Others MAC1 USFT Analysis/Overview

[Franklink]

Had another session with the stinker barrel....and it's still a stinker barrel.

Was really hoping that not shooting as fast would eliminate that random flyer, but it remains, even when REALLY concentrating. Not very often, occasionally it'll even shoot ten in a row without a flyer, but eventually one is coming. And they're not horrible, even the flyer is still pretty close to aim point, but it's certainly not in the 1/4 to 3/8" cluster that the rest of the group is landing in.

Also, the flyer incidence seemed worse on this second session when it was more windy. Dunno if the wind is the issue or what.

In short, the stinker barrel will shoot ten shot groups into 5/8" @ 30 yards, and 1.25" @55, which is good, but not great.

I put my magic barrel back on there after running another couple hundred through the stinker and there'a just no contest. Magic barrel puts em all into 3/8" @ 30 yards, from a bumbag, in the wind. So magic barrel is back on the USFT and it's "whole" again.


I've really enjoyed shooting the USFT in these 400-500 shots over the last couple days, and I'm leaning heavy towards shooting it next weekend at the monthly ft match. And I'm even considering shooting without the knee riser that I have historically always used.

Edit: just shot another half a tin and nope, gonna stick with the high knee riser. I like how much weight it saves by shooting without it, and I'm just a smidge more stable without it, but my neck sure gets stiff getting into position without that tall knee riser.

Edit#2: Figure I've shot close to a tin and a half (500ct) out of the USFT in the last three days and man I sure love this gun. For all the reasons listed in the last 12 pages, but at the top right now is air usage. I'm gonna have to burn through a sizable chunk of a sleeve of pellets before I get the air in this 80cf SCUBA down to my fill pressure of 1500psi on the USFT! I thought a little revisit of the USFT would be a good way to get that tank empty for inspection, but looks like it's gonna need a BIG revisit of the USFT to get there, lol. This gun sure makes a good argument for the guy who might want to simplify and get rid of compressors and lots of the paraphernalia that seems to pile up for an airgun nut. Could downsize considerably, while keeping a high level of precision, AND not have to take the huge step down in performance by becoming a primary springer shooter.

 

[Franklink]

After much deliberation, I've decided to rework the USFT into a Hunter class gun. I've always competed with it in Open, using one of the early Falcon X50 scopes for the last couple years. My X50 is early enough that it doesn't have a mark at 16x, so a change in scope was the first order of business. And I went to one of my favorite all-around scopes, the Athlon Midas Tac 6-24x50 with the APRS2 reticle, MIL. Scope is equipped with a Eric Sanders Scopewerks nautilus wheel.

This is the length situation compared to the gun I've mostly been shooting for Hunter class. So nearly twice the OAL.

You'll notice that I removed the thigh rest and hardware and flipped the buttplate. This is just one of the areas I've been fiddling with, in an attempt to optimize for Hunter class. The buttplate area was a major focus and I think I've settled on a configuration there now.

I've also played with various bipod stops and the best seems to have been to flip the barrel band like seen in the above photo.

I've also been seriously considering a .20 barrel, and chopping it back so that the airtube and moderator ends at the same place. This would be a weight savings as well as a more convenient overall length. I had a recent suggestion to cut back a .177 barrel and am toying with that idea too. Something about a 38-39" USFT intrigues me. But I also want to retain the ability to return to the magic barrel that's on it now.

As for the hamster, when fully collapsed it's under the 6" limit for depth in Hunter class. But it's awfully heavy and really only seems to be be beneficial for offhand shots. I'll likely not use this one for Hunter, but might see about cobbling together a much simpler (LIGHTER) hamster.

As for HOW it shoots from Hunter position, I'm so far pretty pleased. A pulled shot/bad trigger break still lands mighty close to desired impact point. Especially versus a pulled shot from the 25" Veteran. This was 6 groups of ten shots each, taken at 55 yards early in this experiment.

The orange circles are 1." Shot at them first and felt like I had an "aim big miss big" thing going on so the second set of ten shot groups was made at just a small dot made with a marker (3/8" and can just barely make it out on the white page). And it had a trial buttplate situation that has since been abandoned.

I've been testing various holds too. The most recent is with folded arms under the gun, with the gun rested on left elbow and elbow rested on left knee. Not finalized there yet.

And my lightweight, collapsible shooting sticks were no match for the USFT. They're hollow aluminum tubes (think aluminum arrow) and were flexing quite a bit. So the USFT will need the solid steel shooting sticks I've been fiddling with for the last 8 or so months.

Certainly making progress and enjoying the heck out of it. So far it seems the USFT will make just as formidable a rig in Hunter as it is in Open.

 

[Franklink]

Got some of the Hunter class holdover worked out late last night. I'm a shoot it and see actual kind of guy, sometimes following along with Strelok. Started at 3.5 mils for 10 yards, got as far as 0.9mil for 18 yards before I ran out of daylight. Wanted to double check what I had the other night so ran a trap out to 55 yards right before I was out of daylight and confirmed 0.7 mil holdover for 55 yards.

