|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,197
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 5,197 |
I've never heard anyone say, "That rifle is way too accurate."
Luck....is the residue of design... ![[Linked Image]](http://i423.photobucket.com/albums/pp311/patrickgsinclair/96zvyt.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,479
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,479 |
When I started this thread, I have been happily killing critters for 45 years. So what. I like to explore new things to keep from getting bored with my past times and obsessions. I dug out the 2016 article and remembered that I had already read it, however when I did read it I did not give it a lot of thought.
I now belong to a range that goes to 1000 yards and became more interested in shooting and a little less interested in hunting (I still hunt more than more folks that say they hunt). With a little experimenting I realized what I was missing out on with 3 shot groups. Making windage adjustments with the center of a 5 or 10 shot group makes so much more sense now as does vertical adjustments.
I don't remember reading anywhere that says 3 shot groups won't kill stuff. This thread is not about that.
Faith and love of others knows no mileage nor bounds. That's simply the way it is.
dogzapper
After the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box.
Italian Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,385 Likes: 5
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,385 Likes: 5 |
Darn, I have wasted all of these years and components doing it wrong.
When developing loads I load three and shoot them, if the group looks promising then I load three more (in the meantime the rifle is cooling a bit), I then shoot those three into the same group. If it still looks promising I load three more and shoot them for a total of nine shots.
If the nine shot group meets my criteria (3/4 inch or less for my varmint shooting which consists mostly of ground squirrels) I then call it a good load and go kill stuff instead of burning out a barrel looking for another quarter inch less grouping ability.
Wait, after reading 11 pages of this thread I am not sure if I am doing it right or wrong - but I do know that I am doing what works for me.
drover
223 Rem, my favorite cartridge - you can't argue with truckloads of dead PD's and gophers.
24hourcampfire.com - The site where there is a problem for every solution.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,697
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,697 |
The reason I shoot 10-shot groups with rodent rifles is to make sure the barrel heats up enough to discover whether it "walks." Extensive testing has confirmed that 9 shots doesn't get 'em hot enough. :-) Understood. I think the key point in that paragraph is: "If our goal is to characterize a range statistic using the least number of shots..." which is not necessarily the goal (or the only goal) of those shooting 10+ shot groups. I just found that finding rather interesting. And I've never been in the habit of loading nine round batches.  I think it's a common trait for people to gravitate towards nice round numbers. Loading groups of nine seems a bit...off. However, I'm not one to talk. If I decide to load batches larger than 5 shots I use a very highly scientific method of "If I load x number of bullets per test group, how many bullets will be left over from this batch assuming one of these test groups finds 'the load'"? Highly scientific.  So yes, I have loaded 7-8 shot batches for testing loads in my 223 Remington... :shrugs:
“There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a gentle man.”
― Patrick Rothfuss, The Wise Man's Fear
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 11,118 Likes: 3
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 11,118 Likes: 3 |
OK, wading in one last time....
Your firearm exists to please you. If it's already putting bullets where you want them well enough, then leave well enough alone. The objective of any test is to get you to where you want to be, and usually to do that with minimum expense and effort. There is no particularly right or wrong way to do it, but there are approaches that are easier and more reliable than others. If you're experimenting, the following may save you some time.
Different shooters have different objectives. Elk are only slightly smaller than a house. Anything that will reliably group under 1 1/2" is probably just fine out to 300+ yards. Elk at 750 yards are a different story, and prairie dogs are a different story yet.
If heat is your issue, then do as MD suggested.
If you are just trying to determine the long term average group size under ideal conditions, then the average group size of three to five five-shot groups will get you a very decent estimate. A single three or five-shot group will not. If you have masochistic tendencies, then shoot 15-25 shots and take the standard deviation of the distance of each shot from the center of the group. The SD approach will get you roughly a 10% better answer than five-shot group size. That's a small gain for a lot of work, but it's a high quality answer.
