Because I designed the Tac Ops platform's around the Fed Match 168 B.T.H.P Because 98% of all the law enforcement agencies deploy and shoot people dead with that round...
Mike R
Mike R
Very disappointed
- Thread starter Mean_Man
- Start date
^ I remember the last time I hit that 800 yard barrier. I was blasting half-MOA groups out to 799 yards...
Scooted a step back just to get an even number, fired, no impact. Fired again, no impact.
All of a sudden my neighbors cow came out of the woods limping from an obvious gunshot wound to the foot. She was at least 25* off my line of fire and only 425 yards away. It's amazing what those 168s will do once you hit 800 yards and the accuracy comes apart...
Scooted a step back just to get an even number, fired, no impact. Fired again, no impact.
All of a sudden my neighbors cow came out of the woods limping from an obvious gunshot wound to the foot. She was at least 25* off my line of fire and only 425 yards away. It's amazing what those 168s will do once you hit 800 yards and the accuracy comes apart...
I think people may be missing the 800 yard joke...
Isn’t there also some stat about the huge majority of L.E. Rifle engagements happening inside of 100 yards?
Yeah its Litz's fault that he showed the 168 SMK had poor sonic transition so now the "word on the street" is you can't use 168 SMK to shoot beyond 800 yards. In reality there are better choices but gun people being gun people "168SMK can't shoot beyond 800"
I have 168s still super at 1k (marginal) because I needed to fire form some new brass and had 500 SMK lying around for the M1A. Miracle of Miracles I shot about a 180 at 1K. (1150 FPS at 1k). May be going subsonic. Still registered on shotmarker.
ANd inside 600? 168s are da bomb. There's a reason they were popular.
I have 168s still super at 1k (marginal) because I needed to fire form some new brass and had 500 SMK lying around for the M1A. Miracle of Miracles I shot about a 180 at 1K. (1150 FPS at 1k). May be going subsonic. Still registered on shotmarker.
ANd inside 600? 168s are da bomb. There's a reason they were popular.
Let someone go hold an apple in their hand at 900 yards and I'll give it a try with 168's lol
Mike R
Mike R
If you're so confident in your work why don't you hold the apple and let someone else give it a try?
Any national level shooter of your choice.
That’s the key word. Back before there were better bullets with better BCs like now. lol
That's sorta what I'm saying. just because we have better stuff now doesn't make an invisible barrier pop up at 800 yards. But in our black and white world "better" means "only choice" and "worse" means "absolute dogshit"
I have a lot of trouble convincing my charges of this. They are fighting for a accuracy (data science, not shooting) in the 3rd decimal point. Does it matter? I can match their answer in 1/10th the time to two decimal points. A good answer fast beats the best answer slow. But we are so focused on squeezing out the "best". Frank talks a lot about all the guys trying to find perfect loads so much they miss shooting sessions. Like find a load and go shoot. And I am a perenial analysis paralysis person. At those distances (1k), consistency and wind reading... And I'll be honest, I doubt it makes a difference whether I shot 155s, 175s, 185s, or 200s at 1000. Bullet ain't the limitation.
Yet.
I would be down depending on the shooterIf you're so confident in your work why don't you hold the apple and let someone else give it a try?
Any national level shooter of your choice.
Mike R
They are when they go funky through transonic and don’t groups well. There are a lot of better choices now than a 168 smk and by better I mean better. Better BCs so they aren’t pushed off target as easily and better designs so they go transonic as accurately as when supersonic. That 168 smk bullet had a bad boat tail design for long range. It’s a fact. That it can shoot fine at 600 is great but doesn’t change that fact.
I don’t work loads up to the third decimal point or burn out barrels trying to find “the load” but I do know what to send down there and why and I don’t think I have sent a 168 smk down range in around 25 years.
It takes a special kind of dumb to ignore the advice you've been given here. I pegged you as one of those from the start. That's why I don't bother with constructive advice.
Despite what you heard in those discussions neck tension IS an interference fit. If it weren't the bullet would drop into the case on its own. Any time the OD of a part is greater than the ID of a hole it fits into you have an interference fit.
We're saying the same thing...
My point was some people wont even go if they don't have "the load"
Shitty 168SMKs at the range are infinitly better than Berger Juggeraughts sitting at home in the safe (or those 200.x whatever peeps are shooting).
Yeah some bullets may be up 5-10% better--thats huge when you are on the podium. I'm still happy to get 10s/Xs. People like me and the OP. We can see the podium.
Through our spotting scope.
Same thing in PRS. Dude you gotta buy berger bullets!! Yeah cause that extra BC and bullet consistency is what costs me points, not the fact that i can't get my shots off in time and getting blind as bat when Hornady ELDMs are 1/2 cost. It matters for good shooters or elite shooters (HM/Pro shooters). Most of us aren't--lets be honest.
Yeah I agree getting the range time is very important. Agreed most aren’t at that level, myself included anymore, but not going to handicap myself even more with a bullet like the 168SMK. That was my main point. Hard enough doing it now. lol
Now if you want a 168 that 168 ELD-M is nice.
