Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments

[z987k]

"In rifle work group size is of some interest, but it is by no means the critical consideration that some commentators seem to deem it. It is well to remember that a rifleman does not shoot groups, he shoots shots. A tight group is nice, but one must not fall into the error of PII (Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments). I have shot a great deal in a long shooting life, and I have only once encountered a rifle that would not shoot better than I could shoot it. (That was a 32-20 lever gun which had been allowed to rust and then scraped out. In getting the rust out of the barrel, most of the rifling went along with it.)

Group size is unimportant, unless it is very bad. If you can hit a dinner plate, first shot, every time, under all conditions, at 100, that will do." - Jeff Cooper

An 8in dinner plate at 100 is purely unethical at 400. And 400 shouldn't be a hard shot with a modern rifle. An 8in dinner plate is the definition of bad.
Maybe Jeff ate off 2" or 3" plates for dinner.

An 8MOA gun is a piece of trash. I don't know too many people than can't outshoot that gun. I can usually take someone that's never shot a rifle before and have them doing better than that within 30 minutes.

 

[id_jon]

An 8in dinner plate at 100 is purely unethical at 400. And 400 shouldn't be a hard shot with a modern rifle. An 8in dinner plate is the definition of bad.
Maybe Jeff ate off 2" or 3" plates for dinner.

An 8MOA gun is a piece of trash. I don't know too many people than can't outshoot that gun. I can usually take someone that's never shot a rifle before and have them doing better than that within 30 minutes.

He didn't say dinner plate sized groups at 100. Its unlikely that an 8moa gun would hit a dinner plate at 100 in all conditions, meaning standing unsupported as well. If I want first round hits on a 8moa target, I am going to stack the odds in my favor, with a 2moa or better gun, but once you get to 1.5 or better, that should be good enough. No one is saying that an 8moa gun would be acceptable, much less capable of making 400 yard shots.

 

[3325]

Maybe Jeff ate off 2" or 3" plates for dinner.

Cooper was known as a very capable rifleman and hunter. Among the things he advocated was being able to shoot and hit from field positions and getting close to game. I doubt Cooper, a WWII combat Marine who had hunted the world over, ever took a 400 yard shot on game in his life.

 

[3325]

I weigh all my gear in lbs, if it's under 1lb, I pretend its weightless.

I appreciate the humor. But on a serious note, ounces do add up to pounds and pounds do have consequence in the field.

However, slight “advantages” in things like velocity, group size, trajectory, BC, SD, and the like are usually PII for most shooters in most situations.

 

[Gunnersdad49]

Col. Townsend Whelen was quoted to say "only accurate rifles are interesting." I think that the balance here should be that we put every advantage into our column that we can control. If I can't get 1.5" groups out of a rifle / ammo combination with a scope, it likely won't come into the field with me. If I don't have an optic, my eyes about double that minimum group size, and I limit my effective maximum range that because of it.
It seems in hunting, as in all things, a modicum of common sense needs to apply. This initial post shouldn't be taken as encouragement to not care about group sizes, but rather to control what you can, and understand your limitations.

 

[rifletuner]

"Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments" is the foundation of gun marketers and the foundation of outdoor media.

With the easy availability of "information" online today, forums are constantly bombarded with "Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments" presented as essential detail by people that have absorbed it, but dont understand it or dont have the actual knowledge required to assess what they are advocating.

We constantly see some form of "whats the one thing I need to do to kill monster animals / shoot tiny groups / etc" being asked - whether it be on forums, in gun shops, etc. There are any number of companies / media outlets that cater to this audience. There is a much smaller group of people that have put in the effort, and developed the skills to do this and are actually able to assess a lot of the crap being peddled.

So we end up with a high level of noise, to a limited amount of signal, with the majority of the audience lacking the skills to filter the noise and extract the signal.

 

[id_jon]

But on a serious note, ounces do add up to pounds and pounds do have consequence in the field.

I was only half joking, things do or do not go in my pack based on whether I need them before I even know what they weigh. I agree with you for sure though on the consequences of extra pounds, as well as the main thrust of the thread