3 shot groups

Here’s a thought.

3 shot groups can easily be proven mathematically to not be worth much. Right?

Be that as it may, a lot of people (hell we’ve done it have at some point) have tested and developed loads with three shot groups and many have went on to successful hunting careers, smoked plenty of long range targets, and converted untold amounts of small rodents to red mist. Does that suggest that some that can mathematically proven to be wrong or poor, is somehow right and good? Some have concluded that.

Here’s where the thought part comes in. What if it isn’t that inaccuracy in determining accuracy doesn’t matter? What if what is being “proven” is that accuracy itself doesn’t matter nearly as much as we thought?

As scarey as that might be some, there is something to back it up.

Lets go totally crazy and work on the theory of shooting is about hitting and not just shooting groups that get analyzed with questionable methods.

Take a very accurate rifle that isn’t sighted in and you’re not going to hit anything. Luckily thats easily fixed.

Now that it’s sighted in, pass it to someone who can’t shoot. Accuracy won’t fix that.

Not having time to fix the previous shooter’s problems just pass it to the next shooter who holds like he’s made of granite and has ice water in his veins. Thngs are looking better until range and it’s crazy twin trajectory come to make fun of him and accuracy can’t save him.

Watching from the sidelines with progressively meaner tricks is the evil cousin wind. She’s a real ##### with a mean streak and hates shooters. Time to bring on next shooter.

This guy can breath, squeeze, knows his range, trajectory and legend has it is still dating that crazy Wind #####; sort of a love hate thing, abusive relationship that he doesn’t always come out on top with, but holds his own most of the time. He can benefit from a more accurate rifle, most of the time.

The others might as well shoot 3 shot groups🤣
 
Dogleg said:
Here’s a thought.

3 shot groups can easily be proven mathematically to not be worth much. Right?

Be that as it may, a lot of people (hell we’ve done it have at some point) have tested and developed loads with three shot groups and many have went on to successful hunting careers, smoked plenty of long range targets, and converted untold amounts of small rodents to red mist. Does that suggest that some that can mathematically proven to be wrong or poor, is somehow right and good? Some have concluded that.

Here’s where the thought part comes in. What if it isn’t that inaccuracy in determining accuracy doesn’t matter? What if what is being “proven” is that accuracy itself doesn’t matter nearly as much as we thought?

As scarey as that might be some, there is something to back it up.

Lets go totally crazy and work on the theory of shooting is about hitting and not just shooting groups that get analyzed with questionable methods.

Take a very accurate rifle that isn’t sighted in and you’re not going to hit anything. Luckily thats easily fixed.

Now that it’s sighted in, pass it to someone who can’t shoot. Accuracy won’t fix that.

Not having time to fix the previous shooter’s problems just pass it to the next shooter who holds like he’s made of granite and has ice water in his veins. Thngs are looking better until range and it’s crazy twin trajectory come to make fun of him and accuracy can’t save him.

Watching from the sidelines with progressively meaner tricks is the evil cousin wind. She’s a real ##### with a mean streak and hates shooters. Time to bring on next shooter.

This guy can breath, squeeze, knows his range, trajectory and legend has it is still dating that crazy Wind #####; sort of a love hate thing, abusive relationship that he doesn’t always come out on top with, but holds his own most of the time. He can benefit from a more accurate rifle, most of the time.

The others might as well shoot 3 shot groups🤣
Click to expand...
yeah- i think youre onto something here---

youre bottom line is spot on- its not essentially about how accurate that gun is down to the 1/32s - or .002s nearly as much as it is a technique thing, per say.

even the Cuzin thats rootin the wind, he doesnt NEED to know thhat rifle is shooting 2 touching and one half an inch from the last.

ive always wondered regarding Big game, how many people hit the Hair they are aiming for? in typical hunting scenerios-
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGY
todbartell said:
Follow me for more recipes and fun tips as we squash the validity of 3 shot groups :eek::ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
A few years back a fella asked me how valid three shot groups were and why I didn't shoot them much
I told him to collect 10 three shot groups then overlay them on top of each other then he would have a better idea . I then told him I like shooting so why would I only shoot three shots with a target rifle or a rifle I built to shoot matches with? 😁
I worry far more about my accuracy with a particular rifle as opposed to how accurate the rifle is .🙂
Cat
 
one variable that might get overlooked in these higher round count groups is the ability of the shooter to robotically control the rifle and squeeze the trigger exactly the same way every time. as the round count goes up, so does the probability of human variability. different shooters will display their concentration or lack of it on a typical range day. once a single bullet lands far out of the group, all determination evaporates. as any dedicated shooter knows, this is the difference between getting the most out of the rifle or just making noise. like it or not we've all lived it.
 