10 shot groups are not usually the winning strategy, unless you're checking heat. The statistical strength of group size per shot falls off as the number of shots increases. The statistical strength of a 10 shot group is only about 1/3 better than that of a five shot group, for twice the effort. But since shooting is fun, maybe that doesn't matter.
Precision generally improves with the square root of N. Going from 9 shots to 10 sort of gets you from a quality of estimate that corresponds to an improvement like 3 vs. square root of 10 = 3.16. You have to quadruple the number of samples to get twice the precision, so you can quickly get into very large samples if you require very precise estimates.
Last edited by denton; 11/12/18.
Be not weary in well doing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,408 Likes: 2
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,408 Likes: 2 |
10 shot groups are clearly the most informative, testing rifle, ammo and shooter. What I don't understand is how a tight group not centered on the bull is useful if not corrected to POA?
mike r
Don't wish it were easier
Wish you were better
Stab them in the taint, you can't put a tourniquet on that.
Craig Douglas ECQC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,893 Likes: 12
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,893 Likes: 12 |
If at the moment all I'm testing is the load does it matter where it lands?
For example, if I'm using my 20x scope equipped with a fine reticle to aim at a very small dot I don't want 30 cal holes in the group chewing up my aim point.
Last edited by mathman; 11/12/18.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,226 Likes: 27
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,226 Likes: 27 |
mathman,
I agree with you on loading 10 rounds rather than 9. If we were meant to load 9 rounds, loading blocks would have 9-round rows....
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,611
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,611 |
My apology for skipping a few days of discussion. Been off playing with grandkids and helping to cut up elk. I consider a one shot "group" extremely important. After a long trip to hunt if there is the slightest chance that my rifle or scope shifted for any reason, I am not comfortable hunting until I fire at least one shot. Often it is only one shot. I set up a target of some sort at approximately 100 yards and fire one shot to see where it goes. If it is within the circle of its normal multiple shot group and hitting where intended in relation to point of aim, I'm comfortable taking it hunting. One time I had a rifle shoot off, and frazzled away a good 15 shots in a cold dawn wind and never was fully satisfied, though it connected a bullet with an elk the next day. As usual, we are conflating several different topics on this thread. If what you are doing is working, do not lose confidence in it because of an internet post. One time I read an outdoor story about shooting uphill or downhill and so imbibed the info that it caused me to miss a mule deer the next day due to consciously applying the steep downhill data to a 4x4 mule deer too close for angle to make any difference. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,408 Likes: 2
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,408 Likes: 2 |
If at the moment all I'm testing is the load does it matter where it lands?
For example, if I'm using my 20x scope equipped with a fine reticle to aim at a very small dot I don't want 30 cal holes in the group chewing up my aim point. Well...that actually makes sense. I try to learn something new every day, thanks. mike r
Don't wish it were easier
Wish you were better
Stab them in the taint, you can't put a tourniquet on that.
Craig Douglas ECQC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,479
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,479 |
JB, do you use 3 shot groups when testing guns or loads for magazine articles? For instance the 6mm creedmoor article in the Dec issue of handloader
Faith and love of others knows no mileage nor bounds. That's simply the way it is.
dogzapper
After the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box.
Italian Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,813
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20,813 |
3 shot groups are fine. As long as you shoot enough of them, judge them in total and don't cherry pick. A cherry picking example would be making the excuse of "not doing their part."
Last edited by battue; 11/12/18.
laissez les bons temps rouler
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,755
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,755 |
10 shot groups are clearly the most informative, testing rifle, ammo and shooter. What I don't understand is how a tight group not centered on the bull is useful if not corrected to POA?
mike r Seems like there's a disconnect here somewhere. Who said anything about leaving the POI not centered to POA? Part of the advantage of shooting more shots into a group is getting a more accurate representation of the center of that group, so you can adjust it to POA more accurately. Maybe that wasn't specifically said in this thread, but that's what we've been talking about when we mention how a series of 3 shot "groups" can be in different places relative to the bull. It's hard to zero precisely if you don't know where the true zero is.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,408 Likes: 2
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,408 Likes: 2 |
Understood. I guess my thinking was based on finding a repeatable zero with the same ammo. I see a myriad of groups not on the bullseye and wondered why that would seem significant. Mathman answered my question as did you. Thanks.
mike r
Don't wish it were easier
Wish you were better
Stab them in the taint, you can't put a tourniquet on that.
