text:
I gather it's one of the worst sitcoms of all time.
I want to see dinasours.
And Megan Hilty's tits.
I gather it's one of the worst sitcoms of all time.
I want to see dinasours.
And Megan Hilty's tits.
|by Anonymous
|reply 129
Is he straight on the show?
|by Anonymous
|reply 1
He's a gay dad.
|by Anonymous
|reply 2
Thanks, r2.
|by Anonymous
|reply 3
Try to imagine Jack from Will & Grace being 5 years older and well, Jack.
|by Anonymous
|reply 4
This laugh track is horrendous.
|by Anonymous
|reply 5
His face looks different, no?
|by Anonymous
|reply 6
I thought it was really good!
|by Anonymous
|reply 7
Definitely not the worst show ever. And first episodes are usually pretty bad in general.
|by Anonymous
|reply 8
It was b-a-d.
|by Anonymous
|reply 9
The people who greenlighted this must be headless.
|by Anonymous
|reply 10
You'd have to be a gay parent to appreciate how on-target and nuanced the perceptive script was.
|by Anonymous
|reply 11
[quote] You'd have to be a gay parent to appreciate how on-target and nuanced the perceptive script was.
Looks like NBC has a sure-fire hit. A show that you can't appreciate unless you're a gay parent = huge ratings smash.
|by Anonymous
|reply 12
No one wants to see this shit.
|by Anonymous
|reply 13
Go back and see my thread about this show being cancelled in no time.
|by Anonymous
|reply 14
I'm Brian Williams and this is breaking news: With NBC's new sitcom, "Sean Saves the World", there are now officially more gay parents on television than there are in reality. Lets go now to Al Roker for reaction from the streets of Chelsea! Al, are you decent?
|by Anonymous
|reply 15
The whole lineup is just awful. Everyone of these NBC shows are seriously unfunny.
How is making new shows that are hackneyed and humorless supposed to help network TV compete against cable?
|by Anonymous
|reply 16
Bob Greenblatt is hellbent on running the network into the ground, and he just signed on for more years running the joint. He's also gay.
|by Anonymous
|reply 17
But isn't NBC doing great on 3 nights of the week (Sunday, Monday, Tuesday)? It's the other four that are so fucked up.
|by Anonymous
|reply 18
Parks & Rec is really starting to show it's age and it's difficult to get through now. Every time they cut to Ron, you know it'll be one of the same four jokes about his masculinity, love of food, fondness for woodwork, or his disinterest in people.
|by Anonymous
|reply 19
Todd Milliner has what 5 shows on TV right now? Pretty impressive...
|by Anonymous
|reply 20
While not exactly a trainwreck or morass of idiocy, the SSTW pilot depended too much on slapstick and cartoony characterizations for its humor. It's pretty lazy and not very funny.
|by Anonymous
|reply 21
I can't stand Sean. Also, in this new show he acts like a big fairy. BTW, these TV stations NBC, ABC, and CBS produce complete trash and it astounds me that people actually watch these shit TV stations. There is a lot of junk on cable ,but not everything on cable TV is junk because you have much more variety to chose from. NBC, ABC, and CBS has pulled the same old boring routine for years. They have no talented script writers anymore and The comedy is not even funny because it stinks!
I only watch cable TV for a long time.
|by Anonymous
|reply 22
Two words: Linda Lavin.
|by Anonymous
|reply 23
It wasn't as awful as I expected but it wasn't that great either. The office stuff was horrible - find him a new job and co-workers STAT. Lavin was good but at times I felt like I was watching Karen Walker version 2.0.
Biggest problem is the daughter is so bland and the actress so generic that you don't care about her or her relationship with Sean. An insurmountable problem since that's what the show is built around.
|by Anonymous
|reply 24
Why are there so many bitchy wisecracking mothers on TV?
|by Anonymous
|reply 25
It had some clunky moments, but I actually really enjoyed it. Better than Michael J. Fox Show for sure. I have a feeling it's going to tank in the ratings though.
|by Anonymous
|reply 26
It wasn't funny. It wasn't clever. How it wasn't pulled off the air mid-episode is a mystery.
The banter between Sean and the daughter was awful. I had to comment how it was possible they walked off set feeling satisfied with that scene.
Probably the worst new show so far.
|by Anonymous
|reply 27
Just out of curiosity, what comedies do you like, R27?
|by Anonymous
|reply 28
The actress playing the daughter should definitely have been before the premiere. She has no comic timing whatsoever.
|by Anonymous
|reply 29
[quote]I gather it's one of the worst sitcoms of all time.
Because it stars a feminine gay man?
|by Anonymous
|reply 30
[quote]I can't stand Sean. Also, in this new show he acts like a big fairy.
Why are gay men so threatened by feminine gay men? I have never understood this.
|by Anonymous
|reply 31
Not all gay men are feminine, yet that's the stereotype that is constantly perpetuated by Hollywood. Fuck that.
|by Anonymous
|reply 32
As much as I liked Sean Hayes in W&G, I think that he's a one-trick poney. I saw him recently in Win a date with Tad Hamilton and he was terrible. His 15 minutes of fame are pretty much over.
|by Anonymous
|reply 33
[quote]Why are gay men so threatened by feminine gay men? I have never understood this.
I'm not threatened by Chinese crested hairless dogs, but I do find them repulsive.
|by Anonymous
|reply 34
[QUOTE]Not all gay men are feminine, yet that's the stereotype that is constantly perpetuated by Hollywood. Fuck that.
Then get to Hollywood and try to change it. Or, change it in your hometown.
[quote]I'm not threatened by Chinese crested hairless dogs, but I do find them repulsive.
This is just another thread clearly meant to bash feminine gay men by trolls.
|by Anonymous
|reply 35
I had to turn it off after ten minutes.
The writing was a very weak, which was only underscored by over-compensating, obnoxious laugh track. In fact, the dated laugh track was all I found amusing about the whole thing.
Sean awkwardly jumbles dishes in a very ham-fisted, unfunny way? So they sweeten the laugh track with applause, as if the audience had just realized the new Lucile Ball is before them.
|by Anonymous
|reply 36
R34 Repulsive? Really? Says more about you than about the show or the type of man it's about.
Sucks to be you.
|by Anonymous
|reply 37
It's hardly one of the worst sitcoms of all time.
It's not great, but it's marginally better than The Michael J Fox Show, The Crazy Ones, and The Millers, which IS a contender for worst sitcom of all time.
Which begs the question - what the fuck happened? There's almost NOTHING good among the new series, sitcom and drama. One or two, and that's it. Everything else sucks to high heaven.
|by Anonymous
|reply 38
No one has mentioned that the "transition" music ( a drum thing) is reminiscent of the ones from lats year's gay comedy PARTNERS on CNS?
Must be because Jim Burrows is the director of both?
|by Anonymous
|reply 39
why do talented actors like Sean Hayes do this kind of shit for network tv--cant he get something to develop for HBO/Shotime/FX etc--
|by Anonymous
|reply 40
R39, that same "transition" type music was used in the gay-themed film C.O.G. which was just released. It's all the rage in homo Hollywood at the moment.
|by Anonymous
|reply 41
R40, I think it's because his particular talents are best suited for a network, multi-camera sitcom. I don't see him in a gritty cable comedy like Louie.
|by Anonymous
|reply 42
It's funny you should say that, R36, because I got a weird Lucy Show vibe from the pilot.
|by Anonymous
|reply 43
I think Sean Hayes should stay away from roles that even remotely resemble Jack. I loved him in "Pieces of April" where he played a completely different, completely unexpected character - and did it quite well. He should go for a nasty role.
|by Anonymous
|reply 44
hes probably much more capable of doing of something other then the gay court jester thing doesnt have to be gritty necessarily-just smarter writing network probably pays more if it hits-but not if youre cancelled after a few episodes or a season because it stinks
|by Anonymous
|reply 45
It is on tonight. I'm DVR'ing it just for Lavin.
This has DL classic written all over it.
|by Anonymous
|reply 46
I only caught the last 10 minutes yesterday but thought it was pretty funny and clever. Can't wait to watch the first 20 minutes of it now! Glad NBC is rerunning the pilot.
|by Anonymous
|reply 47
sounds like a laugh track to me. one of those Tyler Perry comedy laugh tracks.
|by Anonymous
|reply 48
Does Sean have ""Friends" money?"
|by Anonymous
|reply 49
I hope not, r49.
That would be unfair.
|by Anonymous
|reply 50
it is flat and sluggish
|by Anonymous
|reply 51
I liked "Don't look at my ass! Don't look at my ass!"
|by Anonymous
|reply 52
I'm one of the few who liked it....except for the laugh track, which is so bad it's actually a distraction.
|by Anonymous
|reply 53
[all posts by tedious, racist idiot removed.]
|by Anonymous
|reply 54
I just watched the pilot. For a traditional sitcom, it wasn't bad. I thought it would be worst. The promos/trailer made it sound a lot worst than it was. I hope it last at least a season.
|by Anonymous
|reply 55
r49 Probably. He doesn't have to work after being on "Will and Grace".
|by Anonymous
|reply 56
He and his business partner Todd, have a production company with 5 shows currently on the air. He's not doing too bad.
|by Anonymous
|reply 57
awful laugh track
|by Anonymous
|reply 58
|by Anonymous
|reply 59
R59, the entire NBC Thursday night comedy line-up is a ratings disaster so far.
|by Anonymous
|reply 60
What boss would force an employee (especially an executive as Sean would be) to work late when people can work from home now, especially in a New York company. That part of the pilot felt dated.
|by Anonymous
|reply 61
I liked the bra episode, too.
|by Anonymous
|reply 62
Sean's sassy blonde friend with the big tits is horrible.
|by Anonymous
|reply 63
R64=Katharine McPhee
|by Anonymous
|reply 64
It was funnier than I ever hoped it could be, but why does every sitcom have to end with a homily to middle class life. Can't they just let the humor and the situations speak for themselves.
I tried not to be amused, but Megan Hilty, Thomas Lennon and Echo Kellum made it hard.
|by Anonymous
|reply 65
Thomas Lennon is a brilliant comic actor. Loved him as Lt. Dangle on Reno 911.
|by Anonymous
|reply 66
[quote]What boss would force an employee (especially an executive as Sean would be) to work late when people can work from home now, especially in a New York company. That part of the pilot felt dated.
Not to mention Sean and his daughter just show up at his boss's doorstep. I hate that about sitcoms where co-workers just show up at your house. This NEVER happens in real life. And it would be fucking weird if it did.
|by Anonymous
|reply 67
What the fuck is wrong with Jessica Walter's eyebrows? I kept waiting for Sean to make a joke about her burning her eyebrows off but it never came. So they're SUPPOSED to look like that??
|by Anonymous
|reply 68
I'm sorry, but last night's episode was really good and I enjoy this show.
It's a shame that it's on NBC because it would be a hit on any other network.
|by Anonymous
|reply 69
NBC has its work cut out. The Michael J. Fox Show was just plain awful last night and borders on being completely unwatchable in my opinion. However bad Sean's show is, it can't possibly be any worse. Both shows are in desperate need of a complete overhaul.
|by Anonymous
|reply 70
We watched for about 10 minutes last night. He was on a blind date with some nice looking man. As soon as he opened the door, we knew it would be this juvenile attempt at comedy. Embarassing really. Hayes as not an ounce of subtlety in his acting. It was almost like a vaudeville scene from 1915. When the mother arrived...of course...we left.
|by Anonymous
|reply 71
Nice looking man? Oh, you just made Robert Gant cry!
|by Anonymous
|reply 72
I tried to watch the pilot on Hulu last night. Emphasis on the word "tried." Totally unwatchable. The prologue was god-awful, and then came the office interactions which were even worse. Probably saw a grand total of 8 minutes before turning it off. How does such crap get the ok?
|by Anonymous
|reply 73
I sort of like the show and I wouldn't consider myself a Sean Hayes fan. I'll tune in but I won't cry if it goes away.
In last night's epsiode, they mentioned that the show is set in Chicago.
The set designs for both the office and home are very distracting. Has there ever been an apartment with that room layout? Only on TV.
|by Anonymous
|reply 74
They're repeating it tonight in a desperate attempt to get more viewers, I guess.
|by Anonymous
|reply 75
[quote]What the fuck is wrong with Jessica Walter's eyebrows?
Jessica Walter was on? What part did she play?
|by Anonymous
|reply 76
No R76 NBC just has more holes to fill than swiss cheese.
|by Anonymous
|reply 77
I think r69 meant Linda Lavin.
|by Anonymous
|reply 78
At least Robert Gant has lost most of his lisp.
|by Anonymous
|reply 79
I was offered the part of Sean's mother. Thankless part that only needed someone with limited range.
|by Anonymous
|reply 80
Saw the repeat last night- awful! Who has conversations like that in real life? Sean is talented, but he is a one trick pony. The creators must have seen Kinky Boots in Chicago because the black co worker is channeling Billy Porter. This will not last a season. Another bomb for Megan.
|by Anonymous
|reply 81
[quote]Who has conversations like that in real life?
To be fair, the same thing can be said about most (if not all) sitcoms.
|by Anonymous
|reply 82
NBC just ordered more episodes.
|by Anonymous
|reply 83
would have love to see Patty Duke playing the mother
|by Anonymous
|reply 84
I watched part of it last night. It wasn't that bad, considering it's a comedy, which I don't usually bother with. I didn't finish watching it, however, as I became more interested in learning which Junior Master Chefs were going to go to the next level. That kid with blond hair was so weird, speaking in such perfect reality show confessional mode. I hoped he'd be the next to leave.
|by Anonymous
|reply 85
[quote]NBC just ordered more episodes.
I think just three scripts, hardly a vote of confidence.
What is odd is that they ordered a full season of the awful Michael J. Fox show.
I guess being a bigger star with an illness you've played for attention and sympathy really helped.
|by Anonymous
|reply 86
[quote]What is odd is that they ordered a full season of the awful Michael J. Fox show.
Fox only signed if he was guaranteed a full season.
|by Anonymous
|reply 87
[all posts by tedious, racist idiot removed.]
|by Anonymous
|reply 88
Sean is very successful as a producer. He is one of the producers of Hot in Cleveland. My best quess would be that he WANTED to do another sitcom with the type of character he feels most comfortable doing, someone "sort of in the neighborhood" of Jack McFarland. It was his big breakthrough role and he rocked it for a long time. Same with Lucille Ball. She only ever felt comfortable being some variation of the "Lucy" character, despite it being rather pathetic and unfunny after I Love Lucy ended.
Sean might be able to do something with this show but time will tell. It's no Jack and Karen laugh riot yet, that's for sure. (And how long before Megan Mullally guest stars? Any guesses?)
|by Anonymous
|reply 89
Dump Megan Hilty, get Megan Mullally on board instead. I'd like that.
|by Anonymous
|reply 90
Megan Hilty instead of that bitch Karen is one of the things I like about the new show. I hated the "Jack & Karen" show.
|by Anonymous
|reply 91
Sean is the worst part of the show. Well, him and the shitty scripts. The supporting cast is good, as is the premise of a gay man living with a teen daughter. But the writing, the laugh track, and Sean's "comic" antics are just so tired and one note. Who, for instance, invites a blind date over for a first date and then slams the door in his face? So ridiculous.
|by Anonymous
|reply 92
[quote]This is just another thread clearly meant to bash feminine gay men by trolls.
Get help, hon.
|by Anonymous
|reply 93
The laugh track for this one has to be the worst one of all time. Who should get the blame for it?
|by Anonymous
|reply 94
R96: I agree. The showrunner should get the blame.
|by Anonymous
|reply 95
The writing needs improving. Period. Hayes is trying, but he's running in place. It's exhusting to watch him take sub-par material - the writing & premise,and try and make it work. The cast . the Lavin character is one note, and tedious. Dump Hilty, & that boss , and the office. Start fresh. There is a lot of talent being wasted here. The episode I watched the other night ('Blind Date") had promise - but when Robert Gant (real life partner of current NBC Entertainment head, Bob Greenblatt -gee, how'd Gant get the job ?) came in, the show became the worst kind of 50's sitcom slapstick, ending with burned food, TV exploading, and mom showing up at front door. Is the sitcom de-volving back to "I Married Joan" ? *
* Look it up
|by Anonymous
|reply 96
Let's face the face: lgbt theme shows are not popular and will be cancelled quickly..Glee doesn't count because it's a diverse show"....
|by Anonymous
|reply 97
The pilot was middling. The second episode was ok and the third was better. That may be all it takes for it to last a few years on NBC. I actually laughed a time or two this week, which is pretty good for me.
They need to re-tool the supporting cast, though. They can keep Lavin and Thomas Lennon, though I think they should turn down his Nazi schtick. Megan Hilty seems to be acting in a different show. You don't have to shout at the camera, dear. I cannot understand every third word Echo Kellum says because he apparently is incapable of not mumbling. The daughter is less interesting than wet cardboard. I get that she's supposed to be the straight man in all of this hokum, but you really have to work hard to be that dull.
|by Anonymous
|reply 98
I like the show. The problem is that it isn't very distinct or original. None of the characters are very specific. Most of the often good jokes here could be given to another character without any problem. Hayes, Lavin and Hilty are very talented and sell what they have been given well.
|by Anonymous
|reply 99
The New Normal was a lot fucking better than this crap.
|by Anonymous
|reply 100
R102= Ryan Murphy, still bitter.
|by Anonymous
|reply 101
After reading that NBC had given the green light for 4 new episodes based on talks to improve the show, I decided to watch on Hulu all three shows that have aired to date. They did seem to improve one by one. But they are still dealing with cliches up to this point. Hayes is a talented actor (very funny in a non-gay role in the recent Three Stooges movie) and deserves better material.
|by Anonymous
|reply 102
I respectfully disagree, R102. Sean's show has a lot of problems and is in need of a complete overhaul, but The New Normal committed an even worse sin: it was just plain boring.
"Sean" at least does have a few laughs here and there but TNN spent so much of its time trying to make us think of the guys as The Perfect Gay Couple that they forgot to write them anything funny to do. Plus the cast around them was just horrid, the little girl being the sole exception, and the grandmother character tried way too hard to be shocking and instead just came off as ridiculous, unrealistic and desperate.
If it'd been up to me, I wouldn't have canceled The New Normal; like Sean's show, I would have renewed it and retooled it (same goes for Michael J. Fox's show). To me there's nothing worse than sitcoms with a great premise but lousy execution.
|by Anonymous
|reply 103
I get Sean Hayes confused with Jon Cryer.
|by Anonymous
|reply 104
r104 saw The Three Stooges movie.......oh my
|by Anonymous
|reply 105
He's an ensemble player but not someone who can carry a show. He also looks like he's had plastic surgery using garnet sandpaper.
|by Anonymous
|reply 106
I liked the twenty minutes I could stand. I'd lose the blond, the black, the daughter and the boss and Sean though. The rest of it was very good, especially Linda Lavin in the mattress world commercials.
|by Anonymous
|reply 107
the show should have focused on his love life, rather than his relationship with his daughter.
There could be lots of comedy in his being a single father trying to find love and sex with his daughter getting in the way.
|by Anonymous
|reply 108
I'm obviously in the minority here, but I'm enjoying the show. It gets better each week. The blind date episode had some clever bits.
Not saying the show is any groundbreaking comedy, but it does keep me entertained. It's far better than the Michael J. Fox show
|by Anonymous
|reply 109
They should've called Sean's character Tommy Hyatt, and the viewers could've watched Alice deal with her gay son and granddaughter. Polly Holliday and Beth Howland could've guested. They could've explained Tommy's new face by saying that he was in a terrible car accident and the doctors just weren't able to save his BDF.
|by Anonymous
|reply 110
The laugh track is so awful. I think I laughed once while the people on the track were in hysterics. Sad.
|by Anonymous
|reply 111
When does the "Undateable" pilot air? All I can find is that it's a "mid season replacement." Really looking forward to Chris D'elia.
|by Anonymous
|reply 112
I liked it. I hope it survives.
|by Anonymous
|reply 113
Sean's show is far, far better than that Partners show with Michael Urie that aired for 6-7 episodes last season.
But as someone mentioned already, they're using the same style music as the transition between scenes.
|by Anonymous
|reply 114
How much is Megan Hilty in his? How big is her role?
|by Anonymous
|reply 115
[quote]They should've called Sean's character Tommy Hyatt, and the viewers could've watched Alice deal with her gay son and granddaughter. Polly Holliday and Beth Howland could've guested. They could've explained Tommy's new face by saying that he was in a terrible car accident and the doctors just weren't able to save his BDF.
One day, when Tommy was boiling water in the teakettle to pour over Alice's tired feet at the end of a long day at Mel's, there was an accident...
|by Anonymous
|reply 116
[quote] why do talented actors like Sean Hayes do this kind of shit for network tv--cant he get something to develop for HBO/Shotime/FX etc--
Because he produces a hit TV series on NBC -- Grimm.
So they gave him a comedy series.
|by Anonymous
|reply 117
The was the first throwaway episode, although it was nice to have the reunion of Off-Broadway's OTHER DESERT CITIES's Stacy Keach and Linda Lavin
|by Anonymous
|reply 118
They ordered 4 more episodes, but not a full season. What's the point?
|by Anonymous
|reply 119
I watched all four episodes on the NBC site. I thought the pilot episode was the best one. I wonder if it was actually, literally, shot first or if it just AIRED first. I know that the first I Love Lucy to ever air was the "Mockingbird Murder Mystery" episode but was not the first I Love Lucy episode shot. They did that, I presume, to give the performers a chance to "gel," to get a rhythm going, to get comfortable in the roles. That way, they air a better "first" show.
There are some funny moments. But the plots are contrived, silly and too 1970's "sitcommy." Grownups simply don't ACT that way. Slamming the door in a date's face? Throwing bras into the soup? In fact, they seem to THROW a lot of things on this show. Tired. The workplace blonde is wasted. The black guy has potential and some funny lines but he needs better writing. The boss, too. BETTER WRITING and he could be funny. The bra episode where he kept sneaking into the break room to eavesdrop was funny.
Linda Lavin is okay. She looks good for her age, I will give her that. But she is still playing an older version of Alice.
I really like Sean and I can see that he is TRYING to tone things down here and NOT be Jack McFarland. But there is so much slapstick (which he is great at) and then some "quiet" moments. I think the show doesn't yet know what it wants to be. Needs to find its sea legs.
|by Anonymous
|reply 120
Anyone still watching? I really liked last episode. The show is getting better. At first I thought it was worse than The Michael J Fox Show but now it's way better.
|by Anonymous
|reply 121
Just watched this past Thursday's show online. It was the best episode yet. The DC area didn't see it though...Thursday Night Football, of all things. I haven't seen regular weeknight programming preempted like that in ages.
|by Anonymous
|reply 122
The network has ordered another five half-hours of the struggling freshman Thursday night sitcom starring Sean Hayes as a single dad.
The move comes after NBC gave the comedy an emergency infusion of viewers with a special live episode of The Voice as a lead-in last night, driving it to a series high. The Voice threw its 9.7 million fans at the Sean, which netted 4.6 million last night. Sean still came in fourth place at 9 p.m., though. But maybe the added sampling will pay off in the coming weeks; comedies can grow easier than dramas.
|by Anonymous
|reply 123
The second episode was better than the pilot.
Thomas Lennon is very funny, but he should be used sparingly. It works better when he's in small doses.
I like the tension between Linda Lavin and Megan Hilty.
|by Anonymous
|reply 124
I watched a few episodes and I liked them. I just can't remember when the show comes on. I just happen to find it as I am flipping through the channels.
I really liked the episode when the owner of the dry cleaners thought Sean was into him.
|by Anonymous
|reply 125
Thomas Lennon is really funny. HIMYM really misused him.
|by Anonymous
|reply 126
recent threads by topic delivered to your email
follow popular threads on twitter
Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!


