Accuracy in the field?

[VSS]

My guns are original, early '50s, commercial, FN Mauser 98s. one in 7x57 and one 30-06. they both shoot groups around 1.25" @ 100yds. This is an average of over 20 3 and 5 shot groups. I first established a good load. Now. every time I go, I record my group size. If I call a flyer, or if there is an unusually large group, I will discard it, but it is rare. It happens maybe 10% of the time. I blame it on my shooting or reloading skills or components. What this tells me, is that my guns are more accurate than my shooting. capt david

I like the idea of discounting "flyers". That brings most of my group sizes from this afternoon's session down to about 0.5ins @ 100 yds!
But in reality you can't do that. The "flyer" might have been the first shot of the sequence, and therefore the one you would have fired at the deer. You have to count all shots, surely?

 

[User00025]

Wow ! that's some thread for accuracy in the field. I thought in the field meant out stalking. I just use 8 x 56 scopes on all my rifles zero them so that anything up to an 1.5" group of three is 1.5" high at 100 yds. I then go out and shoot deer at distances up to 200yds. I have done this since I bought my first scope some 45 years ago. Before that I used open iron sights up to 200 yds, my eyesight was better then.

 

[captdavid]

you might be right, but I don't see it that way. even if I did the group might open up to 1.75, or so. capt david

 

[captdavid]

Shooting under the closest to field conditions, basically a front rest or tree or some type of fence post my groups approach 2"or so. Usually I practice on a 6" gong. As I've said elsewhere, I mainly meat hunt and limit my shots to no more than 200yds at stationary deer with double lung shots. capt david

 

[User00033]

@Miki it was interesting to read your take on accuracy vs precision, it being a colloquialism or an American take. That diagram I posted has been in my head probably 30+ years, its how the definition and relationship between the two words is taught in geology (specifically geostatistics) and different engineering disciplines (and I am sure elsewhere too). It’s also the first image that comes up when you google “accuracy vs precision”. It just so happens that the graphic way of illustrating the difference usually uses a shooting style target to get the message across. It is simplistic, but it is also absolutely correct.

For me, when I say I have an “accurate” rifle, I mean the rifle will shoot the bullet where I want it to go, i.e. POA = POI. The confusion comes from the countless images of precise but inaccurate groups, and the misuse in shooting terms of the word “accuracy” when describing tight groups not centred on the bullseye. I was working up a .308 load not long ago, got it just about where I wanted it from a precision point of view, then a non-shooter mate comes along and looks at the target and says “well that’s pretty crap” because I had not adjusted my scope to make the precise load accurate. In his mind anything that wasn’t hitting the bullseye was no good. Which is a very valid point of view when it comes to hunting!

 

[Dalua]

Could we say that precision is a property of the rifle and ammuntion only, and that accuracy depends additionally on the sights and the rifleman?

 

[User00033]

That’s a good way to look at it. Works for me.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

After reading where this thread has gone and what's already been commented on, I'l say this. My 223 is accurate, to get to this conclusion I have put countless numbers of rounds within an inch over let's say a couple of months, some days I got less than a half inch groups, others I got 3/4 inch. I know that bullet will go where I want it too, same with my 308. Accurate. As for shooting at range, my average on deer is 150-200 yards give or take, however, maybe more depending on circumstances. I love sitting out on a nice day and have taken crows to 600. The limiting factor is how well you can shoot at that range and wether the info you put into your ballistics chart is correct

 

[Klenchblaize]

All fine and dandy until it goes wrong and we look for that eatherial and seldom visited thread known as "How Good Is Your Follow-up Shot?" Assuming you get one off quick enough!

K

 

[User00033]

Indeed Klenchblaize, things can go wrong at any range in any environment. In my experience just about the hardest place to get a follow up shot away quickly and effectively is up close in the woods in classic stalking country.

 

[Cottis]

@Miki In his mind anything that wasn’t hitting the bullseye was no good. Which is a very valid point of view when it comes to hunting!

Totally this. There is never anything remotely wrong with aiming for absolute accuracy.

 

[Miki]

@Miki In his mind anything that wasn’t hitting the bullseye was no good. Which is a very valid point of view when it comes to hunting!

Totally this. There is never anything remotely wrong with aiming for absolute accuracy.

Actually a 'non-shooter mate' of DodgyKnees said that not me, though in a hunting scenario I would agree

 

[jthyttin]

what should be done is to measure to the furthermost edge of the group from the point of aim and then double this figure to give the group size as that gives the diameter of a circle, centered on the point of aim, which would fully contain the group.

After deciding on a load for certain rifle, I keep the latest zero check target so I can always visually verify when/where/how the zero was last checked (date and details written on target) and the result. I also keep a mental note how far the worst shot to date landed from the desired POI (usually POA). Keeps you very humble...

For several years I've wanted to upgrade the procedure so that I have one "master target" for a rifle and use it as a backer for zero targets. Effectively I would get the latest zero on clean target and all of the zeroing shots on the "master target". Problem is, I used to have up to 10 different zeros for a single rifle (w/ and w/o mod, 3 different scopes, two different loads). So it'd be too much of a burden even though I've been able to cut down on combinations (mainly because moderators were allowed in Estonia where I often visit).

 

[jthyttin]

Totally this. There is never anything remotely wrong with aiming for absolute accuracy.

This principle wouldn't get you far in real life. Driven game aside, even regular stalking requires you to understand that waiting for the perfect shot leaves you empty handed. It's the ability to know and judge your capabilities that makes you an ethical hunter.

 

[VSS]

It's the ability to know and judge your capabilities that makes you an ethical hunter.

+1

 

[Cottis]

This principle wouldn't get you far in real life.

This made me chuckle.

 

[Kalahari]

"In his mind anything that wasn’t hitting the bullseye was no good. Which is a very valid point of view when it comes to hunting!

Except many of us deliberately set the POI up a bit above the bull to make just aim and shoot practical without lots of range finding turret twirling stuff.

David.

 

[caorach]

For several years I've wanted to upgrade the procedure so that I have one "master target" for a rifle and use it as a backer for zero targets.

Yes I've always fancied doing something like that as well but like you there are some complications such as firing a few with the mod off (which moves my POI about 6 inches) or having a friend fire a few at my target or wandering out to a greater distance to see if I can even hit the paper off sticks from way out there or... However it is the only way to actually establish your group size as each one of those holes in a 10,000 shot group is important and the next time you pull the trigger you could drop the bullet right at the edge of the group, or right in the center. Having spent some time on various ranges and listened to a lot of talk of groups and reloading methods and accurate rifles and so on my experience is that most of the skill in shooting small groups lies in making an excuse for ignoring the shots that don't fall in the small group.

Interestingly I think that most people know what a normal group looks like, they kind of know what size of group most of the rounds will fall into and they also know that you get some that fall outside of this, maybe on occasion quite a distance outside it. Despite this you often hear people standing around claiming they've never shot anything bigger than, say, a 1.5 inch group when they, and everyone around them, knows this is simply not true.

 

[Edinburgh Rifles]

Huge amount of variables
Target size?
Range and expected upper and lower limits
Shooting position - variable?

The used rifles we test are rarely outside the MOA "accuracy"
The "inch at 100" is generally accepted as a fit for purpose standard and roughly equates to an MOA

Where the bullets land is up to you. "Precision" is the ability to put those bullets where you want them.
Rarely can anyone replicate the cloverleaf thumbhole groups in the field, but they are a very important confidence booster and make for better field shots as people who know they can do it are less lightly to second guess themselves and make poor decisions.

Factor in variable ranges for shooting, potentially without the knowledge of exactly how far ('is it 120 or 145m?, 180 or 225?) then the use of MPBR becomes a very useful tool
People are lambasted on here and other forums for not knowing EXACTLY at what range their zero is.

That's not an issue if you intend to shoot -2" or +2" above and below the sight line within a certain range
Its the primary reason actually hitting the dot of death eludes most people

I have personally flip flopped between "MPBR and Holdover" technique and "Dialling" for known distances
or a blend of both!
Had rifles for one purpose and others for another purpose. Always been fun getting it set up and working out drop and accuracy at range
Developed a nice 6mmBR for range work and English Roe, have a .270 for Red/Fallow, a .222 for Roe and Foxes, a 9.3 on way, a 300 Mag for boar and deer

I have recently seen the light......

I recently bought in a Tikka T3 varmint 20" in 308
We test all the used rifles as bore condition is not always a sole indicator of a good rifle
I happened have a Sightron Siii 6-24x50 IR MOA reticule to slap on it

Shot this using HPS Targetmaster 168gr at 200 metres,
Few flyers that I felt long before I saw the result, its a 1" black dot

Decided I am keeping it!
Any rifle that can chuck a 15 shot group almost all with 1" at 200m is not to be overlooked.
Very few of the rifles I have for myself are comfortable enough to do this

Its now restocked in a T3x stock with a Freyr&Devik mod and some flush cup swivels
Comes in at 9 1/2 lb all in.

Can see this being the gun for all occasions.