the case of most modern rifles, if it won't shoot moa or better, it's ammo, a setup issue, or it's you. 90%+ of the time, it's you.

Best post so far.

And I get the point of the OP have no problems with that, at all. Achieve what you need to achieve and do it effectively with less money. That leaves more money for ammo and range time.

Also, there was an old thread called "I may be an idiot" where I got my ass handed to me like ten pounds of lime jello on a cracked porcelain plate (yes, I stole that from Jeff Goldblum in "Ten Speed and Brown Shoe.") The question was, both a $500 rifle and a $5k rifle are both objectively "1 MOA," then what is the difference, other than dollars?

I put up my TC Compass II in .308. Fresh out of the box with 150 gr, it shot .54 inches on the first two shots. Turns out later that it really likes 165 gr or 168 gr. Anyway, I had called it a .5 MOA rifle. Therein lies my mistake. Having the cheapest rifle ever and moderately priced optic was not really the great sin. Making the claims was the problem. As I learned, show me the paper, otherwise, it did not happen.

And has I have learned from others such as Little Creek, the Hornady podcasts, and even the The Texas Predator Hunting podcast and going back and forth, the concept of a rifle being a certain MOA is misleading.

What is more accurate and also more elusive is that the effective MOA depends on more than just the barrel and action combo.

A rifle and shooter may shoot mickey mouses at 100 yards. But, to make the math a little easier, let's use the concept of MOA and a 1 MOA rifle. You would think that at 800 yards, 1 MOA is 8 3/8" spread. Not always. Changing velocity, wind, wind reading ability, shooter, how the recoil is happening based on equipment and shooter position. What started out as a "1 MOA" rifle is really more like a 2 MOA system. And that, with bullet performance and impact velocity should affect range of the shot, especially on game.

I have known some elk hunters who have never shot an elk past 300 yards. Giving belief to the statement that a marksman can shoot a target at long distance but a hunter can kill a deer or elk at 300 yards or less.

Because hunting is a craft, not just a product of the rifle.

So, if the budget build is performing adequately, then bravo.

I may be the stupidest person here but I learn some things, some times.

 

[ekaphoto]

The SPR is a concept, the Mk12 most certainly has a parts list, that's why there's a whole subset of obsessive compulsive shooters dedicated to cloning them.

I don't see eye to eye with everything in your post but I can get behind that 1.5-2.0 MOA rifle will get it done for most applications under the sun, do we want better, of course, but it'll still get it done.

Thanks

Good points. The thing is there was a couple evolution of the MK12 and even the military had some variations of the diffrent reiteratingLibut yes the mk12 itself had some specific spect if it was mod 0 mod1 etc. I am not an expert on all the specifics I just know the concept 18in Douglass barrel etc.

 

[ekaphoto]

Best post so far.

And I get the point of the OP have no problems with that, at all. Achieve what you need to achieve and do it effectively with less money. That leaves more money for ammo and range time.

Also, there was an old thread called "I may be an idiot" where I got my ass handed to me like ten pounds of lime jello on a cracked porcelain plate (yes, I stole that from Jeff Goldblum in "Ten Speed and Brown Shoe.") The question was, both a $500 rifle and a $5k rifle are both objectively "1 MOA," then what is the difference, other than dollars?

I put up my TC Compass II in .308. Fresh out of the box with 150 gr, it shot .54 inches on the first two shots. Turns out later that it really likes 165 gr or 168 gr. Anyway, I had called it a .5 MOA rifle. Therein lies my mistake. Having the cheapest rifle ever and moderately priced optic was not really the great sin. Making the claims was the problem. As I learned, show me the paper, otherwise, it did not happen.

And has I have learned from others such as Little Creek, the Hornady podcasts, and even the The Texas Predator Hunting podcast and going back and forth, the concept of a rifle being a certain MOA is misleading.

What is more accurate and also more elusive is that the effective MOA depends on more than just the barrel and action combo.

A rifle and shooter may shoot mickey mouses at 100 yards. But, to make the math a little easier, let's use the concept of MOA and a 1 MOA rifle. You would think that at 8 yards, 1 MOA is 8 3/8" spread. Not always. Changing velocity, wind, wind reading ability, shooter, how the recoil is happening based on equipment and shooter position. What started out as a "1 MOA" rifle is really more like a 2 MOA system. And that, with bullet performance and impact velocity should affect range of the shot, especially on game.

I have some elk hunters who have never shot an elk past 300 yards. Giving belief to the statement that a marksman can shoot a target at long distance but a hunter can kill a deer or elk at 300 yards or less.

Because hunting is a craft, not just a product of the rifle.

So, if the budget build is performing adequately, then bravo.

I may be the stupides person here but I learn some things, some times.

I think you have learned a lot. I'm not the smartest person here either but I am not the dumbest either.