Been working with a 1.2-1.3 mil holdover at 55 for the .20/13.73 just about maxed out in fps to stay legal. Not news to me, but the .177/10.34 is certainly that "flatter" that some people hate to hear about. I'm about 49/51 on the faster flatter versus slightly more loopy but better in the wind argument. The .177/10.34 being the faster/flatter and the .20/13.73 being the slower but more wind resistant. Both can be accounted for/accustomed to.

That's all with a 30ish yard zero. Should be able to hold cross hairs dead on from about 22-42 yards with the .177/10.34s from the USFT, at least at my home elevation and the high country matches where I often shoot. When I have time I'll shoot em to verify.

 

[Franklink]

Got the rest of the dope and ended on this ...

5 shots @ 55 yards from stool and sticks, 16x, holdover. 10.34 pellet in there for size reference.

And this is the wind!

Lol, that kind of accuracy always makes me giggle. I always seem to forget what this rig is capable of, and then pull it out after it's sat for awhile, and then come the big smiles.

So my zero worked out to 24-42 yards. With how this particular Midas tac ranges from 20-25 yards, I think I'll reset the turrets for a zero of something like 20-38 yards instead.

 

[Franklink]

I shot the USFT a bunch today. Since I'm just getting it set up for Hunter class and that entailed a scope swap, I decided to play around with the zero. I previously had worked out actual trajectory from 10-55 yards but was needing 0.6mil holdover for 20 yards, 0.4mil holdover for 22 yards, and 0.2holdover for 25 yards, getting to the beginning of the zero range at about 26-27 yards. I didn't like that because I was having a hard time getting the Midas Tac to range accurately in those early 20 yard distances. I shot the actual trajectories with a slightly further zero, and of course it only compounded the problem of needing to be accurate to the yard in that 20-27yard range. Eventually I re-reset the turrets to coincide with the beginning of zero at 21-22 yards. This gives m a 0.2mil holdover for 20 yards, and no holdover for 22 yards an on. I effectively eliminated the need to be to-the-yard accurate with my range-by-focus in that tough area of 20-25 yards. Essentially, my eyes are able to more repeatedly land in the same place on the wheel for 45, 50, 55 (5 yard increments) than they were for the 1 yard increments from 20-25.

Take home message-your zero range is incredibly important, and matters even if it only shifts your zero holdover ranges by a couple yards. A fringe benefit to this was less holdover for the 10, 11, 12 yard shots than I had with a zero of only a few yards further out.

Because we often play the silhouette game out to 70 and 80 yards, I always took enough shots at my steel (squeezed in some for the 90 yarders too) that I'll include that holdover data on the dope sheet.

So, now ready to print up a dope sheet and call it good.

I also decided to run some shots over the chrono. The USFT is the gun that I shoot the least over a chronograph. In my 7 years of USFT ownership it has been stalwart in the consistency (among others) department. If I haven't adjusted anything, it shoots to the same spot, with the same fps. Always. So I took random breaks from the trajectory plotting to throw a couple over the chronograph. Made it a point to take some at the top, middle, and bottom of the fill. And, as expected, fps as consistent as the sunrise, right in that window of fps I have come to trust from the gun. Probably go another couple years before shooting it over a chrono again, lol.

I've decided to put the shorter barrel idea on the backburner for who knows how long. The barrel that came in my USFT is simply so amazing that I've decided it's worth the hassle of the gun being long. Furthermore, I went back to the 7inch long Hogan Decimeater instead of the 3.5" Huggett Atom. And for sort of the same reason, but in this case for the report. The Hogan makes the USFT one of my quietest airguns. The nearly non-existent report is worth another 3.5" to the length of the gun.

As for the report and shot cycle.....as I've had the opportunity to shoot more and more airguns in the last 12-13years, I've come to really enjoy a refined shot cycle. Similar to how I used to get along with just about any old trigger but now get a little grumbly about one with a break of more than 5-6ounces, at this point in my airgun journey, I've come to REALLY appreciate the nuance of how a gun feels/sounds/acts when the trigger is pulled. With the USFT, the length/weight/trigger/tuning/moderator/etc? combine to make a super mellow shot cycle. And that shot cycle is a large part of why I love the funny looking thing so much. It is so surreal to be able to watch most pellets on the shots past about 40 yards sink right into their desired impact point. SEEING that pellet make its way to where I want it to go is amazing. And with a sufficient moderator, there's no obnoxious blast of air to ruin the moment. If I was a betting man, I'd put my money on the lack of action noise relating directly back to the absence of the ubiquitous hammer-in-a-tunnel firing mechanism. There's simply no sloshing around of a weighted cylinder in a tunnel when the trigger is pulled.

 

[Franklink]

I've got a .20 barrel being delivered tomorrow that I'm going to fit to my USFT. The plan being to cut the barrel back so barrel+moderator end at the airtube.

Funny thing is that I owned this barrel once before. It was in the Air Force Condor that I sold a few months ago. New owner only wanted the chassis and he listed the .20 barrel for sale. Anyway, it's a 16mm OD barrel and since I'm cutting it back anyway, doesn't matter that it has that reduced OD at the breech end where it fits a Condor (of course that's the part getting chopped off.

This .20 barrel was quite good with 15.89s and 18.9gr slugs, but I never tested accuracy with the 13.73s, which of course will be the primary pellet for an intended field target rig.

It'll have to be quite good to shoot better than what I call the "magic" .177 barrel that's already on my USFT. Should be fun to experiment, and if I don't prefer it as a shorter .20, can always go back to the magic .177.

 

[Franklink]

Got the .20 barrel fitted...

I was originally planning on cutting it to 16.5-17 or so inches and using a 7" Hogan Decimeater. But I decided to cut it back to 20.25" as a test run since the Hugett Atom and moderator adaptor would end right at the air tube this way. Figured I'd test it this way and use what I learned from this length to refine cutting it further back, if I deemed that necessary.

And this is the new look...

OAL is just shy of 39" now. Still long, but sure feels shorter when going through a door and generally maneuvering it around.

Was somewhat surprised to be within about 20-25fps with the .20/13.73s, with the same settings that were doing 915fps with the .177/10.34s from the nearly 24" barrel.

I've found the .20/13.73s to shoot really well in the 795-805 ranges, and 809 is the max fps to stay FT legal, without relying on the 2% variance, which I don't like to do.

So, initial fps, with only the barrel change was 775-785 with the .20/13.73s. During testing I toyed with the hammer spring adjustment and ultimately increased it slightly to get them up to averaging 795-805. That slight increase in hammer tension also brought back the crisp sound and feel of the shot cycle that Im used to seeing from this gun. Before I increased the hammer spring tension it was having a sluggish sound and feel. Hard to describe but with as many shots as I've taken with this gun, I can feel/hear when it's happy, and when it's not.

So here was the first of the shots on paper.

Bottom left was the barrel indexing game. Three shots, then index the barrel, them three shots, them index the barrel. Those first three, 3 shot groups were all touching. Finally got the barrel indexed to the within just a couple clicks of where scope zero was with the .177 barrel. Lots of thoughts on this but I like to get the barrel rotated in the breech so that it's throwing pellets into mostly the 12 o clock position.

That above paper also shows a five or six shot group at 30 yards in the bottom right. And then the upper four bulls were at 50 yards.

Needed a new paper at that point so put it at 55 yards. This is a total of 60 shots. Took five at each bull in the order I numbered them, and then ran through again. So mostly looking at 6, 10 shot groups. Lots of scope clicks, and windage holds, and even the aforementioned hammer spring tweaking throughout the 50 and 55 yards groups.

Of those 60 shots, only a few wouldn't have been inside a typical 1.5" kill zone at 55 yards, considering that the 8 ring measures 2" and the 9 ring measures 1.25".

All the shooting was from stool and sticks. And it was cold! 38 degrees when I finally called it.

So the .20 barrel is showing enough promise to warrant further testing at this barrel length. The 30 yard groups while I was indexing the barrel are probably the most telling, given the conditions I was shooting in. I'm also concerned about how much more fps I'd lose if I was to cut it back to 16.5-17," so I'll give it a solid assessment as-is.

I sure do enjoy shooting this gun, even when it's so cold that I can't feel my fingers.

 

[Franklink]

I had a chance to revisit the .20 barrel a bit yesterday.

First groupings at 55 yards had me pretty, "meh." These are from stool/sticks (Hunter class style) and of course there was some wind switching back and forth, but it wasn't super windy. Top three are 10 shot groups from the .20 USFT, bottom three are 3 groups from the "control," the Vet .20. Alternating guns for each ten shot group. (as an aside, the first shot from each group with the Vet was hitting low, prob time for new orings in the reg...) Overall, the .20/13.73s were tracking into where I wanted them to go better from the Vet. Hence the "meh" for the USFT .20 project.

(the 9 ring on these is 1.25" if I remember correctly, and the 8 ring is 2," so somewhere between the 8 and 9 ring would be the 1.5" typical kill zone size we see at this 55 yard distance)

After the above groups I had mostly decided to go back to the slow twist .177 poly for my USFT. I was even considering converting it back to an Open class rig and swapping scopes around to make all that possible. Remembering a friend's recommendation from a few weeks ago to take a look at the crown, I decided I'd recrown and clean and use that as this barrels last chance before getting shelved. So, made my witness mark for barrel indexing, pulled it off the gun and recrowned the barrel. The existing crown didn't have any obvious defects, or at least not any visible to my poor eyesight. So, light recrown, and then a decent clean with Gunzilla and tight patches. Barrel was fairly dirty with that gray crud that dirty barrels get, but no lead flakes.

Reinstalled barrel and shot these 6x 10 shot groups, again at 55 yards and from stool and sticks. That first 10 shot group into 1/2" got me pretty excited.

So I repeated the same thing, 6 more 10 shot groups at 55 yards.

Got a low one or two in there from forgetting to refill, but overall MUCH improved. Not sure if it was the recrown or the cleaning, but something sure changed.

Finally, decided to run another comparison between the USFT .20 and the "control" Veteran .20. All the same setup as before but the last group from each gun was only 5 shot groups instead of 10 shot groups. Again, top is USFT .20 and bottom is Vet .20.

All said and done, looks to be capable of 55 yard, 1/2" 10 shot groups with high levels of focus and good wind reads, and 1-1.25" groups as the "norm," sans brain farts like forgetting to refill at the appropriate pressure, bad wind calls, and pulled shots. Next step is to experiment with some minor tweaking of the hammer spring tension and the transfer port restriction to see if there's any gains to be had there. As has been stated prior, the beauty of the USFT is the lack of adjustability, as there's just not much to mess with. So, minor fiddling, and then run a full string over the chrono with an intentional slight overfill and shooting down past 1250. That'll give me my new fill and refill pressure, if they've even moved at all. I expect them to still be in that roughly 1500-1250psi range though.

Gotta love an accurate airgun. Fun stuff.

(Oh, man I love the new shorter length! Crazy how losing a couple inches helps a gun feel more maneuverable, in this case it lost 7!!! since I had mostly run that big long moderator on it prior. )

 

[Franklink]

Spent many enjoyable hours shooting the .20 USFT today.

The prevalent wind at my house is usually coming from directly behind my shooting position, going "out" in the same direction as projectile travel. BUT today I had a rare NNW wind that creates an almost perfect 90 degree angle to pellet path. And so I decided to hold a "match" comparing two .20s. The purpose was to see if one is more accurate than the other, specifically in the wind. And also to see if one gets pushed further in the same wind.

So, I shot 4, 15 shot groups from each gun. The top of all of these is the Veteran .20 and the bottom is the USFT .20. No hold offs for wind, just holding on the blue dot. Also not timing for between gusts. I WANTED to see how the guns shot without any attempts at reading the wind. The purpose behind that was to not muddy the waters about misreads and hold offs affecting group size and/or wind deflection . So, 3 shots with each gun, then switch. Five rotations of that for each 15 shot group, repeated a total of 4 times.

All shots were taken from stool and shooting sticks. Distance = 57 yards.

This series was taken from about 1 o clock to 230 ish. Off and on (lunch, kids, laundry, etc).

Wind deflection is very similar between both barrels, enough so that neither is at a clear advantage in that regard.
The average group size of one was 1.6" and the other was 1.66." So again, no clear winner. And that is actually good news, because the Vet .20 is a proven performer. Not show so much in the shared groups, but the Vet .20 is a slightly more accurate barrel, but with an OAL of 26", its a harder gun to hold steady. The USFT is longer and that length seems to reduce the reticle wobble. So the more stable USFT platform makes up for the slightly more accurate barrel in the Vet.

--------------

Hours later, and not much before dark, the wind had calmed down considerably so I decided to compare two moderators: a Hugget Atom, and a Hogan Decimeter.

The Hogan has always seems to make the .177 poly barrel sing a bit sweeter, and I was curious how it would affect the .20.
55 yards this time...but still stool and sticks.
3, 10 shot groups with the Hogan and 3 ten shot groups with the Hugget, totaling 6x10 shot groups. I was surprised to see that they had mostly the same impact point, as usually a mod swap makes the pellet hit in a different spot.

As expected, ever so slight edge to the Hogan.

Also pretty happy with all 6 groups being under an inch.

Haven't doped out the gun yet, but the shooting today proved the accuracy is there to warrant doping it out and trying the new .20 barrel in a few matches.

 

[Franklink]

Had a chance to run the USFT through a couple firsts at a match last weekend.

The scope swap a few months back allowed me to be Hunter class eligible. So this was the first match I've used it in Hunter. And I fitted a .20 barrel to it more recently. So the first time competing with it as a .20.

I'd say it went well. 40/40 on the stool/bipod shots, 4/4 on the kneelers, and 3/4 on the offhand shots combined for a 47/48. The only other 47/48 was Barbara P. She had missed one of her kneelers. So they had us do a shoot off to break the tie. The shoot off consisted of 2 shots at a target that was probably around 35 yards, I'd guess 3/4" but could have been an inch I suppose. And two shots at a target that couldn't have been closer than 52-53 yards. And the KZ wasn't very big, probably 1.5." She missed her second shot on the far target and I went 4/4 on that lane so I won the shoot-off, and the Founders Cup for 2025. Barbara P is a talented shooter and she's very tough to beat.

In regards to shooting off a bipod in Hunter, I REALLY like the longer wheelbase of the USFT over the short little carbines I've been shooting a lot of for field target the last couple years. All kinds of stability. I had a couple shots where I wasn't quite ready for the trigger break, and the targets fell just like they should. USFT has a 3-4oz trigger and is my lightest. I would have had 0s and not Xs on those unexpected trigger breaks with the harder-to-shoot short OAL guns.

I also really like how the gun ends at the airtube now. It was at least 4 inches longer with the full length .177 barrel, and sometimes 7 inches longer (when using a longer moderator). I feel like I'm at a goldilocks OAL with this 20.5" .20 barrel in the USFT now, of long enough to aid in stability, but not so long that I feel like I'm shooting a heavy broom. I might even chop the amazing full length slow twist .177 barrel to this same length if I decide to go back to .177.

As for my offhand miss, I think I'm going to start utilizing the USFT feature LD pointed out a while back in this discussion: the ability to break the trigger without a full dry fire. Some time doing that in offhand position and I think I can cut out that offhand miss in future matches (without burning through a bunch more pellets when practicing).

In conclusion, I had a blast shooting it and I'm thinking this .20 USFT is going to be my numero uno for Hunter class field target the way it used to be when there was an active Open class. Doesn't mean I'll stop shooting other guns at matches, but when I want to win, out will come the USFT. In other words, it still doesn't feel fair when I use the USFT.


