How much can i expect handloading to change the accuracy with a given bullet? And what are the performance of the average factory rifle with a variety

[Archer86]

Use logical thought process here. If someone can not shoot 10, 20, 30, or 100 shots consistently without having a seizure behind the rifle, then that same person can not shoot 3 shots or 5 consistently. The worse a system is, the more data points needed to see the average.


Point in fact, if someone is producing errors, they have to shoot more shots per group, not less to have the same total confidence factor.

All you are doing is proving the shooters capabilities not the rifle then ?

 

[ssimo]

A count of 10 is not a substantial sample size in real world scientific data. There are to many errors your 10 round 20 round 30 round groups do nothing to prove a rifles accuracy potential unless it's is in a fixes device holding the exact same point of aim everytime in a controlled environment so there is nothing that can effect the outcome.

That's the point. "Prove". Who cares about proving what officially is the accuracy of my rifle. I just need to know where it shoots and what is the dispersion of shots. That's it. If your gun shoots well, groups are so small that you don't need to shoot many rounds. You know very quickly what that gun is capable of. But on forums people love to overthink, included me sometimes! All this OT is really stupid in my opinion. Btw, let's go back to the topic!!

 

[Formidilosus]

All you are doing is proving the shooters capabilities not the rifle then ?

It’s one and the same. Three shots has the shooter error in it as well.

 

[Harvey_NW]

That's the point. "Prove". Who cares about proving what officially is the accuracy of my rifle. I just need to know where it shoots and what is the dispersion of shots. That's it.

That completely contradicts itself. If you want to know what the dispersion is, you have to shoot the shots. That's it.

 

[Formidilosus]

. Who cares about proving what officially is the accuracy of my rifle. I just need to know where it shoots and what is the dispersion of shots.

That’s what is being done. To find the dispersion that isn’t random noise takes a certain amount of rounds. Once again, I all but guarantee you that due to you shooting small sample sizes (3 shots) that you have “wasted” more rounds in this than I do in multiple rifles.

That's it. If your gun shoots well, groups are so small that you don't need to shoot many rounds. You know very quickly what that gun is capable of. But on forums people love to overthink, included me sometimes! All this OT is really stupid in my opinion. Btw, let's go back to the topic!!

If you can give answers now- why are you having to ask for advice on forums? Again, this is not me being rude- I am trying to get you to think through this.

 

[grfox92]

My friend this doesn't make any sense. I never said i shot only one 3 shots group, i am saying that i use 3 shots group for everything, from checking zero after the rifle took a beating, to test its accuracy, the trajectory and so on. 10 shots with the ammo i use would be very expensive. No need to waste money and barrel life.. unless you wanna say you use 10 shots groups on a forum

What about it doesn't make sense?

I'll give a personal example. I loaded 3 at 43.2gr, 3 at 43.5gr and 3 at 43.8gr. I took all of those to the range and shot 3x 3 shot groups. The 43.5gr group was by far the best at about 3/4 of an inch. So I went home and loaded 10 of them.

I brought those 10 to the range, set up a mat, got prone on a bipod with a rear bag, spun the scope to 14 power. Shot 10 rounds into the same size orange dot and walked away with a 2" group. I was rock solid, with all 10 shots breaking clean and on target. I waited 10 minutes between 5 shot groups to let my barrel cool.

3 shots told me it was a 3/4 inch gun. 10 shots told me it was a 2 inch gun with that load. I chased my tail repeating this process by loading 3 of different charge weights and shooting 3 shot groups. At the end of the day, when I thought I had something good based on a 3 shot group and then loaded a bunch up and shot bigger groups, I was continually disappointed.


Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[ssimo]

That completely contradicts itself. If you want to know what the dispersion is, you have to shoot the shots. That's it.

Man, listen, i really can't believe there are 3 pages about this totally obvious topic. Isn'tmy point obvious? So, let's try again. with your reasoning no one would know what the dispersion of his rifle is unless he shoots a 10k rounds group. With 2 or 3 3-shots group i have a very good idea (idea!!) of the accuracy of my rifle with a given ammo. To get the zero and test it at various distances, after i choose the ammo basing myself on my very small and totally useless e shots groups, i have plenty of shots to get confirmation of what approximately is the accuracy of my rifle. After this process i go hunting and, while you discuss about why that 9th shot went 0.2 inches higher than what your calculations predicted, i have already taken a deer and made it meat for the freezer. 10 shot groups are not practical, at all, for a hunter. If you have time and ammo to waste cause you get only one or two tag every year, cool. Spend them shooting in the field from field position or work on your stalking skills.

If i had to do some competitions where it is possible to have to shoot many rounds in a row, i would be more concerned about the rifle's behaviour in fire strings. Otherwise shooting a total of 21 rounds divided in 7 3 shots groups or shooting 21 rounds in a 21 shots group makes no difference, assuming you let the barrel cool down similarly.

Actually i think that 3 shots groups are even better cause you are gonna change target and therefore position so you can have a feedback over how good you are to go behind the rifle in the same way everytime. And then, who cares about being able to put one hole in the other hunting. It's the first shot (cold bore but, more importantly, cold shooter) that count.

