Over the years knowledge

[jason75979]

Spotfreakin ON, dude!

Some might consider it a character flaw, but (I'm old, and I feel entitled to some) every time I see a thread asking for a load for something (especially something common), my first thought is, "cheapskate! BUY A BOOK!"

Then, I take a breath, and go on and see if I can help answer their question.

I started with a Spartan press too! about 73 or so. Have worn out probably 3 copies of that manual over the years, and always look in the old book sections at the show, and buy good condition copies when I find them. Also have several generations of Speer, Hornady, Sierra, and other manuals. And the ABCs, and Gun Digest annuals. Also have stacks of American Rifleman, Guns & Ammo, Shooting Times, etc from the 60-70s-80s, kind of tapered off after that, still read them all, just didn't find much worth keeping.

the internet is a wonderful thing, it must be true! I read it on the Internet!

Well, I started reloading in the in'anet days and found this forum through a search for "reloading basics". Great stickie you gents have by 'Dave in Georgia'. When I private messaged him he hasn't posted in months. I received a reply from him within a few hours with a phone# and after a few hour phone chat, was on my way to learning more and starting.
I wound up buying and reading 3 of his suggested books before I even began considering purchasing(there has to be a grammatical error here) equipment.
Other than a few posts from a certain long-winded poster that likes to faintly disguise ridicule, I've received nothing but top notch help and kind wishes here in the reloading forum.
In summary, the innanet is a great tool, if nothing else, to point you in the right direction for the old ways of learning.
I appreciate each and every one of your input.

 

[tirod]

You get up to speed a lot quicker. Resources are available 24/7, instead of trying to remember to ask that experienced shooter the next time you meet him at the range.

You also get to bounce that question off others with a different view. It all adds up a lot more quickly.

I used an M16 for 22 years - mostly before the internet. When I finally focused on it I discovered pretty quickly a lot of information that put things into perspective a lot quicker. And that the Army doesn't bother to discuss. User's aren't let into the "program code" for the reasons why something was done, they are just handed the product and told how and when to push the buttons.

I discovered that experienced users are great resources for how to use the gun, but they are not the engineers or decision makers who weighed the why of it's design. And in fact can be infamously ignorant of how they work.

On the other hand, those who delve deeply into the mathematics of ballistics often have no clue about the dynamic applications.

Between the two, there are some lively discussions. We recognize them as a "caliber war."

One recent observation I've run down is that most shooters are using 1-2MOA weapons and yet trying to hit an 18MOA target - the average size of the center of mass on an enemy soldier or whitetail deer.

Yet, as is well documented, we miss. A lot. I don't think we are practicing the right way, cause, it's not working. In point of fact, the military researched it and found most hits past 125m were from bullets not aimed at that specific target. Dumb luck, as it were.

We don't seem to be able to hit an 18MOA target with guns capable of 2MOA. And that is what some at Command level keep in mind when they commit troops to battle. If dumb luck is killing more of the enemy than aimed fire, ok, lets move to lighter ammo and shoot more of it.

Definitely not something taught in Basic Training, or spoken of by higher level commanders. And yet, there are all the intermediate caliber full auto battle rifles that superceded the older ones that could reach out to 800m. We keep a few around for those better shooters. About the top ten percent.

You get a bigger picture view when you can assess more of the information and the internet does make it available. What you have to do is go look for it, tho. And if you weren't, it seems out of place and even wrong to those brought up on word of mount education, institutional or not.