barsik said:
one variable that might get overlooked in these higher round count groups is the ability of the shooter to robotically control the rifle and squeeze the trigger exactly the same way every time. as the round count goes up, so does the probability of human variability. different shooters will display their concentration or lack of it on a typical range day. once a single bullet lands far out of the group, all determination evaporates. as any dedicated shooter knows, this is the difference between getting the most out of the rifle or just making noise. like it or not we've all lived it.
Click to expand...
I think that is the biggest variable in most cases!
Cat
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGY
We can agree that 3 shot groups aren't ideal. It gives a guy a good idea though.

Some rifles just won't hold it together for 5 shots without the heat pulling everything sideways and not giving a good representation of cold bore accuracy and a couple follow up shots.

I think multiple 3 shotters is the way to go with them.
 
I wonder when it all started, the obsession with tiny groups? And when did people started to actually shoot groups? I mean for the longest time me and plenty of others would grab a box of ammo factory of course, go to the range, shot one shot at 25m zeroed it moved to 100m, fine adjust for bullseye or where ever you wanted it to(2-3”@100m kind of thing) shot a few more shot just for the heck of it and usually went home with at least 1/2 a box of ammo left and went on to multiple successful hunt with that, checking zero every fall before our hunt with usually one shot… my brother in low still does that with his 300rum a box of 20 last him a few years!!
Since I started reloading I do shoot a lot more and I’m also a better shot than I was 15 years ago but does it really matter when most of my hunting is done inside 200m to shoot 10 groups of 5 shots to go hunting? I think we obsess about the tiny groups way too much, just like we obsess we super light everything 😂. That said if I was a target shooter/competitive I would not stop at good enough and probably do 10 5 shots groups to make sure and probably use the top of the line everything to put all the chances on my side. But I’m way too poor for that hobby 😂.
So for hunting purposes out to 400m I will stick to my system even if it is not the best there is.
 
DGY said:
I wonder when it all started, the obsession with tiny groups? And when did people started to actually shoot groups? I mean for the longest time me and plenty of others would grab a box of ammo factory of course, go to the range, shot one shot at 25m zeroed it moved to 100m, fine adjust for bullseye or where ever you wanted it to(2-3”@100m kind of thing) shot a few more shot just for the heck of it and usually went home with at least 1/2 a box of ammo left and went on to multiple successful hunt with that, checking zero every fall before our hunt with usually one shot… my brother in low still does that with his 300rum a box of 20 last him a few years!!
Since I started reloading I do shoot a lot more and I’m also a better shot than I was 15 years ago but does it really matter when most of my hunting is done inside 200m to shoot 10 groups of 5 shots to go hunting? I think we obsess about the tiny groups way too much, just like we obsess we super light everything 😂. That said if I was a target shooter/competitive I would not stop at good enough and probably do 10 5 shots groups to make sure and probably use the top of the line everything to put all the chances on my side. But I’m way too poor for that hobby 😂.
So for hunting purposes out to 400m I will stick to my system even if it is not the best there is.
Click to expand...
I'll wade in here and take some of the heat off DGY. I'm pretty much a different province/same mindset version of the above, and I don't quite understand it either. If YOU as an individual want to be absolutely obsessed with ultimate accuracy, fill your boots and I'm happy for you, and there you go. I've chased small groups in the past too. But it seems the accuracy guys care way too much about the non ultimate accuracy guys, which I find extremely amusing.

If I'm okay with 3 shot groups of 2"@100m, 4"@ 200m, and 6"@ 300m, why do you care? If that's perfectly fine for all my real world hunting at 300 m or less, why do you care? I'm wrong by your standards, but not for myself, so why should I care?

