Worth the time IMHO

[Zeke]

I think our sample size is too small if we want the most data for our given rifle.
Its will depend on YOUR expectations and application.

I know everyone has a "system" that they use but who's adopting some of these points, specifically increasing sample size?

Zeke

 

[2lumpy]

Zeke, you’re right, as usual…….

From a simple size of one, my attitude toward the rifle I’m holding has more to do with where the bullet goes than any data set I’ve ever used.

I know this is as true as the principles of gravity……… good science can be repeated without fail. I’ve repeated this on way too many occasions, not to hold to the concept.

 

[BigPig]

Makes good sense to me. Three shot groups tell nothing and should not be the generally accepted standard. I shoot for ten. That starts to tell the story and provide valuable information.

 

[Blank]

A single 3-5 shot group give a decent idea of the average. A series of 3-5 shot groups on the same point of aim will generally give a true representation

 

[Zeke]

Yes, If you overlay the 3 groups to make a single 15 shot target. That will tell you with about 90% certainty what your rifle can do and should show close to true POI v POA.

It's the radius from POA that tells us the most about what our rifle is capable of.... *provided our sample set is large enough.

Zeke

 

[mtmuley]

I'm a hunter, not a competition bench shooter. mtmuley

 

[2lumpy]

I'm a hunter, not a competition bench shooter. mtmuley

Lung and heart are almost always good enough for me too. I’m not all that upset about missing a prairie dog at 200 yards. But, some folks do care, more power to them.

I’ve said it before, it seems appropriate to say again.

Who am I…..to holler WHOA at a horse race.

 

[Zeke]

Like I said...it's all about YOUR application and expectation.

This info isn't for everyone and I didn't post it to change minds unless someone is receptive to what they have to say AND can see the benefit for THEIR application.

I think that most of us could benefit from a larger sample-set.

Beyond that, I just don't care.

Zeke

 

[mtmuley]

Like I said...it's all about YOUR application and expectation.

This info isn't for everyone and I didn't post it to change minds unless someone is receptive to what they have to say AND can see the benefit for THEIR application.

I think that most of us could benefit from a larger sample-set.

Beyond that, I just don't care.

Zeke

I agree. I am to the point that I know when to quit wasting components. mtmuley

 

[2lumpy]

I agree. I am to the point that I know when to quit wasting components. mtmuley

Ha….. Took the words right out of my mouth. I was going to word it a little differently, like……. I’m too dang cheap for better statistical analysis. ?

 

[Homer]

Zeke,

Did you really listen to all 85 and a half minutes??

 

[Homer]

That was an hour and a half of regurgitated minutia.....wow....painful

 

[CFMuley]

I like rifles that shoot factory ammo well enough to kill animals at moderate ranges. I think the 2 groups of hunters that get this in depth either are guys that like to tinker, really know what they’re doing, and enjoy spending the time to get as accurate of a rifle as possible or guys that spend way too much time trying to make sure their gear is completely perfect before they actually spend the time to learn the basics of hunting.

 

[Cahunter805]

I don’t stress to much about group size at 100 yards. I will load a ladder/OCW test and then fine tune it at 300+. Anything MOA or under and I’m happy to move on and verify drops.
There are plenty of 1/2MOA guns but far less 1/2MOA shooters.

 

[mtmuley]

I don’t stress to much about group size at 100 yards. I will load a ladder/OCW test and then fine tune it at 300+. Anything MOA or under and I’m happy to move on and verify drops.
There are plenty of 1/2MOA guns but far less 1/2MOA shooters.

Wasn't there a thread on LRH (I'm banned you know) that showed most hunters shots at game were 300 yards and under? Might have been more, but not much. mtmuley

 

[Zeke]

I have no issue with people doing things just like they’ve always done them. They probably have decent results…thanks to modern science.

I have no issue with people who want to spend a little time and possibly pick up a nugget and expand their paradigm. Good for them!

I have no issue with people discounting the findings as “so much boring crap”. It was boring but hardly crap. It may not apply to your standards or expectations but that doesn’t make it less true.

We’re all so fiercely independent that we usually have no idea what’s out there for us IF we want it.

If you don’t want to see if you can pick up a new way to do things, no matter to me at all. I shoot every week unless I’m killing so I’m sure I have “some” skills but yet I’m always trying to get better.

Enjoy the info…or not (it’s not mine but I thought I’d share). I have zero skin in YOUR game.

