Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: The multi-load group gets bigger...

  1. #1

    The multi-load group gets bigger...

    Well today the jolly japes continued.

    Opinions on these groups

    I have another 2 loads here that I hadn't shot at the target so I fired them at it today, it's the same target as in the first post but I'm just shooting a few more rounds at it. So, this is it after 7 rounds:

    As you can see I didn't do so well today. I'd cleaned the rifle and also taken it totally apart since firing the groups seen in my first post but I don't think that had an impact upon my group size - the only factor there was where the rifle was pointing when I pulled the trigger. As I've said with a well engineered rifle it shouldn't matter what bullet you put down the barrel, or how hot it gets, or the phase of the moon or whatever other fantasy people dream up. The only thing that matters is where the barrel is pointed when I pull the trigger and the wetware is always the weak link.

    For entertainment I fired 4 more rounds at the target, taking to total to 11. All of the 4 were loads previously shot in the 7 shot group and two of them were repeats of the 2 new rounds which I fired today, just to prove that their point of impact was related to where I pointed the rifle rather than the load or some other mystical forces. So, this is the 11 shot group:

    The squares on the paper are 1 inch so I'd guess the group is starting to tend towards a 3 inch group which is what everyone I've ever met can actually shoot repeatably in the field. Usefully for the deer stalker however the point of impact should be the top of the thick diamond and none of the strikes are much more than an inch from that.

    Just to be clear for those who missed it that this is now 7 different loads, using 6 different bullets, in one group with no changing zero or discarding a group because of the various freak events which seem to blight the people who shoot half inch groups at 600 yards all day long.

    The bottom line is that with a well engineered rifle at normal stalking ranges and no matter what the load if you point it in the right place then it will hit well enough to kill your deer pretty neatly.
    For self catering accommodation on the Isle of Lewis please visit:

  2. #2
    To be fair I think you have proved your point , i too get fed up with people blaming everything other than themselves for a missed shot , I think for now on anyone on the forum who fluffs a shot and blames it on new bullets , hot barrels ect should be sent the link to this thread

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by caorach View Post
    The squares on the paper are 1 inch so I'd guess the group is starting to tend towards a 3 inch group
    I might be misunderstanding something, but that looks to me like a 1.5-2" group at most.

  4. #4
    A few years back a friend of mine and I shot a two shot group at the same separate targets placed 100 yards away every time he visited. This was done throughout the year over a couple of years regardless of the weather. The groups started out sub MOA and approx. 50 rounds each later measured around 3". Both rifles were accurate and capable of 0.5 MOA. An interesting exercise !

  5. #5
    Philip, that photo tells me a few things:

    1. Your scope needs a click left, and maybe a click down.

    2. You have an 11 shot composite group with multiple loads of about 1.5" - your rifle has a fair bit of potential to be really accurate with a load it "likes".

    3. You need to stop fecking about with random ammo and stick to one good load.

    4. On your belly in a wood near Ballycastle is no place to assess load accuracy.

    5. You need to try my 3" gong... I'll give you a couple practice shots on the 8" gong first.

    Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you......

  6. #6
    as dalua said to my way of thinking thats about 1.5/1.75 group nowt wrong there as far as i can see.

  7. #7
    I know you are right Brian but the purpose wasn't to shoot small groups really. I started with the premise that most stalkers can fairly reliably shoot a 3 inch group in normal field conditions and my suspicion was that a decent rifle will shoot nearly any ammo better than the stalker can. When you consider the mumbo-jumbo talked about loads and rifles I think the group above starts to at least support my position on the matter. I just did it for a bit of fun and some of the loads I shot were completely "un-worked-up" while others were loads that I considered to be "accurate."

    However, the point remains that the strikes were all approx within 1 inch of the point where I would have expected them to impact and, as you point out, the error was mostly in one direction and so could likely be reduced by adjustment to the scope. That is pretty impressive for 6 different bullets, from 110 to 165 grains, and 7 different loads from around 2400fps to over 3000fps shot at around the distance many deer are shot.

    It might be possible to extrapolate my results to conclude that time would be better spent engineering the rifle rather than the loads, which is certainly an interesting concept.
    For self catering accommodation on the Isle of Lewis please visit:

  8. #8
    if i could replicate those eleven shots within 2 inch max any day on live quarry i would genuinly be cock a hoop,well done to you ,atb doug.

  9. #9
    You need to now move back 100 yards and repeat the exercise- then you will see which ones your barrel actually likes

    My .223 puts 62g Milsurp, 55g Privi and 50g Norma's through the same hole at 100. Move back to 200 and it's only the Norma's still grouping consistently.

    If I have time, I sometimes pick the right bullet for the job so rabbits, close range crows and <100y foxes get a Privi and the longer range crows and foxes get the Norma's

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by caorach View Post
    It might be possible to extrapolate my results to conclude that time would be better spent engineering the rifle rather than the loads, which is certainly an interesting concept.
    I think you've put your finger on the critical issue.

    My guess is that it's because messing around with the engineering of a rifle is expensive, time consuming and requires a lot of very expensive specialiast kit and know how. Fooling around with loads does not, and is well within the abaility and budget of most people.

    I think that people like to feel that they have some degree of control over the performance of their gear, so they focus on the bits that are accessible to manipulation. Add rather shaky general understanding of statistics, and a tendency to detect meanignful patterns where there are none, and you have all the voodoo and recieved wisdom about reloading.

    As you quite rightly point out, the single largest source of variation is the shooter, and there is little point in fine tuning all the other variables until that one is consistent.

    I really like this experiment - I do a roughly similar thing, using the same cardboard box over several months, and just replacing post it notes after each group. I usually end up with a roughly continuous ragged hole about 3 inches round. And that's even firing 3 different calibres (.222, .243 and .308), some at 200 yards rather than 100.

Similar Threads

  1. I think he needs a bigger truck?
    By 2434me in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-02-2013, 12:08
  2. Foxes getting bigger
    By griffshrek in forum Other Shooting & Keepering
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-01-2013, 22:16
  3. Bigger players
    By finnbear270 in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 22-07-2012, 14:45
  4. Think i need a bigger gun!
    By The Farmer in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 25-02-2011, 13:09
  5. Bigger magnification.
    By crawfordjohn in forum Equipment & Accessories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-01-2011, 00:21

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts