Accuracy of a rifle versus the ammo

[Heym SR20]

Biggest single factor in accuracy is the person using the rifle and how they shoot. Stand on a firing point and watch a group of shooters and most fidget / move etc between shots. Add in multiple different positions and its surprising how well our rifles actually shoot.

Then it is how much kit is hung from the rifle and how well it is hung. Moderators are often loose, threads out of line etc, scope mounts not aligned and putting undue pressure on scope. And bipods taken on and off all the time. And add in built necessity for most of the male species to fiddle with the kit.

Once you take out the above you then need statistical variability. Most of us would agree that a sample size of 3 or 5 is not statistically valid. Jag 5 with a vaccine, you wouldn't believe the result.

yet that is exactly what we do with ammo. Is that clover leaf group really a function of perfect harmony between shooter, rifle, ammo and cosmic forces - or is it just chance.

And is measurement of accuracy realistic. 1MOA or 1” is really quite a small group. I suspect if you took most well put together rifles, added a good scope in good mounts and added them properly, then took lots of good factory ammo ( we are talking a few hundred rounds) the vast majority will be within 1 to 2moa with pretty much all within killzone of a deer

There may be a difference in zero between different loads, but often there will be little.

For most hunters the rifle and its barrel are fixed - we are not in a position to keep changing these. So its worth trying different ammo to see what you “think” works best. And the “think” gives the confidence.

I can already feel the incoming from target shooters and those who get huge satisfaction out of tuning rifles. No issue here at all.

But its a bit like cars. Most modern cars are perfectly capable of driving down the motorways at say 80 mph all day and everyday. Some like a VW Golf GTI and off the shelf its even better, and you can take it onto a track and have fun and turn in respectable times. But to compete in club racing - start spending money and spanner time. It will go round the track a little faster and make you more competitive but ...

I think with stalking rifles, optics and ammo we are often confusing what is needed for just driving down the road, to whats needed on a track, to the Merc thats won F1 constructers title for last upteen years.

The trouble with a good stalking rifle, scope and ammo is once its set up it doesn’t need any tinkering- but that’s against our nature.

 

[Ben23]

The trouble with a good stalking rifle, scope and ammo is once its set up it doesn’t need any tinkering- but that’s against our nature.

Few truer words have been spoken

 

[bogtrotter]

Morning all,

Just a thought that came to me in the shower, as good questions often do, that I though I may posit on here.

To what extent do you think the accuracy of a rifle/round combo is down to the rifle, or the ammunition for that rifle? For sake of argument, this is for deer stalking purposes, so hunting rifle and few shots going down it at a time, and not in competition.

Assuming there is no ‘fault’ with the rifle, if you’re reloading and tailoring a round to a particular rifle, (having just read about such things like barrel harmonics and bullet jump etc.), it seems like one should be able to get pretty tight groups with a well developed round for a particular rifle. But how much does the quality of a barrel, for example, improve that?

I guess what I was pondering, a little bored in lockdown with my stalking cancelled haha, is what percentage do you gents think is on the rifle versus the round developed for that rifle?

Not sure if that’s articulated well, but just interested in hearing your thoughts!

The biggest variable is the person pulling the trigger.
Many years of watching people shoot on the Iron Stag has proven to me the average person is not as good a shot as he thinks he is.
That's not to say I have not seen some very very good shots but they are very much outweighed by the poor ones.

 

[Ben23]

The biggest variable is the person pulling the trigger.
Many years of watching people shoot on the Iron Stag has proven to me the average person is not as good a shot as he thinks he is.
That's not to say I have not seen some very very good shots but they are very much outweighed by the poor ones.

Yes, I agree, it's of course the biggest variable (unless something is physically wrong), and that's why I was removing it from the equation.

I guess it was also a thought along the lines of the law of diminishing marginal returns, and at what point it is the rifle versus the ammunition has the greater impact. I'm not necessarily buying a new rifle, or chasing tiny group sizes, or anything at all really, merely thought it an interesting topic whilst I'm reading up on reloading! Perhaps along the same lines of cheap gun with really well sorted ammo versus more expensive 'sorted' gun with less well developed/factory ammo...

The theoretical question was definitely deliberately removing: shooter, scope, rings, bedding issues, etc... Just regarding the rifle/barrel and ammo.

 

[Dalua]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/936545/Ammunition_IA_-_signed_30_09_2020.pdf

Read and weep.

I've read it before. It is a muddle

In A1 para 2. we see
However, some component parts of ammunition, for example, the lead bullets and cases, are not controlled. The proposed change would be to make it an offence to possess these without a licence if it can be shown there is intent to use them to make ammunition.
I don't know what they mean by 'without a licence' but since they don't seem to be suggesting the introduction of any new 'licence', they mean 'without a certificate authorising possession of the manufactured ammuntion'. This would imply that a FAC-holder who reloads would not be affectected by this at all.

