M14 Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I haven't seen anything recent about the Troy MCS Mod 1 and accuracy so I thought I would post my recent experiences. I am a PO and will soon attend sniper school. My department obtained a surplus M14 several years ago and it has been sitting in a locker unused so I decided to find out its capabilities.

I purchased an MCS and a relatively inexpensive but turns out accurate scope from UTG. I asked the owner of the range that we use for qualifications, who happens to be a long distance shooter, to sight it in for me. At first it's accuracy seemed to be not so good with groups of only about 4 or 5 inches. But, after some adjustments and experimentation with different ammo grain weights it turns out that this surplus rifle is VERY accurate.

I have to say that when the chassis was assembled according to Troy's instructions, which are sparse at best, there seemed to be a lot of play at the front barrel band. That issue was solved by raising the trigger group tension screws so that more force was needed to lock down the guard. That made a big difference. Anyone who has this chassis should ensure that the barrel band is not touching the barrel and that the spacing is even all the way around between the band and barrel.

We shot 147, 150, 155, 165 and 175 grain weights. Accuracy with the various ammo was progressively worse between 147 to 175. Interestingly the rifle shot the best with 147 and 175. Everything else resulted in progressively widening groups until we hit 175 and then the group came together! It seems that Springfield recommended 147 and 175 when the rifle was developed and those are the two weights we discovered provide the tightest groups. Just so happens to be the weight of M80 and M118, go figure.

I have included pics of the rifle and my first three shot group after it was sighted. The group is .75 MOA at 100 yards. Yes that is a fun switch on the receiver and yes it is fun when you turn it on! Only shot about 100 rounds on auto and now it's retired as I intend to use this rifle in sniper school. Shooting 5, 20 round mags on full auto made the fore end of the stock smoke! I am very happy with the Troy MCS, but it would be nice if Troy would chime in with more advice on tuning up their product. It seems to take experimentation to get it right and I'm sure there are some frustrated individuals out there that don't have access to the expert rifleman I had helping me! Hope to hear some comments. This is my first post.

9-21-16
I thought I would add a few more comments regarding the Troy chassis and possible accuracy hurdles. I noticed that the chassis "floats" around the barrel and relies on the stiffness of the chassis to accomplish this, much in the same way that wooden or fiberglass stock does when its been glass bedded. However, it is possible to make the chassis touch the barrel if upward or downward pressure is applied at the fore end near the barrel band (see the pic below). So to avoid this touching situation (lol) it best to avoid supporting the rifle directly underneath the fore end of the chassis. If mounting a bipod I would place it closer to the receiver end to help keep pressure off the front.

I have learned quite a bit from the individual who helped set up the rifle. This person handloads his match ammo and he taught me a lot about ballistics. He also said that a rifle tends to be more accurate if the barrel is slightly "dirty." Not filthy, just a slight carbon layer. He said it tightens the groups. It is his experience that if a rifle is scrubbed clean it takes a few "warm-up" shots to get it to settle back down and tighten up. Sounds logical, but who am I? Oh yeah, the below group was shot with 5 minute cool time between shots. Ambient temp was about 93.
 

·
Premium Member
Honorary Forum Lifer
Joined
·
17,881 Posts
It didn't take long to get a comment about the infamous UTG crap scope.
Yes, Sir.
The latest one like that I have experience with is a guy I know bought a known fake EOTech, didn't want to spend the money for a real one, got it home and could not sight it in, he was screwed. I've seen many inexpensive scopes break, M1As are hard on scopes too. That rifle and chassis are way to nice to not have a great scope on it. Just some meaningless thoughts, no harm intended.
m14brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
It didn't take long to get a comment about the infamous UTG crap scope.
Yes, Sir.
The latest one like that I have experience with is a guy I know bought a known fake EOTech, didn't want to spend the money for a real one, got it home and could not sight it in, he was screwed. I've seen many inexpensive scopes break, M1As are hard on scopes too. That rifle and chassis are way to nice to not have a great scope on it. Just some meaningless thoughts, no harm intended.
m14brian

Might wanna tell your buddy to stay away from real eotechs also they were still selling sights and fielding them to troops over seas knowing they had problems losing zero and knew for years the government just sued them for millions they are also offering to refurbish sights people have bought or buy them back I opted for the buy back want nothing to do with a company that operates that way
 

·
Premium Member
Honorary Forum Lifer
Joined
·
17,881 Posts
Might wanna tell your buddy to stay away from real eotechs also they were still selling sights and fielding them to troops over seas knowing they had problems losing zero and knew for years the government just sued them for millions they are also offering to refurbish sights people have bought or buy them back I opted for the buy back want nothing to do with a company that operates that way
Roger that.
m14brian
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
No harm taken. I did considerable research on scopes before buying this one. It's good enough for training. It has shown to be dead on with no changes n sight setting. Then instructor that assisted me made a one hole group with it. I am actually amazed at the accuracy of the rifle given that it is surplus and not a DMR.

Far as the scope I know that it has many bad comments I have also seen a review by a well respected expert that praised the scope. Could be that UTG has made improvements. If it fails me I will be the first to report it to the forum. I sometimes think that those who denegrate the UTG scopes have not always had personal experience but are passing along what they have read from others. Otherwise they would give their own bad experience for the rest of us to learn from.
Thanks for the input.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
More Pics

I though I would post a few more pics and some advice on accuracy with the Troy chassis. Be sure the barrel/gas system does not touch the front barrel band as it should float around the barrel system. Also if using a bipod mount it close to the receiver. Mounting it close to the fore end tends to press the fore end of the chassis up against the barrel. Or is it the that the weight of the barrel is pressing down? One of those is right....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
Pic issue

I can't seem to post more than one pic at a time. Everyone time I try to post two pics at once it just replaces the first upload with the second upload! Frustrating!

9-21-16
Thought I would provide a little more info on the rifle. It is serial number 57XXXX and shows to be manufactured between 1962 and 1964. Thats all the info I have. If anyone knows if there is a way to find more history on these rifles please let me know. Thanks!
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top