Your Groups Are Too Small

[PineBrook413]

This is a great thread!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BlackTail]

Hornady: “3 shot groups aren’t statistically significant.”

“We’ve never seen a 1/4 Minute Gun.”

Also Hornady:

 

[wind gypsy]

Hornady: “3 shot groups aren’t statistically significant.”

“We’ve never seen a 1/4 Minute Gun.”

Also Hornady:
View attachment 574967
View attachment 574968

Someone forgot to tell their social media dweeb! haha!

 

[id_jon]

Industry standard

 

[metroplex]

Summary:
1. 10 shot group (minimum) for zero
2. Changing bullet and powder can have significant impact upon accuracy
3. Changing primer and jump have minimal impact upon accuracy
3.5. If changing powder/bullet combo doesn’t get your desired results, change barrel
4. 20 and 30 shot group size are relevant
5. Over 30 shot group size not necessary

Was @Formidilosus one of those podcasters?

Edit: added 3.5

10 shot group minimum for zero, at $2-$4 per magnum cartridge that's an expensive zeroing process.

 

[BjornF16]

10 shot group minimum for zero, at $2-$4 per magnum cartridge that's an expensive zeroing process.

3 shot zero and missed animal could be more expensive

 

[Reburn]

10 shot group minimum for zero, at $2-$4 per magnum cartridge that's an expensive zeroing process.

Since you clearly havent watched the video. And since I guess its too much infomation for you just fast forward to 59.30. Anyone and everyone that shoots long range has tried to go with a 5 shot or less zero and had to make a hard decision at the decision making point. I have. I have even had that decision making process at a 10 shot group.

here is the video so you dont have to look for it.

 

[metroplex]

Since you clearly havent watched the video. And since I guess its too much infomation for you just fast forward to 59.30. Anyone and everyone that shoots long range has tried to go with a 5 shot or less zero and had to make a hard decision at the decision making point. I have. I have even had that decision making process at a 10 shot group.

here is the video so you dont have to look for it.

Yep I didn't have 1.5 hours of my life to listen to yet another long drawn out podcast. 1h 06 is where the good comparison is shown. I'll try to do a 10-20 shot zero next time. This explains some of the things I've observed with only 3-5 shot zeros. But at under 100 yd I don't see that as a huge miss with their 5 shot vs 20 shot zero. Of course beyond 100 yd it makes a big difference. But it is still a very expensive procedure if different loads are used. I don't always stick to one when testing out a new rifle.

 

[Reburn]

Yep I didn't have 1.5 hours of my life to listen to yet another long drawn out podcast. 1h 06 is where the good comparison is shown. I'll try to do a 10-20 shot zero next time. This explains some of the things I've observed with only 3-5 shot zeros. But at under 100 yd I don't see that as a huge miss with their 5 shot vs 20 shot zero. Of course beyond 100 yd it makes a big difference. But it is still a very expensive procedure if different loads are used. I don't always stick to one when testing out a new rifle.

Of all the BS podcasts out there. This is one you should watch if your going to be banging at long range. I hate podcasts and dont like to listen to guys drone on about crap. This particular 90 minute video is all valid info. Do with the info as you wish. I shoot 10 shot zeros. I had a factory weatherby trend 0.1 mils high at distance and had to adjust zero last week. Even at that gun and $40 of ammo for zero it still wasnt enough to establish a proper zero.

 

[Harvey_NW]

But it is still a very expensive procedure if different loads are used. I don't always stick to one when testing out a new rifle.

Not really, you can still do 3-5 to see how bad it is. If a 3 or 5 shot group isn't acceptable as far as precision, adding more shots will never make it any better. But if it does meet the criteria, you can add more and see what it does. If it stays acceptable, now you have a good idea of how much dispersion there is, and can make a more accurate zero adjustment from there.

 

[Reburn]

Not really, you can still do 3-5 to see how bad it is. If a 3 or 5 shot group isn't acceptable as far as precision, adding more shots will never make it any better. But if it does meet the criteria, you can add more and see what it does. If it stays acceptable, now you have a good idea of how much dispersion there is, and can make a more accurate zero adjustment from there.

Really a moot point if your buying ammo though.
I dont know anybody that sells less then 20 box.
Why not just shoot all 20.
Pick the one that shoots best and then buy 400 from the same lot.

 

[Harvey_NW]

Really a moot point if your buying ammo though.
I dont know anybody that sells less then 20 box.
Why not just shoot all 20.
Pick the one that shoots best and then buy 400 from the same lot.

Or sell 17 on facebook marketplace and get $20 back. If I shoot 3 shots and it's a 2" group I'm not sacrificing any barrel life on that just to burn it up.

 

[pattimusprime22]

Really a moot point if your buying ammo though.
I dont know anybody that sells less then 20 box.
Why not just shoot all 20.
Pick the one that shoots best and then buy 400 from the same lot.

Trying to sift through all the scam websites that sell ammo online... where do you purchase 400 rounds and guarantee same lot #?

 

[Reburn]

Trying to sift through all the scam websites that sell ammo online... where do you purchase 400 rounds and guarantee same lot #?

Thats like asking for my honey hole where to kill a 350" elk bull.
The websites are out there though.

 

[hereinaz]

Of all the BS podcasts out there. This is one you should watch if your going to be banging at long range. I hate podcasts and dont like to listen to guys drone on about crap. This particular 90 minute video is all valid info. Do with the info as you wish. I shoot 10 shot zeros. I had a factory weatherby trend 0.1 mils high at distance and had to adjust zero last week. Even at that gun and $40 of ammo for zero it still wasnt enough to establish a proper zero.

