Show your Tikka ten round groups

[Formidilosus]

You are referencing data by a presumably notable facility to bolster your statement, and I simply asked for the white paper from the test performed by the unnamed "best ballistic test facility". That is "obtuse" to you, haha. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with you, just asking for the data. I don't get why you are being so cagey over the 'math' & testing data that you specifically reference.....it's weird man, just post it up.

The obtuse part isn’t asking to see data, the obtuse part is that if you understand White Papers, testing, etc., and my responses, then it’s obvious that even if a paper was marked for public distribution, I wouldn’t post it.

Out of context, and standing alone that statement could be an appeal to authority. However in context, no- it’s not.

Hmmm, maybe it's telling that you latched onto a generic statement of internet experts??? But seriously, myself and several other guys have been discussing the statistical significance of round counts for groups.

Don’t be passive aggressive. Everyone knows who you meant with that statement, because you have done it multiple times. If you’re going to say it, own it.

From the test I spoke of-

Wiseman-


Partial results with one barrel and match ammo-



The target with 100 rounds-



That gun also had a sub moa average (.8 IIRC) for thirty-three, 3 round groups.

So the question is, is that barrel fired mechanically from a 6,000 pound rest, permanently attached to a 60,000 pound block that is buried over 6ft in the earth, and fired in a tunnel-

A .8 inch gun (avg of 33x3 shot groups)?

A 1.2 inch gun (Avg 5x4 shot groups, with a group reduction added)?

A 2.01 inch gun (avg of 3x10 round groups)?

A 2.72 inch gun (30 round group)

Or a 3.26 inch gun (100 round group)?


The answer is obvious. Regardless of what anyone wants to say, that barrel is a 3.11 MOA rifle AT BEST. A gun can not be a “sub MOA” gun, unless it will consistently, repeatedly, and on demand put each bullet into a sub MOA target. To state otherwise for a forum dedicated to practical rifle use is being intellectually dishonest.
I have had a bunch of users (relatively speaking) with very capable rifle systems and ammo, and when asked on a questionnaire what their rifles accuracy is, not one of them has hit that sized target 10 times a few minutes later- not one. The answe is also obvious if people let go of the BS. That answer is the rifles aren’t “X” MOA.

I also posted a few pictures from recent shooting that show the kinds of groups that I see out of my hunting rifles with factory ammo. So to spell it out for you, I do not agree with the idea that 2 MOA is a mechanical standard of precision that should be expected from hunting rifles/ammo. I also don't necessarily agree that (3) 10-round groups is the best indicator of zero or of the expected precision from a rifle/scope/ammo/shooter/etc. Of course we agree that shooting more and having more data is better than shooting less. There's a lot of ways to skin this cat.

Your groups are good, yet for the 100 yard’ish ones, regardless of group size, they didn’t all hit a 1moa dot. I understand testing loads or whatever, but even with that, if your are being honest and at 100 yards, those rifles aren't going to hit a .37, .78, .64 MOA target on demand. And if it won’t hit those targets, then they aren’t .37, .78, .64 MOA rifles and the group sizes for practical use is nearly meaningless. I post quite a few 10 round groups that are sub MOA and way sun MOA, yet those rifles are not sub MOA guns because they won’t put every (or nearly) bullet into a sub MOA target at even 100 yards. They are 1, to 1.2 MOA rifles regardless of the fact that over half of 10 roun groups will be under 1 MOA. Average 3 round groups are in the .3’s....


As far as factory rifles/factory ammo being 2 MOA, you are correct.... They’re not 2 MOA, they’re generally much worse. Take ten rifles from each major manufacturer in 6mm and up, use any rest you want, sandbags, a machine, whatever; take a couple different types of factory ammo and fire 30 rounds through each rifle in whatever amount per “group”, order, cool times... do it ever how you want. Very few- VERY few, of those rifles will have all 30 rounds under 1.5 MOA. And most of the ones that will do so, will be Finnish, Scandinavian, or European made, and chambered in 6XC/CM, 6.5 CM, 308 if using match, 300PRC and Norma.

