New project/new sight

[chicago]

Well, my brothers and sister, I now remember why I need a posse. Nothing else could go wrong today unless of course this post fails.

I didn't go to the field today, lucky me. I would have paid an entry fee. and been embarrassed at the same time.

I put the hammerhead rifled 0.688 into my t9.1 and two new cases of FS showed up at my door via the US MAIL by 10:30 AM. I went outside at the forty yard marker and set up the table just like the last three days. The Tiberius/Lapco 0.683 was in the marker. So, all I planned to do was to rechrono. However anything and everything went wrong. I was careful not to loose my spring and switched the barrels (that was all). The first shot was really hot even after turning it down a full turn before we started. But, do to my great luck, we kept turning it the wrong way making the shots hotter and hotter. Finally, we had worked it down to 259 with the shots failing way short.

Second mag. Turning it up meant however wasn't working now. Each shot fell shorter (and was double feeding shots) until we realized we were turning it down not up. Finally 276. First sincere shot through barrel with scope on. I had great expectations. Double feed! Two FS flew out of the barrel. And, that shot registered two forty something on the chrono. Shot again. Same thing same speed so I turned marker reg up. Still double feeds. Another double feed (consistent). Went thru two mags now! Nothing to show yet. Third mag, another double feed so I don't even trust the chrono that reported 303. Maybe after putting more than 150 rounds thru in three days plus another 16 today, it needed a good cleaning.

But, to be sure, let's put back the Tiberius/Lapco 0.683 and use the last two full mags just to get some satisfaction. Cause it was so great to see those shots yesterday. I was thinking that I reported a 3 inch pattern but there were only about two maybe three shots that were that wide and it was while we were adjusting the scope a click or two at a time. Most shots yesterday were bulls eyes (My bulls eyes are like 50 cent pieces). So, I really wanted to try at least two mags.

Could not! First short fell way short, of course, crank up that reg even more. Second shot I didn't see. Third shot sounded funny. Remove mag. Break at the top of the mag! Degassed, safety and removed barrel. There is a round stock in the barrel. Fire once into ground. Broke first strike tumbled out. Fired again (mind you this is with no magazine in the marker, to my surprise, two broken FS tumble out. Looked in barrel (after removing it from marker). Now it is clear but really gummed up.

Well, I still got the old non-rifled FLASC with me. Stick the trusty flasc in. Double feeds. Dry fire. Double pops now! That's it. I quit!

Summary, could not hit target with the hammerhead. But, that does not mean it was the hammerhead . Visually inspected hammerhead. Not the same position from bolt to groves as lapco or flasc barrels. But, right now I'm just just totally disappointed.

There were only two bright things that came out of today. One I didn't travel and waste my time and money in "open" games cause if it was a marker that needs some serious maintenance, it might have started double firing at the field and I would have blamed the tiberius/lapco 0.683. And, two, this experience has given me the excuse to start drinking earlier. That was my third Jim Beam right there!

[chicago]

Thought about it, haven't broken down the T9.1 but, when I do, I'm replacing the Killjoy trigger. I had a problem like this (double firing) when I had the killjoy trigger in my t8.1 (my mp7 setup). Since then, no problems with double firing. So may be a piece of paint or shell got in there by the trigger or may be it just took longer to wear in. I use my Mp7, the silent knight, much more last year than the deaf leopard (because of that extremely long riffled barrel). But, now that the awesome scope means I can put each round I fire on a quarter from 150 feet away, I might be willing to put up with its freakish length (may be remove my beloved silencer). Because after three different barrels I'm totaling convinced its not the nubbins that caused the double feeds yesterday. I bet it's the killjoy trigger and I can't put up with that.

[chicago]

Well, it appeared to be that Killjoy trigger. It seems killjoy triggers and I just don't get along. That's all I changed. If you change one thing at a time, you kinda know what the problem was.

