Flyers Do they Exist

[Longbow]

So who says we can not have nice things/civil discussions on CGN.

I am increasingly coming to believe that flyers do not exist, or at least in centerfire are extremely rare. Once we understand why, it is not really a flyer IMO.

At least as observed by me, failing to properly account for parallax error is often a real culprit in both zeroing and load development even with some fairly experienced shooters.

The discussion also highlighted the importance of an adequate sample size and in many instances our poor understanding/application of statistics and statistical analysis.(I felt mine so poor that I took an online stats course last winter). I think it difficult to overstate the importance of this one, problem is it starts taking shots at some of the almost religiously held beliefs in many of our current load dev approaches.

i do note an interesting trend amongst some of the top competitors in PRS, which seems to involve picking a bullet/speed, loading with the highest quality components, jumping it lots and essentially keeping the same load over multiple barrels...very little fuss or any large amount of load dev.

 

[Ganderite]

Creighton Audette has gone to the big range in the sky. We are diminished. His writings should be collected and published..

RIFLE SHOOTING FROM THE SCIENTIFIC VIEWPOINT

By Creighton Audette

​

At the high power phase of the 1980 National Matches, at Camp Perry, Ohio, the writer was one of those who put on the High Power Rifle Clinic. This clinic was taped, with the intent of transcribing it, printing it, and distributing it to those who attended the clinic. In reading the rough draft of the transcript, it became evident that it was not a good way of making information presented at the clinic available to readers. Much of my part in the clinic involved blackboard sketches as a very important part of the explanation. …………………(skipping ahead in the text)………………

A high percentage of rifle shooters have little interest in the scientific aspects of rifle shooting. They simply follow, by rote, the processes and procedures which they have learned, without any real knowledge of the reasons behind these, or how they affect the ultimate goal of obtaining the best performance from the rifle and ammunition and the shooting of winning scores. The high power rifleman today has to load his ammunition, maintain his rifle and other equipment, as well as to perform all of the functions associated with the act of shooting in competition. It seems reasonable to hold the opinion that the rifleman who has more understanding of what happens, why it happens, and what can be done about it, will, most of the time, turn in a better performance than the shooter with less understanding, if they are otherwise equal in physical and mental attributes. To some shooters, understanding the scientific side of rifle shooting provides as much enjoyment as the shooting itself, and it is from this viewpoint that the following is written.


Rifle Accuracy, What and Why​

Few shooters and hand loaders, even those of long experience, have a thorough understanding of the dynamics of a rifle during the process of firing, nor do they understand what accuracy and dispersion may be expected in an extended series of groups. It is almost universal among shooters to think of rifle and ammunition performance in terms of the best, the most outstanding, groups and scores. These are what are written up in publications devoted to the sport. Poor performance by comparison, is generally blamed on factors such as wind, mirage, light changes, poor holding and let-off. These results may, in actuality, simply be the variation which should be expected in a series of groups, in statistical terms and on a scientific basis.

It is my opinion that any shooter will obtain the best performance from his rifle and ammunition if he clearly understands what results he may expect from the combination in an extended series, discounting the element of luck, where mistakes offset each other as when a poor hold is compensated by a wind change. Knowing what performance may be expected allows the shooter to make sight changes, with changing conditions, so as to keep the group centered in the bull and to lose as few points as possible. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the Palma Team Match, when it is fired in one of the British Commonwealth Countries, using 7.62 NATO ammunition, with the 144 to 152 grain bullet at a velocity of about 2800 fps. Even in the selected lots used in this match, groups will average two to three times the size of the groups obtainable with the better combinations of NRA match rifle and hand loads used in the U.S., ignoring the difference in wind drift. If the rifle-ammo combination, in an extended series, can only be counted on to barely group in the center ring of the target used it is quite clear that the chances are that a windage change is not called for on the sights when a shot strikes just inside the center ring, laterally, and a wind change is not evident to the shooter. A sight change under these conditions may put the next bullet out the opposite side, simply as a result of the group size, rather than due to a wind shift.

Accustomed to the use of highly accurate rifle-ammunition combinations and using heavy bullets, which are good wind-buckers, in their matches at home, U.S. shooters have a tendency to make sight changes in the Palma Match which are not warranted with the group sizes that are to be expected with the Palma rifle-7.62 NATO service ammunition combination and this is one of the major reasons for the lack of success of U.S. Palma teams on foreign soil.