Anyone can take their rifle and try the above. Do it in 30x1 shot groups, 10x3 shot groups, etc. Do it ever how you want. Do not use any group reduction techniques at all- every round that comes out of the barrel counts. At the end of a whole 30 rounds you will KNOW what your rifle will do, but you probably won’t like it.


As far as agreeeing about ten round groups or not, it doesn’t really matter. When someone is asking about grouping, accuracy, trouble shooting a rifle, etc. some nebulous “shoot more rounds” or worse all the nonsense that people post that just take the person farther from the solution, doesn’t help the person asking the question. People need something that has a very high probability of success and we need whatever “data” they get to be consistent and mean something to us so we can compare and get a standard to use. People seem to want every excuse to NOT shoot, so getting someone to shoot a single ten round group is hard enough, getting them to shoot more rounds is nearly impossible, mainly because people are running around calling BS on things they don’t understand.

When I suggest a certain rifle, cartridge, scope, ammo, 10 round groups, free float the barrel, bed, etc. it’s because I know what the results will be- not because I’m guessing.

 

[Formidilosus]

Here's today's groups. Not bad, but it looks like there's a slight POI shift from group 1 to 2. I'm not sure what caused it but I think maybe cheek pressure or shoulder pressure.

It could be, but it also could be two groups that are in the actual cone. Two groups are hard to make definitive statements about, however if you continue to have the first shot higher, it would be of benefit to eliminate the cold shooter problem. Regardless if you overlaid both targets from center, the groups would form a just under 2 MOA group...

With true sub 2moa groups, precision is not going to be why someone misses big game sub 600yards.

I remember reading, years ago, an essay written by someone reflecting on a practice he used (with attribution to White Feather). He went out every day, no matter the conditions, a fired a cold bore shot at 200 yards. It took time, but he eventually amassed a fair amount of DOPE and could use it to surmise a few things about his own ability, as well as the rifle/ammo/shooter system.

That has been done, but with modern good equipment it has less value than you would think. It makes a lot of sense to do the “shoot every day on the same target” deal when you’re using a wood stock that shifts POI, barrels that aren’t stress relieved, scopes that wander, etc..... Actually, maybe most hunters should do those things now based on what they are still using...... grin.


Take a stock and bedding system that is stable (not as many as you think), a barrel that is properly stress relieved (most quality manufacturer's) , a scope that maintains POI (very, very few), ammo that is temperature stable (not as many as you would think); and the result of firing a round everyday/every trip for 20-30 trips in no wind conditions, will be remarkably similar to just shooting 20-30 rounds in one sitting.

That's not an easy thing to do, but it alway struck me as interesting. We shoot groups for confidence - it might be confidence in ourselves, the rifle, the ammo, the optic, all or some of those things in combination. There's something to be said for devising a means of measuring the shooter's ability to produce performance on demand. The way we shoot groups or strings doesn't necessarily do that.

It can. Go back to what I stated were the three reasons to shot groups. For practical field use, they are pretty much the only reasons to shoot groups.
Why I continually suggest to shoot 20-30 rounds on a single target, is because it gives a high confidence of the actual cone. Let’s say I am using a rifle and scope system that is stable (see above), and I am 406smith and I put 20-30 rounds into .78 MOA. I find the center of all rounds fired, adjust to the center of POA. Now, I can put up a .75 MOA dot and as long as I hit that .75 MOA target, the rifle is good, and I am good. If however a single round misses a .75 MOA target, then the rifle/scope system or I have a problem. I do not have to shoot “groups” any more.

As for shooting groups and human error... if someone is unable to consistently move a lever to the rear without having a seizure, then I would submit that they should stop talking about groups or accuracy and go learn to shoot a rifle. This good day/bad day thing is asinine when talking about rested, untimed, 100 yard shooting.

 

[Formidilosus]

Writing from a phone, so multiple posts....




Using what I wrote above, during a scope evaluation I pulled 10k rounds of the same lot # ammo, zeroed this rifle with 30 rounds at 100 yards that went 2.1 something inches. Then to track zero retention, I shot five shots that same day (look at dates)-



That target got lost or destroyed, so another was shot a couple monthes later (check rifle, scope and dates)-



Then same target a month later-



Now doing what everyone else does, I would say probably from the second 5 round group in December, and definitely with the first January group added that I should adjust zero (which means the scope or rifle lost zero...). However remember the gun put 30 rounds into a 2.1” groups initially. The bold squares are 2”.

