Cold bore zero versus (very) Hot bore zero “test”

[amassi]

Are you as dense on that forum as you are here?

Seriously, what does your question have to do with the ongoing conversation?

More zealots to support the old ways I’d guess

Some of the big game cull


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[huntnful]

Great data!! I knew the cold shift was a myth once I started shooting and testing more. As well as using better components. And it is noticeable to me that a steel barrel is more consistent/repeatable throughout the heat cycle on big magnum cartridges than a carbon barrel too. That’s just a small data set and could be a total fluke though.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Great data!! I knew the cold shift was a myth once I started shooting and testing more. As well as using better components. And it is noticeable to me that a steel barrel is more consistent/repeatable throughout the heat cycle on big magnum cartridges than a carbon barrel too. That’s just a small data set and could be a total fluke though.

This has been my personal experience as well with Tikka and Sako barrels. Not only in magnums it seems to be across the board.

 

[MallardSX2]

Would have loved to have seen browning and Winchester thrown in there.

Great test!

 

[Drenalin]

You should go back and read what you wrote, taken as a whole, it is inconsistent. Compare the bold above to this statement of yours:

Believing something is VBS then advocating for it anyway makes ones judgement highly questionable.

I believe he's saying he doesn't prefer to sit down and shoot ten times from the same rifle in one sitting. Like logistically, not because it refutes or supports these test results.

 

[5811]

Was the data from all the temperature readings recorded?

 

[Billy Goat]

Better than that. A functional, organized data base is forthcoming in the not too distant future.

Can you throw one meme in there?

Some of us really struggle to read and need a picture.

 

[Macintosh]

“I believe he’s saying he doesnt prefer to shoot 10 rounds in one sitting”

^^ But would prefer making 5 separate range trips?? If so, fine, but I suspect this preference isnt universal, and this experiment shows it is exactly that, an aesthetic preference not a functional requirement.
Personally, I would rather spend a few minutes and 10 shots to achieve a perfect zero that puts my rifles cone of shots centered exactly on my point of aim, and then spend my time and money on actual practice getting into solid positions and achieving good first round shots. Where I’m getting tripped up is what appears to be someone equating zeroing their rifle with shooting practice. To me those are two completely different things. It’s utterly irrelevant that I only shoot 1 or 2 shots when hunting, I still care very much that my zero is as good as possible, and that needs to be done however an accurate zero is best achieved. The fact that it might take more than a 3 shot group to get my zero fine-tuned enough to take longer shots has zero bearing on the fact that I dont ever plan to shoot 10 rounds at said deer. AFTER Im zeroed, THEN I’m going to practice making first-round hits…and accurate follow-up shots.

it looks to me like our friend is simply saying that 3 or 5-round groups are sufficient to achieve a zero good-enough for shooting big targets at closer (300 and in) range. Probably true-ish if thats what your goal is, seems its clearly not true at longer range Thats a different topic.

 

[yycyak]

How do you practice then? You go to the range and shoot 5 shots and go home after that? I guess I'm not tracking what you're putting down here.

I'm probably just reading things incorrectly, but it appears to read similar to an archer saying that he/she will only ever shoot one arrow at big game, so when they practice they just shoot one arrow and then go back to the truck.

Or (my Canadian showing through here) a hockey player saying he only plans on scoring anyway, so why practice 25 shots from the blue line...

Anyway, I think I derailed this. Because the data appears to show that hot/cold/whatever, barrels don't walk if they are built properly.

Which then has me asking if a skinny mountain barrel can do MOA all the time, hot or cold, what the heck is the purpose of a 26"+ steel bull barrel?

That's not at all what I said. I said I think 10 shot groups at one sitting to be worthless for a big game hunting rifle. IF I were inclined to see what a 10 shot group looked like for a specific load/rifle, I would be more inclined to shoot either 1 cold bore shot over 10 different days at the same target, or maybe 5 different days of 2 shots. Even at that, I think 10 shot groups for big game hunting are a complete waste of time and ammo. Especially given the fact that 95%+ of all big game animals are killed under 300 yards.

 

[ElPollo]

How do you practice then? You go to the range and shoot 5 shots and go home after that? I guess I'm not tracking what you're putting down here.

I'm probably just reading things incorrectly, but it appears to read similar to an archer saying that he/she will only ever shoot one arrow at big game, so when they practice they just shoot one arrow and then go back to the truck.

Or (my Canadian showing through here) a hockey player saying he only plans on scoring anyway, so why practice 25 shots from the blue line...

Anyway, I think I derailed this. Because the data appears to show that hot/cold/whatever, barrels don't walk if they are built properly.

Which then has me asking if a skinny mountain barrel can do MOA all the time, hot or cold, what the heck is the purpose of a 26"+ steel bull barrel?

The majority of hunters practice exactly the way you describe.