Craig Douglas ECQC
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,226 Likes: 27
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 60,226 Likes: 27 |
Sakoluvr,
Often I do shoot 3-shot groups for magazine articles, at least for early testing. Partly this is because most of today's readers don't comprehend anything other than 3-shot groups, and even very accurate rifles will often average over an inch for 5-shot groups with some loads.
As a result, the average reader thinks "That rifle sucks. I just shot a half-inch group with my rifle last week." Which of course means zip.
In fact, if a gun writer averages the results of all 5-shot groups with a certain rifle, then reports ALL of them, many readers are going to think the rifle sucks, because they get "half-inch groups all day long, if I do my part." Which generally means they discount "fliers" in 3-shot groups. Guess what ? Most 3-shot groups have a flier, because odds are that 2 of the 3 shots will land closer to each other then the third.
Most magazines do not have a strict protocol for the number of shots in a group, or the number of groups. The American Rifleman does, apparently because they've been using an average of five, 5-shot groups for a long time. Statistically this is a good test, especially when applied to several loads, but doesn't impress handloaders who shot a half-inch group last weekend.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 9,751 Likes: 6
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 9,751 Likes: 6 |
John means something like this. These were shot and recorded as they hit the paper. No excuses. All shots were reported. No called flyers. I shot 2 - 5 shot groups for each rifle and averaged them. Both these rifles must suck. I know what you're saying. 50 gr. Rem PSPs best group was 0.51 of an inch for me. It averaged about .75 though.
You know, sometimes you just gotta have fun! I have three 222s. Why not have an informal, factory ammunition shoot off? Please note that these tests aren’t scientific. It was just me trying to make the tiniest group possible using each of my three 222s.
I figured two 5 shot groups fired from the three, using eight brands of factory made ammunition. I did not measure the velocities. It is factory, and you get what you get.
Some people believe that the Remington Model 788 is a magical rifle. A firearm that shot tighter groups than any other production rifle of the day. I have owned several 788s, and can attest that they did not shoot better than any of my other rifles chambered for the same cartridges.
I don’t know when or why this mystique was born. 788s were inexpensive rifles that shot good groups for hunters, but they weren't any better than other rifles of the day.
The Loads
1. Prvi Partizan 50 gr. SP – MV – 3133 fps. Made in Serbia.
2. Winchester 50 gr. PSP – MV – 3140 fps. Made in the USA.
3. Federal 40 gr. Nosler BT – MV – 3450 fps. Made in the USA
4. Remington High Performance 50 gr. PSP – MV – 3140 fps. Made in the USA.
5. Sellier & Bellot 50 gr. SP – MV – 3180 fps. Made in the Czech Republic.
6. Sako Gamehead 50 gr. SP – MV – 3180 fps. Made in Finland.
7. Hornady 50 gr. Superformance VMax – MV – 3345 fps. Made in the USA.
8. Nosler Varmageddon 40 gr. Nosler BT – MV – 3400 fps. Made in the USA.
The rifles. A Remington Model 788. A Tikka T3 Lite. A T3 HB. This last rifle has not been shot with the test ammunition yet.
Here are the results for the 788 and the T3 Lite. Average of two 5 shot groups, rounded to the nearest 1000th of an inch. A 1000th of an inch? Really?