Its a very precise and forgiving bullet, just not the ideal long range choice.
Question: Terminally, does the 169gr perform basically the exact same as the 168gr? I know there's a large difference in drag between the two, and I don't know what they changed so I'm just asking encase you or someone else in the thread knows how they compare far as terminal performance.
With all due respect I don't think the Tango would know the difference between getting his wig pushed off his head with a 168 or 169 at around 2560 fps to 2660 fps.
Over the past 30 plus years no one that got shot with a 168 in the dome that I have been made aware never survived to talk about it...
Mike R.
I wish I had been there........long time NRA HP, Long Range competitor. I've watched thousands of Sierra 168 MK's at 600 and beyond. Trace looks like a broken boat propeller. They suck beyond 600 yards and we have better bullets. Like the Sierra 175 MK and just about anything else
Well I was just referring to terminal performance on a fleshy target, not necessarily bi-pedal mammals.
That makes 73 shots on the barrel.
Just ran a bore snake down it a couple times after the first outing. Also funny thing about the CFE powder group… the sticker dot fell off after the second shot…I just used the reticle to bracket where I thought it was relative to the other impacts
NOTE: These were all fired from once fired brass from my rifle, only neck sized. the CFE, W748 and RL-15 were all Hornady match brass, the Varget load was FGMM brass.
Just ran a bore snake down it a couple times after the first outing. Also funny thing about the CFE powder group… the sticker dot fell off after the second shot…I just used the reticle to bracket where I thought it was relative to the other impacts
NOTE: These were all fired from once fired brass from my rifle, only neck sized. the CFE, W748 and RL-15 were all Hornady match brass, the Varget load was FGMM brass.
Last edited:
Some guns shoot good right out of the box, and some don't. See what it does after 200 rounds.
his rifles shoot T308T even better than the 168SMKs and all of the other 175s/185s etc . And police sniper engagements arent really that long.
I guess I’ll bore scope it later today and see if there’s anything that sticks out to me.
If it weren’t for voiding the warranty and they would publish torque specs I’d remove the barrel myself and just take sure everything is torqued to spec and mated up nicely….
Do not do that. Biggest mistake people make. They see something and then it’s in their head. Affordable bore scopes have cost more issues than they fixed. Just work on the load and clean the bore every few hundred rounds. Maybe less if a rougher factory barrel.
How many rounds down the barrel now?
73
By clean in this sense, a few times down the barrel with a bore snake count? And then maybe patch with something like bright bore or CLP every hundred rounds? Because this was basically my plan.
Also just for the information, I let it cool between 5 shot groups so I wonder if that’s effectively the cold bore shot?
That’s not cleaning. You need to get a better cleaning regiment with a precision rifle. It’s not an AR. You need a good rod, bore guide, jag, brush, and some good solvent like Butch’s Bore Shine or similar to remove carbon and copper. If you haven’t cleaned it then you need to.
Also barrels speed up and load can change between 150-200 rounds so I would keep working up a load and then plan to make a small adjustment.
I had a brass rod and jag until I tried to put a single patch on it and run it down the barrel.... broke the rod.
So by clean you mean strip the barrel down of all fouling copper included, good to know. To me that's always been stripping the barrel down to the steel... cleaning was always just brushing it out, mop it some and patch it until the patches are clean.
Last edited:
You broke a rod in your bore? Dude you need some lessons fast before you ruin that rifle.
And with a new barrel that is working in you should strip down to bare metal but after that you can do less cleaning to just clean the carbon out but you need the right tools. Get them before you possibly damage your rifle.
Okay! with that in mind! seriously I'm not doing this to piss you off, I'm just curious and in this case more so of how the cleaning went. The two solvents I have are Brite Bore and CLP. not the brand but the stuff from when I was in the Army, has a NSN number.
ANYway.... so I did scope it, but again not looking so much at the bore as how clean it is. I will say I didn't see any bad spots far as the machining or anything goes IMO, everything looked good, but after several times times with the bore snake, then I don't have a brass brush for .30 but I had a nylon one, so I sent that down several times, then a patch with the bore brite nice and wet... let it sit for 8min or so, then several dry patches until I didn't get much, then moved to the plastic .30 cal jag (can't find the brass one) repeated that process and every or every other time down the barrel folded the wipe over and sent it down until it came out pretty much clean, then bore brite bore, let it sit, scrubbed again a couple times always from chamber to muzzle though I don't see how it matters with a nylon brush... But anyway then the snake again, then some more wipes nice and wet with the bore brite... repeated until dry and clean looking, then sent one down wet with CLP and it's soaking.... before I did that though I scoped it.
There's still copper in the groves....
Again you need to get a class on cleaning a precision rifle before you damage your rifle. Not pissed off as it’s your rifle you are screwing up. Toss those “solvents” because they aren’t solvents. Go buy something worth while and the right tools I already mentioned to clean your rifle. If you just want to clean it like a cheap AR in the Army then have at it. Your rifle.
Well I have 10 FGMM cartridges left…. I could I suppose pull the bullets with the kinetic puller and load them into some FGMM fire formed brass with Varget…
Similar threads