text:
Heroism on display: Alumnus named Marine Corps Aviator of the Year
April 2012 - Flying in the darkness toward Libya's coastline on March 22, 2011, Maj. Eric Grunke '01 raced to save a brother in arms.
On the ground below, an Air Force pilot whispered to Grunke from a hiding place near his crashed F-15.
"Tell my wife I love her."
It was day three of Operation Odyssey Dawn, an international effort to protect the Libyan people from Col. Moammar Gadhafi's regime, and the pilot was being pursued by several vehicles near the city of Benghazi. As the Libyan troops closed in, Grunke dropped two bombs from his Harrier, destroying their targets and causing the other pursuers to retreat.
Thanks largely to those heroic actions, Grunke recently was named Marine Corps Aviator of the Year.
"I never thought I'd be in the same category as a person like John Glenn, who was first recipient of the award," Grunke said. "I was not alone that night. It was a team effort, everyone from my wingman who flew right next to me and looked out for surface threats to the Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft pilots who flew out to pick up the pilot. I was so happy to be a part of that."
From College to the Corps
Grunke's connections to The College of Idaho and the military are extensive. Both of his parents and a sister are alumni of the College, while his father served in the Navy Reserve and brother served in the Marine Corps Reserve.
While the Weiser native started as a pre-med student, his thoughts soon turned to flying and he discovered the Marine Corps would guarantee him a spot in its pilot training program. So Grunke attended officer training at Quantico Marine Corps Base during his summers and went on active duty after graduating from the C of I in 2001.
Throughout his time in the Marine Corps, Grunke said his experiences at the C of I have been invaluable.
"I was part of a tight knit community at The College of Idaho, and being a pilot is like that … the sense of camaraderie is similar," Grunke said. "The diversity, being a music minor and biology major, that broad background has been really helpful as a Marine officer."
Protecting Libya's People
Before participating in Operation Odyssey Dawn, Grunke's unit had been deployed on a humanitarian aid mission to Pakistan.
"We were following along what was happening with the Arab Spring, but we weren't sure whether we'd get involved," he said.
The situation escalated, however, and on March 19, Grunke's squadron was called into action, tasked with destroying tanks and other military targets that Gadhafi was using to attack his own people.
Grunke is proud of what he and his fellow Marines accomplished during two weeks of operations in Libya. On the first night of operations, one of the major roads into Benghazi – a flashpoint for the Libyan uprising – was completely blocked off by troops loyal to Gadhafi.
"By night four after we had been pounding him, the road was open and there was civilian traffic going both ways," Grunke said. "I witnessed a really tangible result from that mission to support the rebels. I could see the difference and I'll always remember how important that was."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
On Thursday, July 17, the Men's B1 City League softball division played their final games of the regular season before play-offs begin next week.
In their final game of the regular-season, The Pub took to the field against Sparetime Supply. Sparetime Supply had had a decent season of 6 wins and 4 losses so far.
Whereas The Pub had been a favorite to date, with an impressive 8 wins and only 2 losses for the season and expected to easily go into the play-offs.
Sparetime Supply played as the home team, putting The Pub up to bat first.
The Pub's batting order began with left-fielder Ryan Carroll, followed by second-baseman Jake Sanchez, then short-stop Steve Espinoza, third-baseman Jeff Harpe, pitcher Chad Wlodarczyk, left-center Homer Holbrook, then first-baseman Josh Stout, extra-hitter Matt Espinoza, catcher Donnie Horn, right-center Ryan Gladen, extra-hitter Bubba Horn, and finishing up the rotation with right-fielder Roger Sellars.
Ryan Carroll started off the top of the first inning at-bat with hit deep into center-field, getting him on second.
Jake Sanchez followed up with a similar hit to center, but was caught out at first-base.
Steve Espinoza got a strong connect-with the ball, but while only getting himself to first base, sent Carroll home for the first run of the game.
Next up Jeff Harpe fouled out for the second out of the inning, but next hitter Chad Wlodarczyk followed with ground infield hit getting to first.
Homer Holbrook was up next to the plate, hit a strong outfield hit for a double and sent Steve Espinoza for a second run.
Josh Stout was up next, hit another deep out-field hit for two bases, and sent two runners home.
The score now was 0-4, and The Pub were showing no signs of slowing down.
Matt Espinoza hit a line drive up the left for a single base. Donnie Horn followed, and was walked onto first base.
The bases were loaded, and Ryan Gladen took to the plate. Gladen hit a low ball to center, and sent Stout home for a fifth run for The Pub so far this inning.
With the bases still loaded Bubba Horn and Roger Sellars hit in two more runners before retiring the top of the first.
Sparetime Supply was finally up to the plate in the bottom of the first inning with a daunting 0-7 lead to catch up to.
Sparetime's batting order started off with right-fielder Mark Pederson, followed by left-center Rock Seaton, then left-fielder Steve Young, followed by extra-hitter Cody Williamson, then extra-hitter Stephen Summers, extra-hitter Ray Britton, short-stop Mike Vanhorn, then right-center Jason McCord, second-baseman Tyler Aguilar, first-baseman Cecil Caldwell, pitcher Tom Summers, and finally third-baseman Tuker Kelly.
Sparetime Supply had a slower start than the The Pub did at bat. Mark Pederson hit a single to get on base. Rock Seaton followed by getting walked to first-base.
Steve Young followed by also getting onto first, and Sparetime Supply had managed to get the bases loaded!
Cody Williamson got a deep outfield hit, but The Pub's outfield caught it. It was a sacrifice play for Sparetime though, as Pederson was able to make it home for their first run.
Stephen Summers was up to bat, drve the ball to second with a grounder, got onto first and sent in Seaton for a second run before the inning was retired for Sparetime Supply.
At the end of the first inning, the score was 2-7.
In the second inning, The Pub managed to get 2 more runs on the board, with one of them a clean home run from Jeff Harpe, while Sparetime only fired back with a single run, ending that inning with The Pub still in the lead at 3-9.
The top of the third inning, was a little cold for The Pub, with runners only being able to get on base. Sparetime Supply was finally seeming warmed up and ready to make a game out of what was looking like a quick shutdown.
Sparetime took the plate in the bottom of the third and seemed to dominate The Pub's pitching. The first two hitters had gotten on to base and were both hit in with a long drive home run out of the park by Steve Young!
This was followed by two more runners making it home for a much closer game of 8-9, The Pub still in the lead.
The fourth was a quick inning for both sides, with only the pub putting a run on the board with a home-run by Jake Sanchez. The Pub were not quick to give up their lead at 8-10.
The fifth picked up a bit for The Pub again, and they scored three more runs before giving the plate for their opponents.
Sparetime Supply for a second inning in a row were unable to score any runs in the bottom of the fifth, and it was starting to leak bleak for them again, as The Pub picked up their lead and time was running short.
In the sixth and final inning, The Pub weren't able to score any more runs in the top, but were feeling pretty comfortable with a lead of 8-13.
Sparetime Supply had only this chance to try to catch The Pub before the game was over.
Impossibly it seemed, they were up to the challenge, starting off with a home run then loading up the bases and getting run after run! Steve Young hit two runners in. Tucker Kelly hit right into a clear pocket in center-field and got another two runners in!
Mark Pederson hit one run on a single, and Rock Seaton got a hug connect for three bases and another two runners sent home.
Sparetime Supply ended their final inning with a huge comeback of 7 runs brought in and beat the odds against a heavy contender in The Pub's ball-club.
The game ended with a nail-biting score of 15-13, Sparetime Supply wins.