I hate to say it but the gun mags you tube etc have brainwashed us into thinking if you don't have the best you can not have fun. In my opinion it is driven by the industry manufactures because they need to sell stuff.

It's not only gun industry I do photography and when a new camera comes out it is the best and your photos will be much better if you buy it. 6 Mos later a new camera comes out and that same camera they say you needed is a pos and has all kinds of issues. I am using a bit of hyperbole here but that is basically the message they are sending in all industries so they can sell stuff

They key is to understand METT-TC

 

[Darryle]

Go play with your poverty ar.

Sig worthy

I can't wait for the move to the pit so this thread will get the attention it deserves

 

[ekaphoto]

Sig worthy

I can't wait for the move to the pit so this thread will get the attention it deserves

This was not supposed to be an argument. Oh well.

Funny thing is on one had he says most rifles made the last several years are sub MOA capable then tells me to go play with my poverty AR like its some POS . You can't make this shit up. LMAO.

About 15 years ago I got a colt LE6920. I had more jams etc with that thing. Never has been accurate unless you call 3 to 4 moa accurate. I finally got it to running but accuracy is still crap. It is accurate enough for self defense out to 200 yards. It cost me about 1k back then because I wanted a quality AR.

 

[Ronws]

I think you have learned a lot. I'm not the smartest person here either but I am not the dumbest either.

I hate to say it but the gun mags you tube etc have brainwashed us into thinking if you don't have the best you can not have fun. In my opinion it is driven by the industry manufactures because they need to sell stuff.

It's not only gun industry I do photography and when a new camera comes out it is the best and your photos will be much better if you buy it. 6 Mos later a new camera comes out and that same camera they say you needed is a pos and has all kinds of issues. I am using a bit of hyperbole here but that is basically the message they are sending in all industries so they can sell stuff

They key is to understand METT-TC

The other thing I have learned both the hard way and also the easy way (by the lessons of others) is the priority of error. In descending order of strongest source of error to the least strongest source of error:

1. shooter
2. ammo
3. rifle and associated gear, such as bases and rings and action screws being loose.

Many is the shooter who has a higher opinion of his own shooting than is actually evident. But there are many details to the "fundamentals."
Natural shooting position that aligns your body to the target. Proper cheek weld on the stock. Proper eye alignment to the ocular lens of the scope. Proper management of recoil with a brake or suppressor. With some kind of recoil pad that has enough give at all parts.

Improper or inconsistent trigger movement. Movement of the rifle. And this has to do with situations. Where I hunt on public land, there are no prone shots. So, I hunt seated or standing with a tripod. With a clamp, I can reduce motion. However, there are not a lot of ranges where I can set up my tripod and practice hunting shots. So, I approximate it with a bipod and my shoulder, as close to real life as I can get. No lead sled for me.

Ammo. Cheaper ammo is going to less QC on metering charge weight from bullet to bullet. In fact, I tried the cheap stuff, Armscor. The case will expand and the bolt won't move to extract. So, I went to a name brand and never a problem since then. So, pick a consistent and well-designed round based on the job at hand.

Proper torque on screws. If those are loose, it is not even as tight as a coin toss where the bullet will land. You may not get near the target board or whatever. At an outdoor range, not a big problem. Indoor range? RSOs get anxious because they don't need you shooting others' targets or the target carriers. So, I kind of add torque problems to shooter error. It is up to each of us to check our gear.

There are acceptable uses for varying levels of precision. And a 1 MOA or 1.5 MOA rifle is not destined to shoot about 1.5 inches from PoA. It might hit right where you aiming and then the dispersion happens with later shots.

I have the Windham Weaponry Dissipator M4 A3 in 5.56 and it came from the factory with a combat zero. Pulled it out of the box and drove it like I stole. Dead on that cross hairs with iron sights at 25 yards. The intention is to have a rise and fall of 5 inches with the second zero at 300 yards. To hit an IPSC target with an assuredness of a hit, if the wind is right.

A colleague has a similar one (he is the one who turned me on to Windham Weaponry.) Verified by the guy who had to pay him on a bet. He hit a balloon at 850 yards, in the wind on the first shot. And that is all him having such a skill. He has also never shot an animal past 300 yards.

 

[ut755ln]

Really? Read the op's claim, read my response, and then go fuck yourself.

I did and I still think you are a moron (but in the nicest way).

The most popular rifle in the US is the AR with more than an estimated 25 million in circulation. Milspec Accuracy is something around 2 MOA for most of the military programs, 1.5 MOA for DMRs. There are hundreds of threads on this forum with people reporting their rifle accuracy (gas guns) and they are consistently not sub MOA. While it is certainly possible to get there and it has been done by many people here, it is not the norm but the exception and it is not with an off the shelf milspec AR (which is the point).