Another 100 round bulk box down the drain. But, what fun. Unless, I was much, much more scientific and precise, I could not tell the difference in accuracy between a Tiberius/Lapco 0.683 and a Hammerhead 0.688. The effiency of the Hammerhead was far superior; but, as far as putting one round after the other in the same place. They were both the same.

On Tuesday of this coming week, I've got a riffled lapco "shorty" at 0.683 and I'll probably test again (just can't be as extensive as we were today!)

Storm coming in now. But, great day for testing. The hammerhead 8.5 inch 0.688 with the M50 muzzle was just as accurate, less than 3 inch pattern at 50 yards.

[chicago]

I was in a hurry yesterday, so that's all I had time to post. But, now a few more astounding observation from your lovable green sex machine.

The Lapco/Tiberius 0.683 and the HammerHead 0.688 seem functionally indistinguishable as far as accuracy at ranges up to 50 yards (It might be farther, but that's all I can measure 150 feet). This XB30 scope has been phenomenal. And, I did learn some other things which are extremely important and that I must retract some more of my earlier statements (last year).

First, I think that the Tiberius/Lapco 0.683 put more spin than the Hammerhead 0.688. I originally sighted in using the 0.683. To my surprise, I had to re-sight in using the Hammerhead (it's shots were higher and to the left (even at the same fps as measure by the same chrono).

Originally, I thought the Hammerhead didn't have the same precision. But when I re-sighted for the hammerhead. It too was dead on. So, I think the 0.683 bore spins/grabs the shells tighter than the 0.688 forcing the shots to spin more and therefore drop down and to the right. This corresponded, was confirmed, by how I had to thumb adjust the XB30 1/4 MOA at 50 yards.

Finally, and here's where I need to make a retraction of an earlier statement I made on this forum. It started when I went down range to listen to the M50 muzzle versus the FLASC suppressor with and adapter. At fifty yards, they were about the same; to me the M50 had a high pitch to the shot, than the FLASC's duller snap. That was just my ears, no db meter used. But while I fiddle with the sound quality, the amount of report down range, the shooter noticed the pattern was not as tight with the FLASC.

So, more experiments including a simple bird cage tip. The initial observation (and when I test the shorty lapco riffled I'll confirm this), the FLASC suppressor and the M50 muzzle were both impacting the dead on accuracy. With just the bird cage or no tip, we tried both. It was now, well the only way I can describe it is, "There was no effort putting rounds right on top of one another even with rapid fire" when using the bird cage or no tip. With the FLASC or the M50 it was weird but we both felt like it took more effort to try and maintain that accuracy and not possible at all with rapid fire.

So, for those who asked me if the FLASC suppressor effected accuracy and I said no; I WAS WRONG, terribly wrong. I just didn't have the tools until now to prove this. I don't mind admitting I was wrong or that I didn't have the proper equipment to test it. I was wrong. I'd just like everyone on the forums to admit or point out when they learn something differently from what they've previously stated.

But, now having spent $150 in First Strike rounds (soon to be almost $200 once the Lapco shorty 0.683) I can tell you that my preliminary observations now confirm that both the Hammerhead M50 and the FLASC suppressor impact accuracy, mostly during rapid fire. Maybe the packing in the flasc is bad or has shifted (as a note, it wasn't my FLASC suppressor tip either), maybe the holes in the reversed ported M50 are too small (not enough venting capability during rapid fire). I can't tell you that. But what I can tell you is that we both observed a negative impact when using anything other than a simple muzzle.

But, in closing, in my opinion, that is not that bad. I have made a quantum leap in sighting in targets and determining their range and in doing so I discovered some other important things. so, this had all been a win for me. I can't wait to complete my riffling tests and then get out to the field again. I look forward to more hits at greater ranges with more confidence.

[chicago]

Well, Lapco had told me it would go out last Friday USPS and would be here by Tuesday or Wednesday of this week. Well, it is Tuesday, and the mail has arrived but no riffled shorty to test.

I had talked with VoodooAddict about the FLASC supressors, I'll feel naked out there without it. He did mention two or three important things. So, along with testing the Lapco riffled shorty at 0.683 bore. I'll retest the FLASC 14 inch smooth bore in the following three ways to try to determine whether it is the smooth bore or the suppressor packing or the suppressor itself that is causing the inaccuracy in the shots. It will be a much shorter test two mags at most. I'm going thru expensive first strikes like water.

I almost have to laugh - in the old days of paintball a 12-24 inch pattern was about all you could expect and certainly not out at 150 feet - now, I'm firing first strikes thru aftermarket barrels and disguarding the smooth bore 6 inch pattern cause I can get less than 3 inch with a riffled small bore! Who would have thought that...)

In all my tests to date, the FLASC smooth bore has been shot with the suppressor attached. It was the configuration I was planning on running so I thought nothing of it. But, as voodooaddict so wisely pointed it, it could be just the suppressor. So, I'll retest the FLASC without the suppressor to see if it is as accurate as the riffled barrels (no tips of any kind). I have also "unpacked my suppressor (removed the packing material that came with the suppressor) so there is nothing in the chambers inside the suppressor - I don't know if I've every used it that way. Then we'll see if that suppressor "unpacked" effects the accuracy. If either of those things don't fail. I'll compare the new sound to the HammerHead M50 muzzle. Then, I have a new packing idea in mind. So, I haven't given up on FLASC yet. But, the writing may be on the wall...If the Lapco does not show up tommorrow I still plan to test the FLASC as described! Any other suggestions? Comments?

[chicago]

Well, it finally arrived. The barrel that theoretically went out last Friday, May 18th showed up today, Thursday, May 24th.

Their Tuesday/Wednesday was optimistic. But, it came today USPS. Serial number 8!

Unfortunately, they sent the wrong threaded tip (I asked for Lapco threading, many of my lapco muzzles including the Lapco Mock Silencer don't fit properly on the Tiberius short threading. Some, don't fit at all - so that's why I specifically asked for the Lapco threading and confirmed it before they sent it out) so my testing will be delayed even more. It is only quarter to nine out there so I'm not expecting to see any response to my email for a couple hours yet; but, this is so disappointing.

[girls, bring me more meds, Chicago has a headache. Where is ArchAngel when you need him! Girls, please be gentle with me...]

[chicago]

WA5P over on the Tiberius forum asked:

"Just to clarify Chicago, you say you are using the APR because it is a comfortable height for your mask. But, what trajectory setting do you have it set on? Is it set to 0 degrees (completely flat) or do you have it on any of the 5 degree increments? I dont want to use any adjustable riser rail or even shim if i dont have to."

My response was:

"To be honest, I don't know for sure. I think I would have noticed all but the first setting. I've always ran it flat before (but, people do use my markers - I love showing off how awesome they are, my deaf leopard and silent knight. I'll check today and confirm. As I said, I just removed the Turglo sight and mounted the Hawke.

I've been so busy ever since I mounted the Hawke being careful, not wanting to change anything more than barrels (to improve the accuracy even more). And, to make sure the range estimating worked and the different crosshairs worked at the various yard markers. And when I change barrels, the velocities change significantly (esp. with the lapco's and not in a good way - if I switch from a flasc 14 inch smooth bore to a 14 inch lapco riffled 0.683, many time the first strike round doesn't even make it out the Lapco barrel).

So, I really have paided no more attention to the Killjoy APR than the Killjoy ROC stock (they just there for easy of comfort in getting into the sight picture. So, I haven't touched them.

But, I promise, I'll check today or tomorrow (Holiday here in the states on Monday and a lot to do before then.)"


BTW, Lapco sent an apolpgy and said they made the mistake. So, they are sending me a return label and then they will send me the correct serial barrel #7. In a way, this still sucks cause it will now take weeks and weeks to get what I had ordered (now over a week ago)!

[chicago]

Update. I got an email from LAPCO the other day. we have come to more favorable terms (because of their mistake). I will hopefully have the correct barrel (#007) next Tuesday or Wednesday (sound familiar - we'll see).

