Tactical Match loads for '03 and CBs

[cropcirclewalker]

I have applied for membership in a sportsman's club that is supposed to have a "tactical" match once in a while.

I don't even know what is a tactical match, but from what I understand, you get presented with various targets ranging from 100 yds out to like 700 yds (at this club a 700 yd max). No sighters. I am told that these guys show up with varmint type rifles with 24x mil dot scopes, laser range finders and all that cool stuff.

I am not tacticool. I love to shoot my '03 (Sporterized) '44 2 groove Remington barrel with a 3x9 scope some trigger work. Nice piece.

So here is the question.

What is a good load to put behind a 311284?

I have no need for speed, but out to 700 yds is a fur piece. I further don't expect to be competitive, but if I could get close, that would be nice.

Any thoughts?

[David R]

All you can do is push your pet load faster or try different powders and see what works if anything. I have loaded 311284 with full loads of 4895. Accuracy was not so good. Gun didn't lead and kicked the heck outa me. I can get reasonable accuracy (FOR ME) out fo my enfield out to 200 yards. I use 22.5 grians of 2400 behind a 311291. I get 5" 10 shot groups at 300 out of my 308 with a full case of WC860 behind a 311244. I also have a 5" 14 shot 300 yd group from my 22-250. Takes a lot of work and I have to weigh every boolit.

I bet you will do well against those guys dressed in gortex.

The longest range around here is 300 yards.

David

[Bret4207]

I think Bob S is the man to talk to here. Try looking back or doing a search for posts by "BobS".

[Bob S]

40-42 grains of WW II surplus 4831 is what I used. V~2000 fps or just on the short side. I never fired these past 300 yards, but at 300 yards, ten shots would usually stay in the 7" ten-ring of the SR target that was used for the prone rapidfire stage of the National Match Course. For your "tactical" course, I would start at 42 grains of the new-production 4831 with a magnum primer; use a 1/4 sheet of toilet paper over the powder (really). My alloy was "old" (pre-1970) wheel weights, not heat treated. You should be able to workup to about 45 grains without leading if accuracy is acceptable for the chore at hand. You're going to get a load equivalent to the old Krag service load, so use published info on that for your elevations and wind corrections. Or, use your chrono data (if you have one) and a ballistic coefficient of .332 and your favorite ballistics program. Years ago, I used 2000 fps guesstimate for the 42 grain load and tables for come-ups and wind drift, and that was pretty close. Have fun and be sure to report back to us.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Larry Gibson]

II am not tacticool. I love to shoot my '03 (Sporterized) '44 2 groove Remington barrel with a 3x9 scope some trigger work. Nice piece.

So here is the question.

What is a good load to put behind a 311284?

I have no need for speed, but out to 700 yds is a fur piece. I further don't expect to be competitive, but if I could get close, that would be nice.

Any thoughts?

Your '03 with it's 1-10" twist and the 311284 will have a velocity limit of 1750-1850 fps and still maintain 2 MOA accuracy (at best). I gave up on 311284 as a long range bullet years ago simply because it did not do well at the 1750 fps (1 1/2 MOA out of avery nice '03A3) I was using at the time. Shot like a house afire out to 300 yards but somewhere past that it dropped through the speed of sound and did not do well at 600 yards at all. I switched to 311299 which has a higher BC and also gave 1 1/2 MOA at 1740 fps. It held sonic to 600 yards and shoots quite well. I use 28 gr of H4895 + dacron filler with that load. I have found with a new CMP '03A1 that 32 gr milsurp 4895 + dacron filler over a lino cast 311299 (194 gr) runs right at 1900 fps and holds 2 MOA (when my eyes do anyway with the issue sights). A couple years ago I had my steel E target over in eastern Washington and was "cone of fire" on it at 700 yards with the 311299 at 1900 fps. I was getting 7-8 hits out of 10 shots if the wind wasn't blowing too bad. That was better than I did with M2 ball at that range. However with M72 loads the E target was pretty hard to miss.

I included the J bullet info just to give you some idea of the 311299s potential at long range. Another thing to remember is that it takes a lot of scope elevation adjustment for a cast bullet to go from a 100 yard zero to a 700 yard zero (57+ for the 311299 at 1900 fps). Most 3x9s have about 45 MOA elevation adjustment range. Thus if you plan on shooting from 100 to 700 you will need a "tactical" scope with more adjustment; some Leupolds have 65 MOA adjustment and there are others also. Even then you will need to shim the bases so your base line 100 yard zero is at the bottom of the elevation adjustment range. A 20 degree base will help but I still end up shimming to put the base line zero 1 to 2 MOA from the bottom of the scopes elevation adjustment range.

Long range shooting with cast bullets is a lot of fun but is very challenging. Have a go at it and let us know if you need more answers and how you did.

Larry Gibson

[Bass Ackward]

A rock hard 311284 with 58 grains of H-870 with .5cc of PSB fired up with a Fed 215 is 2150 fps and about 1 1/2 MOA on a bad day out of my 2 groove. But she rocks.

If you want a squibber, try 20-22 grains of 4759 with that. I don't know what it is velocity wise, but you want to spray some Raid on your boolits to keep the flys from landing on them. My guess is @ 1600 -1700.

[Bob S]

Your '03 with it's 1-10" twist and the 311284 will have a velocity limit of 1750-1850 fps and still maintain 2 MOA accuracy (at best). ... I switched to 311299 which has a higher BC and also gave 1 1/2 MOA at 1740 fps. It held sonic to 600 yards and shoots quite well. I use 28 gr of H4895 + dacron filler with that load. Larry Gibson

Apparently my rifles failed to get that memo. The 311284/4831 grouped ten shots under a minute at 200 yards routinely, not just occasionally. I never fired them past 300 yards, but they would clean the 300 yd. RF stage, which is all I asked of it. I also used the load for 300 yard belly matches at Westfield on the old MR-3 target (5-3/4" ten ring, 7 ring white), and they would also stay in there.

I have been unable to get the 311299 or the 314299 to group acceptably in any of my rifles yet. It does have a higher BC (.377 vs .332 according to Lyman), but it is 15 grains lighter than my 311284's. Still, it would be a good choice if you can get it to group.

As far as staying supersonic at 600, at that weight and BC, you'd have to launch it at 2200, and even then it's close. I don't think 28 grains of 4895 is going to do that.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Larry Gibson]

Apparently my rifles failed to get that memo. The 311284/4831 grouped ten shots under a minute at 200 yards routinely, not just occasionally. I never fired them past 300 yards, but they would clean the 300 yd. RF stage, which is all I asked of it. I also used the load for 300 yard belly matches at Westfield on the old MR-3 target (5-3/4" ten ring, 7 ring white), and they would also stay in there.

I have been unable to get the 311299 or the 314299 to group acceptably in any of my rifles yet. It does have a higher BC (.377 vs .332 according to Lyman), but it is 15 grains lighter than my 311284's. Still, it would be a good choice if you can get it to group.

As far as staying supersonic at 600, at that weight and BC, you'd have to launch it at 2200, and even then it's close. I don't think 28 grains of 4895 is going to do that.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

Bob

I've no intention of getting into a pissing contest here. Fact is you admit to not shooting the 311284 past 300 yards and I have. I agree with you that it is a very fine bullet out to 300 yards. However, having shot them at 1750 fps AT 600 YARDS I can say they did not do well at all. I never got them to shoot accurately over 1800 fps using 4895, RL19 or old 4831. I'm not saying you didn't get good accuracy with your rifle but I've shot the 311284 bullet in several '06s ('03s and scoped match M70s) and never got good consistant accuracy in any of them over 1800 fps. My post was also based on your suggested load of "40-42 grains of WW II surplus 4831 is what I used. V~2000 fps or just on the short side". Sorry but I worked all over that load in several rifles and never got sub 2 MOA. Now you've switched to; "A rock hard 311284 with 58 grains of H-870 with .5cc of PSB fired up with a Fed 215 is 2150 fps and about 1 1/2 MOA on a bad day out of my 2 groove". I have not tried that load so but that's not saying cropcirclewalker won't get the required accuracy at 2150 fps with his rifle. Hell I might just revisit 311284 and try that load myself.

Fact is you "don't think" the 311299 holds sonic at 600 yards. I know it does because I've been in the butts when the bullets came through the target and they were "cracking". I didn't think they would either especially after noting the 311284s did not "crack" at all at 600 yards. However the 311299s lost it shortly after 600 yards and were not "cracking" at 700 yards. Please note in my post that I had boosted the velocity to 1900 fps and they stayed sonic past 700 yards. They do not not stay sonic to 800 yards. I was hoping for a 1000 yards load to use but accuracy has not been sufficient (2 MOA or better) at the required velocity for that. The RPM gets quite high. Additionally I had run out of elevation adjustment on all but the '03A1 and an '03 with a long slide Lyman 48 rear sight. Also be advised that I was shooting at 4500 ft elevation and I probably had a higher BC than what Lyman quotes. I'm sure the temperature and low humidity helped.