I have never followed rules, if a gun shoots very well, you can see it, you don't need many shots to see it if you are confident you are shooting the gun well. Guns are very reliable in priducing their dispersion cone typically. If a gun or load has fliers that sometimes go completely off, the gun or the ammo will disappear from my cabinet ahah

 

[ResearchinStuff]

What about it doesn't make sense?

I'll give a personal example. I loaded 3 at 43.2gr, 3 at 43.5gr and 3 at 43.8gr. I took all of those to the range and shot 3x 3 shot groups. The 43.5gr group was by far the best at about 3/4 of an inch. So I went home and loaded 10 of them.

I brought those 10 to the range, set up a mat, got prone on a bipod with a rear bag, spun the scope to 14 power. Shot 10 rounds into the same size orange dot and walked away with a 2" group. I was rock solid, with all 10 shots breaking clean and on target. I waited 10 minutes between 5 shot groups to let my barrel cool.

3 shots told me it was a 3/4 inch gun. 10 shots told me it was a 2 inch gun with that load. I chased my tail repeating this process by loading 3 of different charge weights and shooting 3 shot groups. At the end of the day, when I thought I had something good based on a 3 shot group and then loaded a bunch up and shot bigger groups, I was continually disappointed.


Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

I did this for 20 years. I thought it's what reloading and shooting were all about.

 

[ssimo]

That’s what is being done. To find the dispersion that isn’t random noise takes a certain amount of rounds. Once again, I all but guarantee you that due to you shooting small sample sizes (3 shots) that you have “wasted” more rounds in this than I do in multiple rifles.




If you can give answers now- why are you having to ask for advice on forums? Again, this is not me being rude- I am trying to get you to think through this.

My God. If you shoot 3 rounds 3 times makes a total of 9. 3x3=9. 3x10=30. Math is funny.

Oh, finally! That's the point. Why i am asking on a forum. I was asking on a forum a technical aspect of reloading, i am totally ignorant about this subject so i asked. If I knew this conversation would have became the nonsense it is, i wouldn't have posted the thread. So, please, can we go back to the topic?

I have already replied just here above and this is just common sense guys. Do what you want, i couldn't care less about how you determine the accuracy of your rifle. There are many ways, some of them are practical and are oriented to use the gun, some of them are just unusual forms of masturba..on in my opinion, but it's ok. It's a free world.

 

[ResearchinStuff]

assuming you let the barrel cool down similarly.

Using the group photos in this thread, how are you still concluding that barrel temp affects group size? Literally just look at the pictures.

The three 10 shot groups I posted, at wildly different barrel temps, are all within .15 MOA. And that's why 10 shot groups are useful - I bet few to none of your 3 shot groups are repeatable within .15 MOA at any barrel temp/condition.

 

[ssimo]

What about it doesn't make sense?

I'll give a personal example. I loaded 3 at 43.2gr, 3 at 43.5gr and 3 at 43.8gr. I took all of those to the range and shot 3x 3 shot groups. The 43.5gr group was by far the best at about 3/4 of an inch. So I went home and loaded 10 of them.

I brought those 10 to the range, set up a mat, got prone on a bipod with a rear bag, spun the scope to 14 power. Shot 10 rounds into the same size orange dot and walked away with a 2" group. I was rock solid, with all 10 shots breaking clean and on target. I waited 10 minutes between 5 shot groups to let my barrel cool.

3 shots told me it was a 3/4 inch gun. 10 shots told me it was a 2 inch gun with that load. I chased my tail repeating this process by loading 3 of different charge weights and shooting 3 shot groups. At the end of the day, when I thought I had something good based on a 3 shot group and then loaded a bunch up and shot bigger groups, I was continually disappointed.


Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

This doesn't sound funny or healthy, i am sorry. You are not getting an award if that piece of steel and plastic can throw metal balls in a 50% smaller circle.

Unless you compete. But we are not talking about that now, it's about hunting (it should be).

 

[ssimo]

Using the group photos in this thread, how are you still concluding that barrel temp affects group size? Literally just look at the pictures.

The three 10 shot groups I posted, at wildly different barrel temps, are all within .15 MOA. And that's why 10 shot groups are useful - I bet few to none of your 3 shot groups are repeatable within .15 MOA at any barrel temp/condition.

Not all barrels/rifles behave the same with increase in temperature! But again, huge OT

 

[grappling_hook]

So, please, can we go back to the topic?

The two questions you asked in the original post cannot be adequately answered in the context of a 3-shot group for each. That is why this discussion is still on topic.

For example, you asked "1) handloading: can a proper load development turn a 2 MOA group into a sub MOA one using a given projectile?"

So say you have a 2 MOA cartridge/rifle/shooter combo-- defined as every shot you take falls within a 2 MOA spread centered on your point of aim, every time. Sometimes by random chance that combo will shoot three shots in a .25 MOA spread. Sometimes by random chance it will shoot three shots in a 1.75 MOA spread. And so on. So using three-shot groups, your question is unlikely to be answered on the context of three-shot groups.