Testing will resume at that time.

Hey, does anyone out their have a 14 inch Hammerhead that turned out not to be 14 inches (more like 12). If you do and want to get rid of it. Send me a pm!

[chicago]

Well, the LAPCO 0.683 shorty showed up today as promised. So, I just got back in from testing it. As I'm typing, I'm realizing, I did not actually measure its length nor did I take pictures yet.

Well today was a lot of testing and finishing up on different side bars. First for WA5P. You asked if the APR I have, has a rise in it (actually just the opposite of a riser, but, that is the way to say it). I used digital calipers from picatinny rail on the T9.1 to the start of the actual scope. So, this is not actually zero to the center of the biggest reticule (but, it is to its base plate that it comes with the Hawke). At the very front (the business end of the marker), it is 1.253 and at the back (where you put your eye) is 1.255 to 1.256 or 0.003 difference. My Killjoy APR is the old analog version so I can't just click it once to see if it zeroes - its more analog than digital adjust. Now, you'll ask, is that 3 thousandths of inch from the Tiberius 9.1 marker, or the picatinny rail, or the adjustable riser, or the Hawke or my own hand measurements. And, yes, as I type this now, I realize I only measured the left side of the marker, not the right side. To be honest I don't know what caused the 0.003 of an inche difference; but, I'm not in the mood to try and find out either. Cause everything is working so well. I just don't want to touch anything until I have to. Oh, WA5P, I will measure it one day; but only when I need to.

VoodooAddict was helping today. I'd say he got lots of data that he actually logged in his notebook. We went through $40 dollars more of First Strike. I had not idea the scope was going to cost so much. But, to be honest, I loved every shot, every moment we were out there. There were some disappointments. Since VoodooAddict is still compiling the data, I'll just give the summaries of what I believe/saw today.

One started with the new LAPCO shorty, 0.683 (will have chrono speeds of each shot later). Very accurate barrel. I loved it; but, far less efficient than the HammerHead or the FLASC and to my shooting, A Lapco riffled barrel still has this tendency to drop shots low randomly (my theory is the grab on the FS fins by the extremely tight 0.683 bore). It was a little wild on the chrono. After roughly 8 shots we decided to try the Hammerhead again and change nothing else (no tips, nothing).

I have to laugh here, we put the Hammerhead rifled 0.688 in and VoodooAddict thought there was something wrong with the chrono. Every shot was the same velocity, so much so that we switched back to the Lapco 0.683 only to see wider swings in velocity again. There were both very accurate barrels, I'm sure either one would be great addition to anyone's marker. However, after more than 100 rounds today alone, I've made my decision on what's going in my T9.1 with the Hawke. It is the Hammerhead 0.688 rifled with the Lapco fake silencer.

Yes, we also tested all kinds of tips once the Lapco shorty test was over. No tip, bird cage tips, and believe it or not one of the those unbelievable loud Lapco blaster tips, or the other Lapco silencer were the only tips that did not seem to impact accuracy. You could just see it happen. Sadly, I put a new flasc suppressor on with a double ported insert. My pattern jumped from sub 3 inches at 120 feet (40 m) to 6 inch pattern. Changed to the the old FLASC suppressor with no packing and single porting, same problems. Even the HammerHead M50 muzzle caused problems with acrruaracy (not as much, but, noticeable. In other words, it would still have hit the player, but I could not double tap one on top of the other.) We were figuring we could still use the FLASC suppressors on T8s configed for round paint but not for long range first strike shots.

That's probably enough for now until VoodoooAddict sends me or posts the spreadsheets he's planning along with plots etc.

[chicago]

Today, I reread my own post on the testing I did yesterday. First, still no data from voodooaddict.

There was a question on the Tiberius forum on how many rounds went thru the HammerHead. Without VoodooAddict's notes, I'd say at least 6 full magazines of first strikes.