The point of my post was not to get into your knickers as I did agree with you on 311284 being very good to 300 yards. It is a very fine cast bullet, ok? I did not say BobS was full of it, you are not If you read my post all I did was relate to cropcirclewalker that there were other things to consider when shooting cast bullets to 700 yards not just the 300 yards you related to. I also related my experience shooting past 300 yards with 311284, which didn't work well for me, and my experience with 311299 past 300 yards, which did work well. While you are "thinking about" shooting past 300 yards with 311284 I have been there, done that, and as they say; got the t-shirt. The fact that 311284 shoots well for you at 2150 fps and doesn't in my rifles over 1800 fps or that 311299 shoots well in my rifles and not in yours is meaningless. I'm sure there are many, many such examples between different members here as with individual rifles having their own preferance for a particular bullet. What we have done is give cropcirclewalker a couple options to consider. Isn't that what this forum is about?

Larry Gibson

[StarMetal]

The 314299 shoots great out of all the 30 caliber rifles I have. I got a CZ 30-06 (new rifle and modern) that shoots both the 314299 and 311284 great. My Finn 39 shoots the 314299 very good too, as does my Krag. All the 03's I had in the past shot both bullets very well. By very well for my CZ I'm talking 1/2 inch at 100 yards. I haven't shot that one much past that. I use to do some 500 yard shooting with my Brazilian 98 Mauser in 7x57 with the Lyman 150 grain loverian and it did well with the issue sight.

Joe

[cropcirclewalker]

This has been some really good info so far.

Thanks.

I have a chronograph and I will be working up some loads to hit 1950 and 2000 fps.

Maybe like somebody said, it's different strokes for different pieces. I will surely try everything I can.

Sorry to admit that I don't have a 314299, but it's on my target list.

I have a No4 Mk 1 Enfield that slugs at .3145 so it's hard to get a 311284 down the barrel without it rattling a bit, but the 9x scope on it's no smith mount should be easier to shim for long ranges and I am in on the "fatter 30" group buy at .316 dia.

I don't know if more than one piece is legal in these "tactical" meets, but, yes, I could set the Enfield up for like 300+ yds and keep the '03 for 300 and down.

Anyway, my juices are flowing.

Now, all that hasta happen is to get voted into the club.

I will advise.

On another thought, maybe I could mix up some [cough cough] spire pointed boat tailed condom [/cough, cough] loads at a little higher velocity for the longer ranges.

I love cast. I gotta think about it.

[Bob S]

Bob

Now you've switched to; "A rock hard 311284 with 58 grains of H-870 with .5cc of PSB fired up with a Fed 215 is 2150 fps and about 1 1/2 MOA on a bad day out of my 2 groove".

Fact is you "don't think" the 311299 holds sonic at 600 yards. I know it does because I've been in the butts when the bullets came through the target and they were "cracking".

I have been there, done that, and as they say; got the t-shirt. Larry Gibson


If you reread the thread, you'll see that the H870 load is not mine and was not suggested by me. Sounds interesting, though.

Who was shooting what ammo in whose rifle when you were in the pits? This is the reason I have to be skeptical about the 311299 remaining supersonic at 600 when launched at 1750, or even 1900:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v76/BobS1/Lymantable311299.jpg

I'm very happy that you got your tee shirt. :-)

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[Larry Gibson]

BobS

Well now that sure is a page right out of Lyman's manual. If you will read the fine print for those charts you will see that those figures are for a "standard" temperature and humidity at sea level. A little research on your part will reveal that as temperature and elevation increase the density of the air decreases. What this does, Bob, is increase the BC of the bullet, i.e. the bullet flies flatter because there is less air resistance and the bullet is slowing down less. The speed of sound also changes as the air density changes. There are many factors that influence when a bullet begins to go sub sonic, the shape of the bullet for one. A blunt bullet can still be "sonic" (indicated by cracking) at considerably less fps than the actual fps of the speed of sound through the air alone. It is the air traveling around the bullet (the blunter the bullet the faster the air is traveling with respect to the actual speed of the bullet, i.e. the air has to move faster around the bullet) that actually "breaks the speed of sound" and cracks. Where the bullet gets buffeted to the effect accuracy is diminished I do not know. What I do know is that those 311299s were cracking that day going through the target at 600 yards. Now I will also say that I developed loads back then usually when the temp was 60 to 70 degrees. The day of the 600 yard test I did not chronograph the loads but it was in the high 80s. It is entirely probable the actual velocity of the loads was greater than 1750 or 1900 fps respectfully. What I do know is that the 311284 load fired that same day barely held the target frame and was not cracking at 600 yards.