Here it is in action on the kneeling lane...(photo credit to Mark K of Airgunners of Arizona FT club)

 

[Franklink]

Shot mine a bit night before last. One of my sons wanted to get out our field target guns and have some fun. It started with paper at various 10-55 yardages, but quickly became a fun session.

My dope and scope zero were all good from back in January. I also shot at my 60-130 steel to gather dope that will be used for some of the silhouette matches at field target weekends this summer.

Had a big euro dove land at about 115-120 right after I'd shot that distance at steel. He wasn't exactly where the steel was, but I was able to kinda triangulate that he was at a pretty similar distance. Used the 115 yard holdover and POP! Was stone dead long before he hit the ground, not even a wing flutter on the way down.

After that we brought it back in a bit and had fun shooting the stems off of dandelions in the 45-55 yard range.

Love me some USFT, and still planning on campaigning ( @cavedweller) it at most of the summer matches over the next few months.

 

[Franklink]

Shot my USFT last weekend at its second match as a .20/Hunter class. This was at one of Garrett's monthly matches at Rio Salado. Been quite a while since I've been able to make it to a match at Rio and I was pleasantly surprised at how much character the course had. Lots of overlapping lanes, lots of shooting through passageways through the desert foliage, and generally a challenging course. And of course the wind was screaming, only upping the difficulty factor.

It subjectively felt like quite a few targets out past 45 yards. I do remember a 3/8" kill zone at 22-23 yards that was on the tough side. I was squadded with Garrett and @Camber314 was in the next squad. Sounded like those two were responsible for setting the course and they were chuckling to each other about how close to legal/illegal that 3/8" @ 22-23 yards was. I don't know exact distance, just that I ranged it somewhere in that ballpark. There was also an offhand lane and a kneeling lane.

I missed one of my shots on my very first lane, and realized right there I was going to need to hold off more for the wind than I'm accustomed to needing to do. I had to hold upwind as much as 3-4inches on some, and that's A LOT for a high BC .20 going 805fps. The WFTF guys at 12fpe were telling me they were holding waaayyyy upwind, off the faceplate even. I scored 5/8 on the forced position shots. I think that was 3/4 on kneelers and 2/4 on offhand. And that went towards my final score of 39/48. A couple of my misses were early on, figuring out the wind. Another couple were the forced position lanes, but the last 3 or so missed were from the wind pushing my body around, versus the pellet. One extremely frustrating miss was when I was braced against the wind with my body, only to have the wind die right at the trigger break and the shot of course went the direction I was pushing into the wind. I assumed that total score would put me way down the scorecard for the match but it ended up being the overall match high score. surprisingly. But I suppose we were all shooting the same course in the same wind so "it's all relative."

So that's two matches now where I've shot the USFT as a .20 in Hunter, and have come away with match high score in both of them. I understand that trend won't likely last forever, but, as usual, I can't find any fault with the USFT, and it continues to be my go-to when I'd like to be competitive.

I was able to shoot the 48 shot match on one fill. As a reminder, my USFT is unregulated. I suspect it was the only unregulated gun at the match.

I've found I need some riser height for the offhand shots, to be able to lock the elbow of my non-trigger hand/arm into my hip. So I used the MAC1 riser for this match, as shown in the photo below. At its max, it's right at 5.75" below the center of bore, when fully collapsed, as shown, so I'm legal for Hunter. But it's heavy, considering all that adjustment potential simply isn't needed for Hunter class. So I'm planning on rigging something lighter up for a riser, specifically for the offhand shots. Other than optimizing the riser situation, the only plans I have for any changes for the USFT are to try to find more time to practice.

Sweet gun.

 

[Franklink]

Dawned on me a few weeks ago that I already have a simple version of a hamster. It came with a different gun, but was easily attached to the USFT, via a UIT to picatinny adaptor, that I also already had. Gotta say, the walnut and walnut and black and black almost makes this look like it was supposed to be. This is a big improvement over the heavy MAC1 hamster. For Open class, yeah, id prefer the MAC1, but when all that weight is otherwise a liability, and the adjustment isn't necessary, or helpful, or allowed ( Hunter class) than this simple riser is the better of the two options.

Here was the first attempt ..

Realize I needed it back a couple more inches for balance point/preference/ergonomics so did just that...

Had a little session with it this evening, shooting 3x10 or 11 shot groups at 30yards, from offhand position. Nothing to be too horribly proud of, and certainly some room for improvement. There's an interesting point where muscles get fatigued and the sight picture becomes more and more of a drive by. I'm embarrassed to say that was less then the 30ish shots I took from offhand during this session. I'll need to get in offhand shape for the summer matches.

The orange stickers are 1" if I remember right. Lol, yeah, nothing to be proud of here.

 

[Franklink]

This weekend I had my third match with it in Hunter class and as a .20....

But first, the silhouette from field target position on Friday evening before the field target match. 40 shots, 1/10th scale silhouettes out to 70 yards. out of the 6 guys we had shooting that match, the USFT was overall high score, with a 37/40.