However, in A3 para 3 we read:
The Government is consulting publicly on whether it should be made an offence to use component parts to assemble unauthorised quantities of ammunition
Here, the term 'unauthorised quantities' seems to point only at FAC-holders - since they are the only people who generally are allowed to possess S1 ammunition up to a certain number of rounds, though I suppose one could argue that for a non-FAC-holder an 'unauthorised quantity' would be one or more rounds. Also, the bit about intent is gone.
It does seem odd to suggest legislation to make unlawful an act of manufacture when possession of the manufactured article is already a crime.

Paragraph 9 is perhaps more hopful - and maybe this is what they really mean:
Through tightening the policy around component parts, it will become harder for non-certificate holders to make ammunition.

And if what they really mean is what it says in Paragraph 10
The policy objective is to reduce firearms crime by making it an offence to possess component parts of ammunition with intent to manufacture unauthorised complete rounds.
Proving intent is always something of a challenge - and in the case of a FAC-holder of good standing who is allowed to hold 100 rounds of .308 ammuntion I'd suggest it would be very difficult to prove intent even though he might possess enough brass, bullets, primers and powder to make thousands of rounds.

The impact assessment muddies the water again, however, as they seem to be suggesting that it will only be certificate-holders who will be subject to scrutiny under the new law - as they are the only folk with whom 'firearms licensing officers' occupy themselves.

Does anyone else have any idea of what they actually mean? Clearly it might be more straightforward to prove intent if the owner of the components has no FAC authority to possess the ammuntion which could be made from them?

 

[Chris J]

And para 29
Option 2 places restrictions on buyers of component parts. These are designed to prevent illegal activity and not to affect legal activity, so it is assumed the market will not be affected. However, there is no data with which to assess whether there would be a reduction in sales caused by the new restrictions and so there remains a risk that some consumers could reduce the amount of component parts they buy. Potential impacts on the market are assumed to be negligible but will be developed as part of the consultation.

The only issue that I can see here is that once again, the intent and purpose of a piece of sensible legilastion may well be over zealously missapplied to the wrong people for the wrong purposes. But as it stands, I can't see it as a real threat to homeloading at all.

 

[Dalua]

The theoretical question was definitely deliberately removing: shooter, scope, rings, bedding issues, etc... Just regarding the rifle/barrel and ammo.

Indeed.
So, if a barrel and action of the highest quality and assembled with the most minute precision is placed in a machine rest and fired then my view is that it would probably 'like' and 'dislike' different charge-weights/seating depths/neck-tensions/bullets/primers and so on; just as a barreled-action made less-well from lower-grade components would.

One might anticipate that the overall groups size from erratically-assembled ammuntion would be less than in top-grade rig than the lower-grade setup - but not necessarily so: a 'barrel-tuner' might help even out some aspects in both cases?

In summary, I'd anticipate the best precision from the top-grade barreled action with ammuntion precicely assembled made specifically for it. Its precision would then surely be greater than that of the less-well-made rig with ammuntion made specifically for it, even if the ammuntion were made to the same high standards.

There is, of course, going to be a law of diminishing returns. The benchrest for F-Class shooter will probably go to greater trouble and expense than the stalker with his rifle-build and his reloading. Some rifles shoot well with PPU and badly with Norma, and other the other way about.

Thanks goodness that good enough is always going to be good enough!

 

[Dalua]

And para 29
Option 2 places restrictions on buyers of component parts. These are designed to prevent illegal activity and not to affect legal activity, so it is assumed the market will not be affected. However, there is no data with which to assess whether there would be a reduction in sales caused by the new restrictions and so there remains a risk that some consumers could reduce the amount of component parts they buy. Potential impacts on the market are assumed to be negligible but will be developed as part of the consultation.

The only issue that I can see here is that once again, the intent and purpose of a piece of sensible legilastion may well be over zealously missapplied to the wrong people for the wrong purposes. But as it stands, I can't see it as a real threat to homeloading at all.

Indeed - it refers to 'new restrictions', but the only 'restriction' referred to in the paper is making intent unlawful.

A muddle indeed, and one that needs a hard look before responding to the consultation!

 

[zambezi]

Getting back to the OP: My experience is that some of my rifles are very fussy about ammunition. [POI shift of 6" at stalking ranges, rubbish grouping]

For all bar one of my rifles, the ammunition I can reload is more accurate than that which can be bought in a shop. [But over time I am sure I will achieve a better reload for that last rifle too]

I can get fair groupings with some factory ammunition. The best performing factory ammunition is not always available.

Shooting live quarry without confidence of bullet placement would be a breach of a FAC holder's duty under HOG 13.9 which condition places onus of a humane kill on the stalker. I know I can do that with reloads.

 

[charlie111]

Read with interest all of replies. Would like to share the following. I bought a sako .243 from a mate . shot good groups at 100yds sub moa . Using sako own ammo clover leafed most of time . Tried to copy sakos factory ammo with home loads
Tried different brands of primer ,powder cases weight of bullets, crimping, neck sizing. Bought a chrono to achieve exact FPS even got really anal sorting weight of cases and bullets never got close. Sold rifle to another experienced member (flytie) after many attemps and sleepless nights he now uses Sako factory ammo for this rifle. Shoots well with homeloads but better with Sako factory ammo. Only rifle I have ever owned that has not shot better with homeloads. We will probably go to our graves wondering WHY.