text:
22 June 2012
The middle innings for the Tigers have a new look. Hard throwing right hander Brayan Villarreal has become the middle reliever of choice for Jim Leyland and the Tigers. Villarreal, the 25 year old right-hander from Venezuela, has appeared in 20 games (23.1 innings) and currently has a 1.16 ERA and a 0.86 WHIP.
With a fastball that touches 98 miles per hour at times and a nice slider, Villarreal is the power arm that the Tigers seem to like in the bullpen. Villarreal has also shown good control for the most part, walking 10 batters in his 23.1 innings pitched. He has the ability to go multiple innings in relief as well, with his longest outing being 2.1 innings against the Pirates on May 19th.
Villarreal has been up and down from Triple-A Toledo three separate times this season, with his latest promotion occurring on May 17 when Jose Valverde was dealing with a minor back injury. Since his May 17th call-up, Villarreal has been lights out, pitching 21.2 innings, allowing only three runs while striking out 33 batters. Villarreal's best work came on May 29 at Boston when he struck out all five of the batters he faced.
Signed by the Tigers in 2005 and after five years of minor league service time in the Tigers' organization, Villarreal is finally staking claim to a major league role. Villarreal has pitched mostly in the sixth or seventh inning, but he's pitched the late innings of close games several times recently. Whenever he has pitched he has become an extremely reliable strikeout reliever.
With veteran Octavio Dotel back from the DL, the Tigers' bullpen becomes a bit more crowded. Although with Valverde nursing a sprained wrist, Villarreal could continue to pitch in pressure situations until Valverde returns.
It remains to be seen how Villarreal will be used when Detroit's whole bullpen is healthy, although his recent performance certainly has to inspire confidence in Leyland and Tigers' management that Villarreal belongs in a big league role.


text:
Imagining Robert: My Brother, Madness, and Survival : A Memoir
A prize-winning novelist offers a touching and uplifting tale of love as he explains the joys and difficulties involved in having a relationship with his mentally ill brother. Tour.
Please visit Help Page for Questions
regarding ISBN / ISBN-10 / ISBN10, ISBN-13 / ISBN13, EAN / EAN-13, and Amazon
Home | ISBN Directory | Affiliate
Program | Contact
Copyright © 2003-2014 AllDiscountBooks.net All rights reserved.


text:
|Find A Doctor:
|Online or call:1-800-247-9580
|Contact Us:
Newton Medical Center: The Patient Experience
Newton Medical Center Awards & Recognition
Newton Medical Center Awards & Recognition
Newton Medical Center has been providing care since 1932, serving the communities of Sussex and Warren counties in New Jersey, Pike County in Pennsylvania and southern Orange County in New York.
Our hospital is accredited by The Joint Commission and our parent company, Atlantic Health System, has a medical school affiliation with the Sidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University. Atlantic Health System is also a member of AllSpire Health Partners, and in 2013, received the Business Investment Award from the Sussex County Economic Development Partnership.


text:
To Train Physicians for Business Leadership, Think Beyond the MBA
Hospital and health system leaders are quickly recognizing the shortage in business training that they face in their physician ranks, especially at the leadership level. But there's a difference between recognizing a deficiency and determining what, if anything, to do about it.
Do you promote someone into a clinical leadership position -- such as a chief medical officer -- without that training, with the idea that the physician will go on to get an MBA while on the job?
Physicians are highly motivated and smart, but often, doing their job and asking them to get another advanced degree is understandably too much. Are there other, less intensive ways for these physicians to get the business and leadership training they need? Or do you simply refuse to put anyone in that position who doesn't have the business degree or training already?
Both approaches are risky. There simply is a ton of competition for physicians who already have leadership training and experience, putting all but the most financially well off institutions at a disadvantage in attracting candidates from such a small pool. If you put someone in who doesn't have the training, who's to say how successful they will be at convincing their fellow doctors to follow evidence-based medicine guidelines, or to work in teams, for example?
Jeff Collins, MD, is one of the latter group. He had no business or leadership training before being promoted to a position that he says really should require it. Collins is CMO of the eastern Washington region at Providence Health & Services, a 28-hospital system based in Spokane.
"In 2006, the previous vice president for medical affairs retired and I was recruited by the medical staff," he says. "On Friday I was an internist and Monday I was the CMO."
Providence had developed a leadership academy program internally that helped doctors in positions like Collins' to get a little training in management. At the same time, Collins was encouraged by a colleague to apply to a program developed by GE and the Health Management Academy that provides training and mentoring to high potential, health system-level physician leaders to prepare them for assuming top leadership positions within their health systems. The program features some of the Six Sigma principles that made the GE management style synonymous with business efficiency and leadership development. Collins was among the first group of physicians to go through the program.


text:
Can Dental Bonding Fix Chips?
Doctor Answers 17
An ideal example of a tooth that should be fixed with bonding
This is an ideal example of a tooth that should be fixed with bonding. Bonded composite fillings can restore a chip such as this and be virtually invisible as well. Depending on how deep the chip is, you might not even need an injection of local anesthetic to get numb. I would guess that the fee for this would be under $200, at least in the Cleveland, Ohio area where I practice.
Can Dental Bonding Fix Chips?
From what you're describing it sounds like dental bonding would be an ideal solution to your problem. Your tooth can be fixed in one visit and this procedure is by far your most conservative option.
I've attached a video that you might find helpful as well.
Take care
Dr. Champagne
Bonding for "chipped" teeth
The areas od anterior incisors can easily be restored with composite bonding. This is a minimally invasive technique that can be performed in a short period of time and would not require profound anesthesia. The chipped enamel when restored with light-cured composite will look absolutely natural and is a good budjet treatment in such cases like yours.
You might also like...
Bonding to fix chipped teeth
Thanks for including the photo, it really helps.
This is a perfect situation for some dental bonding. It can be done without grinding any tooth down and should be matched to be invisible. Fees vary from place to place, but should be in your budget range.
It will also be healthier for your tooth to have it bonded.
Minor gingival enamel defects can be fixed with bonding
Sometimes when teeth form, little dimples form. They are not pathologic (bad) but can displeasing esthetically or trap food (although easily cleansed). Dental bonding (composite restorations) are ideal for these situations.
Learn more: http://www.drtimmerman.com/cosmetic-procedures/veneers/
Yes very easy
Dental bonding, Composite restorations are great material for fixing chips on teeth. This can be done with or without anesthesia depending on the level of sensitivity. The important question is to figure out why you have a chip to begin with. From the picture there may be an underlying issue of bruxism or excessive force on the tooth that caused the chip. Please consult your dentist to evaluate your bite.
Why does my teeth chip
Short and sweet : Bonding is a great conservative to fix the kind of chip you showed on the photo. Most important is WHY it chipped. most of these fracturesat gum line have an yunderlying issue. Go to a cosmetic dentist who performs full mouth reconstruactions . Those dentist deal with bite issues. They usually treat TMj disorders, clenching, grinding. If any of these words ring a bell, you need to see some one who does more than general and cosmetic dentistry. Find out WHY your teeth chip . Go after the cause, not simply treating the sysmptoms.
Good luck and thank you for sharing your photo.
Resin bonding to fix chips in teeth
With the latest bonding materials and techniques in dentistry available today, resin bonding is a wonderful way to add to your natural tooth structure in a conservative way. From your photo, it seems like there is a divet close to the gumline that is causing the gum to fill in in this area. You may need to consider slight gum contouring to access the underlying tooth which can be done at the same time as the bonding to create a more esthetic result.
Bonding can definitely fix a chip
Dental bonding is a great way to fix a chipped tooth! The tooth-coloured filling materials that we have today are so life-like that a dentist who is skilled in using them can repair that tooth so that it looks like no chip ever existed. The dental filling material can be polished and contoured to prevent food from collecting around your tooth. Cost varies based on the degree of difficulty to repair, contour, colour-match etc.
Dental Bonding
When handled by someone with the experience and knowledge of proper techniques, this can be a simple procedure that will make a very big difference not only in appearance but health of your gum tissue. For most offices I would suspect you would pay between $100-$300 depending on experience and location.
These answers are for educational purposes and should not be relied upon as a substitute for medical advice you may receive from your physician. If you have a medical emergency, please call 911. These answers do not constitute or initiate a patient/doctor relationship.


text:
The longstanding anonymity of Warner Bros.' terrific 1937 crime melodrama Marked Woman has always been a mystery to me. You'll never hear it mentioned as one the signature Bette Davis vehicles, even if the list is confined to the first five years of her stardom (from Of Human Bondage in 1934 to Dark Victory in 1939). Of the famed Warners social problem pictures of the 1930s, I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang and Wild Boys of the Road are better known. If you prefer to classify Marked Woman as a gangster movie, the competition gets even stiffer, with countless Cagney and Bogart pictures topping various lists. (Bogart's in Marked Woman, too, but as a district attorney, one of his few '30s roles on the "right" side of the law.)
Its DVD debut—it can be purchased individually or as part of the seven-disc The Bette Davis Collection, Vol. 2—will certainly raise the picture's profile. But at a remove of seven decades, Marked Woman's chances for total rehabilitation are about as promising as a Prohibition racketeer's.
Marked Woman does appear mundane on its surface. It inhabits a familiar Warners genre, features solid but not flashy performances, and, although the pristine DVD transfer highlights director Lloyd Bacon's compositional gifts, its visual style is mostly functional. ("Cinéma brut," Charles Eckert astutely classified it in a 1973 essay.) Marked Woman achieves a sort of equilibrium not uncommon to the studio system era: it doesn't knock you over with its technique, but it does an awful lot of things extremely well. What does seem innovative about the film—its proto-feminist empathy for oppressed women—seems inseparable from its general professionalism.
To this end, Marked Woman merges a conventional tale of a gangster's rise and fall with a female bonding story. As with most entries in the Warners social problem genre, the plot is baldly based on a topical news story. (The studio brass commonly referred to these films as "headlines" pictures.) The event in question was the 1936 trial of New York underworld kingpin "Lucky" Luciano, charged with running the city's houses of prostitution. The prosecuting attorney, Thomas Dewey, obtained a conviction based largely on the testimony of some of the women who worked in those houses. Thanks to intense media scrutiny, Dewey used the case as a springboard to the governorship of New York and eventually the Republican nomination for president. His star witnesses, whose character Dewey had barely bothered to defend from repeated attacks by Luciano's counsel, returned to oblivion.
Marked Woman
Director: Lloyd Bacon
Cast: Bette Davis, Humphrey Bogart, Eduardo Ciannelli, Isabel Jewell
(Warner Bros., 1937) Not rated
DVD release date: 30 May 2006 (Warner Home Video)
In deference to the Production Code's guidelines for self-censorship, Marked Woman changes the primary locale from a brothel to a nightclub (or, in the film's patois, a "clip joint") and the central characters from call girls to "hostesses." Mary Dwight (Davis) and her four roommates work in this capacity for vice lord Johnny Vanning (Eduardo Ciannelli), the Luciano surrogate. Their job: to get male customers drunk so that they lose their shirts gambling in the "social room."
Despite such mandated equivocations, Marked Woman is a tutorial in how crafty filmmakers like Bacon and screenwriters Robert Rossen and Abem Finkel could subvert the spirit of the Code with regard to sexually explicit subject matter. It's obvious what the women's "true" vocations are; the almost hysterical disparagement by their male counterparts, enemies, and allies serves as a fairly strong hint. Other indications are more brazen, as when a wisecracking door-to-door peddler of women's clothing ("I positively guarantee it was stolen from the best shop in town") ogles Emmy Lou (Isabel Jewell) as she models a new dress and declares, "That's one of the most beautiful pieces of merchandise I've ever seen!"
Brash and headstrong in accordance with the Bette Davis star persona, Mary turns on the mob to avenge the murder of her younger sister Betty (sweet-faced Jane Bryan), a naïve college kid who spurned the lecherous advances of a Vanning associate. Undeterred by a savage knife attack by Vanning's goons that permanently scars her ("marking" her in more ways than one), Mary takes her case to the film's Dewey surrogate, idealistic DA David Graham (Bogart, then an up-and-coming Warners contract player). When the trial concludes in their favor, Graham basks in congratulations and speculation about his political future. The five women, in the picture's most visually arresting sequence, exit the courthouse and walk into an enveloping fog, each momentarily isolated in close-up, yet reintegrated into the group in a final wide shot.
For those uninterested in its real-world source material, its subversions of the Code, or in other bits of production trivia recounted in the DVD's perfunctory making-of featurette, Marked Woman still offers many surface pleasures. In addition to its tight, briskly-paced script and sturdy direction, the film also provides a showcase for the always dependable Warners stock company. Not quite all of the performances are up to standard—Lola Lane as the worldly, "sensible" Gabby is notably stiff in her line readings—but most are first-rate. The hypnotically oily Ciannelli is especially memorable in a very broadly drawn role that balances comic relief and genuine menace.
Aside from Ciannelli, the actor having the most fun here is, not surprisingly, Bette Davis. By this time she was the subject of frequent caricature for the intensity of her acting style. (Indeed, look no further than "She Was an Acrobat's Daughter," an amusing "Merrie Melodies" cartoon included on the Marked Woman DVD, that parodies Davis' performance in The Petrified Forest.) This intensity is effectively measured in her performance as Mary Dwight, emerging strategically especially at those moments when her smug self-assurance ("I know all the angles… I know how to beat this racket") is punctured and her ability to master situations is exposed as illusory.
The most affecting display of Davis' skill is also one of Bogart's finest moments. Having previously been deceived by Mary, Graham coolly dismisses her pleas for an investigation into her sister's disappearance. Mary sheds her cynicism and self-righteousness, Graham his pretense of sincerity: for the first time neither character is "acting." When news of Betty's gruesome fate arrives shortly thereafter, you see, through details like Davis' vacant stare and Bogart's clenched jaw, their muted anger hardening into iron determination.
Aside from the star turns that justified the DVD release, Marked Woman's major source of interest for contemporary audiences lies slightly beneath the surface. This source was perhaps first identified by critic Karyn Kay, who in 1972 called Marked Woman "one of the best films about women (and therefore, for women) ever to come out of Hollywood" ("Sisters of the Night," reprinted in Bill Nichols, ed. Movies and Methods [Berkeley: University of California, 1976]). Certainly, it is open to a feminist reading and appreciation as few crime melodramas have been. (It's a shame this angle is mostly neglected in the DVD's featurette, a predictably inert combination of talking heads and publicity stills.) The insistent focus on the camaraderie among women and absence of a romance between the male and female leads are rare enough within the genre. As well, Marked Woman communicates contempt, not just for the gangsters who treat women as disposable commodities, but also for the process by which Graham makes a name for himself at the expense of their reputations.
How could this have happened? How could a film that stops just short of providing an economic rationale for prostitution get released by a major corporation like Warner Bros.? The sophistication of Marked Woman's critique of gender and power relations is startling, but it's not completely anomalous in the context of the old studio system. The movie's feminist proclivities were, to a significant degree, enabled by the casting of Davis, as the prohibitions on sex and violence imposed by the Production Code dictated the amplification of the story's "social problem" elements. And the genre conventions required the audience's sympathy be directed toward the exploited, regardless of their occupations.
The phrase "genius of the system" is often applied to this era's Hollywood cinema for good reason: with all the constraints imposed upon filmmakers, a lot of very good films were made. In more than a few cases, they were made because of the constraints. This is not to say that Marked Woman was just a happy accident; rather, its example illustrates what could be accomplished as the result of the combination of enabling industrial factors and dependable talents. Like the real life heroines who took down Lucky Luciano, this picture has been forgotten for too long. I'm delighted to see it reemerge from the fog to receive at least a fraction of the recognition it deserves.
Bette Davis - Old Acquaintance
Bruce Sudano "When Cinderella Dies" (video) (premiere) // Music
Gunner & Smith 'Byzantium' (album stream) (premiere) // Music
Andrew Bryant "Robert Downey Jr.'s Scars" (video) (premiere) // Music
Derek Hoke "Destination Unknown" (audio) (premiere) // Music
Bette Smith "I Found Love" (audio) (premiere) // Music
Authenticity Issues and the New Intimacies
// Marginal Utility
"The social-media companies have largely succeeded in persuading users of their platforms' neutrality. What we fail to see is that these new identities are no less contingent and dictated to us then the ones circumscribed by tradition; only now the constraints are imposed by for-profit companies in explicit service of gain.READ the article


text:
Charlize Theron's Extremely Unpleasant Past Being Rehashed
Get your frown on, because this one's tense. The official story is that South African Charlize Theron's mom Gerda shot her father Charles to death with a shotgun when Charlize was fifteen. This occurred on the front lawn. There goes the neighborhood. Charles was allegedly an abusive alcoholic and Gerda was determined to have been acting in self-defense after she claimed Charles threatened to kill both her and Charlize. Charlize doesn't talk about this part of her past except to say that Gerda was a victim of domestic violence. Fair enough. Who'd want to talk about it – that's rough stuff. A new book has come out called "Killer Women: Fatal South African Females", discussing Gerda's case. That is a silly-ass title.
In the book, Charles' relatives dispute the facts of the case and make it look like Gerda might have been a little trigger-happy. Charlize's aunt Elsa says that her "mild mannered" brother wouldn't have gone after his wife and kid. She also says that "all those perceptions that Charles was some kind of a monster-at home were very hurtful to our family and everyone who knew him. He was a dedicated family man. His wife and daughter were the most important things in his life." *uncomfortable silence* Gerda had also shot her brother-in-law at the same time, but he escaped with a hand wound. Ok, what was going on in the Theron household? It sounds like the "Devil's Rejects". No wonder why she was so good in "Monster". That was probably a typical Thursday night where she grew up. Gerda was never charged, by the way, but that author and the sister might want to watch their asses. Especially since they're also squawking that Gerda Theron inherited "millions" after the shooting. Oh oh.
Photos: Getty Images


text:
HI All, I am using PgSQL 7.3 for my Application. My problem how can I scale my database ? I mean how many records I can have in my database. and what will be the data retreival speed when multiple clients access the database. Is there any software or mechanism to find out this ? Any help in this regard is highly appreciated. thanks Jagan =====
Next: From: Michael Fuhr Date: 2005-01-28 05:04:15 Subject: Re: Restore postgres database problem Previous: From: Magnus Hagander Date: 2005-01-27 22:14:12 Subject: Re: 8.0.0-rc1 fails to start on WinXP


text:
Conditional Perfect
Conditional Perfect
También llamado Past Conditional, responde a la pregunta: What would have happened? = ¿Qué habría pasado? o What would have been happening? = ¿Qué habría estado pasando?. Se forma: Sujeto + would + have + verbo en participio (I would have worked). Sujeto + would + have been + verbo en progresivo (I would have been working).
| 1. Present
I work
I am working
| 2. Present perfect
I have worked
I have been working
| 3. Past
I worked
I was working
| 4. Past perfect
I had worked
I had been working
| 5. Future
I will work
I will be working
| 6. Future perfect
I will have worked
I will have been working
| 7. Future (going to)
I am going to work
I am going to be working
| 8. Future perfect (going to)
I am going to have worked
I am going to have been working
| 9. Future in past
I was going to work
I was going to be working
|10. Future perfect in past
I was going to have worked
I was going to have been working
|11. Conditional
I would work
I would be working
|12. Conditional perfect
I would have worked
I would have been working
|13. Modals
I (can, could, ...) work
I (can, could, ...) be working
|14. Modals + have
I (can, could, ...) have worked
I (can, could, ...) have been working
|15. Imperative
Let's work!
Simple Tenses - Continuous Tenses
Conditional PerfectWhat would have happened? - ¿Qué habría pasado?
I would have worked - Habría trabajado
- Harry would have learnt about the catastrophe if he had watched CNN.
Harry se habría enterado de la catástrofe si hubiera mirado CNN.
- If Ben had studied harder, he would have passed the test.
Si Ben hubiera estudiado más, habría pasado el examen.
- If Cindy had seen a spider, she would have been terrified.
Si Cindy hubiera visto una araña, se habría aterrorizado.
- Mrs. Brown would have shouted furiously if her son had dented her car.
La Sra Brown habría gritado con furia si su hijo hubiera abollado su auto.
- If you had not obeyed his orders, something terrible would have happened.
Si no hubieras obedecido sus órdenes, algo terrible hubiera ocurrido.
- Had I known you were in a meeting, I would not have disturbed you.
Si hubiera sabido que te encontrabas en una reunión, no te habría molestado.
- Molly would not have done that if she had been in your place.
Molly no habría hecho eso si hubiera estado en tu lugar.
- Would your brother have gotten a scholarship if he had worked harder?
¿Habría tu hermano obtenido una beca si hubiera trabajado más duro?
- Would his uncle have visited New York if he had traveled to the U.S.A.?
¿Habría su tío visitado Nueva York si hubiera viajado a los EE.UU.?
Conditional Perfect ContinuousWhat would have been happening? - ¿Qué habría estado pasando?
I would have been working - Habría estado trabajando
- The employees would have been working on the project if their boss had been
Los empleados habrían estado trabajado en el proyecto si su jefe hubiera estado presente.
- Dr. Hills would have been writing a book if he had found a publisher.
El Dr. Hills habría estado escribiendo un libro si hubiera encontrado una editorial.
- If my neighbors had sold their house, they would have been moving to a new house.
Si mis vecinos hubieran vendido su casa, habrían estado mudándose a una nueva casa.
- If I had seen Patrick, I would not have been calling him.
Si hubiera visto a Patrick, no habría estado llamándolo.
- Would you have been waiting for me if I had not arrived early?
¿Habrías estado esperándome si no hubiera llegado temprano?


text:
Hello all!
I am heading to Oklahoma the week of August 4th to the August 9th. I am going down to help a friend get ready for OSSAS...I would love to meet up and have coffee or even pull some sugar with some of fellow Sugar Artist?
Mary (Ann)
Tulsa to be exact!
2 replies
I would love to but I doubt you'l be coming through Little Rock. Or, you could come to Little Rock and help ME prepare for OSSAS and we can still have coffee and sugar. You're very sweet to come down and help your friend. Just be prepared for how sticking hot it's going to be.
Yes, I have been told I am going to melt!


text:
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1
October 27th, 2009, 2:52 PM #1
door rattle
I recently purchased a 1998 S-10 extended cab with 61.000 miles on it; I'm pleased with the vehicle except for a really obnoxious rattle in the drivers door. Is this a common problem. Is there by any chance a quick fix for this.
Thank you in advance for your help
Thank you in advance for your help


text:
LAUSANNE, Jan 11, 2013 (AFP) - A Swiss laboratory on Friday denied that it helped Lance Armstrong cheat after claims from the US Anti-Doping Agency that it gave the shamed cyclist information about how to beat drug tests. "Did I give the keys to get around EPO (erythropoietin) tests? The answer is clear: no," Martial Saugy, head of the anti-doping laboratory in the Swiss city of … [Read more...]
Swiss Lab Refutes USADA Armstrong Claim
January 11, 2013 By


text:
To many shooters, hitting something from the 1,000 yard line is like putting a man on the moon. It can be done, but it takes a smart person, specialized gear, and a lot of money. Of the two happiest moments of my shooting career, one took place on the 1,000 yard line at USMC Base Quantico with the ArmaLite AR-50 (the other was a few weeks ago, firing this thing). And the happiness didn't come from the fiddy cal, the happiness came from the distance. With .50 BMG being just a bit expensive I decided to set out on a mission to see if $500 would buy enough gun to get rounds the full 1,000 yards and actually hit something at that distance, putting long range joy within reach of the average American shooter.
When reaching for distance, the smaller calibers are typically discarded. That's not to say this shot couldn't be made by a 5.56x45mm NATO gun (the guys I shoot with do it regularly, with IRON SIGHTS even!), but that takes a lot more skill than the average shooter has on tap and the 5.56x45mm NATO trajectory tends to drop pretty steeply at long distances. For our gun we want a flatter trajectory, which means a larger bullet with more momentum.
The round of choice for cheap bastards at distance is 7.62x51mm NATO (or .308 Winchester for you civvies). There are a variety of offerings, from 110 grain hollow point bullets to 180 grain full metal jacket bullets, but the "standard" weight round seems to be about 150 grains. 150 grain 7.62x51mm NATO ammo is cheap and plentiful, two adjectives which cannot describe the more typical 1,000 yard rounds (like .338 LaPua or .50 BMG). Looking back over the consistency testing we did a few weeks back and using that data, that puts the drop at 1,000 yards (with a 50 yard zero) at just about 34 MoA (34 inches @ 100 yards). Large, but manageable.
Luckily I already purchased a "value priced" rifle in .308 Winchester / 7.62x51mm NATO: the Mossberg 100 ATR. Designed and produced in the good ol' U.S.A. (despite what the Sweedish flag draped box may have you think), this rifle is the poor man's answer to the Remington 700 and in some ways may even be better than the latest run. It's a no-frills bolt action that comes with pre-installed Weaver rails for a scope, all for far less than the magic $500 number.
Now that we have our rifle and some money to burn, it's time to turn to the glass.
Whenever I need a cheap optic, Primary Arms is my first stop. While their stuff isn't the best in the world it's definitely worth every penny. I just did a review of this model so I'm not going to completely rehash it here, suffice it to say that it's a scope that works. Tack on a couple of scope rings and onto the rifle it slips.
At this point, we have a functioning rifle with a pretty good optic on it. Add in a couple of shooting bags or sand bags to rest it on and you could probably make it to 1,000 yards without a problem. But I had some money left over (as the rifle + scope was still well under $500) and so I decided to splurge on a nice cheap bipod.
Why a bipod? Mostly because it looks cool, but also because it helps stabilize the rifle. Three solid points of contact with the ground makes a stable shooting position (bipod legs and butt support), meaning the crosshairs won't dance all around the target when you start aiming at it. The same effect can be achieved with a sandbag or standalone shooting rest, but a bipod just means that there's one less thing to forget on the way to the range.
What we end up with is something that looks damn close to a respectable long range rifle. Let me put on my best Johnny Dollar impression and tally up the receipts (not including tax, shipping or transfers)…
- Mossberg 100 ATR in .308 Win – $310
- Primary Arms 3-9×40 Scope and Rings – $105
- Winchester 6″-9″ Bipod – $40
A complete rifle with money to spare, which is something like a small miracle in an age where being under budget isn't cool anymore. But how does it shoot? I trucked it out to the NRA Range and used some of the Birchwood Casey Shoot-N-C targets that they generously provided to us writers to find out.
Ignoring the flier (avoiding flinching is damn near impossible with a Mosin Nagant M44 in the next stall), that's 5 rounds in a 1 inch circle at 50 yards. 1 inch at 50 is 2 inches at 100, or 2 MoA. That translates into a roughly 20 inch cone of uncertainty at 1,000 yards. Which, in the scheme of things, isn't that bad.
I've got a rifle that shoots pretty well, a range at my disposal, and about $50. Let's see if we can squeeze just a touch more accuracy out of this baby, and then the final test: a 1,000 yard shot by an average shooter (not me). Stay tuned…
84 Responses to TTAG Project: 1,000 Yard Rifle for $500
Great idea, I've always liked the concept of "doing more with less."
One question: Why .308? .30-06 is more common and the longer case allows for a bit more velocity. I can understand why the military uses that caliber (A/K/A 7.62 NATO) as the M14/M21, M60/M240 machine guns are chambered for it but if you're starting from scratch, it seems to me that .30-06 would be a better round. I've also had difficulty finding rifles chambered in .308, again .30-06 being by far more common (and thus less pricey.)
Well the 30-06 is slowly becoming outdated . The military used 30-06 before the 308 was made. 308 is overall more superior for things like barrel life, size, reliability. Although the 3006 has more velocity it's barely noticeable, (308 drops 25 inches at 1000yards and the 3006 drops 20) so if you want to spend extra money for that extra 5 inches at 1000 yards then do so but remeber the barrel won't last as long, more recoil, takes up more space, and slowly becoming obsolete due to the 308. Plus there aren't any new modern 30-06 chambered rifles coming out (at least not nearly as much as 308)
little bit more than 25 inches of drop at 1000yrds unless your zero is out past 900
A .308 actually drops more then 25 inches at 1000 yds.
Even with a maxed out hot round it will still drop more then 25 inches.
Plus to say the barrels wear out faster in a 30-06 is pretty uneducated.
It depends on the materials used to make the barrel not the caliber it is.
I guarantee my 1977 Savage 110 30-06 will out last any .308 made.
I've put literally thousands of rounds through it over the years and there is not a single sign of wear in the barrel.
I clean the barrel up and you would think the gun has never been shot.
My friend had a .308 for about 4 years and the rifling starting wearing out after only 4 years. He had to buy another barrel for his .308.
It's not the caliber it's the manufacture and what the make them out of.
If you want a gun that will last you a life time go with an older solid wooden stock.
New guns now days are junk.
My 77′ Savage will out shoot and last any .308 made.
I got a wooden peace of oak
Drilled a hole true it for a barrel. Test fired it at 2 miles with a 458 round. I packed 3000grans of sxon in it and was using a 500 grain boat tail cast titanium . Got 1.
5 inch groups at 2 miles . Shot a 55 gallon
Drum of water . Cut the drum in half.
Kevin, I don't get the connection between a wood stock and longevity? Seems like a stock made out of a synthetic material would be less upkeep and last longer. Seems like the accuracy would be a moot point for wood vs synthetic. I like the looks of the wood stocks but other than that I don't see the advantage. What am I missing here?
When you are comparing how fast a round will wear out a barrel, you hold all else equal, ie you use the exact same type of barrel. A 30-06 will wear out a barrel faster than a 308 with all else equal and if all else is not equal then the test means absolutely nothing,
My remmington model 12 made in 1928 can pick off dvds at 100 yards no problem and still has a good looking rifleing. Outshoots newer 22s all day.
Just plain wrong information about barrel wear. It has to do with pressure and overbore. A .308 will go in excess of 8000 rounds. A .243 (same case as .308) will only get 1500-2000 because of overbore/pressure. 3006 suffers from slight overbore and will wear faster.
I consider the .308 more accurate due to its shorter action, but up here in AK we have to drive big slugs into animals that weigh as much as small cars. The sub zero temps and the resultant more dense air can reduce small case based cartridges ranges as much as 400 yards, so to each his own. Good job on the low buck weapon.
Thanks Randy, I just saw your comment, I was just about to say, "what kind of 30-06 are you shooting that only drops 20″@ 1000 yrds???" I shoot religiously and my 30-06 drops 19 MOA (or 159.6 inches @ 800yards) shooting 180gr Sierra Match Kings.
The 30-06 has a greater case neck tension and therefore requires a greater release force. A longer bullet neck means more metal holding the bullet in the case. Overall though the 308 also has a higher ballistic coefficient compared to a similar 30-06 round. In the end, the little bit of extra powder you get in the 30-06 doesn't outweigh the greater neck tension found in the 30-06 cartridge. They're both good, accurate calibers as long as they're in good hands. But the 308 is better.
They both use the same bullets. The ballistic coefficient has nothing to do with what case a bullet is in, just the projectile itself. I dont know how you could possibly say a 30-06 has a higher bc than a 308, it doesnt even make sense.
I agree, this guy has a miss conception about b. C. And sectional density. Not trying to be condisending. Just trying to help.
The m240 is chambered for 556
Not sure where you got that info but it's not 5.56 it's 7.62.
when i was given the weapon in Ft.Benning GA as the first testing platoon being actual infantry airborne RDF 11B MOS's to gauge whether the wepon needed anymore drawing board modifications, It was a 5.56 nato upgraded m16 a2 round. though variants later upped the caliber of the ammo. To my recollection the marines were the first to use the 7.62 variant. Its ejectable barrel replacement option made me mount 4x 200 rd ammo boxes to my ruck frame linked the left two together then the right two, then all ya had to do was pop the bottom ammo box lid off and baby "suppressive fire" was a smaller, faster hit you in the foot come out yer neck tumble-thon…bit of trivia though after going thru 3 barrels in Grafenwoer and hoenfels training assault got me a company grade article 15 for using a weapon in a way its not supposed to be used-true story.
The M240, officially Machine Gun, 7.62mm, M240, is the US military designation for the FN MAG (Mitrailleuse d'Appui Général, meaning General Purpose Machine Gun), a family of belt-fed, gas-operated medium machine guns firing the 7.62×51mm NATO cartridge.
Isn't 7.62x54R cheaper? I mean, if you're really going for a budget rifle… 🙂
Fair enough 🙂 Why the ban? I'm guessing they don't like steel core, but perhaps it's just national pride? Nah…
Or they don't like sorting out the brass?
I think most of the ComBloc stuff is steel case – you can "sort" it from the brass with a magnet.
I go at a 30-6 smith and weson icon.
With a. 3-9 power scope. I can place a group 1.5 in. At 100 yards. 136 gran boat tails.
Match grade ammo or handloads will tighten up those groups, especially at 1,000 yards. Find what it likes to eat.
Also, why not go with 7.62x54R? The Mosin-Nagant's iron sights go all the way to 2,000 meters! That's way beyond 1,000 yards! Hell, you'd even save $400 and it comes with a cool oil bottle and ammo pouches. Now that's below budget!
For Martin Albright. Lots of folks argue that the .308 is inherently more consistent than the .30-06, and thus more accurate.
The .308 has a shorter case, and thus a shorter powder column than the 06. The shorter case helps powder burn to be more consistent than in a longer case. Fewer spikes or lags means not many variations in velocity shot to shot.
Check out cartridges like 6mm Benchrest with its stubby fat casing.
The .308 is inherently more consistent and isn't that much slower than the 06.
And no snark or sarcasm intended, but where do you live that .30-06 rifles and ammo are more common and cheaper than .308?
Here, the local Academy Sports has low-end .308 for aroun $9 per 20. They have just as many loads in .308 as 30-06, if not more. At my local gun store there are probably 11 or 12 .308 rifles in various actions compared to one .30-06 semi and four or five .30-06 bolts guns.
Again, I'm not intending any negative tone. Just curious where .30-06 is still more plentiful and cheaper than .308.
Again, I'm not intending any negative tone. Just curious where .30-06 is still more plentiful and cheaper than .308.
Colorado. Dad and brother both have .308 rifles and I went searching for one for ammo compatibility. What I discovered was that for the same type of rifle, there were at least 10 .30-06s for each .308 I could find. In fact, .308 is really an "oddball" caliber out here, other than Dad and brother I don't know anybody who hunts with it.
From what I've seen both here in Colorado and in Wyoming, .30-06 ammo is probably one of the most common if not the most common centerfire rifle caliber on the shelves (with .30-30 and .270 being 2nd and 3rd.) Any bulk ammo store will have multiple loads of .30-06, everything from 140gr up to 180 or bigger, while .308 choices are limited to one or two, typically 150gr loads.
As a handloader, I load both .308 and .30-06 and I sometimes have problems with my .308 cases being too small to hold a full charge of H4895. In my .30-06 loads I typically use a 60gr charge to push a 125gr Nosler ballistic tip which is about as flat-shooting a round as you can get (I call it my "antelope load" because I like to hunt speed goats on the Wyoming plains.)
I wish I lived where 06 was cheaper and more plentiful than .308. I don't know about burn or inconsistency – to me, the 06 is consistent and very accurate at long range.
German Salazar's excellent series of articles on .308 for 1000 yard palma matches begins here:
At a minimum, you may want to make sure your choice of factory loads will keep you supersonic the whole way. Also that the twist rate of your barrel and the weight of the bullets are a good match. If your barrel is 1/10, you might be happiest with the heaviest factory bullets you can find.
Swiss K31. Done.
Agreed. The K31 is very accurate, the problem is mounting a good scope to take advantage of that accuracy, without rails.
The 7.5 Swiss is an inherently accurate long-range round, and the Swiss Army issue GP11 is match-grade.
The USMC range's caliber restrictions are baffling, to say the least. Bulk brass processors (like the contractors that clean up military firing ranges) have no problem sorting Soviet calibers from NATO, or stell cases from brass.
I dig the Mosin, but the ammo choice is limited to cheap so-so surplus and pricier commercial ammo. True match-grade 7.62x54r ammo doesn't really exist outside of Russia.
I don't know what USMC you're familiar with, but where I'm from it's E-3's and below that sort the brass, link, etc
"The Mosin-Nagant's iron sights go all the way to 2,000 meters!"
That rifle (which I love) was developed for mass fire, where accuracy past "battle distance" of 300 meters was not required. The battle plan was to launch as much lead as possible in the general direction of the enemy, not to sight and squeeze. Unless the 91/30 in question is a bona fide sniper model with a rechromed barrell, long distance shots will be measured in minutes of barn door. But damn, they are so much fun to shoot!
Simo Häyhä Finnish sniper killed over 500 Russian with Mosin Nagant M28/30 rifle and iron sights. Remember its 90% shooter 10% weapon.
But he certainly had a Finnish Mossin Nagant that were of much better quality than the Russians'. And he certainly had one of the best of them.
how would the mossberg atr compare to the savage arms axis
I love the Mosin Nagant reference lol.
