What role does probablity play?

[MaraviaDave]

Let me ask it this way. How likely are you to hit a 14" target at 700 yards with a cold bore. In field conditions/winds variable at 5-10 mph? For an above average "long range hunter", is it 90% of the time?

Put some effort into finding out for yourself, by using the M.E.R.C. spreadsheet. You’ll find the link to it in my earlier post (#18). Otherwise, the answer to your question is ……. a probability of about 23.759% for hitting a 14” target.

 

[Dobermann]

It’s always an educated roll of the dice- there is no such thing as “100%” certainty. However, very, very few ever get to the point where they are thinking and acting based on real numbers or probabilities. The Applied Ballistics WEZ calculator is a fantastic tool, but it only works when real, unbiased numbers are input. And unfortunately even most people that do use it put in their wishes/best ever/hopes/etc, instead of something resembling data.
Take the comment that sub MOA is not that difficult/easy/etc. It’s not that difficult to randomly get a couple of rounds close together and claim “sub moa”, it’s another thing entirely to shoot enough shots into a single target, or enough single shots into single targets to state that a rifle is sub moa. You’re talking 20+ rounds with NO CALLED FLIERS. Every shot counts. Oh, and it needs to be done from the position that you’ll shoot from. I.E.- the WEZ is different from prone, than from sitting on a pack even with the exact same rifle and shooter. If people put in real data, with real numbers, they’d be shocked to see how low hit percentages are for them and their systems in field conditions.

We miss do to the largest sources of error. The largest sources of error in order tend to be-

1). Shooter incompetency
2). Accuracy due to positions other than prone
3). Incorrect zero
4). Optic failures
5). Incorrect data

And then, if all of those are addressed properly- Wind (#6). One can argue for different positioning of 1-5, and for each person they may be in a different order, however they’re all in there. 1-5 are baseline fundamentals and yet are very rarely all addressed. But let’s say someone gets through 1-5, wind is the number one source of error, and it’s not even close to the next one. After wind errors it would be inaccurate ranging (#7).
Of course everyone screams “LRF” yet I have watched repeatedly over the last month person after person range animals incorrectly due to not knowing where their laser is zeroed and under or overshooting in broken terrain by 10-20% on average.

Notice that precision- that is group size hasn’t been listed yet. No muzzle velocity or MV standard deviation or extreme spreads, nor any of the other mouse turds that most pole vault over. We miss do to the largest sources of error, and those are 1-7 by a huge margin.

In addition / to support what Form has said, check out the work being done by Chris Way of Rifle Kraft.

His website is here: https://riflekraft.com/menu

And you can listen to a Precision Shooter podcast episode with him here: https://precisionshooter.co.nz/chris-way-from-rifle-kraft/

He's also done a couple with Frank Galli on The Everyday Sniper podcast, and others.

For the visually-minded, here's a discussion -and an example of the process - with Mike Lilly:

That video also touches on hit probabilities.

In short, Chris gets shooters, usually from the precision shooting competition world, but also hunters. to shoot a set target from standing, kneeling, sitting, prone in real-world conditions (to replicate field conditions/common positions in comps), and then send in the results, which he analyses (for free) and collates.

I could be wrong on this, but I think he has said that the top competitive shooters tend to be around 2 MOA, and most 'good' shooters tend to be about 4 MOA.

(I think he has provided different numbers at different times as the data gathering has gone one, but if this is wrong, PM me and I'll correct the figures.)

 

[Bighorner]

I appreciate it. I ll take a look. I myself have little interest in long range shooting, but it comes up more and more in discussions with wildly different accounts of what a hunter is actually capable of consistently. Thanks for your time.

 

[LaHunter]

I appreciate it. I ll take a look. I myself have little interest in long range shooting, but it comes up more and more in discussions with wildly different accounts of what a hunter is actually capable of consistently. Thanks for your time.

You have to remember, this is the internet. The lines between reality and fantasy can get blurred. I would recommend you re read Forms post.

 

[Formidilosus]

In addition / to support what Form has said, check out the work being done by Chris Way of Rifle Kraft.