So a few days later-



Hmmm. Now the mean point of impact (center) of all 15 rounds looks a lot closer to being centered up (still zeroed). Using a target size that matches the cone removes a lot of variables and questions, and allows you to track zero retention and mechanics. Shooting a couple BS 3 round groups and not caring where they overlaybthe target, does not allow that.

I’ll see if I can find the target, but that scope lost zero within a couple days/weeks of the last group. Was rezeroed and then did the same again. The lens that housed the reticle started rotating (which is an issue with 20% of those particular scopes...).

 

[Formidilosus]

Look man, this is the weirdness that I just don't get. It's a secret report, but not so secret that you can post about it and reveal partial results on a public internet forum? That's strange. I work as a private consultant (not firearms related), and deal with NDAs here and there. If it's 'secret', I don't talk about it - not to coworkers that aren't involved, not my wife or friends, and not internet strangers. If it isn't secret and you're going to refer to it online, than post it.

Sigh. This is what I referred about obtuse. There is a difference between something being legally or technically allowable, and something being culturally acceptable. The entire test may be technically approved for public release, but culturally it is not acceptable to do so. What I post IS acceptable.

I write what I can, when I can about what is relevant. I provide enough information that astute people can understand and grasp the validity or not, they can match it up with patterns that emerge from others and determine if it has merit, and they should be able to understand why all of their questions aren’t answered. Your, or anyone’s belief in what I write or post does not effect me in anyway. I write it to share what I formation I can. If you choose to make a determination that’s it an idiot on the internet- knock yourself out.

I also don't go full retard in getting a perfect zero - I note the offsets, and I've been fine out to 1,400 yards.

People who are skilled and know what they are doing can make all kinds of non ideal equipment or situations work. However, having a .5 MOA rifle whose zero is .5 MOA off, when you are trying to hit 1 MOA targets, will cause more first round misses than than having a 1moa rifle that is zeroed correctly trying to hit those same 1moa targets.

I need/want the zero to be within a single click of the scope (.1mil/.25moa). Nothing ore or less.

I haven't bought a factory rifle in about 10 years, and those that I did buy have since been 'upgraded'. I will say that my experience with quality factory ammo out of match barrels is more in the 1/2 - 3/4 MOA range.

This thread is about factory rifles. Not built rifles, and I’m going to guess not even about rifles that are technically “factory”, yet are anything but- I.E., AI, MRAD, TRG, etc.

More and more I tend to think that multiple single shots at individual targets with the shooter breaking away and re-addressing the rifle is a better indicator of that person's average zero with that rifle/ammo/etc. I don't have a magical threshold - more is better.

I have not seen enough testing on that specifically to state definitively, however with a massive amount of anecdotal data- hundreds of thousands of rounds a year, I have not seen that to be the case with people who execute the shot process correctly. Again, believe it don’t, but we have done multiples upon multiples of grouping where the exact same shooter puts 50 rounds, 100 rounds, and uneven 250 rounds on a single target as a “group”, have a target that is the size of that “group”, and then have them randomly shoot that target- whether it’s one round at a time, or 5 round groups, or ten rounds at a time. When the same amount of rounds have been fired, the group size and locations are nearly identical.

The barrel from the partial data, was my barrel. My average ten round group from that barrel sandbagged was within .2 MOA of the 3x10 round Wiseman groups. If someone can repeatable and consistent press a trigger without flinching, and offers a straight and neutral recoil path to the rifle, there really isn’t that much difference. People that can shoot groups, can shoot spots. People that can shoot spots, can shoot groups. I suppose it’s possible to be able to do one and not the other, but I haven’t seen it, and logically that doesn’t make sense unless someone flinches are isn’t neutral behind the gun. It’s also telling that all the “I didn’t do my part” is 100% of the time about shots rounds that land on paper whet ethey didn’t want them to. It’s never “I screwed up, yet it went into the group”, which statistically speaking would happen as often.

Actually no that I’ve written that, I am a spot shooter. The difference is I find out what the total cone of fire is and then the spots are that size.

I must've missed it. I don't know what this is in regards to, but OK.

Our only interaction on this forum has been in regards to rifles, optics, and precision/accuracy. Other than a very few instances, what I wrote has to do with information on reliability, suitability, or function of items. Generally you are disagreeing, which interesting as like not buying factory rifles, it questions whether you have a large sample size, used broadly with the other items.




In any case, I’m tired of typing about this.

 

[Formidilosus]

I’ve been bored and so started reloading again. Still not sure what’s enjoyable about it, but....

Playing with 130gr Terminal Ascent and a T3x Lite.




No the far left round is not a “flyer”, all rounds broke in the .3’ish inch wobble zone I had. Precision was comparable at 719 yards, and 1112 yards, with the 1112 having a bit more vertical (2’ish MOA) due to shifty headwind with updraft and I’m sure velocity ES.

 

[fightthenoise]

Are ten rounders still good or did we move to 30 while I was gone?

 

[leoni1]

Here is my best 10-rounder with the stock T3 30.06. 165gr SST over a moderate charge of IMR 4350. 109yds.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HighUintas]

@rtockstein I don't own a Tikka, but I'll try to get out tomorrow or next week and post-up some more pictures of groups......no more discussions or rants....probably, haha.

Now worries! I enjoy hearing all of the various opinions.

I also have been planning to start doing single shot groups by standing up and resetting everything in order to evaluate my proficiency on that first shot repeatability.

 

[HighUintas]

It could be, but it also could be two groups that are in the actual cone. Two groups are hard to make definitive statements about, however if you continue to have the first shot higher, it would be of benefit to eliminate the cold shooter problem. Regardless if you overlaid both targets from center, the groups would form a just under 2 MOA group... .

What test do you suggest to eliminate the cold shooter problem?

 

[Formidilosus]

What test do you suggest to eliminate the cold shooter problem?

Lots of Ball and dummy, and then dry fire.

 

[Boomer51]

Tikka .223 TBAC Ultra 7. 75 gr. ELD-M. 10 shots. Left to right gusts. Still working on getting the ES down. The load still shoots well at distance.

 

[07yzryder]

not 10 but 2 3 round groups testing 41.5 and 42.5 of 4350 behind a 143 eld x. bottom is shot as quick as possible.

testing isnt extremely accurate since i held on the half mil hash on the top left corner for hte head and the 1 mil line for the mid section.

both are a hair over 1moa and if it was 15 mph winds and i had a paper target with something other then a white target to aim at itll be under 1moa.

 

[fightthenoise]

not 10 but 2 3 round groups testing 41.5 and 42.5 of 4350 behind a 143 eld x. bottom is shot as quick as possible.

testing isnt extremely accurate since i held on the half mil hash on the top left corner for hte head and the 1 mil line for the mid section.

both are a hair over 1moa and if it was 15 mph winds and i had a paper target with something other then a white target to aim at itll be under 1moa.

What distance?

 

[07yzryder]

What distance?

sorry that was only 100, had the 2 loads just wanted to see how they were working and it was windy as crap. Painted over the 500 yard impacts. Both were head shots all day. dialed half mil to account for wind and sweet steel rang over and over.

depending on how i feel after my hike this weekend ill get a 10 shot on paper.

should add, factory tikka t3x with a bushell scope. only mod was a trigger spring.

 

[BjornF16]

T3X Lite (new) in .223 Rem. Shooting new Black Hills 77 gr HP. First 10 shots at 100 yds following sight-in at 50 yds.

Shots 8, 9, and 10 are the three left most shots.

Conditions: 90 F, winds calm, Sunny.

 

[DJL2]

If the WX holds, I hope to get some trigger time tomorrow. In the meantime, enjoy my paltry 8 shots (ran out of time, had to get lunch for the fam).

This is my first range session, rounds 12-20 w/ my T3x in 7RM. That “look at my sweet sub half MOA rifle” group was 4-6. Clearly I struggled with consistent POA.

 

[HighUintas]

@rtockstein If this is too far from your original intent, I can delete - just let me know.

