Bren vs BAR

[Soren]

It's very hard to hit anything past 500m with iron sights, thats true for most people, and only a sniper/sharpshooter can really achieve consistant hits on a human sized target at 1000m or more. But you are nonetheless capable of doing it with a full power rifle, while it would be impossible with an assault rifle. Hitler liked that his troops had a weapon with a long effective range, which for bolt action rifles usually was around 1000 to 1200m, and that was the direct reason for why he retained the K98k as the main infantry arm and mistrusted less powerful weapons the role.

That having been said German snipers were required to shoot groups no larger than a head sized target at 400m and a torso sized target at 600m, and kills past 1100 meters were confirmed on several occasions, Matthäus Hetzenaur accounting for one of these. There were also incidents were US troops found themselves under sniper fire from over 1200 yards away and even then casualties occured.

 

[Glider]

It's very hard to hit anything past 500m with iron sights, thats true for most people, and only a sniper/sharpshooter can really achieve consistant hits on a human sized target at 1000m or more. But you are nonetheless capable of doing it with a full power rifle,

Or more accurately put
It's impossible to hit anything past 500m with iron sights, thats true for everyone. Only a sniper/sharpshooter can really achieve consistant hits on a human sized target at 1000m or more. But you are nonetheless capable of doing it with a full power rifle with a telescopic sight.

While it would be impossible with an assault rifle. Hitler liked that his troops had a weapon with a long effective range, which for bolt action rifles usually was around 1000 to 1200m, and that was the direct reason for why he retained the K98k as the main infantry arm and mistrusted less powerful weapons the role.

I find it hard to believe that even Hitler would believe this. For all his many faults he did serve with distinction in WW1 and would have known this it is simply not possible to see let alone hit anyone with iron sights at these ranges. Can you give any support to this statement.
FYI the peep sights that I used were not telescopic but are not practical for military use which is why the target had a site mark 48 inches wide.
The development of the machine pistol where its fair to say that Germany had a lead in WW1 and WW2 would question this statement.

 

[renrich]

As stated before, snipers during the War Between the States were able to make shots well past 500 yards with optical sights and black powder rifles but I don't believe that even an expert sniper can hit a man sized target at 1000 meters consistently over open sights. At 500 yards with the Garand and a peepsight, the Army got many trainees to hit that thirty inch bull at least some of the time, BUT, we were in a prone postion with a tight loop sling and knew the distance precisely and had the sights adjusted accordingly. I have done a lot of hunting in the West and made quite a few long shots but have never been able to get a shot where I could use a prone position( the grass or bushes being too high) and the range was always an estimate and often way off. To me, that experience more closely simulates combat conditions than firing on the KD range. Having said all this though, my hat is off to the NCOs where I was in basic for their ability to make at least some sort of rifleman out of young men many of which had never handled a firearm.

 

[Soren]

Or more accurately put
It's impossible to hit anything past 500m with iron sights, thats true for everyone.

I find it hard to believe that even Hitler would believe this. For all his many faults he did serve with distinction in WW1 and would have known this it is simply not possible to see let alone hit anyone with iron sights at these ranges. Can you give any support to this statement.
FYI the peep sights that I used were not telescopic but are not practical for military use which is why the target had a site mark 48 inches wide.
The development of the machine pistol where its fair to say that Germany had a lead in WW1 and WW2 would question this statement.

I'm afraid that you're badly mistaken Glider. I've consistently been able to hit human sized targets at 600m with iron sights. Yep thats right, 600 meters. It can be done I promise you! And also at longer ranges!

Torso sized target, K31, 640 yards, 5 hits out of 7 shots! (71.5% hit rate) IRON SIGHTS!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsomougcK6E

Torso sized target, K31, 1,000 yards, 2 hits out of 6 shots! (33% hit rate) IRON SIGHTS!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZ-Lcvyrifw

Torso sized target, scoped K98k, 900 yards, 3 hits out of 4 shots! (75% hit rate)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8B4Me5HXNo

 

[Soren]

but I don't believe that even an expert sniper can hit a man sized target at 1000 meters consistently over open sights

I would agree, but a sniper usually has optics on his rifle, and with that it is absolutely possible and often done, hence my comment on that.

 

[Glider]

Soren
Your examples prove the point. They are Bench fired rifles, fired at a known distance, in perfect weather, by a specialist shot, almost certainly using hand made ammunition, at a bright target and using a scope to see the target. Not exactly typical combat conditions.

Personally, the best that I have done was a 92 at 900 and 500 yards with a grouping of about 30 inches at 900 yards and 18 inches at 500 yards, our rifles were held in the prone position not rested and the ammunition purchased. This is closer to combat but as I have said the sights whilst not telescopic were for target shooting, the weather was pretty good, the target clear and I was an experienced shot although mostly with a .22.

Your average solider would do well to spot a target at 500 yards let alone hit it first time.

 

[parsifal]

The videos are all very impressive, I will say. A small point, the second is at 1000 yds, but there is no verfication of the targets hits, except for the guys saying "got it". It might not be the case that he actually got it.......

 

[Soren]

Soren
Your examples prove the point. They are Bench fired rifles, fired at a known distance, in perfect weather, by a specialist shot, almost certainly using hand made ammunition, at a bright target and using a scope to see the target. Not exactly typical combat conditions.

Personally, the best that I have done was a 92 at 900 and 500 yards with a grouping of about 30 inches at 900 yards and 18 inches at 500 yards, our rifles were held in the prone position not rested and the ammunition purchased. This is closer to combat but as I have said the sights whilst not telescopic were for target shooting, the weather was pretty good, the target clear and I was an experienced shot although mostly with a .22.

Your average solider would do well to spot a target at 500 yards let alone hit it first time.