Wind conditions were really challenging, for both the silhouette match on Friday, and the FT match on Saturday. This was taken from the Mormon Lake weather station, just a few miles from the match site, and felt like about what we probably dealt with....Far right is wind speed, pink is the gusts.

So, sustained wind speeds around 15mph, gusts up to 30.

Not only was it a lot of wind, but it was extremely variable wind. Big gusts, and then it would die, right before another big gust. Time your trigger break wrong and....miss. Some of the gusts contained blasts of cooler air. Me and my squad-mate talked about whether the chillier air was from the next over shady spot in the woods, or from downdrafts from stratified air higher up. Not sure which was right. And on top of the wind speeds, the course was a big U-shape, so we had to account for a slightly different angle to the predominate winds for each lane. Due to the wind, it was a very challenging day of field target.

But it was a fun day of field target.

The .20 USFT was good for 45/48. First miss was when I held high on a shot that was a direct head-on angle into the wind, expecting the pellet to get pushed down slightly, nope, it hit on the upper edge of the kill zone, right where I was holding. Second miss was on the opposite side of the U, with mostly a tail wind, but also an angle slightly quartering away from the right shoulder. This one was on the side of a tree, about 4-5 feet high. Reset string was limp and hanging straight down on the first shot, held dead in the middle and target went down. Seemingly same conditions the second shot so I repeated what I did the first time, and missed, not being able to see where the miss went. Not sure what happened, but I think I may have caught some wind that wasn't appreciable. Third miss was on a looongg target, most of, it not all of 55 yards. And this one had the predominant wind at a 90 degree angle to pellet travel. I held off, and had the first shot lift up and left, impacting the edge of the kz at about 1030-11 o clock. I adjusted accordingly and knocked it down on the second shot.

That 45/48 was good for second place in Hunter, and overall second. @steve123 also shot a 45, but in the Unlimited class. The overall high score was shot by Kent, with a phenomenal 48/48. Due to the wind, one of the most impressive clean scores that I've seen at a field target match.

So that makes 3 matches with the USFT as a .20 in Hunter class. And my knockdown rate for those three matches works out to 135/148, or 91.2%. I averaged more in the 95% + range with the USFT as a .177 in Open class over a couple years. While I prefer the stability of the Open class shooting aids over the shooting sticks, I don't feel at much of a disadvantage in Hunter versus Open, And the slight difference in knockdown percentage is likely more due to small sample size and pretty windy conditions in 2 of the 3 Hunter matches.

I'm still quite fond of my unregulated USFT, I've just had too many field target successes over the last 8 years to feel otherwise. Some call it being a fanboy. I suppose if choosing to shoot a gun that gives me the best chances at winning is being a fanboy, then yep, fanboy it is.

 

[Franklink]

Some USFT related updates....

#1
Tim McMurray was johnny-on-the spot this morning!!! I'm in the process of resealing @SAZ's #56 Hunter, and shot Tim a text about an oring kit. Within 4 hrs I had an email confirmation for shipment for a full set of orings. Not cheap ($40) but the convenience of not needing to trial-and-error my way through the various oring sizes was worth it, especially with the time crunch of getting this gun back to its owner at the next match that we're both attending in 4 weeks. So, paid for convenience. Oring kit should be delivered on Thursday.

#2
I shot my personal Hunter # 165 this past weekend at a monthly FT match. It's still a .20, using a repurposed LW barrel from an AirForce Condor and the .20/13.73grain JSBs at an average of 795-800fps. Used it to secure my first clean match in Hunter class (priors have been in Open). So #165 went 48/48, which included 4/4 on offhand and 2/2 on kneeling. It was not a hard course, as there were two other shooters that also cleared it, good friends Rex and Bobby. It was more a matter of being able to take 48 consecutive shots without a mental error, which is often not an easy task.

So of course we had a shoot-off to determine 1st, 2nd, 3rd. Dunno if the co-match directors decided to use up all the difficulty they'd held back for the course or what, but they decided on a 1/2" kill zone at 50 yards to be the tie breaker. A 1/2" KZ at 50 yards is a 112.5 Troyer factor target, without any wind factors applied.

First round of shoot-off: Rex shot first, and took it down. I shot next, and also took it down, although I believe I got lucky with a split. Bobby was third, and also knocked it down.

Second round of shoot-off: Same 1/2" KZ at 50 yards, but offhand!!! Yeah right-that's a 197 Troyer target!!! We all three missed, two of us drew faceplate at least, lol.

Third round of shoot-off: same 1/2" kill zone, but scooted the shooters back to 54-55 yards, and let us go back to stool and sticks. We're now looking at a 122+ Troyer target. We all missed the first round @ 55yards, but I thought I could see my and Bobby's hit on the right, lower edge of the kz, due to a little bit of wind quartering in from about 10:30-11:00 .

Fourth round of shoot-off: still 1/2" kill zone, still stool and sticks. Rex shot first, and missed. I shot second, held on the upper, left edge (again, about 10:30-11:00) of that teeny tiny little kz, and knocked it down!!! Bobby shot third and missed. So that put me in first for the Hunter class.

Firth round of shoot-off: still 1/2" kz, and still stool and sticks, but now determining 2nd and 3rd place. Rex got it, and Bobby missed, putting Rex in second place.

