What caused the Rokslide shift to smallest caliber and cartridges?

[Big_wals]

The "average" American hunter shoots less than 40 rounds per year and many more shoot fewer than 20. The number that shoot 100 rounds a year from their hunting rifles has to be under 10% of all hunters. People will spend $5k on a new gun, new scope, new camo, new calls, and a new backpack but won't spend $500 on ammo and targets because they suck at shooting and it doesn't make them feel good to know that money can not buy the skills or the knowledge how to shoot. You only gain that through repeatedly practicing with proper techniques and gear that has been properly setup. People in general, don't shoot enough with their hunting gear to become proficient with their systems.

Jay

I was going to say this after I got caught up, ya beat me to it. Some guys need to spend more money on ammo instead of buying boxer briefs in the same camo pattern as their boots.

 

[Formidilosus]

the vast majority of people do not associate their identity with how much they shoot a firearm. Priorities matter.

That has nothing to do with what is being discussed. One does not have to associate their identity with something, to not speak about it out of ignorance. If you lack legitimate knowledge, skill, and ability about a subject- ask questions, not argue your beliefs based on ignorance.

There is a very clear delineation-

Those who do not shoot and practice much, also generally post factually incorrect technical information about shooting and ballistics, and also generally share the common “fudd lore” belief systems about guns/ballistics/shooting.

Then, there are those who generally shoot and practice a lot, look for factual data driven technical information about shooting and ballistics, and they tend to lean to smaller cartridges and certain views.


It is common in modern culture, for people to speak very definitely about subjects that they know very little about (regardless of how long they have been doing the thing), but no where is that more evident than in shooting and guns.

 

[eric1115]

Fair, and that makes sense. I guess my only question then is how does someone know what they are capable of with their hunting rifle? Recoil is different from a 223 or rimfire practice gun, so how do you actually know what you can do with that gun? Its one thing to say you shoot it just as well, its quite another to prove it to yourself (and the assembled rokslide masses). Isnt a drill like this valuable by itself for any hunter, in addition to merely “settling an argument”? I personally have been using this drill occasionally this year, and have found it to be really good both as practice but also as a diagnostic tool since being “standardized” it allows me to track performance and progress.

In addition to that, I'd say a 10 round group is especially important for someone who only shoots say 40 rounds a year from a given rifle. Such a low round count will be much less likely to reveal issues in use that the 10 round group might show.

 

[wyosam]

In addition to that, I'd say a 10 round group is especially important for someone who only shoots say 40 rounds a year from a given rifle. Such a low round count will be much less likely to reveal issues in use that the 10 round group might show.

They probably shoot a 20 round group the weekend before hunting season starts. If 3 of those 20 can be covered by a pie plate at 100 yards, It’s good to go. The other 20 are at a game animal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sled]

Actual serious question... Have you ever done, say, 5 separate 2 shot "groups" (or 10 cold bore shots) on the same target with a heavier recoiling rifle, and the same with a .223? 10 shots same POA tells a much more complete story than 3, and if you spread it out it really tells what you can expect under perfect conditions, best case scenario.

I've been doing something like this for years and even mentioned it here once. 2 shots and done. One cold bore and an immediate follow up to the same POA. I can take all the data from years of dope and gain a realistic field condition proofed expectation of mine and my rifles capability in a variety of conditions. I also spend less money and get more practice. After those two shots with my hunting rifle I switch to a bolt 223 and burn the barrel.

That method is as relatable to hunting as I can get. It's in the same mountains I hunt in and in the same conditions. Typical shots for practice are 400-800 yards. I'll shoot from different positions and finish with some off hand.

I should mention the off hand are closer. Usually about 100 yards.

 

[E.Shell]

I'd make three points in favor of light-recoiling rifles:

1) As pointed out above, differences in recoil fade when prone and/or well supported. In hunting situations there are times when one must violate their NPOA and the heavier the recoil, the less flexibility one has with position before the gun is impossible to control well. Tree stands can present this sort of challenge when the game comes in exactly wrong. Being able to stay on target has the benefit of spotting the impact and staying with the animal to deliver a second shot if required.

2) Spotting impacts is important for knowing how to handle the hit animal, and to a much lesser degree; potential corrections. The trigger breaks and you call the shot 'good'. You see it plunk him in the lungs, you can stand down and starting packing your gear. If you see it land a little far back, as can happen with animal movement or faulty wind calls, you might want to give it a rest before following up.

3) Being able to stay on the animal, regardless (almost) of control issues (recoil, NPOA) or bullet impact position, lighter recoiling rifles provide the opportunity to watch where it went and how, as well as not mixing it up with its companions.

 

[MCS]

So, explain to me why so many benchrest shooters don't shoot large 30 caliber magnums? They buck the wind much better than the small caliber stuff those guys usually shoot.

Also, please educate me as to where energy has it's place since I obviously have a low IQ and very little experience.

A lot of bench rest shooters use the 300 wsm and the 7saum on high wind days.

 

[Dave_S]

I was going to say this after I got caught up, ya beat me to it. Some guys need to spend more money on ammo instead of buying boxer briefs in the same camo pattern as their boots.

but then how am I supposed to select my boxer briefs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JGRaider]

Always interesting how people are “proud” of how little they shoot and practice.

With regards to your post about how "proud" people are about how little they shoot (whatever that means), the vast majority of people do not associate their identity with how much they shoot a firearm. Priorities matter.

My response was in direct response to your quote above, not all that other crap you posted last.

 

[Thegman]

but then how am I supposed to select my boxer briefs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And...those camo boxers really help you from being caught with your pants down. Vital equipment IMO.

 

[Marbles]

"It's the lungs and not the heart that pumps blood and the heart is a vortex that turns the blood into plasma." (Real thing I was told recently)

Big powder columns are better at disrupting the vortex I guess, or something like that. I wonder if a vortex scope helps? I must admit all this is rather out of my depth and I think it is time for me to go back to the kiddie pool because I'm starting to think the big kids piss in the water for fun.

 

[The Guide]

"It's the lungs and not the heart that pumps blood and the heart is a vortex that turns the blood into plasma." (Real thing I was told recently)

Duh fuq is this? What maroon said this gem?

Jay

 

[Marbles]

Duh fuq is this? What maroon said this gem?

Jay

A relatively normal looking and apparently normal intelligence level adult person who is generally functional in life explaining why my profession recommendations were wrong.

I'm starting to realize, sometimes I am the joke when I engage certain ideas as I am placed outside of the realm of influence. This thread is starting to make me feel like the joke.

 

[The Guide]

A relatively normal looking and apparently normal intelligence level adult person who is generally functional in life explaining why my profession recommendations were wrong.

I'm starting to realize, sometimes I am the joke when I engage certain ideas as I am placed outside of the realm of influence. This thread is starting to make me feel like the joke.

This is why fudd lore will live on forever.

Jay

 

[thinhorn_AK]

Oh the horror! No one is giving up precision by using a 7MM RM or 300 Win Mag. In no way does a 6.5 increase hit rates. What increases hit rates is taking shots within your level of competency and the cartridges capability. However bullet mass and energy have their place.

Strange, the United States military found that hit rates were higher with lighter recoiling cartridges back before world war 2 even started. The only reason the 30-06 continued on was that we had so much surplus ammo and with the budget as well as general anti military sentiment of the time it didn’t make sense to add a different cartridge.

You must know something the military dosent though.

 

[yeti12]

Better question would be what are people not gullible about. With regards to your post about how "proud" people are about how little they shoot (whatever that means), the vast majority of people do not associate their identity with how much they shoot a firearm. Priorities matter.

This year I've shot very little compared to other years but I still have over 1200rds fired so far. That's not just blasting a pistol at pop cans. That's all precision positional practice. Good meaningful practice. It's not uncommon to shoot 5000rds a year.

There's people that are around me every day that know me that don't know how much I shoot, that I shoot at all or the level I compete/have competed at.

It's not an identity, I dont meet people and tell them how much I shoot. it's my duty as a hunter. I believe being able to take long shots increases my odds of a harvest so I need to practice those situations best I can. I also think it's fun to compete. (2 separate ways of doing things with some crossover).

Litterally anything in life you need to practice to be good at. Just cause it's a firearm doesn't make it any different.

 

[Macintosh]

I like data.

Regarding higher recoil affecting overall hit rates--this link to a paper from the US army research lab (linky) squarely looks at the effect of recoil on shooter performance, including accuracy. Accuracy conclusions are on page 978 and 979 of the PDF (dont worry, its not a 1000 page doc, just an excerpt from some collection of papers). Their findings:

hit rates and "critical hit" rates with various cartridges to show effect of recoil--this is at short range so this isolates shooter performance, ie the difference is not contingent on ballistic differences:
5.56: 81% overall hit rate/59% critical hit rate
6.8spc: 76% hit rate/41% critical hit rate
7.62 nato: 76% hit rate/36% critical hit rate
So this^ shows a clear degradation in hit rate as recoil increases, with a 39% reduction in rate of critical hits, and a 5% reduction in overall hits, between 556 and 762 cartridges.

Also, they looked both at single shots versus paired shots (so including a follow-up shot) accuracy “mean radial error”--this shows a degradation of accuracy as recoil increases, while it shows a very significant degradation of accuracy on paired shots, almost a 30% increase in second-round mean radial error for the higher-recoiling cartridge:

 

[HandgunHTR]

I like data.

Regarding higher recoil affecting overall hit rates--this link to a paper from the US army research lab (linky) squarely looks at the effect of recoil on shooter performance, including accuracy. Accuracy conclusions are on page 978 and 979 of the PDF (dont worry, its not a 1000 page doc, just an excerpt from some collection of papers). Their findings:

hit rates and "critical hit" rates with various cartridges to show effect of recoil--this is at short range so this isolates shooter performance, ie the difference is not contingent on ballistic differences:
5.56: 81% overall hit rate/59% critical hit rate
6.8spc: 76% hit rate/41% critical hit rate
7.62 nato: 76% hit rate/36% critical hit rate
So this^ shows a clear degradation in hit rate as recoil increases, with a 39% reduction in rate of critical hits, and a 5% reduction in overall hits, between 556 and 762 cartridges.

Also, they looked both at single shots versus paired shots (so including a follow-up shot) accuracy “mean radial error”--this shows a degradation of accuracy as recoil increases, while it shows a very significant degradation of accuracy on paired shots, almost a 30% increase in second-round mean radial error for the higher-recoiling cartridge:
View attachment 747451

Come on man!

We all know that the reason the military went to the 5.56 was so that enemy soldiers would be wounded rather than killed, because wounded enemy are better than dead ones, or something.
And because the bullets tumble, which is good, right?

 

[Castle Rock]

Well the bit about bullets tumbling is good, when the Poms went to the MKVII 303 the Krauts were bitching because they thought they were being shot up by expanding bullets

 

[AkRyan]

Well, we're past that test...and so far it's worked well for me, and multiple others.
View attachment 743252
View attachment 743253

How far did they go after the shot? That's the real test imo. If these animals are running over 100yrds then it's not what I would consider to be ethical, if they die in sight or close to then your onto something.