The videos just prove what I've been saying, nothing more, nothing less. The effective range of a rifle is around 1,000 to 1,200 meters, which is what Hitler was referring to each time he had to argue for the K98k. He however missed out on the fact that most combats took place at 300 to 400 meters, and thus a 1,200 meter effective range wasn't needed in most cases.

The rifles above were fired with ammunition no better than war time ammunition for the rifles in question (K31 K98k) and at a torso sized targets (18 inches).

When shooting with open sights I always shoot with V sights, and when prone I can with very good consistency hit a human sized target at 600 meters. At 1,000 meters it's hard to see the target, but I can nonetheless hit it (Still the same type human silhouette target). With a scope I can hit a human sized target at 1,000m with very good consistency.

And like already mentioned German snipers were required to hit a head sized target at 400 meters without fail, and a torso sized target at 600 meters without fail. If they couldn't achieve this then they weren't applicable for the title of Scharfschützen.

 

[Soren]

The videos are all very impressive, I will say. A small point, the second is at 1000 yds, but there is no verfication of the targets hits, except for the guys saying "got it". It might not be the case that he actually got it.......

Parsifal I know the guy, he's a friend of mine, he got it, you can trust me on that. You can also hear the *gong*.

And yes, he's a great shot!

 

[Glider]

Soren
I doff my hat to you. Thats close to national team standard shooting with less accurate sights, without a tuned rifle and presumably limited coaching, you may want to take it up seriously.

 

[Soren]

Glider,

It aint that great, if you got good eyesight and a steady hand you can easily hit a human silhouette at 600m with a full powered rifle. At 1,000m it's very hard indeed, esp. since the target is damn hard to see, but again with a full powered rifle you CAN hit it. With a scope however it is a lot easier because you can actually clearly see the target.

As for the sights, V sights are the most accurate iron sights there are if you ask me. I don't care much for peep sights.

PS: When shooting long range I always shoot with some kind of support for the rifle, be it a sandbag or bench. We always used sandbags on the range in the military.

 

[Glider]

That explains it, in competition you are not allowed to rest the gun, it has to be held and that makes a huge difference.

 

[Soren]

Tell me about it! Without something to rest my rifle on I'd struggle to hit a man at 500 meters.

 

[Shortround6]

I would argue with your assesment of Iron sights.

The rear peep offers several advantages. And if it is ajustable in size it offers even more.

Using peep (or aperture sights) on a target range with a defined aiming point there is often little to chose betweent eh "iron sights" and the scope.

ON a very lucky day when I was test firing a Palma rifle with intent to purchase I fired 22 rounds. After using 12 to settle in and ajust the rifle to me the last 10 shots scored a 98 with 5X at 1000yds. 50% in a 10in circle at 1000yds. Iron sights, prone with sling.

Yes, I bought the rifle

Is this practical battle field shooting? NO

But what is effective range?

At 1000yds how many rounds does a MG fire to cause ONE casualty?

Why does a rifle have to a much higher hit rate in order to be considered effective?

If 5 men each shooting 10 rounds per minute can put ALL their bullets in, say a 5 meter x 5 meter sqaure at 1000meters, wouldn't that be close to the supresive fire of a MG?

IF hits only count then many armies has wasted a lot of ammunition in supresive fire over the years.

 

[Colin1]

General-issue weapons cease to be personal weapons beyond 600m, at this point they are section weapons and you're not expected to hit anything with an iron-sight weapon unless you're employing co-operative fire ie firing on the target as a section.

That was SOP for the SLR, no idea if anything's changed for the SA-80 which is generally more accurate but hardly what I'd call a proper battlefield weapon.

 

[Soren]

Shortround,

My opinion is that the V sight offers greater accuracy than the peep sight, at least it does for me and several of my friends. The peep sight allows for too much slacking/guesswork if you ask me. With the V sight you know that everything is 100% when the pointer is lined up with the top of the rear sight and in the middle, something which should be easy if you got good eyesight. That's my honest opinion.

 

[Glider]

Shortround
That is really good shooting, well done.

 

[Shortround6]

Shortround,

My opinion is that the V sight offers greater accuracy than the peep sight, at least it does for me and several of my friends. The peep sight allows for too much slacking/guesswork if you ask me. With the V sight you know that everything is 100% when the pointer is lined up with the top of the rear sight and in the middle, something which should be easy if you got good eyesight. That's my honest opinion.

I will note that I have never seen a V sight on a serious target range. I have been to the American National matches (small bore) 6 times. The Canadian nationals 2 twice (full bore), several trips to Australia including being allowed to fire at the 1991 Oceanic Continental Shooting Championships ( not really allowed to compete for some awards becasue I was from the wrong part of the world, saved myself some embarrasement
I have also helped coach junior and high school teams for over 20 years.

I will grant that none of this is combat shooting but we are discussing sights aren't we.

Look through a peep sight, all you have to line up is the front sight and the target. Eye only has to focus on the front sight (at what distance?) and let the target go a little fuzzy. Young shooters may not even notice target is blurry.
V sight shooter has to line up three things, and has to focus eye at three distances.

 

[Shortround6]

Shortround
That is really good shooting, well done.

Thank you.
A calm day. Good hand loads from a freind ( I didn't own a .308 at the time) and a very good rifle.

And a bit of luck

 

[Ivan1GFP]

Regarding peep sights versus open sights, the National Match aperture sights on a M1 / M14 are adjustable to 0.5 MOA for windage and elevation because someone obviously believes you can see the difference. I don't think you can see the difference with open sights. I also have never seen any with such fine adjustments. Have any of you seen them?

BTW, regarding Palma Match ammunition and .308 Winchester. I believe that all the components are interchangeable, but I don't think Palma ammunition is loaded to .308 SAAMI specs. I know that the chambering reamers (especially in the throat) are different.

- Ivan.