So let's change the context to a ten-shot group (or two five-shot groups overlaid on the same target, or three 3-shot groups plus one extra on the same target, etc). In my experience, if you're starting with high-quality ammo like Hornady Precision Hunter, then no, it is not a realistic expectation; if you and your gun are shooting 2 MOA 10-shot groups with factory ELD-X bullets, it is highly unlikely that you are going to be able to shoot sub-1 MOA 10-shot groups with hand loaded ELD-X bullets, even with an optimized hand loading process, high quality brass, etc.

 

[grfox92]

There is a term, that the actual name slips my mind, but it happens in science and academia.

I'll use doctors for an example. Doctors are taught something in medical school and then graduate and use what they were taught to treat patients. Then science and research catches up and it turns out that little piece they were taught and have been practicing for so many years is inaccurate and not repeatable to be considered a good treatment or method any longer.

Doctors are very hesitant to trust the new information and continue citing the old literature when treating patients and it takes years for them to accept the new information and implement it into their practice.

This thread reminds me a lot of that.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[Maverick1]

Which would result in a more accurate and precise shooter / weapon combination?
1. Spending 10 hours at the range shooting factory loads?
2. Spending 5 hours handloading, and 5 hours at the range shooting?

3. Spending all 10 hours arguing with strangers on the internet?

 

[grfox92]

This doesn't sound funny or healthy, i am sorry. You are not getting an award if that piece of steel and plastic can throw metal balls in a 50% smaller circle.

Unless you compete. But we are not talking about that now, it's about hunting (it should be).

Funny or healthy?

I'm not trying to win medals, but I also don't want a hunting rifle that shoots 2" at 100 yards. I demand better. That's why I'm here to learn. You and I are trying to accomplish the same exact thing. I just believe, with good evidence from my own limited experience as well as the experience of this forum, including a guy in this thread, who teaches shooting and tests rifles and optics for a living, that 10 shot groups at a minimum for load development are better then 3 shot groups. That's it. There's nothing more to it.

Some people may say that it's an opinion, but Formidilosus lays it out statistically with facts to support his reasoning, and what he is saying makes more sense then what anyone arguing 3 shot groups are sufficient is saying.

If someone else posts something compelling enough in support of 3 shot groups, I am mature enough to throw away the 10 shot group method and go back to 3, but so far no one had said anything convincing.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[wind gypsy]

Hi guys, i have a couple questions.
1) handloading: can a proper load development turn a 2 MOA group into a sub MOA one using a given projectile? For example, let's pretend a rifle is shooting hornady precision hunter with a eld-x bullet 2 MOA. If i take my time developing a handload, is it reasonable to expect that i will be able to achieve sub-MOA or even sub-half-MOA accuracy with a load using the same eld-x ball but with a different primer/powder/case/depth? I have a rifle which is capable of sub-Moa accuracy but not with the projectile i want to use hunting, that's why i am asking. I admit my total ignorance in the hanoading world.

I wouldn't expect that hand loading would result in reducing dispersion by more than 50%. I'd think it's possible and not crazy unlikely. Also possible that barrel just doesn't like that particular bullet.

If I really wanted to shoot a bullet and the first bullet/powder combo wasn't shooting well enough, I'd maybe try one other powder that's well suited for it before giving up on that bullet.

 

[wind gypsy]

And trust me, 3 shots groups, if you print 3 or 4 of them, give you PLENTY of data for any hunting application.

I agree, if you look at them in aggregate like if they were a 9 or 12 shot group or if they are all really tight like 0.5 moa or better and centered around the same POI.

 

[stanginthe11s]

let me respond to this before I read further lol.

Ok. Which one is which? This should be easy if a hot barrel resulted in the groups “walking” or opening up. That is, if cold barrel produces a result that is different in point of impact, or relevant group size, then it should be no problem to say which is cold and which is hot.

it is irrelevant which is which, all that matters is there's a difference between the 2. which way one goes can depend on other things, there's no reasonable way for me to determine if your gun shoots better hot or cold.
also, just to stir the pot, all those nice 30 round groups started with the first 3 rounds. not that it means anything, but just saying lol.
hot vs cold barrel is no myth, I can assure you of that. unless you found a way around metallurgy, things will always change between the 2. will they change enough to notice? maybe, but then you have to look alloy composition, grain structure etc. and that also applies to bullets as not all jackets are the same. plus the retained heat in the chamber will have an effect overall. but that's getting into thermal dynamics.
form, to be clear, I am not for or against any preferred group, but through many years of shooting I can say I have been pretty on point with only 5 shot groups. also, for a hunting rifle, minute of animal shouldn't take large groups unless you plan on reaching out. for that situation, a larger sample size is always better.

 

[roadrunner]

A count of 10 is not a substantial sample size in real world scientific data. There are to many errors your 10 round 20 round 30 round groups do nothing to prove a rifles accuracy potential unless it's is in a fixes device holding the exact same point of aim everytime in a controlled environment so there is nothing that can effect the outcome.

Real world of scientific data?