There was the first mag just getting chrono measurements. That's when we switched to the Lapco, and as reported above, then another mag thru the hammerhead, just to confirm in our minds how steady the Feet per Second (fps) really was. It was amazing. And, that is all thanks to VoodooAddict meticulous measurements (to be honest, I might not have noticed). But, it confirms something I'd said a long time ago about variations in fps. I felt it was not just the Tiberius reg or the HPA's reg. There were IMO a number a variables that contributed to the consistency in fps at the tip of a marker with barrel being one of them!

Oh, I did say what my deaf leopard (the T9.1) was going to have: The 0.688 Hammerhead and the Lapco fake silencer tip; but, I never said what my silent knight (the MP7) was going to have now. I will be the 0.683 Lapco shorty and either the hammerhead M50 or just a simple Lapco bird cage tip (haven't decided yet. So, today or tomorrow, after weeks of "work"/testing, I've got to fine tune my deaf leopard and my silent knight. Get them ready for open games this weekend!

You see, during yesterday's tests, everything was kept exactly equal, no changes in anything accept the barrels. Therefore, I'm shooting just a little hot with the Hammerhead (in the 280s and I want to be like 279 where 280 is field limit). That change will possibly effect my zero by a click at 50 yards/meters. And, the poor silent knight's reg will need to be cranked up all the way to accommodate the 0.683 Lapco shorty. I hope I have enough first strike left for this weekend!

In closing, you may now say, "but, you needed to adjust the reg for each barrel cause of the bullseye." But, two things, first, the 0.683 Lapco shorty was more efficeint than the 14 inch cousin and the rifling seems "smoother" than the 14 inch Lapco riffled! Trully, you can feel the difference. VoodooAddict flet it too, it is smoother than the 14 inch. So, I assume that the first strike had an easier time spinning and exiting the "shorty" barrel than the long. So there was no reason to adjust the velocity (they were close enough). It was shooting as I remember in the upper 260's or low 270's with the Lapco. When we get VoodooAddict's numbers, we can confirm that. The hammerhead was in the low 280's and the FLASC one piece (gave it one more test with no tips) was shooting in the 310s - but don't quote me, let's wait for voodooaddict's numbers. I think he wanted to write all this down cause the results have been so amazing. Oh, the FLASC 14 inch smooth bore one pieceeven with no tip attached was not as accurate as either the shorty (8 inch) hammerhead or the Lapco.

And, that's my last point. Although we had a standard bullseye and shot from the same table, the same distance, the same position, the same everything; we did not even adjust the scope. So, we (I mean voodooaddict) will be normalizing the pattern. In otherwords, all Lapco shots were about one inch off to the left of bulleyes at 40 yards. All HammerHead's were off by an inch to the right.

I remember that disticntively because, we both assumed the tighter Lapco would be imparting more of a spin and therefore go to the left (while the hammerhead was going to impart less of a spin causing it to go to the left). This truly was a surprise. But, since every shot was measured, we should have a great pattern for both. Then when I fine tune my scope today or tomorrow I'll give it a 1/2 MOA to adjust the barrel of choice dead on bullseye before I head to the field. That I think that really covers everything now...

[chicago]

May be tweaking day is at hand. No more massive testing. Give my sights and my barrels the "as close to 280 as possible" reg adjust and then tweak the scopes. Then its Saturday and Sunday at the fields, if weather permits.

"So, what's the point Chicago," you ask. Oh, just wanted to report something someone on the Tib forum asked. They said, "why don't you run with hammerheads in both markers?"

The answer I gave was, "I would, but I only own one hammerhead (and after all the First Strikes I went thru), I can't afford another hammerhead barrel." HH were surprisingly awesome. I'm hoping to find one of those 14 inch HH that turned out to be way short of 14 inches. If anyone has one, they'd like to get rid of it (like, may be next month and it's at a reasonable price), I'll get one. Yes, I'd love to run both Tiberius markers with HH! I'm afraid my two ladies will get jealous again. The deaf leopard will have an HH and my sexy little silent knight won't. She might act up on me! She's done it before.