 

[JGRaider]

“I believe he’s saying he doesnt prefer to shoot 10 rounds in one sitting”

^^ But would prefer making 5 separate range trips?? If so, fine, but I suspect this preference isnt universal, and this experiment shows it is exactly that, an aesthetic preference not a functional requirement.
Personally, I would rather spend a few minutes and 10 shots to achieve a perfect zero that puts my rifles cone of shots centered exactly on my point of aim, and then spend my time and money on actual practice getting into solid positions and achieving good first round shots. Where I’m getting tripped up is what appears to be someone equating zeroing their rifle with shooting practice. To me those are two completely different things. It’s utterly irrelevant that I only shoot 1 or 2 shots when hunting, I still care very much that my zero is as good as possible, and that needs to be done however an accurate zero is best achieved. The fact that it might take more than a 3 shot group to get my zero fine-tuned enough to take longer shots has zero bearing on the fact that I dont ever plan to shoot 10 rounds at said deer. AFTER Im zeroed, THEN I’m going to practice making first-round hits…and accurate follow-up shots.

it looks to me like our friend is simply saying that 3 or 5-round groups are sufficient to achieve a zero good-enough for shooting big targets at closer (300 and in) range. Probably true-ish if thats what your goal is, seems its clearly not true at longer range Thats a different topic.

It's not a burden....my neighbor's range goes out to 1000 yds. I have multiple rifles that I like shooting, and my method of 'zeroing" has proven to be as sound as anyone else's, IMO/IME. Zeroing, and practice are independent of each other in my world.

Once again, out of almost 400 big game animals, my longest shot (primarily open country hunting) to this day has been 498 yds. 95%+ of big game animals killed are 300 yds or under, so most of this "mandatory" LR stuff is not really mandatory. Sure is fun though!

 

[JGRaider]

More zealots to support the old ways I’d guess

Some of the big game cull


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice work on the vermin......

 

[Macintosh]

You can lead a horse to water.

 

[atmat]

my method of 'zeroing" has proven to be as sound as anyone else's, IMO/IME.

Two things:

1) This is a thread on hot vs cold barrel impact. Not a thread on zeroing. Zeroing is a secondary issue which is impacted by barrel performance heated vs cooled.

2) The biggest issue is that you’re quoting your “opinion” and “expertise” without showing any objective data to back it. That’s why people are arguing with you.

 

[Marbles]

I believe he's saying he doesn't prefer to sit down and shoot ten times from the same rifle in one sitting. Like logistically, not because it refutes or supports these test results.

He specifically states a preference for a cold bore zero and confirms that preference and that while he does not feel 10 shot groups are needed, if he did, he would do it cold bore even though a cold bore shift is a myth.

He defends it by calling it practice. Then he specifically agrees that zeroing is not practice. (He also ignores well founded science on what is good training, but that also is not the topic of this thread).

But, he insists that his statement of practice answered the question of why if he wanted a 10 shot zero he would take 5 to 10 days to do it.

I can give other examples, from this thread alone, but doing so is pointless.

He has diarrhea of the mouth and cannot slow down and think. Despite numerous people having asked careful questions he cannot bring his comments into a coherent framework. His only fall back is to quote irrelevant experience and seeing as he agrees POI shift due to bore temp is a myth, the only apparent reason for commenting is to disparage the work of others. He has laboriously confirmed and continues to confirm that opinion in numerous posts.

None of that is germane to this thread.

 

[Drenalin]

He specifically states a preference for a cold bore zero and confirms that preference and that while he does not feel 10 shot groups are needed, if he did, he would do it cold bore even though a cold bore shift is a myth.

He defends it by calling it practice. Then he specifically agrees that zeroing is not practice. (He also ignores well founded science on what is good training, but that also is not the topic of this thread).

But, he insists that his statement of practice answered the question of why if he wanted a 10 shot zero he would take 5 to 10 days to do it.

I can give other examples, from this thread alone, but doing so is pointless.

He has diarrhea of the mouth and cannot slow down and think. Despite numerous people having asked careful questions he cannot bring his comments into a coherent framework. His only fall back is to quote irrelevant experience and seeing as he agrees POI shift due to bore temp is a myth, the only apparent reason for commenting is to disparage the work of others. He has laboriously confirmed and continues to confirm that opinion in numerous posts.

None of that is germane to this thread.

He capitalized the IF...I took it as saying (1) 10 round groups are not necessary, (2) 10 round practice sessions are not necessary, and (3) if he were going to shoot ten rounds out of one rifle, he prefers to spread it out over multiple sessions due to points (1) and (2) preceding.

Before we continue, I don't disagree with the rest of your post. I don't know the guy, we don't drink together on the weekends. And I'm not qualified to speak for him, nor should I. I was just trying to help clarify what I think was being said.

You and I are doing that thing to the horse, which probably isn't beneficial to you, me, or the thread. Let alone the horse, who won't know the difference in the end anyway.

 

[JGRaider]

You are spot on Drenalin. Marbles isn't real swift.

 

[Pro953]

I really like the idea of being able to push out a ten round group over a shorter period of time. On warm days waiting for the barrel to cool down can take a fair bit between shots. I was always more concerned more variables were being introduced between atmospherics, shooter fatigue and other variables that impact the data.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JGRaider]

I really like the idea of being able to push out a ten round group over a shorter period of time. On warm days waiting for the barrel to cool down can take a fair bit between shots. I was always more concerned more variables were being introduced between atmospherics, shooter fatigue and other variables that impact the data.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is NOT an attack on anything you said personally. I am curious though, for those who agree, what if the 10 consecutive round group is terrible, like 3 MOA? What do you do then, blame the equipment, wind, barrel mirage, load, or what?

 

[ResearchinStuff]

own up to the fact that you shot a terrible group. and if it's a repeatable terrible group, then you start changing stuff until either the group is acceptable & repeatable, or you rebarrel. It does no good to shoot a small group if it's not repeatable, centered on the same POI, over and over.