***DISCLAIMER***
I did not go out with the intent of doing any kind of write-up on here. I just hit up the range to shoot a couple groups with one of my hunting rifles, and then I got carried away on the back-end. I figured somebody else might be interested in the results. I was not taking my time between shots, and I was running the bolt and breaking shots about as fast as I could & not waiting for the rifle to cool down (again, the intent was just to shoot a couple groups).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

75*; Sunny; light wind @ ~2 MPH with 'gusts' of ~7 MPH
Prone with bipod & rear bag off of concrete
R700; 6.5CM; Bartlein 3B @22"; Manner EH-1, Timney 510 (I know, it's not a Tikka)
Thunderbeast Ultra-7
Bushnell 3-12 LRTS;
Copper Creek 140 Berger Elite Hunter - just 'off the shelf' load, not a 'worked-up' for my rifle.

This rifle shoots factory 143 ELD-X a little better, but I had a case of the 140 Bergers, so that 's what I'm shooting. It's not my most precise rifle, and the scope is what I consider to be a budget scope. In case anyone cares, the front rest is an Atlas Gen2 Tall CAL, and my rear bag is a SAP Run N' Gun with lite fill (6oz total weight).

Shot (11) rounds at 100 yards. Absolutely pulled a shot (can you guess which one?), but all shots count. Initially shot top row while aiming at bottom bullseyes and dialing 1.0 mil up. Then shot bottom row after dialing back down 1.0 mil, then shot center row without dope on the turrets.
View attachment 187387

Shot 9 more at 100 yards to finish out the box. Shot all these by aiming at actual bullseye without any dope dialed.
View attachment 187388

Superimpose all 20, and you get the following (0.78 MOA without flier and 1.02 MOA including flier). I will discount the flier in terms of zero and rifle/ammo/scope capability, but I include it in terms of evaluating my own abilities (even if it only accounts for 5% or less of my shots). The reality is my rifle/ammo/scope is likely far better than 0.78 MOA if a better shooter was behind the gun or if the rifle was set-up in a mechanical rest without a shooter's influence.

View attachment 187389

Below is actually the first 5 shots of the day. I memorized my 7RM dope, and dialed it on for my 6.5 like a moron, haha (it's been a pretty long week at work).
View attachment 187394

Shot the 20 rounds at 100 yards shown previously, and then came back to 426 yards. Adjusted to the actual dope and shot 5 more
View attachment 187395

If you superimpose the two (5) shot groups, and adjust for the discrepancy in dialing between the two groups, you get the following:
View attachment 187397

Vertical dispersion is about 0.6 MOA, total group size is 0.91 MOA (which includes a little variance from the wind).

If you want to further dork out for no real reason, scaling down the 426 yard group to 100 yards and superimposing over the previous 20 rounds, you get the following (Blue shots are original 100 yards and green are scaled from 426 yards). Excluding the flier, group is ~0.939 MOA, with flier, group is 1.22 MOA. It is worth noting that the scaled down shots from 426 yards includes variance from wind, so the below group would be overly conservative in terms of evaluating mechanical accuracy of the rifle/ammo/scope.
View attachment 187398

Previously, someone asked for a time lapse of shots, so below is how the 20 shots at 100 yards turned out for me:

View attachment 187425

Now below is a quick tabulation of data from those 20 shots at 100 yards.
View attachment 187440

So once more, I did not set out to write anything up, and next time I might take a little more time shooting to eliminate my influence behind the rifle AND I might take a little more time to perform an actual in-depth analysis in lieu of this cursory data vomit that I've presented. Not that I would consider this data set statistically significant, but it is interesting to see that 5-shot groups are showing a potential to be an indicator of myself behind my rifle.

Not from the world's most bestest lab, but from the world's most okay-est shooter.

That is some good shooting!! I like what you did with all the shots being individual but superimposing them to get an idea of overall accuracy. That's essentially what I want to do after feeling consistent in my technique and ability. Unfortunately, I'm not so computer savvy so mine would be hand overlayed. Good work!

I wanted to get out to the range two days ago, but I didn't realize their hours are limited at this point. Hopefully I'll get to shoot out in the desert tomorrow or Sunday, weather permitting. I've got some powder/bullet projects to work on coming up so I may need to get a chrono

 

[PNWGATOR]

Be interested in seeing your ten round groups

 

[HighUintas]

Be interested in seeing your ten round groups

Mine? I've got a few posted through this thread. I plan to continue putting up further targets as I shoot them.