Remington Model 788
1. Nosler – 0.670 inches
2. Winchester – 0.710 inches
3. Sako – 0.800 inches
4. Remington – 0.910 inches
5. Federal – 0.920 inches
6. Hornady – 1.55 inches
7. Prvi Partizan – 2.00 inches
8. Sellier & Bellot – 2.15 inches
Average for eight brands – 1.21 inches
Tikka T3 Lite
1. Federal – 0.770 inches
2. Nosler – 0.795 inches
3. Hornady – 0.800 inches
4. Prvi Partizan – 0.820 inches
5. Sako – 1.600 inches
6. Remington – 1.630 inches
7. Winchester – 1.640 inches
8. Sellier & Bellot – 1.650 inches
Average for eight brands – 1.21 inches
Hmmm. Neither rifle shot magical groups. What conclusions would you draw?
Safe Shooting! Steve Redgwell www.303british.comGet your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - Mark Twain Member - Professional Outdoor Media Association of Canada ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/AP39Jhm.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,479
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,479 |
JB, thanks. That's what I figured. It would be nice if the number of shots were stated. This has been a very informative thread and I thank you for your input. If anything, it is so much easier to find the center of 5 or 10 shot groups and click it to where it needs to go.
Faith and love of others knows no mileage nor bounds. That's simply the way it is.
dogzapper
After the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box.
Italian Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 19,179 |
If at the moment all I'm testing is the load does it matter where it lands? EXACTLY ! ! When 'group' shooting - checking for load potential or accuracy it does NOT matter to me where it lands on the target. (as long as it is ON the target background) I'm NOT zeroing using an UNknown load...duh ! After sufficient groups that I'm satisfied with the accuracy of the load....... THEN I zero the load/scope for the purpose intended. I typed this ^^^^^^^^^^ before I read lvmiker's response. Understood. I guess my thinking was based on finding a repeatable zero with the same ammo. I see a myriad of groups not on the bullseye and wondered why that would seem significant. Mathman answered my question as did you. Thanks.
mike r Jerry
jwall- *** 3100 guy***
A Flat Trajectory is Never a Handicap
Speed is Trajectory's Friend !!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,192
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 10,192 |
The challenge we shot actually was 2 10 shot groups on the same piece of paper and rest's were allowed, bi-pods, bulls bags etc., just no lead sled's or mechanical rest's that take the shooter out of the equation. I shot it off my range bag cause that's all I had with me. It was a freaking shooting challenge not a mathematical formula that would change the world.
I can't believe a forum full of gun guys would gripe so much about shooting too many rounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,264 Likes: 29
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 48,264 Likes: 29 |
The challenge we shot actually was 2 10 shot groups on the same piece of paper and rest's were allowed, bi-pods, bulls bags etc., just no lead sled's or mechanical rest's that take the shooter out of the equation. I shot it off my range bag cause that's all I had with me. It was a freaking shooting challenge not a mathematical formula that would change the world.
I can't believe a forum full of gun guys would gripe so much about shooting too many rounds.
Those challenges are still open too, by the way. Anyone here is more than welcome to participate. I think this thread is more of an eye opener for me than anything else. I also think hondo was right in the fact that 10 shot groups just rub some people the wrong way. Much in the same way, 3 shot groups and guys saying their rifles are "sub moa all day long", "IF I DO MY PART", remarks do others. I could care less how much ammo a guy does or doesn't burn up, but if they are going to talk big behind the keyboard, shoot some honest targets and post them up in those challenges. No one cares about a .200" 3 shot group that is 4" to the left and 6" low. What does impress me is a rifle/shooter/load that consistently shoots sub moa 10 shot groups. Those challenges are a great test of equipment and skill. Not for everyone, of course. But along the same lines as the op of this thread: They can be a real eye opener. Maybe too much, in fact, for some...
I try to stick with the basics, they do so well. Nothing fancy mind you, just plain jane will get it done with style. You want to see an animal drop right now? Shoot him in the ear hole. BSA MAGA
|
|
|
|
|
203 members (1OntarioJim, 06hunter59, 320090T, 257 roberts, 6mmCreedmoor, 3dtestify, 19 invisible),
1,134
guests, and
984
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,194,093
Posts18,522,153
Members74,026
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
