Does the 223/6mm for everything change when hunt cost $$$

[ElPollo]

I usually shoulder and hold my rifle when shooting it. Do you?

Still waiting on that easy equation that factors in rifle weight, time in bore, recoil energy, shoulder pressure, body weight and all the other factors and tells us how far the rifle will move with the bullet in the bore.

Everyone else is wrong. Show us you are right.

He will keep talking as long as you keep responding.

 

[solarshooter]

What we are skirting around is explored and tested in Bryan Litz's latest volume (III) of Modern Advancements in Long Range Shooting, and resulted in his so called TOP (Theory of Precision) Gun Theory. He takes a bunch of data across many rifles and shots on barrel motion with high speed cameras, and also group size. He then explores a variety of models (mathematical equations) that involve momentum, energy, and weight of the rifle and bullet, and how well they fit the experimental data. His conclusion is the following equation:

Precision = 0.005*(KE/W_r)+0.039

Precision = 5 shot group average at 100yds in MOA
KE = Kinetic energy of bullet at the muzzle in ft-lbs
W_r = Weight of the rifle in lbs



Conservation of momentum did predict barrel motion well. However, barrel motion did not correlate well with precision.

 

[TheGDog]

That was poll numbers.



This is completely inaccurate. People use logic and emotion to make choices. Not exclusively one or the other.

Please provide data showing the contrary.

RE: People use logic AND EMOTION to make choices.

CLEARLY... Emotion is involved in making choices for a lot of the "Normies" (and I use that term loosely) out there.

I mean Hellooo!!! Even though we know it was rigged, just look at how many people voted for FJB. THAT... was fueled by PURE EMOTIONAL RESPONSE (TDS)... nothing more.

 

[TheGDog]

What we are skirting around is explored and tested in Bryan Litz's latest volume (III) of Modern Advancements in Long Range Shooting, and resulted in his so called TOP (Theory of Precision) Gun Theory. He takes a bunch of data across many rifles and shots on barrel motion with high speed cameras, and also group size. He then explores a variety of models (mathematical equations) that involve momentum, energy, and weight of the rifle and bullet, and how well they fit the experimental data. His conclusion is the following equation:

Precision = 0.005*(KE/W_r)+0.039

Precision = 5 shot group average at 100yds in MOA
KE = Kinetic energy of bullet at the muzzle in ft-lbs
W_r = Weight of the rifle in lbs

View attachment 715823

Conservation of momentum did predict barrel motion well. However, barrel motion did not correlate well with precision.
View attachment 715826

I'm assuming for his testing he found an indoor rifle range? To take wind out of the equation?

 

[yeti12]

He will keep talking as long as you keep responding.

Yeah. It's kinda like a crackhead explaining to you that his spaceship is in a cardboard box behind the gas station. I know he's wrong, I'm just responding to see his thought process play out. Then I pay for my items and go on my way. I'll be on my way very soon....

 

[Formidilosus]

RE: People use logic AND EMOTION to make choices.

CLEARLY... Emotion is involved in making choices for a lot of the "Normies" (and I use that term loosely) out there.

I mean Hellooo!!! Even though we know it was rigged, just look at how many people voted for FJB. THAT... was fueled by PURE EMOTIONAL RESPONSE (TDS)... nothing more.

It is possible, if not preferable, to use reason and logic when making objective decisions.

That people use emotion instead, doesn’t mean it’s better or that they can’t and shouldn’t learn to make rational decisions based on observable reality instead of the one they dream up in their emotional hissy.

 

[sickles107]

I think a huge point being missed by all this talk on theory is not that a small bore is necessarily a "better" tool in itself, but a better tool for making the shooter better.

It all comes down to spotting hits in my opinion, and experience the last year shooting a 6 creed with an swfa 6x next to a 308 with an swfa 10x.

Let's say you have two differnt rifles, the math on elevation is trued. Only difference is perceived recoil. and for argument sake to eliminate the variable, let's say you are 100% not effected by the higher recoiling rifle (even though you are..)

On a calm day maybe you go 18/20 on a 10 inch plate at 500yds with both rifles. But on a windy day, you start missing more with each. Lets say you spot 40% of your impacts with the high recoil rifle, and 80% with the low recoil rifle.

The learning from real time feedback, seeing how the wind effected the bullet and made you miss, is compounding. the lower recoiling rifle is better at showing you why you are missing, therefore better at showing you how to not miss on your next shot, therefore higher hit rates.

Goes for confidence on first round hits on steel or animals, as well as confidence for corrections on follow up shots on steel or animals.