When trying to establish the proper load for a new rifle, it is a common practice for a shooter to load up five rounds each of several different loads, to go out and shoot these off a bench, using a riflescope, and to assume that the load which gives the best group in this test is the best one. Let's assume that the shooter is using a .308 Winchester caliber rifle, Lake City cases, 168 grain bullets and DuPont's #4895 powder. He loads five rounds each of powder charges of 39, 40, 41 and 42 grains, shoots them with great care and the corresponding groups in minutes of angle are: 1 , 7/8, 3/4 and 1 . Perhaps he loads more rounds of the 41 grain load and shoots a couple more groups which are somewhere near the 3/4 moa level and is now convinced that he has found the best load. The fact is that there is no statistical difference among all of these groups. The differences in group size are what should be expected in a limited test.

Among the earliest applications of statistical probability was its use in controlling artillery fire and every ordnance textbook has a chapter on probability of fire. It is a mathematical concept based on sound and proven theory, and it is applicable to rifle fire. The 1929 edition of the British textbook of small arms has a chapter on it and two or three good articles covering it have appeared in "The American Rifleman” in years past. Figures 1, 2 and 3 are taken from one of the Rifleman articles.

 

[Ganderite]

Figure 1 shows the probable limits of the long run average ( L) in terms of test average (T) on the basis of the extreme spread of 5 shot groups. It is evident, and it is what one would expect that the more groups that are fired, the more accurate the estimate of the long run average will be. If only one 5 shot group is fired, the actual, long run average of a series of 5 shot groups of that load may run anywhere from about 0.55 times to 1.45 times the size of that particular group.

With three (3) groups, it will run from about 0.73 to about 1.27 times and with ten (10), from about 0.86 to about 1.14 times. Taking the example of the shooter above, who selected the 41 grain load on the basis of one group; if he had fired (100) one hundred 5 shot groups of his load, the average of the (100) one hundred might have been as small as 0.41 moa or as large as 1.09 moa. The extremes of these one hundred (100) groups would have varied much more, as explained below.



Figure 2 shows the probable group sizes in terms of the long run average (L) and in terms of the extreme spread of 5 shot groups. It shows that 50% of the groups fired will have an extreme spread of the size of the average or smaller than the average; about 10% will be 0.70 times the average or smaller; about 19% will be 1.50 times the average, etc. It should be noted that about 2 or 3% of the groups may be as small as 0.50 times the average or as large as 2.20 times the long run average!




Figure 3 shows the probability of relationship of the extreme spread of groups 3, 5, 10, and 20 shots. The shooter who tests a rifle and ammunition by shooting 5 shot groups should remember that the probable size of a 20 shot group, fired with the same conditions, would probably be about 1.45 times larger than the 5 shot group. That is the probability, as the averages of the extreme spread of 5 shot group and 20 shot groups would approach each other if an infinite number of groups were fired. (Also note the expected difference in a 3 shot and a 5 shot group - statistically speaking)

It is often difficult to convince shooters that this statistical data is correct, that it is generally applicable to all types of rifles and loads, and that it is something to be kept in mind while making a decision to change sight settings on the basis of one shot which did not impact where the shooter expected it to. Some, very good shots state that it would undermine their confidence in the rifle-ammo combination; they want to believe that the combination is capable of always shooting into the small circle of dispersion of the best groups they have fired with it, provided they do their part. It is difficult to convince many that the root of the theory is based in mathematics and that it has wide applications in other fields, such as quality control.

The following simple example may serve to give a feel for the APPLICATION OF STATISTICAL PROBABILITY. If 6 coins are shaken and tossed, it is apparent that the charting of the results of the tosses in an extended trial would center on half heads and half tails. A very small percentage of the time, a toss would turn up all heads or all tails. The balance of the results of the rest of the tosses would be in between, with 4-2 combinations next in likelihood to the 3-3. If a large number of coins were used and a large number of tosses charted, the resulting chart would have a curve similar to Figure 2 and would be termed “a normal probability curve”.

There is a great deal of loose talk among shooters (and loose writing by gun writers!) about the accuracy of rifles and ammunition. Claims are made about combinations which shoot consistently into a half-minute of angle, under good conditions. If there is any basis to such claims, other than ego, they are usually based on a very small number of selected groups, with the poorer groups discarded for various reasons. Refer again to figures 1, 2, and 3, and stop to think of what the long term average group size would have to be, statistically, if all the groups were to be moa or smaller!