Very nice, Foghorn. Now I want to see my dream carbine. A simple M1 carbine design, Hi Viz sights, parkerized, with a blackened alloy heat shield and steel butt, 20 shot magazines and in .357 magnum or .44 magnum. The one tactical attachment would be a small Sure Fire flashlight under the barrel. It would be the Ruger .44 carbine-the way it should have been made. I think for all the trouble it should be .44. Now who do we get to make it?
Somewhere in my archives I have a flyer I got from a company that was doing M1 Carbine conversions back around 1992-94 or so. IIRC they would rechamber your M1 to .45 Win Mag or .357 Win Mag (both being rimless cartridges.) I think the cost for the conversion was something around $400 back then, plus of course you had to supply your own M1 Carbine.
.357 Magnum, being a rimmed revolver cartridge, would require an extremely curved magazine and would not function well in a semi auto. There were several .357 semi auto pistols made, including at least one version of the Desert Eagle, and I think they all struggled to feed the rimmed cartridge.
I believe Ruger got around the rimmed-cartridge-in-a-semi-auto issue on their .44 carbine by having it feed from a tubular magazine like you'd find on a lever-action Winchester or Marlin.
Yes, that was the only thing with the Ruger-that 4 shot capacity. But, Coonan found a way to mag feed successfully, I think.
Couldn't find a picture of a Coonan magazine of feed lips yet, not giving up! Because we're gonna find a way to make it work and then go for the Safari grade of the Cujo Carbine, the .45-70 model! Work with me here! I'm having a Busey moment! Now the .45-70 model, I'd be willing to go tube fed with it, but we need at least 6-8 rounds. More power!
Or, we go with 10 mm and .458 SOCOM! .458 SOCOM, imagine-now my nipples are hard…
using soft point or federal hollow points in the 30 carb makes it as effective as the 357. Evans ans marshal data show this cartridge as a surprisingly good stopper . 110 gr bullet is great at 1990 fps.
I agree, I just love the excitement of making it more and more powerful. Imagine .458 SOCOM, wow!
Not to get really picky, but 7.62mm NATO and .308 Winchester are not the same cartridge. Using a .308 in a 7.62mm weapon could potentially be dangerous. 7.62mm NATO milsurp ammo is supposed to be loaded up to a pressure of 50,000 psi. .308 Winchester rounds are loaded up to 62,000psi. Using a .308 in a weakened milsurp chamber designed for 7.62mm NATO could lead to issues with the weapon. I have run both through my Century CETME and had no problems with either type, but that animal will eat anything that it is fed.
I believe that there may also be minor dimensional differences between the size of the two cartridges.
The 7.62 NATO has a thicker casing for multiple reloads and a hardened primer to prevent slam-fire from a automatic loading mechanism. The semi-auto rifles for the civilian market, such as the Springfield M1A have taken this into consideration and have made them specifically for .308 Win, while stating they should use military surplus ammo because of the primer issue. Check in a Springfield manual to see if I am correct, but I believe I am.
The Coonan magazine doesn't seem that complex. It has a lot of lift at the nose end and looks like it tilts the cartridge to one side. Sooo, could it work? After peusing the .458 SOCOM stat's though, it looks awesome. The question would be could an M1 carbine receiver handle such pressure? It COULD be the Alaskan model of an M1. My fevered mind wonders…
Ah, Colorado.
I reckon I understand now. I lived in northern Wyoming for two years, and it was really hard to find .30 Carbine ammo or 7.62X39 in the local gun stores up there.
They had every kind of 300-whatever-magnum-ultra-whomper-stomper you could name, however.
For your consideration:
No doubt factory 150 grain bullets will travel way beyond 1000 yards, but the question
is are they still stable 1000 yards from the muzzle? If they go subsonic short of the target they lose stability and accuracy is in the dumpster. That's why Sierra developed the175 Match King, but a .308W has to be loaded near max to keep it supersonic out to a thousand yards.
Do you have enough "UP" in your scope to get yourself on target? I've seen a lot of
first timers try to go the distance with hunting scopes only to find out too late they were forty clicks short of what it took to get there. If you can't go up at least
120 quarter minute clicks from a 300 yard zero, you need a better scope, some
Burris rings and inserts, or long range blocks. Hope this doesn't bust your budget.
Your rifle's poorly "set up." Your scope is mounted way too high for a steady cheek weld on the stock. You can't get into a steady firing position with your head waving
around in the air. Aiming with your chin on the stock comb is not a viable alternative
to a well fitting rifle.
Lastly, your sporter weight barrel is going to get hotter than Hell after the first five shots if you shoot more than one shot a minute. Light weight barrels warp all over the place when they heat up, so don't expect the bullets to go where you aimed them
after shot number five. You're going to need a heat shield on the barrel too or the target's going to look like a gelatinous blob of quivering protoplasm. Make one out of an old metal venetian blind and some velcro. It'll cost you about a dime.
So, if you get some target ammo, get a scope that'll go the distance, get your rifle
set up to conform to your body and shoot at a slooow… rate, I have absolutely no doubt
whatsoever that you'll be able to shoot 160 or better (probably much better) at a thousand yards with twenty shots – IF YOU CAN PLAY THE ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS.
Good luck and let me know how you make out.
Very interested in the outcome, can't wait for the rest of the story.
Where's the rest of the story? It's been 7 months. Seems kind of bush league to me.
im just wondering if you have taken this out to 1000, i want a low cost 1000 yard rifle (just for fun), like this one but i think id rather get it in 06 (simply due to Availability). would you recomend this set up for this?
I have a atr 100 in 308 and have put about $600 into it all together. It came with a scope for about $400 and then I added a good muzzle break about $150. Even with the cheap scope I get my 143 g hornady ballistic tips with about 59.7 g of h337 to 1000 yards. A bit over loaded but the atr 100 shoots it like a champ. Very pleased with this cheep and accurate gun
I have a atr 100 in 308 and have gotten consistent accuracy at 1000 yards with my hand loads.
I have a stevens 200 308 w/SWAFA SS. I had to replace that horrid plastic stock with a wooden Savage stock $467.00
My old Savage 110 in 270win shoots rings around the Stevens but I have $1500 in that ($900 in glass and rings vs $140 in the SS).
I am really looking forward to your findings.
I am a relatively new center fire shooter myself, having shot .22 most of my life. I have just taken up hunting within the past 6 years.(at the age of 30) I started with a used bow then upgraded to a new one.
However in 2008 I set out on a similar quest, a decent hunting rifle for under $500. I too selected a Mossberg ATR100, but in .30-06 ($235) then mounted a Nikon Prostaff 3-9×50 ($199). And after 6 months and over 500 rounds of shooting shrinking groups to 3 MOA at 100-200yds(and about 2 out of 5 shots on an 18″ steel target at 300yds) I found I had a lot to learn. I started asking and reading and found the two main things that could be made better were the shooter and the rifle. Obviously I practiced, so this is about the rifle.
First up was a trigger job that cost about $5 for the 1000 grit sandpaper and about 5 hours of sanding, testing, sanding, testing… resulting in a crisp clean SAFE trigger. ( I still however do not loan out my project rifle) That improved the group some. (on certain days) So another year and 800rnds a slight improvement, mostly in my fundamentals I think.
Next with all of this brass lying around, I took the $500 plunge and got into reloading. (not included in the price of the rifle as I have several different rifles now) I did more reading than trying of different bullet manufacturers, and after several successful hunts (5 deer, 8 feral hogs, and one coyote over 3 years) have settled on Sierra bullets.
Finally after 3 years of wondering I got fed up at the range one day (1.75″ group @ 250 yds, then 2 days later couldn't get within 2.5 MOA) I went straight to the local boat shop and asked for some Marine Tex. "We won't have any until tomorrow.", said the shop mechanic. I found an industrial size box of JB Weld at a local auto parts store. So $14 for bedding compound, the brown kiwi polish that I don't use out of my shine kit, some long 1/4-28 screws I had lying around and several hours after work over the next week. Wah-lah, one almost professional bedded synthetic stock.
And to date I have since upgraded my scope to a Leaper's UTG 4-16×56 SWAT MILDOT. ($179 transferred Nikon to another rifle so not added to cost) Last trip to the range to play with scope I made a 6 spot target on a piece of 20×30 foam board and moved target down the range shooting 3 shot groups at 150,200,250,300,350 yards then pulling it all the way back up and returning to my 100yd zero. Repeatable 1.4 MOA with some wind drift, at 350yds was hitting 8″ to the right, guessed an 8MPH wind DOPEd the scope and back to center. I was impressed.
Now I have spent well over $500 shooting these past 4 years. However as the rifle sits, here's the tally (no taxes) if you are a little adventurous.
Scope (rings included)- $179
JB Weld- $14
Time tinkering and learning my rifle to be comfortable to shoot out to 400 yards- priceless. (just had to throw that in)
My original goal was 500yds but I'm hoping to do a little landscaping out in one of the fields and set up an 800yd shooting lane (that's about all the farther I can go without knocking down trees on this private property)
Anyway looking forward to your results. Maybe I'll try a 1000 yd poke someday, just at paper though. I have no interest at the moment in trying to harvest an animal at that range.
Thanks. Very informative.
Around here (S. Carolina-Georgia area), .30-06 is extremely common, while .308 is harder to find. For example, at the local Wal-Mart (before the buying craze started) there were about 12 boxes of .30-06 soft-point hunting ammo and only one box of the same type in .308. In the local gun shop it was about the same. From what Ive seen, .30-06 and .308 are the same price. (Of course when you're talking about surplus FMJ, .308 is certainly more prevalent.)
Wait a second! First you claim it was a Mosin that threw off your "flier" on your target, then you claim that Mosins aren't allowed at the range you were shooting on. :-/
Anyway, these days about the ONLY ammo you can get is 7.62x54R. Your range must be damn quiet or full of Russkies! 😛
I hear the Fins had a limited number of Mosins in 308.
I picked up a Remington 770 (.300 win mag) to attempt almost the exact same thing. I was surprised, it obviously doesn't hold a candle to my 700 (also .300 win mag) but I'm only a little over $400 into it, including scope, and I can hit targets out past 600 yards all day long.
The action is a little rough on the 770, like everyone says, but otherwise, I'm very pleased, I'm going to go against the grain and say it's not the junk rifle the internet has claimed.
However, I don't see making out past 750, I think I have squeezed all the performance out of the 770 I'm going to get. Keep in mind, I tossed a cheapo Tasco 2.5-10x 42mm varmint scope on the thing. A better scope would get me out a bit further, but at the end of the day, I'm thinking that I've bumped up against what the rifle is capable of, even with a better than average shooter.
i have this gun i love it ive put in about $544 but did something other stuff to it but i freakin love this thing. ive gotten about 500 yrds at a grouping of an inch free hand (no bi pod ) it handles great best gun ive bought in a long time
i own both .308 an 30-06 mossberg atr 150gr. put any 150gr.bullet in 30-06 either hits hole of 1st bullet fired or eigth inch higher. mossberg atr great in my book .308 is stevens 200 yes it shoots great but not like mossberg , getting ready to buy .308 in mossberg atr ill let you know if it hits same. but if you are looking for long distance an less drop get 7mm rem. mag. in savage its got it all. put it against any gun in from 300 win. mag. down. with 150gr. bullet. but thinking hard on 165gr. hope tis helps. 7mm the gun look at drop an compare. but the main thing is the man behind the gun that counts.
[…] across this article one day… TTAG Project: 1,000 Yard Rifle for $500 | The Truth About Guns Its not gonna shoot a ragged hole but it rings the steel. Personally I'm a bigger fan of expanding […]
I think you all have this completely wrong. You cannot measure the long range performance of a rifle by shooting it at 50 yrds because ANY rifle is capable of putting 5 rounds through the SAME hole at 50yrds, bench clamp one and see. If it doesn't there is something very wrong with it, like a burr on the barrel for example. When I was a kid my dad let me have his old .22 rifle it had a martini breech I used to lay out there in the yard target shooting with that rifles for hours I everntually got so good with it, I could take out quarters at the end of our yard every time (I measured that at 125 yards) my dad didn't believe I could until I proved it to him, by shooting candy mints off the tree stumps just short of the end of the yard, (about 115yds) The long range (1000yd) performance of a rifle cannot possibly be measured by shooting a 50yrd target because the factors that govern long range accuracy are mostly in the ballistics of the round used. The stability of a round at 1000yds is affected by its spin rate, its velocity at long ranges, and the quality of manufacture of the round. There is only one way to test your rifle's accuracy at 1000yrds, that is to bench clamp it on the 1000 yeard range.
I spent a touch more on my Savage 11VT – .308 (heavy 24′ barrel) it came with a cheap scope as a combo for $500 (the 11VT is a Dick's exclusive so you wont find info on the Savage web site) I swapped out the scope with an SWFA SS 10x for $299 and LOVE it
Also I heard that .308 and the 7.62 NATO are slightly different, the .308 has more charge or something like that, also I heard that you can fire the 7.62 a .308 barrel but shouldn't fire the .308 through the 7.62 NATO….. Not sure if this is true but its what I heard…
if anyone knows if this is true or not please comment
You are correct, they are not the same. See http://www.thegunzone.com/30cal.html
1) The "superiority" of the .308 round is usually based on factory loadings. Within the bounds of safety, the 168 gr. Match King bullet can be goosed to the 3000+ f/s range in the 30-06, thereby reducing even further the drop @ 500 or 1000 yds. With the lesser .308 brass capacity you start to run into issues of having to use faster/higher peak pressure powders to get the same +P level velocities above standard factory ammo. IF the NATO round had never become the 7.62 X 51, the 30-06 would have continued to be the unquestioned choice for snipers until the 'ultra' rounds like the .338…came along. Military armorers once routinely loaded them to 3000+ f/s.
2) If you had chosen the Savage rifle w/ accu-trigger…You wouldn't have accepted 1″ groups @ 50 yds. because any off the shelf Savage is a 1 MOA rifle (or less) – especially with the accu-trigger. I just bought a Savage Axis II (for my son) w/ accu-trigger and decent 3×9 scope (a package) for $375 AND there's a $50 factory rebate on that as well. This rifle with a bi-pod, 3000 f/s handloads with the 168 gr. match king bullets is certainly capable of zinging a one-foot bulls eye @ 1000 yds. with regularity.
You you think one could do the same starting with a Wal-Mart 700 ADL in 30-06?
How do I go about get a long range rifle built to shoot coyotes here in san antonio texas
There are a lot of bullshitters, as always on the net,
people who has only hypothesis and theories,
and fantasies about getting a serious 1000-yard rifle
-to work properly- with few hundred bucks.
Just, forget it.
[…] TTAG T&E Editor Nick Leghorn had an intriguing challenge a few years back: to come up with a complete rifle for under $500 that would allow an average shooter to reliably … Read […]
34 MOA is 340 inches at 1000 yard
Lmao, just get a 300 Win Mag with decent glass and a little practice!! Pretty damn simple if you ask me!!!
[…] TTAG Project: 1,000 Yard Rifle for $500 – The Truth About Guns – To many shooters, hitting something from the 1,000 yard line is like putting a man on the moon. It can be done, but it takes a smart person, specialized gear, […]


text:
Related Products:
Perfect MS-70 First Strike from the San Francisco Mint!
Special "Red Label" featuring "Struck At The San Francisco Mint". This coin appeals to collectors and investors alike for its beauty and purity. Containing 1 troy ounce of .999-fine Silver, the American Silver Eagle coin is one of the most highly recognized Silver bullion coins in the world. Buy Silver Eagle coins to add to your Silver coin collection.
Protect your investment! Click here for a beautiful wooden presentation box, the ideal accessory to display any graded coin! Click here to shop for even more accessories!
Not yet rated. Be the first to Write a Review
We provide all of our customers with a refund, return and / or exchange on everything we sell including all bullion and certified coins. If for any reason, you have a problem, please feel free to call us. We will always do our best to accommodate you.


text:
- 7 total posts
- 7 questions
Questions from Blaahbe
I got two nose jobs down within 3months. Is There Something Wrong with my Nose? (photo)
I went on vacation three months ago and my aunt introduced to me to a doctor whom does rhinoplasty. I got two nose jobs down with in 3months. The first time, my nose wasn't... READ MORE
Could Swelling of the Nose Change the Shape?
I recently got a nose job and i feel like my nose is more swollen on one side of my nose and one of my nostrils look bigger as well ( the same side that is swollen more). could... READ MORE
One Month of Rhinoplasty My Nasals Seem Slightly Different?
When i was having the surgery done my doctor told me my left nasal is closed (i don't remember what the name for it is) but there was something blocking my left nasal, so it... READ MORE
Could Vitamins Build Cartilage After Surgery?
After a nose job, if to much cartilage is taken out in the beginning and you are not aware of it, could you build it back up by eating healthy? I read somewhere that it is... READ MORE
Uneven Swelling After Rhinoplasty?
When I first took off my cast, my nose was straight and my nostrils were even. after a week my nostrils seemed uneven (one nostril circular the other flared), and still seems... READ MORE
Seven Months After a Rhinoplasty Bleeding And Dry Skin?
It's been seven months since i had rihnoplasty done, I got a lot of work done to my nose. I experience dry skin and bleeding once in a while, it's not all the time, maybe about... READ MORE