Free Country and loving it,
Zeke

 

[2lumpy]

Wasn't there a thread on LRH (I'm banned you know) that showed most hunters shots at game were 300 yards and under? Might have been more, but not much. mtmuley

I have no trouble believing that. Now, things could have changed in the last 15-20 years but a 300 yard shot, with a 3X9 it’s a poke for me. Unless it’s got a large set of antlers, at that range, I can’t tell if it’s a male or a female.

 

[mtmuley]

I have no issue with people doing things just like they’ve always done them. They probably have decent results…thanks to modern science.

I have no issue with people who want to spend a little time and possibly pick up a nugget and expand their paradigm. Good for them!

I have no issue with people discounting the findings as “so much boring crap”. It was boring but hardly crap. It may not apply to your standards or expectations but that doesn’t make it less true.

We’re all so fiercely independent that we usually have no idea what’s out there for us IF we want it.

If you don’t want to see if you can pick up a new way to do things, no matter to me at all. I shoot every week unless I’m killing so I’m sure I have “some” skills but yet I’m always trying to get better.

Enjoy the info…or not (it’s not mine but I thought I’d share). I have zero skin in YOUR game.

Free Country and loving it,
Zeke

Thanks Zeke. mtmuley

 

[littlebighorn]

Way to burst my bubble Zeke!
All this time I thought all my rifles were .25 MOA shooters because I have a 3 shot group from each to prove it!

Now I'm hearing these shooting eggheads tell me that those "bad days shooting" were actually my .25 MOA rifle's fault.?

I'm guessing 95% of us will continue to shoot those 3-5 shot groups and be happy, but it is pretty interesting information and puts lots of things in perspective.
Our friend Zeke (and his bro) shoot more than anyone else I know and I know a number of avid shooters. I applaud you my friend for sharing this enlightening podcast. No doubt it was very informative...and ego deflating at the same time. ?

 

[Zeke]

I know, it’s sad to wring out what a rifle is really doing.??

My takeaway from the loooong video is: (yes homer, I watched it all) shoot a larger sample-set and then have even more confidence that when the trigger is pulled, it’ll hit within the sample-set group size. ie: know your load/rifle, know your limits, know the conditions, make a clean kill.

A couple+ years ago, we switch from 3 shot groups, for hunting rifles, to 5 shot groups because it’s a 15%+/- more accurate representation of what the rifle will actually do.

All this minutia is the Nth degree stuff and doesn’t apply if a guy doesn’t like to tinker and/or doesn’t stretch the range a bit.

I posted it to help if someone wants it. I didn’t post it to say it’s the only way that good things can happen. I’m sure y’all have had way more than your share of success!

Funny: I had a buddy (he’s passed on to his reward) who put lots of stock in a 2 shot group.

We’ve known forever that a 3 shot group will tell you if the load is bad but not if it’s good. 3 shot groups are fine IF 5-7, 3-shot groups are fired and the groups are overlaid to get a true picture of what’s going on.

Oops! I didn’t use the word “run” so I must not know of what I speak. Haha

Keep up the good work,
Zeke

 

[2lumpy]

Probably a dumb question Zeke…… but that’s never stopped me before.

Does a 5 group cause any hot barrel expansion variables? What about sighting a rifle at 95 degrees Fahrenheit and hunting/target shooting at 20 degree Fahrenheit?

I need all the excuses I can get…………. ?

 

[2lumpy]

Another dumb question…….. based on the consistency or the inconsistency depending if you a guy that deals in half empty, half full glasses of water……. has anybody measure 5,10…. 100 shot deviations, comparing a mechanical discharge device vs an expert human shooter. When it’s a human shooter I wonder how much of the deviation is caused by flesh and blood vs the rifle barrel/stock/trigger etc. How do they measure the “human” factor into these statistics, or do they?

 

[Zeke]

Probably a dumb question Zeke…… but that’s never stopped me before.

Does a 5 group cause any hot barrel expansion variables? What about sighting a rifle at 95 degrees Fahrenheit and hunting/target shooting at 20 degree Fahrenheit?

I need all the excuses I can get…………. ?

Yes and Yes.

I take a long time to complete a 5 shot group in a hunting rifle for two reasons.
1- A hot barrel wears out more quickly and we don't want that.
2- I want each shot as close to a hunting situation (cold seasoned bore) as possible.
5 shot group takes me about a half hour... but that's just me. I've been known to shoot a couple groups one week and continue the following week to get a larger sample set. We call this "verifying" our loads.

I'm NOT a competitive shooter so I don't need to bang away 5-10 shots in a row. I have a couple AR's or pistols for that if I need to get some aggression out of my system. haha

Powder burns differently in 95 degree weather as opposed to most hunting temps so POI can change over the extremes. Is it enough to miss a deer at 300 yards? No but remember we're talking Nth degree stuff for slightly longer-ish ranges.

Even the temp stable powder is more like temp resistant.

I also verify a load at pretty close to hunting temps when I can.

Zeke

 

[Zeke]

Another dumb question…….. based on the consistency or the inconsistency depending if you a guy that deals in half empty, half full glasses of water……. has anybody measure 5,10…. 100 shot deviations, comparing a mechanical discharge device vs an expert human shooter. When it’s a human shooter I wonder how much of the deviation is caused by flesh and blood vs the rifle barrel/stock/trigger etc. How do they measure the “human” factor into these statistics, or do they?

I KNOW there's a human factor and it's been scientifically proven time and again but I don't have a mechanical rest so I have no idea how much better my rifles would shoot.

When working on the load, I try to eliminate as much "human" as possible. I use bench and bags or a bipod and bags depending on the rifle.

When I'm practicing, I use improvised rests and position shooting to replicate real-world. A guy soon learns that field shooting presents more challenges than "bench" shooting. It's all part of the game we play.

Again I say, know your rifle, know your limits, read the conditions, make good choices.

Zeke

 

[2lumpy]

Thanks for the insightful reply’s Zeke. Tries it together better……. for me.

 

[Homer]

"Again I say, know your rifle, know your limits, read the conditions, make good choices.".....

....and then jerk the trigger and pray...

 

[accubond]

I agree to an extent but, like somebody already mentioned, how do you separate the human variables from the equipment variables?

 

[Zeke]

I agree to an extent but, like somebody already mentioned, how do you separate the human variables from the equipment variables?

That's a variable, for sure.

Some guys are better shots than others, no doubt (few will ever admit that). That's why a guy might want to think about shooting with other good shooters and possibly compare results. Kind of goes back to that ego thing that LBH referred to.

At least if you shoot a large enough sample-set, you'll know what YOU can do with YOUR load and rifle. That's really all that counts anyway!!! You certainly shouldn't care what I can do with your rifle! You probably out-shoot me anyway!

The goal for ME is to see what I can do real-world, not from a machine rest in a vacuum....human error and all. Then I can make better choices.

Zeke

 

[accubond]

That's a variable, for sure.

Some guys are better shots than others, no doubt (few will ever admit that). That's why a guy might want to think about shooting with other good shooters and possibly compare results. Kind of goes back to that ego thing that LBH referred to.

At least if you shoot a large enough sample-set, you'll know what YOU can do with YOUR load and rifle. That's really all that counts anyway!!! You certainly shouldn't care what I can do with your rifle! You probably out-shoot me anyway!

The goal for ME is to see what I can do real-world, not from a machine rest in a vacuum....human error and all. Then I can make better choices.

Zeke

I can't argue with that and sound intelligent.

 

[BigPig]

Larger groups that are statistically significant tell you what a rifle and load are truly capable of. It’s called a “cone of dispersion” and it’s important to identify. With my rifles and their chosen load (factory or handloaded) I want this information and large groups are the only way to get it. That way when a shot randomly falls outside that cone, I know it’s me. Or if shots start regularly falling outside that cone I know there is a mechanical problem somewhere.

To me, this is valuable info. 10 years ago I would have scoffed at such a notion as shooting 10 shot groups and would have written it off as wasteful. I now know more and expect better of myself and my rifles. It’s made me a better hunter.

The majority of hunters don’t shoot enough. Most do things because that’s the way they always have (1 shot zero check, 2” high at 100) and they miss opportunities to learn. Boring as it may be, the content shown here should not be dismissed.

 

[BigPig]

Another dumb question…….. based on the consistency or the inconsistency depending if you a guy that deals in half empty, half full glasses of water……. has anybody measure 5,10…. 100 shot deviations, comparing a mechanical discharge device vs an expert human shooter. When it’s a human shooter I wonder how much of the deviation is caused by flesh and blood vs the rifle barrel/stock/trigger etc. How do they measure the “human” factor into these statistics, or do they?

This is exactly what large shot groups tells you. Shoot 10-20 shot groups enough times and you will begin to see patterns. You will soon learn what your rifle and load is capable of regularly producing. Do it enough to identify your cone and it then becomes obvious whether it’s “you” or the rifle.