Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Palma vs Benchrest?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="rscott5028" data-source="post: 507919" data-attributes="member: 24624"><p>With wind and other conditions being such a huge factor at 600-1k, I think it's apples and oranges to overlay aggregates onto a single target and call it a 20 shot group. For that very reason, most f-class shooters want to shoot their full string in short order before conditions change. </p><p> </p><p>Along the same lines, the actual accuracy of the rifle takes a back seat to reading and compensating for wind. </p><p> </p><p>My curiosity about the comparison of the rifles is from an engineering/design perspective. </p><p> </p><p>If I understood Bart B correctly, he's suggesting long/skinny/whippy vs short/fat/stiff doesn't matter. It all comes down to repeatability. </p><p> </p><p>I can't disagree with the need for repeatability. But, I think fat/stiff is easier to attain repeatability although the degree of benefit may be insignificant due to one's ability to read/compensate for wind. </p><p> </p><p>-- richard</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rscott5028, post: 507919, member: 24624"] With wind and other conditions being such a huge factor at 600-1k, I think it's apples and oranges to overlay aggregates onto a single target and call it a 20 shot group. For that very reason, most f-class shooters want to shoot their full string in short order before conditions change. Along the same lines, the actual accuracy of the rifle takes a back seat to reading and compensating for wind. My curiosity about the comparison of the rifles is from an engineering/design perspective. If I understood Bart B correctly, he's suggesting long/skinny/whippy vs short/fat/stiff doesn't matter. It all comes down to repeatability. I can't disagree with the need for repeatability. But, I think fat/stiff is easier to attain repeatability although the degree of benefit may be insignificant due to one's ability to read/compensate for wind. -- richard [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Palma vs Benchrest?
Top