Years ago I dated this chick who was a pretty decent copy of "one time at band camp" girl. Anyways, I'm at her place, she makes me a coffee, and I proceed to put sugar and cream in, and stir it 3-4 times one way, and put the spoon on the counter. She's now looking at me kind of weirdly so I said "What's up?" She proceeds to tell me that I needed to stir it the opposite way an equal amount of times to make it right. I didn't even know if it was a joke or some OCD quirk, but it actually bothered her. I told her to stir the coffee if she wants, but that was clearly not going to be my thing.

Point being, you can stir your cup of coffee both ways, and I don't care, but I'll stir my coffee my way, and it's not wrong for me.
 
tactical lever said:
We can agree that 3 shot groups aren't ideal. It gives a guy a good idea though.

Some rifles just won't hold it together for 5 shots without the heat pulling everything sideways and not giving a good representation of cold bore accuracy and a couple follow up shots.

I think multiple 3 shotters is the way to go with them.
Click to expand...

A 30 round group can be 30 cold bore shots spread out over multiple range trips if you take your target home with you

DGY said:
I wonder when it all started, the obsession with tiny groups? And when did people started to actually shoot groups? I mean for the longest time me and plenty of others would grab a box of ammo factory of course, go to the range, shot one shot at 25m zeroed it moved to 100m, fine adjust for bullseye or where ever you wanted it to(2-3”@100m kind of thing) shot a few more shot just for the heck of it and usually went home with at least 1/2 a box of ammo left and went on to multiple successful hunt with that, checking zero every fall before our hunt with usually one shot… my brother in low still does that with his 300rum a box of 20 last him a few years!!
Since I started reloading I do shoot a lot more and I’m also a better shot than I was 15 years ago but does it really matter when most of my hunting is done inside 200m to shoot 10 groups of 5 shots to go hunting? I think we obsess about the tiny groups way too much, just like we obsess we super light everything 😂. That said if I was a target shooter/competitive I would not stop at good enough and probably do 10 5 shots groups to make sure and probably use the top of the line everything to put all the chances on my side. But I’m way too poor for that hobby 😂.
So for hunting purposes out to 400m I will stick to my system even if it is not the best there is.
Click to expand...

You don't need to shoot a 3 shot group to kill an animal. However I am sure truckloads of animals are lost every fall from incompetent hunters who employ the gravel pit "close enough" one shot zero, leaning over the hood of a truck with a rolled up coat as a rest

I'm pretty sure the drive for increased precision with firearms started early in firearm use.
 
The precision required is in the pursuit of the game.
If your in competition against others, precision is the goal. If it is hunting inside 200 yards, not so much.
My competition requirements is under .2" at 100 yards. My hunting is 2" at 100 yards.
My pistol is 10 in a business card at 27 yards.
Too each their own.
 
Joel said:
How about that! Interesting test, props for seeing that through.

They'd be way more consistent if you just threw out your fliers tho ;) /s
Click to expand...
LOL, reminds me of back in another life when I used to play golf occasionally. Played a round one day with a buddy, went back to the clubhouse and a couple other golfers were just coming in so Brian asked one how he did, he said his score (which was pretty good iirc) and Brian turns to me and says, “ let’s go another round, I want to beat that guys score”. So out we go. On about the 3rd hole he puts one in the water, turns to me and says “that one doesn’t count” then hit another. A couple holes later he makes another poor shot and says “that doesn’t count, I want to beat that guys score”. I told him “yup, pretty sure you are going to beat his score if you discount any shots you don’t like” 🙄
 
Last edited:
todbartell said:
A 30 round group can be 30 cold bore shots spread out over multiple range trips if you take your target home with you



You don't need to shoot a 3 shot group to kill an animal. However I am sure truckloads of animals are lost every fall from incompetent hunters who employ the gravel pit "close enough" one shot zero, leaning over the hood of a truck with a rolled up coat as a rest

I'm pretty sure the drive for increased precision with firearms started early in firearm use.
Click to expand...
Well it is possible, but I hear way more about guys with long range rigs big scopes that after ranging there quarry and twirling there turrets and looking through there xmass tree reticle made a mistake and missed or wounded the animal they were after.
I use to go to a gravel pit and sometimes I would bring a table but most time I was off the hood of my truck and so far even in those days I never lost a game animal! But all is possible but I don’t think a string of 10 5 shot groups would make me a better hunter .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom