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
Tubb's Final Finish Bullet Kit Worked!!!
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="cdherman" data-source="post: 898339" data-attributes="member: 12282"><p>To be fair -- we all develop loads under "consistent" conditions. You want a load that is shooting well into a small group first. THEN, you should test it at different ranges, first shot, cold barrel etc....</p><p> </p><p> When I posted about 5 shot versus 3 shot groups, I was merely pointing out (from personal experience and a bit of statistical knowledge) that shooting a good 3 shot group can happen, and it might just be pure luck. Shooting 5 into one hole leaves little question -- the load and gun and shooter were working well under those conditions, no questions asked.....</p><p> </p><p> I've stopped using 3 shot groups for any gun that I have even a clue about its accuracy. A gun capable of .5 MOA is going to shoot almost all of its test loadings into less than 1.5 MOA. The statistical variation in three shot groups versus 5 shot (or 4 shots) is much greater. That means I have more trouble knowing if the group I shot was really better, or just random.</p><p> </p><p> 5 shots leaves little doubt. </p><p> </p><p> What I do often find is that on a bad day (lots of wind, my eyes not working well etc), when shooting 5 shots the groups all end up being about 1.5 MOA. Tells me the other variables are exceeding the variation of the load. Now, if I had the ultimate luxury of shooting 10 shot groups, even under less than perfect conditions, I could perhaps tease out the trends towards one load or the other.</p><p> </p><p> Unfortunately, in such situations, the "sample size" that allows a precise statistical analysis, is not really feasible....</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cdherman, post: 898339, member: 12282"] To be fair -- we all develop loads under "consistent" conditions. You want a load that is shooting well into a small group first. THEN, you should test it at different ranges, first shot, cold barrel etc.... When I posted about 5 shot versus 3 shot groups, I was merely pointing out (from personal experience and a bit of statistical knowledge) that shooting a good 3 shot group can happen, and it might just be pure luck. Shooting 5 into one hole leaves little question -- the load and gun and shooter were working well under those conditions, no questions asked..... I've stopped using 3 shot groups for any gun that I have even a clue about its accuracy. A gun capable of .5 MOA is going to shoot almost all of its test loadings into less than 1.5 MOA. The statistical variation in three shot groups versus 5 shot (or 4 shots) is much greater. That means I have more trouble knowing if the group I shot was really better, or just random. 5 shots leaves little doubt. What I do often find is that on a bad day (lots of wind, my eyes not working well etc), when shooting 5 shots the groups all end up being about 1.5 MOA. Tells me the other variables are exceeding the variation of the load. Now, if I had the ultimate luxury of shooting 10 shot groups, even under less than perfect conditions, I could perhaps tease out the trends towards one load or the other. Unfortunately, in such situations, the "sample size" that allows a precise statistical analysis, is not really feasible.... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Tubb's Final Finish Bullet Kit Worked!!!
Top