I love shoot-offs, even when they don't go my way. And will add that I was feeling like the biggest under-dog against Rex and Bobby.

Anyway, USFT Hunter #165 performed admirably, as it always does. Man I love that gun.

On a side note, Jessie, a local AZ FT competitor, had these super cool "clean sweep" pins made up, and awards them whenever someone pulls off the feat. I love the concept, and a big thanks to Jessie!

 

[Franklink]

Reseal of Hunter #95

This was the first time I've disassembled a USFT, and it was pretty cool to see how it works. My take-away was that LD's naming his baby the "Simple Simon" was spot-on, cuz there's just not a whole lot complicated about them. Simply not a lot of rings, and no complicated parts. Elegant in their simplicity.

All the parts laid out...

First task was to file down (yeah, I groan inside just thinking about it) the raised bumps for the holes through the tube. For whatever reason, this particular USFT had some nasty ridges of sharp aluminum at the boltholes through the tube. In texting, @Arzrover speculated that perhaps A BUNCH of barrel swaps while pressurized could lead to this. I was wondering if over-torqueing the bolts could cause it. Dunno for sure, but it needed ameliorated. So, file. This was the before and after of the filing and then some alumiblack to try to touch up the filing. Of note, the distorted metal is mostly on the side of the holes that the bolts would be pushing on from the pressure in the tube. I inspected my personal USFT, and it doesn't exhibit any of this hole distortion. Again, was # 56 over-pressurized at some point in it's life? Problem is now solved. I did verify that there were no sharp burrs at the bolts holes on the inside of the tube (potential for cutting orings on reassembly).

End plugs for air tube...
Of note here is how three of the six oring grooves are un-anodized. Tim's reseal kit only contained 3 of the urethane 028s for this groove, and one of the black (viton/buna?) 028s, yet this particular gun needs a total of six. The non-anodized grooves and not enough of them in the seal kit made me wonder if these were added by some owner some time after it left Tim's hands. Regardless, I had ordered extra 028s in case I nicked one or had trouble getting it to seal so it worked out.

Tim is huge on urethane orings, specifically 90d. His old website talked about their longevity. My personal USFT was made in 2017 and still has the original orings. If I'm remembering correctly, @Arzrover told me his from the early 2000s is still running on originals too.
This is what some of the orings I took out of #56 looked like...this one was under the fill port, if I'm not mistaken.

The large 028s that seal the air tube plugs were black, not the typical opaque color of a urethane oring. They also felt soft for 90d. Leading me to believe that somebody resealed this gun after Tim.

Here are some close-ups...
The valve is removed through simply unthreading it, using the pin holes on either side of the exposed valve stem. A tool was sold by Tim for this express purpose at one point, but I had some pins that fit perfectly and worked just fine.

Poppet return spring sits in that small depression in the bottom of the threaded hole that the valve comes out of.

Swing breach removed from valve here. It rotates on those two parallel orings for opening and closing for loading/firing.

All said and done, I got it resealed and now holding air. But it did require a few baths and hair dryer/time on the trampoline in the sun a few times for the dry-out.

The pile of orings that came out of it. Those big black 028s were looking pretty ratty.

What I learned that could help anyone resealing one in the future...

• DO NOT fill your threaded bolt holes through the breech with grease. Whoever owned this thing before the last two owners filled the threaded holes with nasty, black, tarry grease. I can only presume they did this with hopes of making barrel changes easier. And since we're talking about steel bolts in aluminum threads, some grease is a probably a good idea. But I question their choice, and their excessive use. It was prodigious. I was reminded of greasing farm implements with a grease gun. Whoever did this to this gun had to have put three or four pumps from a grease gun into all four bolt holes. It was frankly, comical. Cleaning up the grease was a large part of the reseal process.
• Don't hesitate to dunk it underwater. It gave me invaluable information about where I had leaks after my first reassembly with new orings.
  • The biggest was the poppet. I was hoping to reserve the replacement poppet and spring that Tim included in the reseal kit for future use by this gun's owner. But the previous poppet didn't want to hold air so I put the new one in. I grabbed hold of it with an electric drill and gently pulled it against the valve seat and briefly spun it. This was to coax the new one into sealing. And it worked the first time.
  • I had a slow leak from the gauge and the fill port. Slightly tighter got those sorted.
  • I had a small leak from the front end plug. I pulled that and replaced one of the white orings with the singular black one Tim included in the kit. I don't know if that black one was supposed to go in any particular place, or if it was meant for a trouble oring groove, but that's what I did, and it worked.
• The inner air passageways of the valve require it to be in the correct orientation, which requires MUCH more force on threading the valve back in than I would have guessed. The correct orientation is that the disassembly pin holes of the valve need to basically line up with the barrel. If the pins are not in line with the barrel (think , the air passageways are blocked, and....no air makes it to the barrel when the trigger is pulled. Think of the disassembly pin holes as the handle of a ball valve for PVC pipe and you'll know what I'm talking about..."open" is when the handle aligns with the flow of water, and "closed" is when the handle is at a 90 degree angle to the flow of water (air).
• The tiny little oring in the check valve is a pain in the butt. Being 90d, there's just not much stretch. And being so small makes it even harder. I eventually got it, but it was a bit frustrating that such a simple little part of the process took so long. I was taking great care in not scratching or nicking the oring groove. And the check valve is just tiny to hold onto. No tips here, just be patient.

So now that it's holding air, I can address the owners next concerns, accuracy. The first step was a gun rule-out/control by dropping in a known exceptional barrel (explained in the link above).

Here are red and black Hunter #95 and my personal Hunter #165.

 

[Franklink]

[COLOR=rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.87)]After all of the above testing (and more in that last link I shared), I decided to put my "magic" 1:36 slow twist poly back in my USFT. That means it's going back to .177, from .20. End on a high note with the last match of the .20 I suppose. And that means that, as a 24" barreled .177, it's a long son of a ....gun again. I'm working on a solution to be the best combination of quiet and length, but when you've got a 24" barrel, it can only be so short. I went through some mental gymnastics with this one, as I REALLY like shorter versus longer OALs. My internal justification was that, at least for field target, dealing with the length is worth it for the improved accuracy and resistance to wind deflection.

So, I figured that would mean some adjusting of the hammer tension, and possibly the transfer port restricting grub screw. And that it did, because the first few shots over the chrono after the barrel swap back to .177 were in the 950s with 10.34s. That makes it squarely illegal for field target. I found it interesting that the same hammer tension and port restriction for 800-805 with .20/13.73s was 950 with .177/10.34s. I suspect most of that relates to 6 more inches of barrel with the .177.

Anyway, this graphic shows the 70 shots that I took with the chrono, after minor adjustments to hammer tension and TP grub screw...
I purposely overfilled slightly, and shot longer than the likely refill pressure.

All 70 shots were from 1500psi to 1100psi.
For practice I'll probably run it from 1450 to 1150, for 60ish shots.
And for matches I'll probably fill to 1400 and refill at 1150psi. That's for an ES of about 25, which is the same sort of ES that I've always ran from this gun. That's an ES that will put them all inside of a field target kill zone. I am 100% NOT a single digit ES kind of guy, kinda like pellet sorting, there's just no point in chasing either endeavor for field target. Success can be had without them, as correct wind reads and reducing mental mistakes are a much higher valued proposition.

This barrel has always been exceptional with an average fps of 915-925 for the 10.34s, and so that's where I am.

In this particular string, I've got 2-3 semi-illegal shots, as the 20fpe cut-off for 10.34s would be 933fps. And my three highest are: 933.7, 934.6, and 935.9. There is also a 2% allowance that would get me up to 952. I don't like to rely on that 2%, but in this particular case, only 5% of my entire string is over the limit, and only over the limit by 2-3fps, not 18fps. So I'm a bit closer to the legal line than I like to be, but still well under the 2% rule for all shots, and inarguably under the actual limit for 95% of my shot string. If the match chrony reads higher than mine, easy adjustment on the hammer tension, but I don't foresee that being likely, as my chrono has never varied enough from that used at matches to make me fail a prematch chrono variation.

Pretty decent, for a non-regulated gun working on 25 year old technology.

Some consider it outdated, but in my opinion performance doesn't go out of style.



Here is the shot string data that was plotted above. Pressure in left column, fps in right.

1500​	898.9​
893.1​
903.6​
899.9​
898.2​
900.1​
1450​	907.6​
905.4​
909.8​
906.1​
909.2​
910.5​
910.3​
911.5​
912.7​
911.5​
904.9​
1400​	914.1​
915.1​
917.7​
917​
924.4​
921.5​
923.9​
926.3​
1375​	924.6​
922.2​
923.8​
923.9​
927.3​
928.9​
1350​	927.4​
925.1​
929​
929​
929.5​
929.5​
929​
1300​	931.3​
933.7​
932.8​
934.6​
935.9​
932​
932​
932.5​
928.2​
932​
1250​	930.5​
929.7​
928.1​
926.9​
927.5​
922.5​
925.8​
1200​	923.9​
923.4​
924.1​
920.3​
922​
920.3​
1175​	913.3​
916​
913.1​
910.3​
1150​	905.9​
909.3​
906.6​
901.8​
1100​	899.3​

[/COLOR]

 

[Franklink]

I feel like I've got @SAZs #95 Hunter ready to rock and roll. He had three barrels with it, and after fairly extensive testing, and some barrel work, the best of the three was a 12 land and groove. One of the three has flashes of absolute brilliance, but would occasionally throw a flyer. The third was generally "okay" but pretty ho hum.

So here is how the best of the three barrels does...

Left column is 10 shot groups, each at 30 yards. Right column is 10 shot groups @ 55 yards. The top right and middle right were just held dead in the middle, the bottom right was trying to adjust for wind. This is 16x and stool and sticks.
I believe the 10 ring is just shy of 0.5" and the 9 ring on these EBR style targets is 1.25."
Shooting quite good now.

 

[Franklink]

 

[Franklink]

Recently weighed it. Always been curious and @cavedweller made it possible. Thanks Rudy.

This is without the thigh rest and associated hardware. Also no MAC1 knee riser/hamster, although it does have the much lighter Veteran-borrowed riser. Scope is a 24ouncer if I remember correctly.

I imagine I would have been pushing 16lbs with how it was set up for Open class....with the bigger heavier scope and the heavier MAC1 hamster and thigh rest.