 

[Castmaster]

I kinda thought that throwing the 375H&H, the laughing emoji, and by saying “Texas heart shot” in to the end of my one of my previous posts would be enough for people to realize I was trolling about that but apparently not .

In regards to a Mountain Nyala hunt though I would still pick a controlled expansion or copper bullet in something in the 7mm or 30 cal family I think a 300 win mag would really be a perfect option for that hunt also due to world wide ammo availability on a hunt in a foreign country if your ammo were to get lost in traveling.

 

[RockAndSage]

It is possible, if not preferable, to use reason and logic when making objective decisions.

That people use emotion instead, doesn’t mean it’s better or that they can’t and shouldn’t learn to make rational decisions based on observable reality instead of the one they dream up in their emotional hissy.

Emotion is triggered by thought - but it happens so fast that we often don't recognize the thought...and many don't even realize their subsequent "thinking" is being driven and clouded by emotion. The more intense the emotion, the more it's invariably related to either threat perception or their sense of identity. And those emotions are incredibly powerful when it's a perceived threat to identity.

And that's what almost every single gun-guy decision comes down to, when not driven by hard data - their identity, and how they express that and its related tribalism with their choices of guns, cartridges, brand loyalty, etc, etc.

When someone is presented with a mountain of data and verifiable, repeated evidence, and still disregards it in their decision making - you can be almost certain they're experiencing threat perception emotions related to their sense of identity. It's too big of a hit to their ego.

I personally don't know how someone could read every single post of that .223 thread, and still disregard or dismiss that evidence.

 

[wind gypsy]

I kinda thought that throwing the 375H&H, the laughing emoji, and by saying “Texas heart shot” in to the end of my one of my previous posts would be enough for people to realize I was trolling about that but apparently not .

In regards to a Mountain Nyala hunt though I would still pick a controlled expansion or copper bullet in something in the 7mm or 30 cal family I think a 300 win mag would really be a perfect option for that hunt also due to world wide ammo availability on a hunt in a foreign country if your ammo were to get lost in traveling.

They got a bunch of good 300wm ammo on the shelves in Ethiopia or Tajikistan if someone finds a way to get a rifle there but not the ammo?

 

[solarshooter]

I think a huge point being missed by all this talk on theory is not that a small bore is necessarily a "better" tool in itself, but a better tool for making the shooter better.

It all comes down to spotting hits in my opinion, and experience the last year shooting a 6 creed with an swfa 6x next to a 308 with an swfa 10x.

Let's say you have two differnt rifles, the math on elevation is trued. Only difference is perceived recoil. and for argument sake to eliminate the variable, let's say you are 100% not effected by the higher recoiling rifle (even though you are..)

On a calm day maybe you go 18/20 on a 10 inch plate at 500yds with both rifles. But on a windy day, you start missing more with each. Lets say you spot 40% of your impacts with the high recoil rifle, and 80% with the low recoil rifle.

The learning from real time feedback, seeing how the wind effected the bullet and made you miss, is compounding. the lower recoiling rifle is better at showing you why you are missing, therefore better at showing you how to not miss on your next shot, therefore higher hit rates.

Goes for confidence on first round hits on steel or animals, as well as confidence for corrections on follow up shots on steel or animals.

Just to follow this example, doesn't this "spotting misses" imply you are missing more? If you can spot impacts with a higher recoiling gun, does the advantage of lower recoil go away?

By the way, your example of 6 creed vs 308 is a bad one, 6 creed will almost always have a better wind rating! Let's compare say 6.5CM vs .223, where the wind number could be 1/2-2/3rds.

 

[wind gypsy]

What we are skirting around is explored and tested in Bryan Litz's latest volume (III) of Modern Advancements in Long Range Shooting, and resulted in his so called TOP (Theory of Precision) Gun Theory. He takes a bunch of data across many rifles and shots on barrel motion with high speed cameras, and also group size. He then explores a variety of models (mathematical equations) that involve momentum, energy, and weight of the rifle and bullet, and how well they fit the experimental data. His conclusion is the following equation:

Precision = 0.005*(KE/W_r)+0.039

Precision = 5 shot group average at 100yds in MOA
KE = Kinetic energy of bullet at the muzzle in ft-lbs
W_r = Weight of the rifle in lbs

View attachment 715823

Conservation of momentum did predict barrel motion well. However, barrel motion did not correlate well with precision.
View attachment 715826

Interesting results. Would be even more interesting with all the same cartridge. Go say 308 in 5.5# to 25# builds using same action, barrel mfr, gunsmith, etc. Say do a bartlein #1 and an ultralight stock through a 1.25” straight contour with a weighted stock or chassis and everything in between.

 

[762 ULTRAMAGA]

Bump that noise! If I was blessed enough to cough-up 40 large? Definitely wouldn't be a .223 Rem in my hands.

And why should I? With rounds like 6.5cm where the recoil is actually not bad at all. Kinda no excuse not to bump-up a little on the ft-Lbs.

Weaksauce son
Real men kill Griz at a mile with 223s

 

[Formidilosus]

I think a huge point being missed by all this talk on theory is not that a small bore is necessarily a "better" tool in itself, but a better tool for making the shooter better.

It all comes down to spotting hits in my opinion, and experience the last year shooting a 6 creed with an swfa 6x next to a 308 with an swfa 10x.

Let's say you have two differnt rifles, the math on elevation is trued. Only difference is perceived recoil. and for argument sake to eliminate the variable, let's say you are 100% not effected by the higher recoiling rifle (even though you are..)

On a calm day maybe you go 18/20 on a 10 inch plate at 500yds with both rifles. But on a windy day, you start missing more with each. Lets say you spot 40% of your impacts with the high recoil rifle, and 80% with the low recoil rifle.

The learning from real time feedback, seeing how the wind effected the bullet and made you miss, is compounding. the lower recoiling rifle is better at showing you why you are missing, therefore better at showing you how to not miss on your next shot, therefore higher hit rates.

Goes for confidence on first round hits on steel or animals, as well as confidence for corrections on follow up shots on steel or animals.

Correct. People want to make decisions based on one single factor- in a vacuum. Just because something has better wind numbers does not, in and of itself mean that success rates will go up.
The number one reason that we miss is due to us- not wind. We suck, and the more shootable a rifle is, the less our sucking effects where the bullet goes, and the quicker and more consistently we can observe and recover from errors.


The whole thing should be looked at holistically- which item or technique results in the most success from muzzle to as far as one will legitimately shoot an animal?


Item “A” results in two more opportunities at 700 plus yards, every 30 animals; but costs 5 opportunities every 30 animals from muzzle to 700y: for a total of 27 successes for every 30 opportunities.

Item “B” costs two opportunities at 600 plus yards every 30 animals due to cross canyon and heavy winds; but results in 5 more opportunities every 30 animals: for a total of 28 successes for every 30 opportunities.


Item “B” is the better choice in this example overall.
That’s how it should be. Not, “well in this most extreme contrived situation “this” item will result in a 2% better hit rate, even though that situation almost never happens or is unrealistic, and I’ll ignore the cost in every other area to get that small advantage for a situation that doesn’t happen anyways”.

Humans are bad at making probabilistic decisions, and instead generally make them on emotion from very small data sets, or from no data at all. The amount of hunters that have been able to use cartridges and calibers from .224-.338, and bullets from frangible to monos in very large sample sizes for both- is very small. Of that tiny fraction of a percent of hunters that have, those who are objective enough or even care enough to log what happens without emotional bias, are a fraction of a percent of that. If that fraction of a fraction, the amount that have a legitimate understanding of factual terminal ballistics is even smaller.

 

[Thegman]

Rifle movement:

It's a conservation of momentum problem (not center of mass, really) as far as I can tell. A close approximation is pretty simple.

Rifle Movement (before bullets leaves the barrel) ~ = (Bm + 1/2Pm)Bl / Rm

Bm = bullet mass
Bl = barrel length
Pm = Powder mass (assumes average powder gas position is half way down the barrel upon bullet exit, thus the 1/2 factor)
Rm = Rifle mass (with scope, rings, etc).
All masses in grains (1 pound = 7,000 grains)
All distance/length in inches

This gives about 0.09 inches of movement for my Kimber Montana 308 with a 22 inch barrel and a 150 grain bullet with 49 grains of powder. That's pretty close to what is shown on the high-speed video.

Slightly less movement even for my scoped ultralight ultralight 300 HAM’R with a 125 grain bullet and 26 grains of powder.

0.25" of movement could happen, but it would be a lot. I'd have to be shooting a 350 grain bullet (instead of 125 grain) with the same amount of powder from my 3# 5oz 300 HAM’R.

 

[Formidilosus]

Emotion is triggered by thought - but it happens so fast that we often don't recognize the thought...and many don't even realize their subsequent "thinking" is being driven and clouded by emotion. The more intense the emotion, the more it's invariably related to either threat perception or their sense of identity. And those emotions are incredibly powerful when it's a perceived threat to identity.

And that's what almost every single gun-guy decision comes down to, when not driven by hard data - their identity, and how they express that and its related tribalism with their choices of guns, cartridges, brand loyalty, etc, etc.

