This explains a lot. Invariably the weather conditions are windy and bone dry where I shoot. However, I intend to watch a lot more closely during the 1.53 second TIF. Thanks.
Why groups at long range are the same as close range.
- Thread starter Maple57
- Start date
This explains a lot. Invariably the weather conditions are windy and bone dry where I shoot. However, I intend to watch a lot more closely during the 1.53 second TIF. Thanks.
Mystic Precision
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Summerland, BC
wouldn't be surprised if that is the firing of a TOW missile and 'shopped' into a hunting pic
That is one heck of a concussive blast cause by that side venting muzzle brake.
Jerry
Yes trace is easily visible in the right conditions if you are looking in the right place. Have never seen it look like that. To me it looks more like a disruption in the mirage. Hard to see with a .308 much inside 400m unless you have very good recoil management. The more steady your position and the faster your reticle comes back on target the easier to see. Very helpful particularly for windage calls on steel if there is foliage behind the target that eats up bullet splash. If you own a Kestrel with AB it will actually show you how high in your reticle to look for it.
Surprised no long time DCRA shooter has piped in about positive compensation. I have never experienced it my self, but then I have never shot my No 4 past 500m with issued ammunition which was the game at the time. There was an entire cottage industry built around improving the accuracy of the relatively thin Lee-Enfield, barrell which in part involved creating upward pressure forward on the barrel, reading chicken bones, and no small amount of Vudoo. The basic notion was to that the slower bullets would exit at the barrels upper end of deflection and the faster bullets at the lower and therefore convirge at the target at a certain distance and therefore produce tighter groups.
Certainly a warmly debated topic.
http://ww.geoffrey-kolbe.com/articles/rimfire_accuracy/tuning_a_barrel.htm
Surprised no long time DCRA shooter has piped in about positive compensation. I have never experienced it my self, but then I have never shot my No 4 past 500m with issued ammunition which was the game at the time. There was an entire cottage industry built around improving the accuracy of the relatively thin Lee-Enfield, barrell which in part involved creating upward pressure forward on the barrel, reading chicken bones, and no small amount of Vudoo. The basic notion was to that the slower bullets would exit at the barrels upper end of deflection and the faster bullets at the lower and therefore convirge at the target at a certain distance and therefore produce tighter groups.
Certainly a warmly debated topic.
http://ww.geoffrey-kolbe.com/articles/rimfire_accuracy/tuning_a_barrel.htm
There is nothing new about external ballistics … it has been widely studied and analyzed … here is one brief summary link http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com...on-of-bullets-why-is-too-much-spin-a-problem/
and generally if you do a search on artillery external ballistics precession and nutation you will find plenty of information on the subject.
’longbow’ brings up an extremely interesting discussion on the ‘compensating’ ‘mechanics’ (if that’s the right term!!) of the no.4 at long range ….. personally I think it is that kind of observation that makes shooting so fascinating.
and generally if you do a search on artillery external ballistics precession and nutation you will find plenty of information on the subject.
’longbow’ brings up an extremely interesting discussion on the ‘compensating’ ‘mechanics’ (if that’s the right term!!) of the no.4 at long range ….. personally I think it is that kind of observation that makes shooting so fascinating.
Positive compensation sounds interesting and may explain some good groups when the stars align, but I do not see it in any way as being something to deliberately strive for, as temperature changes and normal day to day variation will knock the balance out of tune in a minute.
I think positive compensation is a thing that happens by accident and on rare occasions, but not something you can rely upon on any given day.
Here's another example of spiraling bullets that group better than the diameter of the spiral.
Positive compensation is often used to explain how and why a rimfire barrel tuner works. For a basic explanation, see, for example, h ttp://www.varmintal.com/a22lr.htm
It should be kept in mind that in the video pellets are used rather than bullets. They can be two very different things. There's reason to believe that among the factors that can cause pellet spiralling that it's the shape of the pellet itself that contributes most. Unlike bullets, pellets have a diabolo shape, which means the bulk of the weight is in the nose, the waist is slim (wasp-like), and there's a hollow cavity at the rear end, which is surrounded by the pellet's skirt. For details on this, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR5j4aZwNH0 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feohlZ0bsYY
I’ve got an 8 twist .223 that I’ve shot FTR with that will consistently shoot under .5moa at 300m (see the .5 at 300 sticky). I tried many many times to put 5 5 round groups into less than .5 at 100 and have never succeeded. I also have a 6br that will shoot under .5 at 100 always. There is something to this but why is for people smarter than me.
Look into mirage refraction. Quite possibly the problem.
You can use a second rifle scope (about 24x or more) as a spotting scope. Put it on a weighted tripod and use a phonescope cam on an old cell phone to watch it on the phone display.
Point it at your target and with your left eye, watch where the reticle moves relative to the bull. Always shoot at where the reticle is relative to the bull and not at the bull.
That will take mirage refraction out of play and the only thing left to do is compensate for wind.
I suspect at 300 yards, the refraction may average out and as a result the refraction over the distance may be more static.
This does not help in F Class if they are manually pulling targets (because they don't always return to the same place) but can help when using static targets with electronic scoring.
Last edited:
So are you going to attempt Litz’s shoot through challenge? To prove your theories, and post your results?
I’m sure Bryan would love to see your results proving him wrong.
As to your comments about phase, how do you care to explain a mass regaining stability. Saying that the bullets come in and out of phase means exactly that.
Not really talking about changing trajectory in mid flight - but you already knew that.
Talking about introducing a slight yaw as the bullet leaves the muzzle and then fully stabilizing further down range. I've had this phenomena of tighter MOA groups further down range often enough to know that something's going on here and it's not the shooter.
Don't twist words or set up straw man arguments.
I’d really love to understand how something that doesn’t happen makes sense in your head.
Do the bullets talk to each other? Do they say, “ok you two go that way, and us three will go this way, and we’ll all meet back up at 300 yards.”?