I like your point.

Even after zeroing at 100, the RIFLE SYSTEM has to be proofed at distance to be zeroed at that distance after you dial. No amount of math and apps can do it. Without proofing, there is a huge unknown about your rifle system, which includes everything from the clothes you wear to the tolerances of the scope’s internals and then to the bullet model/bc in the ballistic app. And more, especially the skill of the rifleman.

I am a guy that believes a 1 moa rifle system in the hands of a good rifleman will kill at distance. And, with a 10 shot zero, lots of half moa guns will actually be a 1 moa gun.

I have a problem with 3 shot groups beyond just the statistical nature of an inadequate sample.

In some fairness to a guy who uses a 3 shot group, implicitly they know more about the gun than those three shots. Everyone gains data along the way about the rifle that went into the 3 shot group that they rely on. The three shot group wasn’t in a complete vacuum.

They know, whether they reveal it or not, that there is a “margin of error”. Internet speak for that “margin” is “when I do my part.” So, they really know that the practical real world group size is actually larger. So, it can be good enough for many applications.

A 10 shot group is actually a better representation of the rifle system, because the shooter is part of the larger system too. And, there are “flyers” that get assessed as “my fault” or “the guns” fault.

Having tried to figure out when flyers were me or the gun, I have shot enough to know that in lots of situations, I am not aware of something I am doing, and the flyer really is me.

Also, we as humans have a tendency to asses “responsibility” depending on our objective or mood. A guy bragging on the rifle will be more likely blame himself. A guy bragging on himself will blame the rifle too much. If we are honest with ourselves, we can catch it happening. And, if we are honest we also will admit that most of us haven’t shot enough to know the difference between the source of errors, whether was our execution of the shot or the rifle.

My issue with 3 shot groups and the idea of absolutely minimizing the number of shots fired is that a 100 yard zero proves only that. As soon as you use a turret or holdover, the system has changed. You have to proof the rifle system in the new condition. It’s cold out, proof the system. You cleaned the barrel, proof the system.

There are so many factors that require more than a good three shot zero at 100 yards. I think many don’t fully realize the value of shooting more out of each rifle system. I shoot a lot more than the average, and the more I shoot the more I scratch my head because I keep learning.

I am afraid that many people are missing so much more because of constraints that prevent them from putting bullets down range. Now, I know guys have limited budgets, and they may choose to go with a 3 shot zero. It may be the best a guy can afford, that is what it is. Other guys don’t have time. It is what it is. If that is you, embrace it. It’s ok, you don’t need to worry about judgment from the random internet dude. I certainly don’t care what you do.

I do care about reality and especially people trying to learn. Also, a person just shouldn’t fool themselves, heaven knows it happens to all of us. Confirmation bias and all sorts of tricks are played on us by our brain.

The scientific method is observing the real world free of bias. Real world evidence says 3 shot groups at 100 is a very limited basis from which to make decisions to make impacts at long range.

Yeah, world record holders may build consist rifles that can shoot three shot groups at 100 in the same hole, but those guys are insanely controlling so many variables to reach that proficiency and precision. Besides the experience and institutional knowledge that they rely on. And, I know that unless I am controlling the same variables and have the same knowledge, I would need more proofing than them.

Anyone can find Brian Litz material, read his books, or use his WEZ program to see real world results from actual testing in a scientific and statistically valid method.

There are so many factors in play at long range. Bullets don’t lie, and there is no way to assure precision without enough down range.

You are right, even in known shooting range, there are too many factors between 100 yards and 700 to say a 100 yard zero is good. You could be .1 mil high.

All the really serious long range shooters I know, and I mean those that want to know their rifle system and their skills may not shoot a “10 shot group” but they shoot many 3 shot groups and look for trends in the groups. They are proofing and adjusting accordingly.

For guys that shoot “3 shot groups” to zero and call it good on a new rifle system, consider proving it to yourself that your rifle is zeroed. It might be, but it might not.

A good test is to put out a target with 10 or 15 dots and shoot each dot once, walk away from the rifle and then build the position again and shoot the next dot. Cold bore shots at the range can be teased out as “cold shooter” with this test. It also can explain why you might shoot a sweet three shot group and then shoot an moa group after a cease fire.

At the end, trace impacts onto one sheet. See how your rifle is actually zeroed. You’ll find it is also a test of your skill as a marksman to build the same position. If it’s truly a .25 moa gun, then how good are you?

The proof is in the pudding. That makes a guy confident in a shot.

 

[Formidilosus]

10 shot group minimum for zero, at $2-$4 per magnum cartridge that's an expensive zeroing process.

If the cost of ten to twenty rounds is a limiting factor, how do you afford to practice with the rifle enough to be competent at long range with it?

 

[ToolMann]

If the cost of ten to twenty rounds is a limiting factor, how do you afford to practice with the rifle enough to be competent at long range with it?

^ This. One could, I don't know, not shoot a magnum and get something more economical to shoot that kills just the same. There may be a few threads on here about just that topic.

 

[Maverick1]

Another thread that has turned stupid and bombed into the black hole of 3-5-10 shot groups……

 

[Harvey_NW]

Another thread that has turned stupid and bombed into the black hole of 3-5-10 shot groups……

I mean, that's essentially what it was about from the start, so..

 

[Reburn]

I mean, that's essentially what it was about from the start, so..

Fixed it for you.

I mean, that's literally what it was about from the start.