Heh heh heh..... nevermind.RECIT wrote:How good of a group is pretty good?
I've been considering assembling an AK platform weapon. Having done a couple of ARs now, the thought of assembling an AK doesn't seem as intimidating as it might otherwise have seemed. That said, I'm still a little up in the air about whether to convert a Saiga .308, or buy parts for either a commie 7.62x39 or 5.45 caliber gun.
I was chuckling at the group size comment because there's "accurate" semi auto .308s, and then there are accurate .308s. I own an M1A Loaded model, to which I've done a few relatively minor upgrades. Is it accurate? Well, yes, it is accurate.......for a semi-automatic battle rifle. With match ammo, it will consistently shoot under 1.5 MOA, and occasionally under 1 MOA. It also seems to like Federal Fusion 165 grain cartridges, and has produced one or two .5 MOA groups with that—although not with any degree of regularity. Anyway, I would call it a pretty accurate rifle for what it is. And in the real world, 1-1.5 MOA may be less important in a firefight than being able to get lots of rounds down range with 2-4 MOA accuracy. And it is certainly "accurate enough" for use in most hunting applications inside of reasonable distances. I actually bought it as a "hog-mauler."
On the other hand, I've got a heavy barreled Reminton 700 in .308 that is an unbelievable tack driver with certain loads. With my favorite load, it will shoot 3/8" groups with great regularity. For better or for worse, that is the standard I tend to keep in my head when I assess what "accuracy" means to me in .308 caliber rifles. So by that standard, even my very nice M1A leaves something to be desired.
So, if the Saiga .308 can produce the same kind of accuracy as a common issue-grade M1A/M14, or a FN-FAL, then I would call it acceptably accurate. By that standard, "pretty good groups" could mean anything up to maybe 3 MOA. The point of all of this is that "pretty good groups" is a "pretty relative term." It can't really be defined without knowing what your baseline standard is. In truth, it is unfair of me to compare Saiga .308/M1A/AR10 accuracy to my Remington 700. Certainly it is possible to build an AR10 or an M1A that will be as accurate as my Remington......but at what cost? And again, coming back to the real world, if you can put a .308 caliber bullet with "acceptable accuracy" into the vitals of a man-sized target—or a white-tail, or a hog—at 200 yards, does it really need to be more accurate than that?
I've made the statement quoting some great gun author of the past that "only accurate rifles are interesting." Well, I should have said, "accurate rifles are the most interesting," or words to that effect; because even though my M1A isn't nearly as accurate as my 700, it is still an interesting rifle and I derive great enjoyment from shooting it. More importantly, I have confidence in it. If I decide to build from a Saiga .308, I'm sure I'll enjoy it nearly as much in the long run. But all of that is moot anyway as I'm tending to lean more toward a folding 5.45 carbine.
