Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: A new metric? (Slightly tongue in cheek!)

  1. #1

    A new metric? (Slightly tongue in cheek!)

    From reading the posts on here, other forums, my own experience and even manufacturers' blurb it seems that the accuracy available to the shooter using fairly modest kit is increasing to the point that it is hard to distinguish the results using the traditional 100 yard target yardstick.

    Most days someone will talk about the minuscule size of their group and the impact of the load that they are developing, but I find myself thinking 'Why?'. Don't get me wrong - I am definitely not one of the 'it'll do' guys. I want my rifle and shooting to be as accurate as possible, but I am finding that I am a lot more interested in what happens further out exposing meaningful differences between the alternative rounds and the weaknesses in my shooting technique. Does a difference of a few millimetres matter at relatively close ranges really matter?

    So, I am wondering..... do we need a new metric.
    Last edited by rabbitter; 22-10-2014 at 10:52.

  2. #2
    I take your point, 300m is a much better yardstick, particularly for load development. However, 300 yard ranges are hard to come by, and the group sizes at that range can be demoralising for some of us.
    Brian.

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

  3. #3
    An interesting thought. The metric I have pursued for a long time is my performance in competitions and it's consistently telling me I can do better.

    Regards JCS

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by jcampbellsmith View Post
    An interesting thought. The metric I have pursued for a long time is my performance in competitions and it's consistently telling me I can do better.

    Regards JCS
    I often get that feeling too

  5. #5
    When I shoot at 300 metres, I am sometimes elated and sometimes I burn my targets in shame. Probably the reason I DON'T compete. I would probably get my arse handed to me.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Claret_Dabbler View Post
    I take your point, 300m is a much better yardstick, particularly for load development. However, 300 yard ranges are hard to come by, and the group sizes at that range can be demoralising for some of us.
    and its a pain having to walk out and back 300 yds,

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by bobt View Post
    and its a pain having to walk out and back 300 yds,
    I find that too - and when you get back you need a moment to get your breathing under control. Actually, I normally put out a fair few targets at 150, 200 and 250 metres, say with the assistance of my truck.

    I would really like some gong targets or steel plate targets to shoot at extended distances. Anyone got any links?

  8. #8
    If you are considering load development then the problem with going to 300 yards is that you have introduced an awful lot of variables over which you have no easy control, perhaps the most important will be wind or, perhaps, your shooting. It will, therefore, prove much more difficult to provide sufficient evidence that some small tweak on the reloading bench caused the observed change in group size. The end result of this is going to be that you'll end up kidding or confusing yourself even more than at 100 yards.
    For self catering accommodation on the Isle of Lewis please visit:
    http://www.7south.co.uk/




  9. #9
    SD Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    East Midlands M1/M69 Junction 21
    Posts
    5,404
    Military rifles were tested for group, from a machine rest, or used to be by Enfield and the other factories) at just thirty-five yards. It will tell you nearly all that you want to know and a one hundred yard group will tell you all that you need to know.

    As others say too many variables on open ranges (and from other than a machine rest) at the longer distances to really be of any greater value to the 95% of users of hunting or stalking rifles. Longer distances than one hundred yards unless of a machine rest are relying on the shooter's skill too greatly...

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitter View Post
    ....I would really like some gong targets or steel plate targets to shoot at extended distances. Anyone got any links?
    I've just taken a small delivery from these folk BH Targets supplier of AR500 steel shooting targets haven't tried them yet as there was stalking to do, but some quiet day I plan to set a gong up and have a go at it. I've picked a nice windswept spot out.

    Regards

    JCS

Similar Threads

  1. Imperial/Metric measurements
    By blaven in forum Equipment & Accessories
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 14-07-2014, 07:30
  2. For Sale Ohaus metric reloading scales
    By leebut in forum Reloading
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14-03-2014, 22:58
  3. Fallow with tongue
    By docholiday in forum Photos
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-09-2012, 20:06
  4. imperial/metric conversions on ticket
    By remy17 in forum Rifles & Calibres
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 24-01-2012, 06:52
  5. Deer Tongue
    By Mannlicher_Stu in forum Deer Stalking General
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 16-07-2010, 13:57

Posting Permissions

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