I do not blame you for being skeptical, I was to. I had the very same Lyman chart you post and was testing loads from the 1750 fps load up through 2000 fps hoping for something that would stay sonic at 600 yards. That is why I ran the tests.

The testing was done at the old National Guard range out of LaGrande, Oregon up past the LaGrande Rifle range along the Grande Ronde River. The tests were done in late July or early August as the river runs between the 200 yard line and the butts. It low enough my jeep (or Jack's) could ford the river then without a 10+ mile drive around to get to the butts. The NG used twice and a halfs to ford the river just about anytime they wanted to. Jack Wickander was shooting when I was in the butts (we alternated pulling targets and shooting). He was shooting my rifle and my ammo. We were the only ones there. We were in communication via radio and discussed each load and shot. It is very possible if cropcirclewalker duplicated the 1750 fps load with 311299 it might not stay sonic at his location to 600 yards. That's why I also mentioned the 1900 fps load that did work well for me to 700 yards.

I have found through actual tests and practical hands on experience that the charts, computor programed ballistics and many times loads in manuals are not always correct for the conditions we use them. That is why I and others use them as a guide only and not God's Gospel truth. Tuesday the 4th I was at some friends place up on Lake Tapp. He said, looking out the sliding doors; "it's raining!" His wife said, looking out the kitchen window; "it is not!" Turns out both were right at the same time as it was ranining on one side of the house but not the other. Fathom that........

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

A rock hard 311284 with 58 grains of H-870 with .5cc of PSB fired up with a Fed 215 is 2150 fps and about 1 1/2 MOA on a bad day out of my 2 groove. But she rocks.

If you want a squibber, try 20-22 grains of 4759 with that. I don't know what it is velocity wise, but you want to spray some Raid on your boolits to keep the flys from landing on them. My guess is @ 1600 -1700.

Sorry Bass for not giving you credit for the load, sounds interesting and worth a try. Now If I hadn't traded off that 311284 mould.......

Larry Gibson

[Larry Gibson]

This has been some really good info so far.

Thanks.

I have a chronograph and I will be working up some loads to hit 1950 and 2000 fps.

Maybe like somebody said, it's different strokes for different pieces. I will surely try everything I can.

Sorry to admit that I don't have a 314299, but it's on my target list.

I have a No4 Mk 1 Enfield that slugs at .3145 so it's hard to get a 311284 down the barrel without it rattling a bit, but the 9x scope on it's no smith mount should be easier to shim for long ranges and I am in on the "fatter 30" group buy at .316 dia.

I don't know if more than one piece is legal in these "tactical" meets, but, yes, I could set the Enfield up for like 300+ yds and keep the '03 for 300 and down.

Anyway, my juices are flowing.

Now, all that hasta happen is to get voted into the club.

I will advise.

On another thought, maybe I could mix up some [cough cough] spire pointed boat tailed condom [/cough, cough] loads at a little higher velocity for the longer ranges.

I love cast. I gotta think about it.

Cropcirclewalker

Be advised there is a 311299 AND a 314299, both basically the same bullet except the 314299 is fatter. Bullets cast hard from my 314299 will not chamber in most of my .308 bores (none of my 4 '03 barrels) as the nose is to large. The 311294s nose will most often slightly engrave as it is a tight fit riding the bore in .308 barrels.

The 314299 does work quite well in my .311/.312 bores and in my .303. Just to let you know that the 314299 may or may not work in your '03s depending on the mould, the alloy and the condition of the throats on your '03s.

Larry Gibson

[Bass Ackward]

Sorry Bass for not giving you credit for the load, sounds interesting and worth a try. Now If I hadn't traded off that 311284 mould.......

Larry Gibson


Larry,

The load is sensitive to seating depth so you may need a grain either way. Seat into the lands so that the bullet remains in place a little longer to get the fire going. If you can't, or choose not to, then you will need to duplex the load to get it to burn.

Of coarse bullet fit was everything. Jumping was never successful for me, but 4 grains of 3031 (.3cc LEE dipper) and change to a Rem 9 1/2M primer was about peek when I had too.

Carnuba in the lube was a help in cleanliness.

[Bob S]

Larry:

Thanks for the tutorial on exterior ballistics.

Actually, I have done quite a bit of research, with "conventional" projectiles and some rather novel ones, too, at NSWC Crane and in the tunnel at Aberdeen. I can do the calculus that is the basis for some of the the numeric solutions used to construct the tables. It used to be my job. I wrote some code about 20 years ago that has the temperature, atmospheric pressure and relative humidity as independent variables. It works quite well. I used it to adjust my Quantico zero for the local conditions at Raton for the 1992 Palma Match, and the first bullet out of the tube was a ten. No table or equation is worth a pisshole in the snow unless you can use it to reliably predict real world conditions. Sometimes I have to beat that into the heads of my junior engineers.

I have not given up on the 311299 and 314299; I just have not had "success" yet. "Yet" is an operative word here. The 311284 load really isn't "mine", either: it was suggested to me in a "Dope Bag" letter from E.H. Harrison in 1965. It worked right from the start. Sometimes you get lucky.

I will be casting some 311284's in lino to try Bass's load, too.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[cropcirclewalker]

All this stuff is making me wonder......

311284, from the limited experience I have, is a good boolit.

I can shoot 50 yds off my basement back door and have messed with some light loads outa my '03 with it.

I have other loads which I shoot at the range, so far only 100, but am happy with the accuracy of both.

They are different loads.

Now my question......

If a guy was to work up some loads (I guess varying the velocity mostly) that were tuned in to distance. (Get it?)

1 load for 100 yds
another load for 200 yds
another different entirely load for 300 yds.......and like that.........
Could a guy just....
estimate the distance and then reach into the ammo can and select the round based on its distance and fire away?

I guess we must be talking serious load work, but perhaps with some minor changes in the elevation adjustment on the scope.

Has anybody tried anything of such nature?

I visualize a real thick data book.

computers and like the freeware Point Blank software should simplify.

You adjust the load in the brass based on the distance to shoot, not to adjust the clicks on the scope.

Just wonderin'

ps. There are no stupid questions.......only stupid answers.

[JSH]

I tried the different load thing a few years ago. Some days it worked, some day it didn't. I have went to one load and then change my sight settings or scope settings. A fellow shooter made the comment to the effect, that was why they were adjustable. I also found out, about the same time, skimping on sights and scopes will cause a great deal of grief in the long run. You end up with what you start with.
Another thing on the multiple loads. Have a couple of ammo boxes tip over for some unforseen reason, then try and figure what you have. Or, better yet, grab what you think is the "right" ammo and drive 2 hours and find out other wise.
I like what a fellow described to me as the K-I-S-S theory. Keep It Simple Stupid.
Goes along way with me.
Jeff

[Bob S]

All this stuff is making me wonder......

If a guy was to work up some loads (I guess varying the velocity mostly) that were tuned in to distance. (Get it?)

1 load for 100 yds
another load for 200 yds
another different entirely load for 300 yds.......and like that.........
Could a guy just....
estimate the distance and then reach into the ammo can and select the round based on its distance and fire away?

I guess we must be talking serious load work, but perhaps with some minor changes in the elevation adjustment on the scope.

Has anybody tried anything of such nature?



Well, sorta. Most of my shooting the past 5 years has been as-issued vintage bolt rifle matches and Garand Matches. For a variety of reasons, most of the time I use a K31. The advantage of shooting a foreign rifle is that I can shoot any safe ammo that I want, including cast, if I so choose. For most CMP-sanctioned matches, if you shoot a U.S. rifle, you have to shoot ammo that is issued on the line, and for the past several years it has been crap.

A disadvantge of the K31 (and Mausers, and most foreign rifles) is that the rear sights have no windage adjustment, and are crudely adjustable for elevation. The K31 is adjustable in 100 meter increments, with 4 MOA between "notches" on the tangent sight on the low end, and as much as 11 MOA between "notches" on the big end. Most of the matches are at 200 yards on the SR target, but some are only at 100 yards on the SR-1 target. I "regulate" my elevation zero with the powder charge, so that with the rear sight on one of the 100 meter increments (and I don't care which one), the group is centered in the ten ring with my hold and "average conditions". I may also show up with ammo loaded with 0.3 grains more or less powder to account for different lighting conditions, and just select the load that is the best for that range and that day, based on the allowed sighters.