 

[menhaden_man]

@rtockstein If this is too far from your original intent, I can delete - just let me know.

***DISCLAIMER***
I did not go out with the intent of doing any kind of write-up on here. I just hit up the range to shoot a couple groups with one of my hunting rifles, and then I got carried away on the back-end. I figured somebody else might be interested in the results. I was not taking my time between shots, and I was running the bolt and breaking shots about as fast as I could & not waiting for the rifle to cool down (again, the intent was just to shoot a couple groups).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

75*; Sunny; light wind @ ~2 MPH with 'gusts' of ~7 MPH
Prone with bipod & rear bag off of concrete
R700; 6.5CM; Bartlein 3B @22"; Manner EH-1, Timney 510 (I know, it's not a Tikka)
Thunderbeast Ultra-7
Bushnell 3-12 LRTS;
Copper Creek 140 Berger Elite Hunter - just 'off the shelf' load, not a 'worked-up' for my rifle.

This rifle shoots factory 143 ELD-X a little better, but I had a case of the 140 Bergers, so that 's what I'm shooting. It's not my most precise rifle, and the scope is what I consider to be a budget scope. In case anyone cares, the front rest is an Atlas Gen2 Tall CAL, and my rear bag is a SAP Run N' Gun with lite fill (6oz total weight).

Shot (11) rounds at 100 yards. Absolutely pulled a shot (can you guess which one?), but all shots count. Initially shot top row while aiming at bottom bullseyes and dialing 1.0 mil up. Then shot bottom row after dialing back down 1.0 mil, then shot center row without dope on the turrets.
View attachment 187387

Shot 9 more at 100 yards to finish out the box. Shot all these by aiming at actual bullseye without any dope dialed.
View attachment 187388

Superimpose all 20, and you get the following (0.78 MOA without flier and 1.02 MOA including flier). I will discount the flier in terms of zero and rifle/ammo/scope capability, but I include it in terms of evaluating my own abilities (even if it only accounts for 5% or less of my shots). The reality is my rifle/ammo/scope is likely far better than 0.78 MOA if a better shooter was behind the gun or if the rifle was set-up in a mechanical rest without a shooter's influence.

View attachment 187389

Below is actually the first 5 shots of the day. I memorized my 7RM dope, and dialed it on for my 6.5 like a moron, haha (it's been a pretty long week at work).
View attachment 187394

Shot the 20 rounds at 100 yards shown previously, and then came back to 426 yards. Adjusted to the actual dope and shot 5 more
View attachment 187395

If you superimpose the two (5) shot groups, and adjust for the discrepancy in dialing between the two groups, you get the following:
View attachment 187397

Vertical dispersion is about 0.6 MOA, total group size is 0.91 MOA (which includes a little variance from the wind).

If you want to further dork out for no real reason, scaling down the 426 yard group to 100 yards and superimposing over the previous 20 rounds, you get the following (Blue shots are original 100 yards and green are scaled from 426 yards). Excluding the flier, group is ~0.939 MOA, with flier, group is 1.22 MOA. It is worth noting that the scaled down shots from 426 yards includes variance from wind, so the below group would be overly conservative in terms of evaluating mechanical accuracy of the rifle/ammo/scope.
View attachment 187398

Previously, someone asked for a time lapse of shots, so below is how the 20 shots at 100 yards turned out for me:

View attachment 187425

Now below is a quick tabulation of data from those 20 shots at 100 yards.
View attachment 187440

So once more, I did not set out to write anything up, and next time I might take a little more time shooting to eliminate my influence behind the rifle AND I might take a little more time to perform an actual in-depth analysis in lieu of this cursory data vomit that I've presented. Not that I would consider this data set statistically significant, but it is interesting to see that 5-shot groups are showing a potential to be an indicator of myself behind my rifle.

Not from the world's most bestest lab, but from the world's most okay-est shooter.

Badass look at some shooting - good info for folks that enjoy reading in the evening or on the throne.

What software do you use for the group calculations?