When someone is presented with a mountain of data and verifiable, repeated evidence, and still disregards it in their decision making - you can be almost certain they're experiencing threat perception emotions related to their sense of identity. It's too big of a hit to their ego.

I personally don't know how someone could read every single post of that .223 thread, and still disregard or dismiss that evidence.

Yes.

 

[cuerro viejo]

Just to follow this example, doesn't this "spotting misses" imply you are missing more? If you can spot impacts with a higher recoiling gun, does the advantage of lower recoil go away?

By the way, your example of 6 creed vs 308 is a bad one, 6 creed will almost always have a better wind rating! Let's compare say 6.5CM vs .223, where the wind number could be 1/2-2/3rds.

We need to define a miss. Miss could be 3 inches from aim point. self Spotting impact while not the best double check, it’s better then nothing when evaluating if you hit the animal and if your shot requires you to haul ass to get in front and put it down for good, etc

 

[Formidilosus]

Just to follow this example, doesn't this "spotting misses" imply you are missing more? If you can spot impacts with a higher recoiling gun, does the advantage of lower recoil go away?

By the way, your example of 6 creed vs 308 is a bad one, 6 creed will almost always have a better wind rating! Let's compare say 6.5CM vs .223, where the wind number could be 1/2-2/3rds.

You are still trying to make this about one single aspect in a vacuum.
The problem should be looked at as- “fewest missed animals or rodeos per 100 opportunities from muzzle to legitimate max range”. That what I am and others are trying to convey. Wind drift is but one factor, and not nearly the number one factory of missed shots.

 

[Castmaster]

They got a bunch of good 300wm ammo on the shelves in Ethiopia or Tajikistan if someone finds a way to get a rifle there but not the ammo?

I highly doubt you would be getting any ammo in Tajikistan besides your own, but me suggesting that caliber had to do with Ethiopia it’s a fact that things get lost in travel and the chance of your PH having something along the lines of 30-06, 300 win mag, rifle or ammunition in camp would be a heck of a lot more likely than something wild like a 6.5 Sherman. These are things you should think off when traveling a long way to a foreign country.

 

[eric1115]

Correct. People want to make decisions based on one single factor- in a vacuum. Just because something has better wind numbers does not, in and of itself mean that success rates will go up.
The number one reason that we miss is due to us- not wind. We suck, and the more shootable a rifle is, the less our sucking effects where the bullet goes, and the quicker and more consistently we can observe and recover from errors.


The whole thing should be looked at holistically- which item or technique results in the most success from muzzle to as far as one will legitimately shoot an animal?


Item “A” results in two more opportunities at 700 plus yards, every 30 animals; but costs 5 opportunities every 30 animals from muzzle to 700y: for a total of 27 successes for every 30 opportunities.

Item “B” costs two opportunities at 600 plus yards every 30 animals due to cross canyon and heavy winds; but results in 5 more opportunities every 30 animals: for a total of 28 successes for every 30 opportunities.


Item “B” is the better choice in this example overall.
That’s how it should be. Not, “well in this most extreme contrived situation “this” item will result in a 2% better hit rate, even though that situation almost never happens or is unrealistic, and I’ll ignore the cost in every other area to get that small advantage for a situation that doesn’t happen anyways”.

Humans are bad at making probabilistic decisions, and instead generally make them on emotion from very small data sets, or from no data at all. The amount of hunters that have been able to use cartridges and calibers from .224-.338, and bullets from frangible to monos in very large sample sizes for both- is very small. Of that tiny fraction of a percent of hunters that have, those who are objective enough or even care enough to log what happens without emotional bias, are a fraction of a percent of that. If that fraction of a fraction, the amount that have a legitimate understanding of factual terminal ballistics is even smaller.

Yep, I think part of the problem boils down to how poorly we judge our abilities to utilize the full potential capabilities of our tools.

I'd guess that most "pretty good" drivers would turn in better lap times in a Porsche Boxster than in a Carrera GT on a road course. But everyone is going to want to drive the GT.

500SW bear guns, 450CC dirt bikes, 1000CC sport bikes, .300PRC elk rifles, ballistic solvers that want lat and direction of fire so they can solve for Coriolis, 37" mud tires, and 24x top end on rifle scopes all sell because of this error in judgment. 99% of people who buy all those items would be better served by the 2-step lower option.

I'm sure it happens in all arenas, but I don't really know or care what ridiculous overpowered graphics cards people buy for their computers or Teflon coated knitting needles or whatever.

We all fear the hypothetical situation where the gear holds us back at the top end much much more than we fear the real situation where the gear holds us back because we don't have the skill level needed to actually use it to its full potential.