I am currently shooting a load using components salvaged from a lot of A-190 (.300 Win Mag) that was loaded by Federal around 1988 for NSWC for the SpecOps guys that didn't work out for them, so us slobs on the Team got it, and it didn't work for us, either. I had serveral hundred rounds that I disassembled, and I use 46 grains of the powder and the 180 grain Match King with the hollow point swaged shut, and even the primers. On my regular K31, the rear sight needs to be set at 500 meters to put this "on" for 200 yards. I got lucky, and with the rear sight on 400 meters, the same powder charge is "on" for 100 yards. I also keep some loaded with 45.7 grains and 46.3 grains for "fine adjustments".

So if you're nuts for thinking of this, you're in good company. :-D

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[garandsrus]

Cropcirclewalker,

Keep in mind that you can get some left to right deviation as the velocity changes also....

John

[Larry Gibson]

........Now my question......

If a guy was to work up some loads (I guess varying the velocity mostly) that were tuned in to distance. (Get it?)

1 load for 100 yds
another load for 200 yds
another different entirely load for 300 yds.......and like that.........
Could a guy just....
estimate the distance and then reach into the ammo can and select the round based on its distance and fire away?

I guess we must be talking serious load work, but perhaps with some minor changes in the elevation adjustment on the scope.

Has anybody tried anything of such nature?

You adjust the load in the brass based on the distance to shoot, not to adjust the clicks on the scope........

Cropcirclewalker

JSH, Bob S and garandsrus give excellent info. Many high power shooters, myself included, will have a load for the 200 and 300 yard line and then a different load for the 600/1000 yard line. This requires different zero for the different ammo at the different range.

That leads me to your next question/statement: "You adjust the load in the brass based on the distance to shoot, not to adjust the clicks on the scope."

At the ranges you mentioned in the first post (out to 700 yards) some very serious elevation/sight changes are necessary with cast bullets. I mentioned earlier that most scopes do not have the 57+ MOA adjustment to take you from a 100 yard zero to a 700 yard zero. It will not be feasable to "adjust the load in the brass based on the distance to shoot, not to adjust the clicks on the scope." You will indeed have to adjust the scope/sights even when going from 100 to 200 yards even with different loads.

As an example; I use the Lee 312-155 over 6.5 gr Bullseye to sort of duplicate the "Guard"load in my '03s. It runs 1120 fps and is very accurate and pleasant to shoot. I have been know to plink out to 500 yards with it using the ladder sight on the '03A1. The zeros for it are completely different than those for the previously discussed 311299. I also have used the 311299 for "cat's sneeze' loads as low as 300 fps which takes up a whole lot of rear sight elevation (most of it actually) just to zero at 50 yards.

It was suggested to KISS and use one load for your tactical matches. I concur as you will have enough "fun" tracking the different sight settings at the different ranges let alone tryimng to figure out correction for the wind.


Larry Gibson

[45 2.1]

A disadvantge of the K31 (and Mausers, and most foreign rifles) is that the rear sights have no windage adjustment, and are crudely adjustable for elevation.

Have you heard of a fineadjuster for the Swiss sights. Its offered in several styles for windage and elevation.

[Bob S]

Have you heard of a fineadjuster for the Swiss sights. Its offered in several styles for windage and elevation.

Yes, I have several. Also two different clamp-on receiver sights. None of these are allowed in as-issued vintage competition.

Resp'y,
Bob S.

[45 2.1]

Do they allow you to regulate those vintage sights.

[Bob S]

About the only "regulating" you can do is that you may vary the height of the front sight blade. Altering the sight bed would probably be considered an illegal modification.

The rule book is posted here:

http://www.odcmp.com/Competitions/Rulebook-booklet.pdf

Don't confuse the rules for Excellence-in-Competition and the National Trophy Matches with those for "as-issued" service rifles. They are very different.

Some local clubs run non-sanctioned matches using the CMP rules, but with some "relaxations", like adding a category for "modified" rifles, so guys can use the Swedes or Swiss with diopters or finesight adjusters, or a Mauser or Springfield with a Lyman 48 or 57 on the back, but otherwise still in "military" configuration.

Resp'y,
Bob S.