-------------------Skipping forward ------------------
From the above, it can easily be understood why the extreme spread of individual groups in a long series can vary in size as shown in Figure 2. The knowledge of what can be expected from a target rifle and target ammunition should make it possible for a shooter to make the best judgement for sight changes. If the shooter has just fired three, successive X’s, well centered, at 600 yards, fires the next shot and gets 10 a 3:00, with no observable change in conditions, it would be well to consider whether that shot may have been within the normal capabilities of rifle-ammunition and shooter, hence, statistically probable. Many shooters will make a full minute correction, which is likely to be unwise, with the following shot a 9 at 9:00. It may well be that no sight change is necessary and, if one is made, that a half-minute change is the best to make.

 

[Ganderite]

Here are some good reading suggestions:
Internal Ballistics

BAL0270 How To Figure Muzzle Velocity, by Stanley Goodard
BAL0170A Metal Fouling And Pressure, by M.D. Waite
BAL0470 Effect Of Different Fouling, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0870 Barrel Rest Affects Impact And Grouping, by Gen V.E. MeGee
BAL0970 Steel Jacketed Bullets, by M.D. Waite
BAL1070 The Diminishing Returns Of High Velocity, by Willard Hafler
BAL1070B Primer Construction, by M.D. Waite
BAL1070C Ballistic Computation Frame, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1070D Ball Powder Fouling, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1170 Hangfire? Misfire?, by M.D. Waite
BAL1270 Prolonging Match Barrel Life, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0171A Does Bore Fouling Reduce Accuracy?, by Gen Vernon E. Megee
BAL1071 Is There Salt In Your Gun Barrel?, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1171 Why Hangfires Hardly Ever Happen, by Col Jim Crossman
BAL1271A Calculated Muzzle Velocity, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0572 Consumable Cartridges, by M.E.B.
BAL0872 Bell Bottom Bullets, by M.D. Waite
BAL0972 How To Figure Lock Time, by John T. Butters
BAL0972A Pressure Testing Gun, by A.F.R.
BAL1172A Thickness Of Gun Barrels, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0373 Guns Are Also Heat Engines, by Roy G. Goodman
BAL0473 Volumes Vary Among (.308 Winchester) Cases, by Charles M. Byers
BAL0573 The 12-20 Burst, by Col Jim Crossman
BAL1273 Oily VS. Dry Bore, by W.L. Faatz & J.J. Stransky
BAL0274A Blackpowder Barrel Lengths, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0474A Make The First Shot Count--A Dry Bore, by Norman E. Johnson
BAL0574 Secondary Muzzle Flash, by Nils Kvale
BAL0574A Blowup!, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0574B Blackpowder Under Smokeless, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0774A .308 Cases VS Pressure, by Kenneth C. Raynor
BAL0774B Recoil VS. Shot Weight, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0874 Bullet Trajectory And Sighting In, by Albert Agnese
BAL0874A Toward Successful Light Weight Cases, by Reed E. Donnard
BAL1074 The True Meaning Of "Dram Equivalents," by E.H. Harrison
BAL0275A Rodman Pressure Gage, by K.C.R.
BAL0875 Bore Wear, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0875A Black Powder Velocities, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0875B Pressures By Copper Crusher, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1075A Black Powder Residue, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0276 Bore Or Groove Designations, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0376 Twist Rate Extremes, by M.D.W.
BAL0476A Causes Of Bore Rusting, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1076 Warning: Use Lubricants With Care, by Kenneth C. Raynor & Joseph B. Roberts
BAL0277 How To Calculate Recoil, by William C. Davis, Jr
BAL0677 Barrel Length And Muzzle Velocity, by William C. Davis, Jr
BAL0777 Twist And Pressure, by C.E. Harris
BAL0977 Density Of Loading, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1277 A Test For Ignition Force, by Frank De Hass & Mark De Hass
BAL0178 Facts Of Barrel Life, by Creighton Audette
BAL0378 Shotgun Velocity, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0478 Black Powder Velocities, by Crawford Yates
BAL0478A Varied Case Volume, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0578 Case Splits, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0978A Carelessness Causes Firearms Blow-Ups, by Norman E. Johnson
BAL0978B Chamber Peening, by C.E. Harris
BAL1078A Collapsed Case Shoulder, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL1278 More Facts On Chamber Pressure (The 2.7 gr Bullseye Blow-Ups), by W.C. Davis, Jr.
BAL0279A Deteriorated Powder, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0379 +P+ And LE Loads, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0379A "Primer Hotness," by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0579A Ball Powder Misfire, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0679A More On Peening, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0679B Twist And Velocity, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0779 Magnum Primer/Ball Powder, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL1279 Shotgun Bores & Chokes, by Robert N. Sears
BAL1279A Powder Flash Inhibitors, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0380 An Accurate Barrel--How Long Will It Last?, by Col Charles Askins
BAL0380A Loading With Ball Powders, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0480A Twist Determination, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0780 Recoil Calculation, by W.C. Davis, Jr (Update to Feb. '77 article)
BAL0181 Cartridge Efficiency, by Dr. Carry Tacek
BAL0381C Effect Of Case Shape, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0381D "Brisance" In Primers, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0481 Cylinder Throat Fit, by J.B. Roberts, Jr
BAL0481B Loading Density And Air Space, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0681 Cartridge Cases And Accuracy, by Creighton Audette
BAL1181A 9mm Barrel Length Vs. Velocity, by C.E. Harris
BAL0182 Cartridge Cases And Accuracy, by Creighton Audette
BAL0382 Proper Throating Is The Key To Accuracy, by C.E. Harris
BAL0682 Proper Throating Is Essential For Accuracy, by C.E. Harris
BAL0682A Measuring Powder Space, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0782A Marlin's Microgroove Barrels Will Perform, by C.E. Harris
BAL1082A .308 Velocity Vs. Barrel Length, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL1282 Forcing Cone Erosion, by C.E. Harris
BAL0183 Bullet Fit Is The Key To Accuracy, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0283 Making The Accurate Barrel, by C.E. Harris
BAL0383A "Burning Rate" Misleading, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0483 Neck-Sized Vs. Full Length, by C.E. Harris
BAL0783A Caseless Ammunition, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0883 Achieving Bullet Stability, by C.E. Harris