I could be wrong on this, but I think he has said that the top competitive shooters tend to be around 2 MOA, and most 'good' shooters tend to be about 4 MOA.

The Rifle Kraft drill (as well as the hunting drill I have posted), quickly shows the ridiculousness of chasing incremental group size reductions.

 

[JeffRaines]

The Rifle Kraft drill (as well as the hunting drill I have posted), quickly shows the ridiculousness of chasing incremental group size reductions.

Couldn't agree more.

Trying to reduce your ".75" group to ".6" or whatever arbitrary number isn't gonna mean shit in the field. You'd be better off spending the time actually shooting from realistic field positions - this does not include shooting from a perfectly level place, prone, off a nice comfy shooting mat using sandbags in a comfortable, stable position with little to no wind(or a definitive way of determining wind at the target). If I had a billion dollars for every animal I shot at from such a position I'd still be broke(relatively speaking) - and that's not likely to change, unless I start hunting at the local shooting range

 

[Bighorner]

You have to remember, this is the internet. The lines between reality and fantasy can get blurred. I would recommend you re read Forms post.

My curiosity is in some folks that tend to do poorly at long range shoots. But are proud to mention some questionable distances they attempt to take game at.

 

[Formidilosus]

My curiosity is in some folks that tend to do poorly at long range shoots. But are proud to mention some questionable distances they attempt to take game at.

People do poorly at close range too. People just suck at shooting. Across the board, does not matter the ranges. Listen to any group of hunters and you’ll hear over and over about missed shots and wounded game.

 

[Bighorner]

Fair enough

 

[HighUintas]

This is why every kid needs to grow up running around the woods with a pellet gun and then a 22.

 

[Wapiti1]

This is why every kid needs to grow up running around the woods with a pellet gun and then a 22.

A single shot .22. Learn to make that shot count. Only one you will get and a 200" gopher walks out of your life.

Jeremy

 

[SomeJackassOnAForum]

Let me ask it this way. How likely are you to hit a 14" target at 700 yards with a cold bore. In field conditions/winds variable at 5-10 mph? For an above average "long range hunter", is it 90% of the time?

CA Ridgeline, 6.5CM, MV 2663 FPS (Chrono'd), G7 BC .315 (G1 .62), below data @ Sealevel:

675 yds, drop is 4.8 mils; 116.64"
700 yds, drop is 5.1 mils; 128.52"
725 yds drop is 5.4 mils; 140.94"

675 yds, 10 MPH wind is 1.2 Mils; 29.16"
700 yds, 10 MPH wind is 1.3 Mils; 32.76"
725 yds, 10 MPH wind is 1.3 Mils; 33.93"

675 yds, 5 MPH wind is 0.6 Mils; 14.58"
700 yds, 5 MPH wind is 0.7 Mils; 16.38"
725 yds, 5 MPH wind is 0.7 Mils; 16.97"

Half MOA rifle puts the bullet anywhere in a roughly 3.5" radius circle at these distances.

The biggest factor is accurate distance to get accurate drop. (Buy a good range finder)

If you can't tell if it's a 5 MPH or 10 MPH wind, split it, you'll be within 8" of either mark.

14" is a big target if you can get prone, read your environmentals, and take a good shot with a high BC bullet. (...and 6.5 CM is not a particularly stunning example of that for an ELR application...)

 

[PathFinder]

Probability is a result of process capability. Negating all forms of shooter error, every rifle system (load, rifle, mount and scope) has a measure of process capability.
A "1 MOA" rifle will put 99.7% of rounds into a 1 MOA group. 95% will be within 2/3 MOA, and 68% will be inside of 1/3 MOA.
So the "odds" of a good hit are quite high, even if the target is slightly smaller than the process capability of the rifle.
That said, wind call errors are responsible for the majority of error. Chasing an extra 1/4 MOA is silly compared to spending time in the field learning to call the wind.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

People do poorly at close range too. People just suck at shooting. Across the board, does not matter the ranges. Listen to any group of hunters and you’ll hear over and over about missed shots and wounded game.

What group of hunters are you hunting with? Sounds awful.

 

[Formidilosus]

What group of hunters are you hunting with? Sounds awful.

Did I say “my group”? Do you believe I only interact with “my” people? You need to get out more, hunters suck at shooting.

 

[5MilesBack]

This is why every kid needs to grow up running around the woods with a pellet gun and then a 22.

I started out with a BB gun and got a 5000-pack of BB's every birthday (July) and Christmas. And there were times where I'd have to replenish in between getting those. It was the same when I moved up to a pellet rifle, and then a .22 as well. But it helps when you grow up on a farm with a river bottom. I would shoot anything back then, just to be shooting.......I'm the same way now with my bow. That's why I need just about indestructible arrows.

 

[RockinRam96]

I did not read all the comments but I did read the OPs post.

I find it somewhat comical to read all these post about guns that shoot 1 MOA or sub-MOA. I want to know what these guys are doing. I have spent a lot of time behind a scope. My dad started my brother and I shooting pellet guns and 22s at 8-10 years old. I have bought a few nice guns and nice scopes with sub-MOA claims but from a bench and a bag I cannot shoot 1 MOA. I probably shoot 500-1,000 rounds a year through all my rifles a year and I am a 2 MOA shooter at best. Unless you spend hours and hours at the range putting holes in paper, I have a hard time believing some claims. Or using a led sled, or similar device.

Back to the OPs question, as I mentioned I am a 2 MOA shooter. I can hit a 12”x18” steel target at 400 yards, a 10” steel target at 300 yards, a 8” at 200 and a 6” at 100 very consistently, with a cold bore and cold shooter. Would I shoot that far at a deer? No. I am shooting from a bench at steel, who knows what position I might be in, in the field.

If I saw a deer worth taking at that kind of range, I’d try to stalk in a bit closer. Cutting the distance in half wouldn’t be very difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[5MilesBack]

I find it somewhat comical to read all these post about guns that shoot 1 MOA or sub-MOA. I want to know what these guys are doing. I probably shoot 500-1,000 rounds a year through all my rifles a year and I am a 2 MOA shooter at best. Unless you spend hours and hours at the range putting holes in paper, I have a hard time believing some claims. Or using a led sled, or similar device.

Do you load your own rounds? In my entire life I have never had a rifle that shot factory ammo less than 2 MOA on its best day. But I've tested and developed loads that I could get under 1 MOA. Does that mean that I can shoot 25 rounds in a row inside that 1" mark? No idea, I've never shot that many in a row. But I've shot several 3-5 shot groupings on different days with these rifles that were 1 MOA or less. When they start to open up, I know it's time to clean my barrel. But that could be 200+ rounds later. And that's with a lead sled. At the range I want to know what "the rifle" can do, not what I can do. Just like setting up my bows......I want them perfect from a tuning and sighting standpoint from the start. That way, any mistakes while shooting are all mine.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Did I say “my group”? Do you believe I only interact with “my” people? You need to get out more, hunters suck at shooting.

The general population is awful at shooting doesn’t matter if they hunt or not,

I hear what you’re saying though, “hunters” who only shoot a couple times per year and newer shooters trying long range shots at big game is an issue. I’d never hunt with somebody like that though.

“Getting out more”… You’ll learn that quality is way more important than quantity when it comes to interacting with shooters. It’s one of the main reasons I don’t teach shooting anymore.

 

[Wrench]

Let me ask it this way. How likely are you to hit a 14" target at 700 yards with a cold bore. In field conditions/winds variable at 5-10 mph? For an above average "long range hunter", is it 90% of the time?

If I have a static target and can toss my pack off, clear LOS and 40 seconds.....you certainly don't want to be that target.

Start chiseling away at those qualifiers and your odds go up.

I don't squeeze shots I don't know will land where I want. The run and gun, offhand, kneel etc really means little to me. In 50 previous shots on big game, I can recall maybe 5 offhand and they were at shotgun range. Exactly one kneeling, but was on a 30* slope so kneeling was with my pack burried into the bank....the rest were from improvised rests, my trekking poles or and most likely, my pack thrown onto whatever high spot gave me the opportunity.

I'd rather shoot farther with a setup than closer without.