Time for a new rifle.

 

As you can tell by this blog, I’ve been working on a “Designated Marksman” course focused on law enforcement officers in small communities for the last little while.  And while I culminated that coursework with the selection of a Savage 110 in .308 – the reality is that most officers end up with their patrol rifle in hand when the need for an accurate and precise shot is needed.  To accomplish this, you need a rifle capable of making such a shot.  While virtually all ARs that are selected as patrol rifles can make a “combat effect hit” – in other words the “hit” degrades the threat’s ability to do the officer harm, a rifle capable of “better” accuracy and precision is needed for a DM role.

So first, let’s talk about Accuracy and Precision.  Accuracy is the ability of the rifle – along with its inherent accuracy, sighting system and ammunition - to place a round within a defined area on a threat.  Precision is the ability of the rifle, again along with its inherent accuracy, sighting system and ammunition to place multiple rounds – typically 5 consecutive rounds – in close proximity to previous rounds fired.  The “standards” I’ve chosen are a target area of 2-inches at a distance of 50-yards, 3-inches at 100-yards and 6-inches at 200-yards.  Statics show that the average engagement distance for an officer is 51 yards.  To date, the longest shot sits right at 170 yards.

The size of the target is based on the average size of the ocular cavity – about 3-1/2 inches.  So, if a DM can keep their rounds within a 2-inch circle at 50 yards and a 3-inch circle at 100 yards . . . at least 80% of the time, I will consider their efforts successful.  Tighter is, of course, better.  The goal I want a DM to work towards is a 2MOA group regardless of distance.  At 50-yards I typically put 3-5 rounds on 10ea 2-inch targets.  I will then use an app called “RangeBuddy” to score each target.  The app then will average all 10 targets giving me my average group size.  I am looking for an average over the 10 targets of 2MOA. 

At 100-yards I will put 5 rounds within a 3-inch target with 5ea targets to a target sheet.  Again, I will score each target and look for an average of 2MOA over 5 targets.

If I look at priorities, the priority is to have 80% of the rounds within the specific target for all targets on the target sheet.  The second priority is to achieve the 2MOA average group size over all targets on the target sheet.

Ammunition also plays a part – a big part.  If you look at the variance between standard “ball” ammunition and “Match Grade” ammunition it can easily be 1/2MOA or more.  That said, from simply cost point of view, I would encourage the use of a good quality ball ammunition for practice while a high quality defensive ammunition is carried while on duty such as Hornady’s Critical Defense.  Zero the AR for the Critical Defense ammunition, set the zero stops on your scope’s turrets.  Then, for range sessions, set new offsets for the practice ammunition and then return to the zero stops at the end of the session.  While a bit of a hassle, I think the cost savings will make it well worth your while.

So, now we have some fundamentals when looking for an AR that will meet my accuracy and precision requirements.  I ran across an excellent article at AccurateShooter.com that listed 14 key items to be considered.  To me the ones I considered as “Primary” were Great Barrel, Rigid Upper, a Rigid Free-Float Handguard, Component Quality and Quality Ammunition. 

I received my first M16 in August of 1968.  Pretty much qualified on them every year for 20+ years.  I’ve owned a number AR-15 variants myself for the past 20 years taking them to numerous courses from Gunsite, Rob Pincus, NAPSI as well as the Patrol Rifle course taught in the state of Iowa and an instructor course for “Patrol Rifles”.  I also completed the AR Armorer course to gain a better understanding of the platform and to be able to maintain my own ARs.  What I learned is that, in my opinion, it’s a great 6MOA gun.  That’s what it’s designed for.  It is, in no way a “precision” firearm.  The military set the spec and so it has been since the M16s introduction.  The government began a search for a replacement for the M-16 and designated a specification of 4MOA.  During that search Land Warfare Resources Corporation International – LWRC – was born to develop a competitive model.  Despite their efforts and the efforts of a number of other companies, the government closed that competition in 2013 and decided to continue with the Colt contract and a slightly heavier barrel.  However, LWRC did not simply pitch all their hard work in the trach.  Rather they introduced the variant they developed and the LWRC IC-A5 was born. 

