Smaller grouping at 200 yards compared to 100 yards
- Thread starter ArmedGinger
- Start date
Is your parallax set for 100 yards? Without moving the rifle try moving your head slightly while looking through the scope. The reticles should not move relative to the target. I have found this can make a noticable difference.
Someone might say it is because your projectile closer in is unstable and has a corkscrew like path but Bryan Litz tested this extensively and found it that while it can happen it makes almost no measurable difference.
Someone might say it is because your projectile closer in is unstable and has a corkscrew like path but Bryan Litz tested this extensively and found it that while it can happen it makes almost no measurable difference.
Last edited:
RangerPark
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Near Edmonton, AB
How many times has this happened? So many variables in surplus ammo, it's probably more likely that whatever rounds you fired for the 200 yards group were more closely matched than the rest of the batch. I see this often with Lake City ammo, average group size is 1.5" at 100 meters, every now and then I'll see a 0.5" group, but it's not the norm. Fire 50 rounds at each distance, 10x 5 round groups, and see if the 200 yards groups are consistently better. I doubt they will be.
Last edited:
Ok I didn't think of this at the time, must have been the heat.
The scope is an old Weaver T-10
They call that "Going to sleep."
It's an often argued subject, but seeing is believing right?
On the other hand sometimes we see what we look for...
My 300 yard groups are often better than my 100 yard groups... but why?
Mirage refraction could be a factor... I think mirage has a way of averaging out better at longer ranges than at shorter distances. 100 yards is refracting left, then 200 yards is refracting right, then net effect is zero.... and the result of that is a good group.
It's an often argued subject, but seeing is believing right?
On the other hand sometimes we see what we look for...
My 300 yard groups are often better than my 100 yard groups... but why?
Mirage refraction could be a factor... I think mirage has a way of averaging out better at longer ranges than at shorter distances. 100 yards is refracting left, then 200 yards is refracting right, then net effect is zero.... and the result of that is a good group.
Last edited:
Agreed but... Litz is an expert on ballistics... not light refraction.
Any seasoned long range competitor has seen where rifles are often more accurate at longer ranges than up close and it would be wrong to insist that it does not occur and to presume the reason why is simply ballistics.... or even that traditional ballistic theory is infallible... but we must be open to other possibilities.
It's natural that people see only what they look for ... I get that, but shooting is full of voodoo and superstition where one thing is explained away for the wrong reason.
As I stated above, the effect of light refraction may very well explain the phenomenon.... and it is entirely possible there may be other factors that may be yet to be understood. For me... I think its just that light refraction can average itself out over distance... at times and under certain conditions.
Last edited:
Rayleigh_Scattering
Regular
- Location
- Under the arch
Could be a loose action shifting in the stock due to bedding issues. That causes all sorts of strange relationships between what you do between shots and the point of impact. I was having a heck of a time last fall trying to troubleshoot it in the field last year.
Or you were set up at the wrong end of the range, which I'm told really aggravates the other shooters.
Or you were set up at the wrong end of the range, which I'm told really aggravates the other shooters.
It certainly seems that the theory that a set of missiles will 'diverge' at 100m and then mysteriously 'converge' at 200m is pretty hard to explain. And 'if' it happens....why wouldnt it cause the impacts at 300m to be spread out again?