You'd think Hammerhead would just send me one they have in their "scrap pile." After all the good things I've said on the different forums about their product! Oh, I didn't say all those good things to get a free barrel from them, I reported what I observed. I was not actually expecting the Hammerhead to come out on top. But, I figure, they have all those old "14 inches that don't even fit in the T9.1 standard configurations with a shroud" so you would figure they might contact me and send me one of the old barrels they can't really sell any more! Hint, hint Hammerhead (HHH).

[chicago]

Rained all day yesterday. It's raining now so I don't know when to get the tweaks in.

Haven't heard from anyone about those less than 14 inch barrels, not even HammerHead , themselves. They could have offered to at least discount one for me (very disapointed).

oh, here are some pix of the speical Lapco run of 50! I have numbers 7 and 8 (7 is a "lapco" thread, 8 is a tiberius thread - the tiberius threaded one would not even accept the lapco fake silencer!)

[chicago]

Well, I tweaked the deaf leopard for today's field test. Was a great day. I'm so pumped right now. I wished I had a hammerhead in the T9.1; but, the 14 inch 0.683 Tiberius/Lapco is still an awesome barrel. I put the hammerhead in the silent knight. Too bad Hammerhead could not see fit to send a barrel (14 inch or shorter for my deaf leopard).

As you all may or may not remember, I came up with a not great looking but very functional quick disconnect that swivels in all directions. I used it both on the T9.1 deaf leopard and the mp7, silent knight and I always take both markers with me whereever I go (luckily I took both today).

Could not play with the T9.1 with the riffled 0.683 and the hawke scope. The adapter I came up with was missing. So, not going to move the hawke scope to my mp7, the silent knight. Long story short, nothing to report on the hawke scope (she saw no action). But, the HH on my Mp7 rocked! Very consistent, and many long range kills today (people actually took note).

Wished I'd had the scope. I'm sure we would have had probably many more kills. Went thru the rest of my first strikes! Have more ordered from rockstar that should be here Monday or Tuesday of next week. I still can't wait to use the deaf leopard, my T9.1 with a HH barrel and the Hawke XB30. But now, it is at least another week away7. Too bad for hammerhead, they've had their opportunity and blew it again!

[chicago]

Probably the last post for me in the new XB30 project. It was a good project and revealed a lot for me. It also tore down some old bad assumptions I had and reinforced other beliefs that I could not prove til now.

Anyway, got my hands on a Hammerhead (less than 14 inch) 0.688 rifled barrel today. I measured it. With the bangstik muzzle on, it is 14 inches (but, that's with the muzzle which I don't see other barrel manufacturers quote that way - heck depending on the muzzle, like their M50, it adds two more inches making it a 16 inch barrel. Why don't they market it as a 16 inch barrel.) I checked the actual barrel is 11 something making it only 2 inches longer than the HH 8.1 (8.5 inch) shorty.

What I also found interesting was that it did not fit with a tip if there was a front "extension/shroud." These shrouds are sold with T9.1s. When the shroud was attached (the most common configuration for T9.1s) this HH is too short!. I tried it to confirm what we've heard and it is true; you can't use this barrel in the standard T9.1 configuration (would only work on a CQB configuration). But, it works for me cause I prefer shorter barrels and CQB type configurations. I'm not making an excuse for them; I'm just reporting the facts as I see them and how they work in my configurations.

Secondly, the thing came packaged as a T8.1 barrel (no reference to T9.1 so, I guess that's how they fixed their problem). Without coming out now and saying it, these two barrel lengths are only for the T8.1! Can you say, sleezzy?

Well, I don't run with the front shroud so it fits. That's why I was interested in it; that's why I looked for one. I prefer a shorter barrel. I replaced the Lapco 0.683 rifled barrel I had in there (shooting under 280 fps which is most fields limits around here). I put the hammerhead in. First shot chrono'd at 341 fps second at 347; so, we cranked the reg down, down, and down some more to 279, 271, 272, 275. You get the picture. I did not search for the HH "sweet" spot. I found that one on the HH shorty and after 7 dead on same speed shots, I'm hoping to find it on the not 14 inch version (but not now - lets see how efficeint and accurate this is first).

HH is between 50-60 feet per second more efficient than the Tiberius Lapco 0.683. To me, that is a lot! My beloved oold FLASC only presented 20-30 fps more efficiency than the standard Tib barrel sold with the T9.1 (and, that was a smooth bore). But, at the time 2-3 years ago, that was pretty efficient, that was before riffled barrels for the Tiberius roamed the earth!

Now, for accuracy with or without the "bang" tip, the hammerhead was extremely accurate and, it was a windy day. So after 8 first strikes spent on chrono and another eight first strike spent tweaking the sight. I fired 8 shorts with the bangstick muzzle and then 8 shots without any tip. Yes, I limited my testing today cause of the wind and cause I can't afford to keep dumping a bulk case of first strikes each time I switch barrels! As it was, I probably spent around $15 on this small test today just on FS rounds.

Anyway, I've found my barrel now! It is the hammerhead. It is a good 6 inches shorter than the Lapco (when muzzles are attached), it was just as accurate and it was at least 55 fps more efficient than the lapco! Will there be pictures, no. I'm tired of all this testing and expense; I just want to get out there and play!


Deaf Leopard's field configuration:

- Tiberius T9.1 (stripped down)
- added remote line with Ninja reg set to 430 psi
- Killjoy original Roc stock
- Killjoy original APR (flat)
- Magpul original AFG
- unknown manufacturer's of bipod (don't really like it).
- Hawke XB30 crossbow scope

[Allu]

Sounds sweet, good luck on the field. And if the testing feels tiresome and expensive, remember PPPPPP
(Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance)

And as always that one perfect shot usually makse it worth it

[chicago]

Promised I'd report on the HH. Well, the hammerhead 0.688 is a dream both the short (8.5 inch) and "the long" around 11 inches - don't remember the exact measure. Sorry, I'm testing out a new bourbon right now. It is from IOWA of all places - I didn't think you could call it bourbon if it came from IOWA - but it sure is different.

Anyway, I promised I report on the HH. The shorty is so sweet; so accurate, so efficient and consistent (Same FPS from shot to shot). Will never give her up.

The "longer one" was not as consistent (still a lot more efficient than the Tiberius Lapco 0.683) but, I haven't found her sweet spot either. Did not take the time. Was focused more on accuracy. Long story, may be another time when I find that sweet spot. Anyway, I promised I report on HH and just did.

My new barrels after all this testing - HH 8.5 0.688 in my mp7, the silent knight. And HH less than 14(much less than 14) in my T9.1, the deaf leopard sporting the hawke xb scope! I'd change her name to fart, cause she's silent but deadly except, she's not as silent anymore and to me deaf leopard is a nicer name than fart!

[trinity]

Chicago gets my thanks for his work with the Hammerhead barrels (which I have begun to work with), but also especially for the crossbow sights. While I think APRs are essential, especially for any targets at 200 feet and beyond, I still hate fiddling with them. It wouldn't be so bad if my eyes cooperated, but in my declining years I find myself wearing glasses for distance (vision that used to be 20/10). While wearing those glasses under a paintball mask I can't remove, I end up have trouble making rapid adjustments to my APR. That's especially true when I am lying up in some deeply shadowed sniper hide and a target pops up at a distance I hadn't thought to lase in advance.

The Hawke XB30 briefly displaced my tried-and-true Bushnell Banner on my T9.1. It is, as Chicago says, a great scope with multiple reticles for different ranges. The vari-power setting (magnification) adjusts the distance between those reticles based on your chrono speed. It's easy to sight-in, built well, and has crisp optics.

For me, it has three down sides. The first is that while the scope is vari-power, it really isn't able to be used that way. The magnification on the scope moves from about 1x-4x, but that magnification is changed when you adjust the scope for the chrono speed you are using. Once you are dialed in you can't adjust the magnification because that will also change your zero. I haven't done any testing but my guess is with the scope sighted in for its normal ranges at 275 FPS the magnification looks to be about 2.5.

When I am moving on the field from place to place I like to be able to dial my scope back to 1x so I can see as much of he field as possible. When I go to ground, I move the scope up to maximum magnification. In addition to shooting, I often use it to verify whether I am looking at part of an arm, foot, or mask at distance or whether what I am seeing is just part of limb or stump. Also I firmly believe that when shooting at distances of over 200 feet it gets really hard to see where your rounds are going without some kind of scope magnification.

The second negative is the scope caps. This is more of a nitpick than a negative. They caps are junk. I've already replaced mine with Butler Creek covers. If anyone needs the size for the Hawke scope optics I have that.

The third negative might not even be a negative and it isn't for guys like Chicago. The standard way of zeroing the Hawke means that using the reticles you can reach out to a maximum of 180 feet. I routinely shoot at distances from 200-250 feet. Some players don't. They like that less than 200 foot shot. For them this scope is perfect because 2.5x magnification at shorter distances is sufficient. To be honest, my experience on the field tells me that most players probably would save money by not shooting at targets at distances beyond 200 feet anyway. They don't practice enough with first strikes (for a lot of reasons) to be truly accurate and all they are doing is the equivalent of expensive long-balling. For marksmen, as opposed to snipers, this scope couldn't be better.

There is a way around the shooter-to-target distance limitation though, and that is through the use of your APR. My guess is that to get full range out to 300 feet using the reticles you would probably need to make only one APR adjustment and figure out where your new impact points for each reticle. In fact, that is what I intended to do when I mounted it on my T9.1. Then, of course, I stumbled onto something else, something that I hope will allow me to have the advantages of a crossbow scope and still take my old friend, the Bushnell, back out onto the field.

The Hawke now proudly sits on my shorty T9. It is the perfect match. That is the gun that I go to when either terrain or mission demands CQB kind of stuff (60-200 feet). It has a longbow stock, short barrel, optic, and Flasc suppressor. That's it. The Flasc Suppressor does not seem to impact accuracy at all when used in conjunction with a smooth-bore barrel (thanks Voodooaddict for that insight). I used to use an ATN holographic sight on its top rail along with an APR. The Hawke is even quicker because I can estimate range and use the appropriate reticle. No mental math for holdover. The T9 is not as accurate as the T9.1 but it is still plenty accurate for 180-foot shots.

In a few minutes I will be leaving to put some first strike rounds downrange with the T9. Last weekend I drilled with the T8. By next weekend, I should have my special project scope mounted and give that combination a test with the new Hammerhead barrel.

[archorn]

could someone please take these measurements (see picture) of the Hammer Head 8.5 riffled. i need them as precise as you can get them and if your tools have both metric and imperial units please send me the metric ones (and to minimize the chance of confusion say what kind of unit it is)

Attachments:

[chicago]

Will do tomorrow; but, I have my sons over tonight and one of them brought me a nice bottle of bourbon. I would not trust my measurementes tonight!

[chicago]

OK, first measurement is 0.875 inches (that's not the threading but the digital caliper measurement after the threading) the actual barrel at that point. I figured that's what you were asking for (otherwise its the standard lapco/tiberius type - I think 7/8ths 20 thread count.)

The second measurement, I took after the o'ring to the point that the slope starts. That was 0.197 inches.

Sorry, I was too lazy to repeat the measures in meters. We are afterall lazy americans! Hope this helps.

p.s. I just reread my own post and realized by looking at your drawing that the length meausrement you were looking for is from the very tip to the change of the barrel size. If true, my bad, I'll get that measurement for you another time. Right now I'm puffing from running up and down steps four flights in all. So, I'm not going for eight at this time. What can I say, I'm a crazy old man! And, I had a lot of Bourbon last night! Booker, it was a father's day gift!