 

[Ganderite]

External Ballistics

BAL0869 Chronograph Choice, by A.F.R.
BAL0969 Bullet Could Go 279 Miles On The Moon & Firing A Bullet In A Vacuum, by E.H. Harrison & Ashley Halsey, Jr
BAL0769 Measuring Bullet Velocity Made Easier By Oehler, by NRA Tech Staff
BAL0969B Velocity Lost In (Paper) Chronograph Screens, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1169 Damaged Powder Can Be Scrapped Safely, by James Glackin
BAL1169A The Firearms Expert On The Witness Stand, by Jeff Cooper
BAL1269 Analyzing Shooting Accuracy, by H.O. Davidson
BAL0170 Altitude And Shotgun Chokes, by A.F.R.
BAL0270A Trajectory Height, by W.D.
BAL0370 The Practical Range Of Small Arms, by G.L.M. Kjellgren
BAL0570 Wind Deflection Of Shot, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0471 That Shotgun May Shoot Further Than You Think, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0671 Before You Buy That Digital Chronograph, by James Riedel
BAL0671A Computing Elevations, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0771 Bullet Energy Calculation, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0771A Use QC To Check Your Shooting, by Harold O. Davidson
BAL0472 Gravity And Sighting, by B.R.L.
BAL0672 Learn Your Chances Of A Distant Hit, by Harold O. Davidson
BAL1172B Number Of Groups Required, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1272 Velocity Of Falling Bullet, by W.D.
BAL0373A Why Do Some Bullets Fly Faster, Longer?, by Jack Osborne
BAL0473A Calculating Drift, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0473B Calculating Maximum Range, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0773 Measuring Velocity By Drop, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1173 Bullet Deflection In Brush, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0274 Putting Raw Ballistics To Work Helps Scores, by Jack Osborne
BAL0674A Sight Adjustment Problem, by K.C.R.
BAL0974 Vertical Drift, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1074A Uphill-Downhill Rifle Shooting, by Robert L. Gilkey
BAL1274 F alling Shot, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0175 Chronographing Is Practical, by Norman E. Johnson
BAL0375 Basic Steel Shot Ballistics, by Keatinge Keays
BAL0475 Calculating Bullet Drop, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0975 Round Balls In Flight, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1075B Effects Of Canting, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1175 Ballistic Pendulum, by E.H. Harrison
BAL1175A Ogee Projectile Head, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0476 Dispersion And Range, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0976 Wind Deflection Of Shot, by W.D.
BAL1076B Effect Of Boattail, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0177 Wind Drift, by C.E.H.
BAL0277A Bullet Weight Vs. Impact, by William C. Davis, Jr
BAL0377 Velocity At 78 Feet, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0477 Factors Of Sighting Error, by L.F. Moore
BAL0577 Nomographic Computations Of Flat Trajectory Ballistics, by G.L.M. Kjellgren
BAL0577A Sighting In For Drift, by E.H. Harrison
BAL0778 Shooting In The Rain, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0778A Keeping Chronographing Convenient, by Norman E. Johnson
BAL0679 Military Bullet BCs, by W.C. Davis
BAL0980 Sight In Your Hunting Rifle, by Robert N. Sears
BAL0381B Standard Deviation, by Robert N. Sears
BAL0481A How Far Will Shot Fly?, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0382A Ogival Shape, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL1282A K.E Formula Variations, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0483A "Drift" Explained, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL0583 Measuring Sub-Sonic Velocities, by C.E. harris
BAL0583A Influences On Accuracy, by L.E. Wilson
BAL0683 Ballistics On The Home Computer, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL1183 Computer Equation Use, & Computer Bug, by W.C. Davis, Jr
BAL1283 Maximum Range Of Bullets, by C.E. Harris
BAL0278 Energy Calculation, by W.C. Davis, Jr

 

[Longbow]

Creighton Audette has gone to the big range in the sky. We are diminished. His writings should be collected and published..

RIFLE SHOOTING FROM THE SCIENTIFIC VIEWPOINT

By Creighton Audette

​

At the high power phase of the 1980 National Matches, at Camp Perry, Ohio, the writer was one of those who put on the High Power Rifle Clinic. This clinic was taped, with the intent of transcribing it, printing it, and distributing it to those who attended the clinic. In reading the rough draft of the transcript, it became evident that it was not a good way of making information presented at the clinic available to readers. Much of my part in the clinic involved blackboard sketches as a very important part of the explanation. …………………(skipping ahead in the text)………………

A high percentage of rifle shooters have little interest in the scientific aspects of rifle shooting. They simply follow, by rote, the processes and procedures which they have learned, without any real knowledge of the reasons behind these, or how they affect the ultimate goal of obtaining the best performance from the rifle and ammunition and the shooting of winning scores. The high power rifleman today has to load his ammunition, maintain his rifle and other equipment, as well as to perform all of the functions associated with the act of shooting in competition. It seems reasonable to hold the opinion that the rifleman who has more understanding of what happens, why it happens, and what can be done about it, will, most of the time, turn in a better performance than the shooter with less understanding, if they are otherwise equal in physical and mental attributes. To some shooters, understanding the scientific side of rifle shooting provides as much enjoyment as the shooting itself, and it is from this viewpoint that the following is written.


Rifle Accuracy, What and Why​

Few shooters and hand loaders, even those of long experience, have a thorough understanding of the dynamics of a rifle during the process of firing, nor do they understand what accuracy and dispersion may be expected in an extended series of groups. It is almost universal among shooters to think of rifle and ammunition performance in terms of the best, the most outstanding, groups and scores. These are what are written up in publications devoted to the sport. Poor performance by comparison, is generally blamed on factors such as wind, mirage, light changes, poor holding and let-off. These results may, in actuality, simply be the variation which should be expected in a series of groups, in statistical terms and on a scientific basis.

It is my opinion that any shooter will obtain the best performance from his rifle and ammunition if he clearly understands what results he may expect from the combination in an extended series, discounting the element of luck, where mistakes offset each other as when a poor hold is compensated by a wind change. Knowing what performance may be expected allows the shooter to make sight changes, with changing conditions, so as to keep the group centered in the bull and to lose as few points as possible. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in the Palma Team Match, when it is fired in one of the British Commonwealth Countries, using 7.62 NATO ammunition, with the 144 to 152 grain bullet at a velocity of about 2800 fps. Even in the selected lots used in this match, groups will average two to three times the size of the groups obtainable with the better combinations of NRA match rifle and hand loads used in the U.S., ignoring the difference in wind drift. If the rifle-ammo combination, in an extended series, can only be counted on to barely group in the center ring of the target used it is quite clear that the chances are that a windage change is not called for on the sights when a shot strikes just inside the center ring, laterally, and a wind change is not evident to the shooter. A sight change under these conditions may put the next bullet out the opposite side, simply as a result of the group size, rather than due to a wind shift.

Accustomed to the use of highly accurate rifle-ammunition combinations and using heavy bullets, which are good wind-buckers, in their matches at home, U.S. shooters have a tendency to make sight changes in the Palma Match which are not warranted with the group sizes that are to be expected with the Palma rifle-7.62 NATO service ammunition combination and this is one of the major reasons for the lack of success of U.S. Palma teams on foreign soil.

When trying to establish the proper load for a new rifle, it is a common practice for a shooter to load up five rounds each of several different loads, to go out and shoot these off a bench, using a riflescope, and to assume that the load which gives the best group in this test is the best one. Let's assume that the shooter is using a .308 Winchester caliber rifle, Lake City cases, 168 grain bullets and DuPont's #4895 powder. He loads five rounds each of powder charges of 39, 40, 41 and 42 grains, shoots them with great care and the corresponding groups in minutes of angle are: 1 , 7/8, 3/4 and 1 . Perhaps he loads more rounds of the 41 grain load and shoots a couple more groups which are somewhere near the 3/4 moa level and is now convinced that he has found the best load. The fact is that there is no statistical difference among all of these groups. The differences in group size are what should be expected in a limited test.

Among the earliest applications of statistical probability was its use in controlling artillery fire and every ordnance textbook has a chapter on probability of fire. It is a mathematical concept based on sound and proven theory, and it is applicable to rifle fire. The 1929 edition of the British textbook of small arms has a chapter on it and two or three good articles covering it have appeared in "The American Rifleman” in years past. Figures 1, 2 and 3 are taken from one of the Rifleman articles.

Fantastic contribution...I do wonder in the over 40 years since this event what the achievable number would look like in comparison given the general improvement in accessability to much improved components and barrels and tolerances in action construction.

 

[Mystic Precision]

Fantastic contribution...I do wonder in the over 40 years since this event what the achievable number would look like in comparison given the general improvement in accessability to much improved components and barrels and tolerances in action construction.

Simple... look at the current state of LR F class around the world. The components, rifles and tuning have advanced where large samples sizes are indeed redundant. We are replicating loads that work in well defined nodes with components that will reach very high levels of consistency and performance. The heavy lifting has been done years ago.... for most shooters, it is rinse and repeat. And if a barrel doesn't respond to work in the desired node in this game, the barrel is typically tossed.

Or there is something mechanically wrong with the rifle ... or a bad batch of components.

Factory rifles and factory ammo are a different story.... some do, some don't. For me, just too expensive to play this way.... except for rimfire which is well.... rimfire.

When I do my initial trial for a new competition barrel in one of my 2 chamberings, I will know if the barrel is a keeper within 21rds. The final, final load may take some more rds but whether it is worth the time to continue will already be determined in those first 21rds.

If you ask PRS shooters using popular 6mm cartridges like the Dasher, GT and BR... with similar components and set ups, the popular loads are likely within 0.5gr for that case over many shooters.

We are not reinventing the wheel.

The tools, techniques and gear have progressed a bunch even over the last decade

Jerry

 

[regulate34]

I’ve had “flyers” that I could not explain at first.
It’s always the load combination I was playing with.
As changing the recipe would fix it.

Since I got a chronograph I have seen flyers show up in velocity.
Gettting a ES of 10-20fps. Then all of a sudden you see one round 130fps off the average for the load.
It shows up on the target out of place.

Was it’s a bad powder charge. Was is a slightly hot primer
Bullet with a anomalies? Did I pull a little?

Hard to say. For what I do a 1” group that throws a 2” group every once in a while I’m not worried.

Chucking a flyer out to 4-6” needs attention. Only had this personally 2x
Lead cast in a 30-30 and campro bullets in 45colt.

30-30 needed .311” cast
45 colt campro needed to loose 300fps