While filling the square of “Armorer” for our community PD the Chief of Police purchased an LWRC a number of years back.  I would periodically run PMs on all patrol rifles and I have to say I was very impressed with the LWRC IC-A5.  It was a sturdy, beefy and well-built rifle.

So recently, I decided to add the semiautomatic carbine to my options for a DM rifle just to see how it would hold up to a bolt gun.  And, I simply could not find a better option than the LWRC IC-A5 rifle.  Money changed hands and presto-change-o, I was the proud owner of a new AR rifle.

Next came additional “furniture”.  My standard sling is the Vickers VTAC Padded sling – no better sling on the market.  I added a MAGPUL Bipod, a Streamlight TR-1 flashlight and then a scope.  Since this was to be used for more precision shooting out to 100-yards, a Red Dot was not on my list to add.

I have a fondness for Scout Scopes for DM rifles.  They will provide magnification up to around 7 and the long eye relief provides better situational awareness in my opinion.  Since I have a Vortex 1x7 Scout Scope on my personal DM rifle 

I decided to add one to the LWRC.  Let’s just say the results were mixed.  It’s a big scope and bulky.  My results at 50-yards were fine – not so much at 100-yards.  A had any number of folks point out that I was “bridging” my rings meaning that the rear ring was on the lower and the front was on the handguard that was a separate component.  The theory goes that when the gun fires the barrel sends harmonics through the handguard and will affect the accuracy of the scope.  Honestly, I’m not sure how that happens since the barrel free floats and entire weapon is at “rest” when you pull the trigger – I would think the same forces would act on the bullet regardless how the scope is mounted.  Setting all that aside, the whole thing was just plain too bulky to be workable, so I scrapped the idea and looked at LPVOs.  I eventually settled on the Bushnell 1x8 LPVO with the BTR-1 illuminated reticle . . . it was a great choice.  Of course, there’s always something.  The rear bell is very big – so big that even with “high” rings it still rubbed on the rear BUS (Back Up Sight).  So, I removed it and configured it for a comfortable eye relief.  This is 3.5-inch-ish but there’s lots of play so mounting the rifle is very easy.

This is the final configuration as it stands today – we’ll see if it stays going forward.  Winter is moving in hard, and I have some hospital time coming up next month (I have a new hip on order) so I suspect “she’s” put away until things begin to warm up in March.

I’ll post photos from both range trips, I suspect you’ll pick up on the difference the new configuration with the Bushnell scope made.  But I found the first trip disappointing.  There were two issues – first was accuracy at 100-yards and second was a “spongy” and long trigger.  Let’s talk about accuracy first.

The spec for the government contract was a 4MOA rifle.  My average group size 7 targets, 5 rounds per target was 2.59 inches.  Well within the 4MOA spec.  That said, it’s well outside my desired 2MOA spec.  Granted, this was just ball ammunition – but for practical practice – no shooter can afford match grade ammo for all his range work.  So, somehow it needs to work with ball ammunition.  All that said, remember my expectation of accuracy is to be able to place all the rounds within a 3-inch target at 100 yards.  Here things failed in a fairly spectacular fashion shooting a 73% on one target and a 68% on the second. 

As far as 50-yards were concerned there were no real issues.  My average group size across 10 targets, 3-rounds per target was 2.01MOA – I’ll take it and I shot a 97%. 

It was at this point that I flushed the Scout Scope and replaced it with the Bushnell AR 1x8 and did a “rinse and repeat” for a range trip at 50-yards and 100-yards.  I was still shooting PMC Bronze – I am a cheap bastard and I believe more reps are important.  The results were much more satisfying.

Without match grade ammunition I backed off and just focused on the Accuracy component, getting the rounds within the 2-inch target at 50-yards and a 3-inch target at 100-yards.  Honestly the results were much better.  I shot a 100% at 50-yards shooting 3-round groups.  And I shot a 84% at 100-yards shooting 5-round groups.  80% passes the course for students . . . but as the instructor I like to hit 90% - just did not happen this time. 

 

The other thing I commented on earlier was that the trigger was “spongey” – and it’s “long”.  And while I didn’t measure it, I suspect it’s 3+pounds as well.  Honestly, for a military grade and LEO grade rifle, I expect that.  “Hair” triggers really have no place in the workplace.  However, that said – by working the trigger reset – the trigger weight was significantly reduced, and the “spongey-ness” was completely eliminated.  What I mean is that after sending the first round down range I held the trigger hard to the rear, reacquired a proper sight picture, eased forward on the trigger until it reset and then pressed off the next round. This significantly increased accuracy as well.  And yes . . . match grade would bring things in as well – but no, not going to use match grade for practice ammunition.

Of course, such a weapon is typically used off-hand and at much closer distances.  I use a 50-round evaluation course of fire to see where a shooter is at with both their handgun and their rifle.  To do this I utilize a SEB target from Action Target and is divided into 6 engagements shot from a distance of 10-yards for the rifle.

Engagement #1 – Mount – Touch – Press Drill - 5ea single round engagements (5 rounds total)

On the command “UP!” and starting from the low ready you Mount the rifle and acquire the target – Target #1.  (Remember you are much closer to the target and at this distance your POI will be about 2-inches below your POA).  You confirm your  POA and smoothly press the trigger – then return to the low ready.  Your primary goal is to get the hit – time is secondary.  There is balance in the timing between speed and accuracy – but getting the hit takes precedence.

Engagement #2 – Single Round Engagement – 5ea single round engagements. (5 rounds total)

On the command “UP!”  and starting from the low ready to send a single round into Target #2 and return to the low ready.  This will be repeated for a total of 5 engagements.

Engagement #3 – Head Shot – 5ea single round engagements.  (5 rounds total)

On the command “UP!” and starting from the low ready you send a single round engagement into the Ocular Cavity of the head-box.  Again, remember the 2-inch difference between the POA and the POI.  This will be repeated for a total of 5 engagements.  (5 rounds total)

Engagement #4 – Hammer – 5ea accelerated pairs. (10 rounds total)

On the command “UP!” you engage Target #3 with an accelerated pair – going as fast as you can while still getting the hit.  This is repeated for a total of 5 engagements.

Engagement #5 – High Center Mass Hammer – at Max Speed – 5ea accelerated pairs. (10 rounds total).

On the command “UP!” you engage the High Center Mass box with two rounds as fast as you can drive the gun.  The obvious goal is that your rounds go in the box, but in this specific engagement speed is the driving force. 

Engagement #6 – Failure Drill – a combination of a Hammer in the HCM box and a single round in the ocular cavity.  (15 rounds)

On the “UP!” command you engage the High Center Mass box with two rounds and then transition to the Ocular cavity for a single round engagement.

The minimum score for this set of evaluation drills is 80%.  When I shot this for the evaluation shoot with the LWRC IC-A5 I shot a 92%.  I think this does a good job of wringing out some basic shooting skills anyone running an AR should have down solid.

To wrap this up, regardless of the final changes in equipment and methodology I’m satisfied for the time being and will continue to work with the rifle come this spring.

So, will this rifle “fill the squares” for a DM rifle?  Yes, I believe so.  The reality is that most small departments do not have DM.  Many will send an officer to “Sniper School” but that is such a unique and specialized skillset that I do not believe most officers or departments will spend the money required to maintain the sniper skills.  And the likelihood of taking a shot past 200 yards in a community is minimal.  If an officer works hard and consistently on their marksmanship with their patrol rifle, that can go a long way to fulfilling a DM role especially if they choose a patrol rifle and outfit it to do just that job. Frankly, I prefer a larger caliber – read .308 here – rifle and a bolt gun for the DM role.  And that’s how I teach the course.  That does not stop from folks bringing their ARs though.  Most come to realize that it can be hard to meet the accuracy expectations with a standard AR and red dot.

Bottom, bottom line – I find the LWRC IC-A5 a superior AR option and would not hesitate to recommend it to anyone looking for a solid AR rifle.