Satellite flyers, soooo frustrating!

[Utectok]

How long between groups? Barrel cleaned between groups? Without knowing which shot is the flyer its difficult to say, it could be the first, cold bore, as you don't know which shot I'll assume you can't see the bullet hole with your scope, possibly a poa issue, either try turning the mag up if possible to observe the impact or invest in a spotting scope

With a good barrel I’ve never noticed cold bore shift or any significant poa change over 20 shots shot at a leisurely pace. That’s a normal tapered barrel. Pencil barrels or poorly de stressed barrels may be different.

 

[Tazz]

For hunting purposes the most important fact IMHO you need to know is where does the first shot go

 

[Greenmist]

With a good barrel I’ve never noticed cold bore shift or any significant poa change over 20 shots shot at a leisurely pace. That’s a normal tapered barrel. Pencil barrels or poorly de stressed barrels may be different.

I quite agree, although I'm trying the answer the op's question. I have no idea which barrel is fitted or how the groups were fired, hence my questions

 

[caorach]

Attached is a target which illustrates my frustration. Tikka SV in .300 WM, 178 gr. Hornady ELDX, 76-79 gr. Of Ramshot Grand. Of the 4, 3 shot groups, 3 of the groups had 2 bullets in the same hole all 4 groups had a flyer. Thoughts? I don’t know which shot was the flyer, if it’s the 3rd shot, I would assume barrel heat. I’ll have to retest and observe which round is the flyer. Could this be a bedding issue? I’m thinking bedding or barrel heat. Of note, the Ramshot Grand seems to be very accurate, produces minimal heat, burns clean, and cleans out the copper fouling. I have not tested the velocities yet but will do so when the rains stop. I think it’s a winner.

As has already been clearly stated you, and everyone else, are governed by the rules that make the universe work and in your case the laws that make statistics work are looking in your direction.

Among the accuracy/reloading community there is a very marked reluctance to accept this and so many "made up words and concepts" are used to account for things that are actually already well understood and explained. So called "gun writers" seem to make a living out of this and many of them, and their readers, are doing nothing more than fooling themselves.

Many of the various procedures you are called upon to carry out when shooting, or reloading, have no foundation in the actual physics and, indeed, the people promoting them are unable to understand basic physics never mind come up with new physics.

In terms of the statistics consider the world record group shot at some benchrest competition. If it is possible to shoot this group why is the person doing it not getting such a group every day? Why are his groups not all like this? Why are some shooting records years old, and others recent? The truth is that the results are governed by statistics but statistics only apply to large samples.

I would also encourage caution when it comes to what people claim on the internet. Many years ago on this forum a member was claiming that he was shooting very small groups all day every day leaning on his Land Rover. A quick look at the figures for the claimed groups revealed that for the range involved they would have been world record groups. There was also a much quoted expert in ballistics/reloading etc. who had a web page and was very keen to point out that he had a PhD - he always used the title of Dr. in his name. The implication was that he somehow knew more than you do but a quick read of his "research" saw him using made up words, or the wrong words, or seeming to show a lack of basic understanding. A few minutes research revealed that his PhD was in sociology, no doubt an achievement but hardly a qualification for inventing new physics.

I saw Mungo say he would post some examples of, I suspect, normal distributions. Your shooting will look like this because this is a physical reality that quite literally governs how the universe exists. Not only does it open the possibility that your groups will often be bigger than you like but it also creates the possibility that, if you are only going to fire 3 shots at the target, then you might one day shoot a world record group. You can always post the picture on the internet and tell everyone that you shoot groups like that all day every day

 

[trickie]

Let’s looks a this a little differently
Your have at least 4 variables
Shooters ability. ( say .5 moa)
Rifle barrels ability, (well keep these all at .5 moa)
Ammunition variability (.5 moa)
And weather conditions, again at (.5 moa)

So on a perfect day .5 moa is possible, not probable. A 2 moa group would not be considered “outside” these figures.

Minimum decent group size is 10 rounds.

Take your Anschutz match Benchrest rifle to do ammo testing at Ely, you might end up with a group exceeding 30mm over 40 rounds -with the ammunition batch your rifle shoots the BEST.

Physics is a bummer if you don’t agree with it.

Personally I shoot 5 round group, ammo is to expensive to shoot 10 round groups for me.

 

[Utectok]

For hunting purposes the most important fact IMHO you need to know is where does the first shot go

Exactly and you only know that with a good zero

 

[webley701]

Attached is a target which illustrates my frustration. Tikka SV in .300 WM, 178 gr. Hornady ELDX, 76-79 gr. Of Ramshot Grand. Of the 4, 3 shot groups, 3 of the groups had 2 bullets in the same hole all 4 groups had a flyer. Thoughts? I don’t know which shot was the flyer, if it’s the 3rd shot, I would assume barrel heat. I’ll have to retest and observe which round is the flyer. Could this be a bedding issue? I’m thinking bedding or barrel heat. Of note, the Ramshot Grand seems to be very accurate, produces minimal heat, burns clean, and cleans out the copper fouling. I have not tested the velocities yet but will do so when the rains stop. I think it’s a winner.

They are all part of the long-run group size - unwelcome news that may be.

 

[Klenchblaize]

Watching your fall of shot is actually detrimental to group size. I shoot better when I don't know anything about the size of the group that's forming. I just focus on making a good job of the next shot.
Regards
JCS

You may have a point but its difficult not to see a 100-yard group 'develope' when scope is set at 25-power!

This was shot with a fixed 6-power scope and it wasn't until I retrieved the target that it was revealed as my best 5-shot group to date from a 222 stutzen:

I'm hoping the one in the middle was my first shot but will never know.

K

 

[A Guy Out West]

How long between groups? Barrel cleaned between groups? Without knowing which shot is the flyer its difficult to say, it could be the first, cold bore, as you don't know which shot I'll assume you can't see the bullet hole with your scope, possibly a poa issue, either try turning the mag up if possible to observe the impact or invest in a spotting scope

I used my barrel cooler between groups to cool the barrel to ambient temperature for each string. Next outing, I will be numbering each shot as I go.

 

[Utectok]

Here’s a ten shoter no waiting but also not machine gunned. That’s a fairly normal distribution in my experience (for my cloverleaf three shot gun lol ) three shot for comparison.

 

[A Guy Out West]

As has already been clearly stated you, and everyone else, are governed by the rules that make the universe work and in your case the laws that make statistics work are looking in your direction.

Among the accuracy/reloading community there is a very marked reluctance to accept this and so many "made up words and concepts" are used to account for things that are actually already well understood and explained. So called "gun writers" seem to make a living out of this and many of them, and their readers, are doing nothing more than fooling themselves.

Many of the various procedures you are called upon to carry out when shooting, or reloading, have no foundation in the actual physics and, indeed, the people promoting them are unable to understand basic physics never mind come up with new physics.

In terms of the statistics consider the world record group shot at some benchrest competition. If it is possible to shoot this group why is the person doing it not getting such a group every day? Why are his groups not all like this? Why are some shooting records years old, and others recent? The truth is that the results are governed by statistics but statistics only apply to large samples.

I would also encourage caution when it comes to what people claim on the internet. Many years ago on this forum a member was claiming that he was shooting very small groups all day every day leaning on his Land Rover. A quick look at the figures for the claimed groups revealed that for the range involved they would have been world record groups. There was also a much quoted expert in ballistics/reloading etc. who had a web page and was very keen to point out that he had a PhD - he always used the title of Dr. in his name. The implication was that he somehow knew more than you do but a quick read of his "research" saw him using made up words, or the wrong words, or seeming to show a lack of basic understanding. A few minutes research revealed that his PhD was in sociology, no doubt an achievement but hardly a qualification for inventing new physics.

I saw Mungo say he would post some examples of, I suspect, normal distributions. Your shooting will look like this because this is a physical reality that quite literally governs how the universe exists. Not only does it open the possibility that your groups will often be bigger than you like but it also creates the possibility that, if you are only going to fire 3 shots at the target, then you might one day shoot a world record group. You can always post the picture on the internet and tell everyone that you shoot groups like that all day every day

So I think what your saying in a diplomatic way is: just shut up and be happy with what I have. I’ve tried telling myself that, it’s that blasted accuracy bug, it’s like a monkey on my back.

 

[A Guy Out West]

With a good barrel I’ve never noticed cold bore shift or any significant poa change over 20 shots shot at a leisurely pace. That’s a normal tapered barrel. Pencil barrels or poorly de stressed barrels may be different.

You are lucky then. Of my several rifles, only my Remington VSSF in .220 Swift does not seem to shift point of impact when heated. I will get it hot but not so hot that touching it is uncomfortable. My other rifles with standard sporter barrels shift poi after 3 or 4 closely spaced shots. One day I decided to test my Browning A bolt in .270. It will usually shoot a moa group with no problem. I shot a round and then let the barrel cool completely, repeated this 3 times. Result was a ragged hole. In my simple mind, that proved to me that barrel heat is a factor. My sample may be too small to be reliable, I don’t know. As Coarach points out, the rule of large numbers is what determines predictability and provides credibility.

 

[Utectok]

You are lucky then. Of my several rifles, only my Remington VSSF in .220 Swift does not seem to shift point of impact when heated. I will get it hot but not so hot that touching it is uncomfortable. My other rifles with standard sporter barrels shift poi after 3 or 4 closely spaced shots. One day I decided to test my Browning A bolt in .270. It will usually shoot a moa group with no problem. I shot a round and then let the barrel cool completely, repeated this 3 times. Result was a ragged hole. In my simple mind, that proved to me that barrel heat is a factor. My sample may be small that it is not reliable, I don’t know.

Weirdly mine has no poa shift from dirty to clean either! That is unusual. But a good well made barrel should manage a ten shot string I’d have thought? Most competitions (prs nrl hunter f class) require at least that? I might be wrong as all I have is my experience and I’ve more or less disregarded barrel temp in normal usage. Obviously long periods of rapid shooting will toast a barrel but I’d not think twice about 20 shots and expect the last shot to be as accurate as the first.

 

[Heym SR20]

My rifles are hunting rifles. Its the first shot that counts.

When i shoot groups or zero, I take my time letting the barrel cool between shots. I will usually get up between shots and look at the target with a telescope and note down the position of the shots.

After several shots, this gives you a really good and honest picture of how you, your rifle and ammunition is actually shooting. As others have said, many shoots give you a true indication. Two or three are just vanity.

I like tiny little groups, but in reality as long as they are within a couple of inches your deer is dead. I like the centre of my group to be about 4cm above my point of aim at 100m.

 

[Utectok]

Here’s a ten shoter no waiting but also not machine gunned. That’s a fairly normal distribution in my experience (for my cloverleaf three shot gun lol ) three shot for comparison. View attachment 401292View attachment 401293

Also note the 3 shot group is half the size of the ten shot one that is statistically about exactly what you would expect.

 

[HonestJohn]

Here’s a three shot group. I’d argue it tells a relatively good story about grouping, esp since when i shoot abother 3 shot group on another day it looks the same

 

[Utectok]

Here’s a three shot group. I’d argue it tells a relatively good story about grouping, esp since when i shoot abother 3 shot group on another day it looks the same

Basically with that information you don’t know whether you have an accurate rifle or not. It may well be but equally it may not be? Impose ten of your 3 shot groups on top of each other and if the group is still the same size you have an exceptionally accurate rifle and congratulations.

 

[HonestJohn]

Impose ten of your 3 shot groups on top of each other and if the group is still the same size you have an exceptionally accurate rifle and congratulations.

superimposed they’ll look the same I can guarantee you that. Just an off the shelf Schultz Larsen Hunter in 25-06 pinging 117g hornady factory ammo eldx precision hunter.
Being 1:10, it’s not even supposed to like 117g bullets

That group was 200yds offhand of course

 

[Mungo]

So I think what you’re saying in a diplomatic way is: just shut up and be happy with what I have. I’ve tried telling myself that, it’s that blasted accuracy bug, it’s like a monkey on my back.

There is nothing wrong - it is exactly what you expect to see with random error.

Shoot a 10 or even 20 shot group, and you’ll see your ‘fliers’ disappear into the main group.

 

[hw101]

As has already been clearly stated you, and everyone else, are governed by the rules that make the universe work and in your case the laws that make statistics work are looking in your direction.

Among the accuracy/reloading community there is a very marked reluctance to accept this and so many "made up words and concepts" are used to account for things that are actually already well understood and explained. So called "gun writers" seem to make a living out of this and many of them, and their readers, are doing nothing more than fooling themselves.

Many of the various procedures you are called upon to carry out when shooting, or reloading, have no foundation in the actual physics and, indeed, the people promoting them are unable to understand basic physics never mind come up with new physics.

In terms of the statistics consider the world record group shot at some benchrest competition. If it is possible to shoot this group why is the person doing it not getting such a group every day? Why are his groups not all like this? Why are some shooting records years old, and others recent? The truth is that the results are governed by statistics but statistics only apply to large samples.

I would also encourage caution when it comes to what people claim on the internet. Many years ago on this forum a member was claiming that he was shooting very small groups all day every day leaning on his Land Rover. A quick look at the figures for the claimed groups revealed that for the range involved they would have been world record groups. There was also a much quoted expert in ballistics/reloading etc. who had a web page and was very keen to point out that he had a PhD - he always used the title of Dr. in his name. The implication was that he somehow knew more than you do but a quick read of his "research" saw him using made up words, or the wrong words, or seeming to show a lack of basic understanding. A few minutes research revealed that his PhD was in sociology, no doubt an achievement but hardly a qualification for inventing new physics.

I saw Mungo say he would post some examples of, I suspect, normal distributions. Your shooting will look like this because this is a physical reality that quite literally governs how the universe exists. Not only does it open the possibility that your groups will often be bigger than you like but it also creates the possibility that, if you are only going to fire 3 shots at the target, then you might one day shoot a world record group. You can always post the picture on the internet and tell everyone that you shoot groups like that all day every day

This is a brilliant reply - really enjoyed reading this - probably because I agreed with everything you said.