“So you understand cost vs benefits analysis of functional vs perfect. ...” [Bryanw92, post 78]
Pretty succinct. Except that “perfect” never happens. Also assumes that:
1. The user knows what they want
2. Politics (institutional, interservice, national, international) don’t intervene
3. Original requirements remain stable
Item 2 almost never happens. Item 1 is sometimes an uphill battle - especially when the user is slow to acknowledge that constraints exist (laws of physics, development time is never zero, designers and manufacturers want money before they perform, etc) or is over-impressed with advancing technology and clings to the dippy faith that tech solves all (and does so overnight, for no money). Item 3 is unpredictable, but is made worse when the user clings to the “tech solves all” faith. There are more; these loom larger.
“...So, a rifle that can put its rounds reliably into a 10 pie plate at distance is useless or not? If I am a sniper, I want the eyeball shot. If I am a regular soldier or militiaman, is a solid center mass or pelvic hit good enough? ...”
Not a bad approximation, but still too generalized. Chances of success depend too tightly on situations, which are simply too varied, and change too quickly in the field, to predict the need beforehand.
Military units compensate by creating teams (more manpower enhances flexibility), improving communications (radio for air support), and fielding heavier weapons (ATACMS outrange sniper fire). The civilian user ordinarily cannot call on any of those.
“...Factory ammo baby!! That’s the name of the game. ... Factory quality control is very good. ... I quit reloading year ago. Don’t have the patience ... I do have money and plenty of suppliers.”
If Bryanw92 has the money and what he buys fills the requirement, good enough. After reloading for all but two calibers (out of dozens), I confess my patience has declined (along with my physical stamina).
But my experience has been just the opposite when it comes to accuracy: no reload I have created has ever proven less accurate than factory ammunition. And reloads have proven more accurate by wide margins, typically: 70-80 percent reduction in group size. Holds true across all chamberings and all platforms. Only one exception: cast bullet, wrong configuration & weight.
Gun magazine writers wax enthusiastic about advances in factory loads, which deliver much smaller groups. Heard it by word of mouth also, from former customers (no one ever brought us targets to compare, though). But prices for the newer stuff have been high, so I’ve never bothered; my reloading was already delivering better results, at a fraction of the cost.
My other experiences in gun sales and repair indicate that the shooters too busy to reload are thes one firing magazine upon magazine through their Kalashnikov (or AR-15). They demand the cheapest ammo they can find, then complain about poor results. Volume means more to them than performance
>>Military units compensate by creating teams (more manpower enhances flexibility), improving communications (radio for air support), and fielding heavier weapons (ATACMS outrange sniper fire). The civilian user ordinarily cannot call on any of those.
Please try to understand what I’m saying. I’m not talking about unit tactics. I am literally talking about a gun that a private citizen owns. If you can’t restrict the conversation to that, then you are wasting your time.
>>Not a bad approximation, but still too generalized. Chances of success depend too tightly on situations, which are simply too varied, and change too quickly in the field, to predict the need beforehand.
That is exactly what I’m talking about. Question: will an AR-15 meet the non-specialized needs of the common American citizen in the 21st century? I’m not talking about a stand-up battle with a mechanized infantry unit or shooting down aircraft. But everything from small game to rabid dogs to taking down a killer from across a parking lot, while being inexpensive enough for widespread ownership with ammo that is cheap enough for enough practice. Think hand-size accuracy, not 1 MOA.
>>Pretty succinct. Except that “perfect” never happens.
Umm. Yeah. That’s what I was telling you. I don’t want a golf bag full of “perfect” rifles. I own an 870, an AR-15, and a 10/22. There is nothing that I would do that requires a different long gun. I can bag a squirrel with the 10/22 so a bolt-action that can allow me to bag a cockroach at the same distance is unnecessary.