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
Applied Ballistics 'Shoot Thru Target' Challenge
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="Pdvdh" data-source="post: 1109019" data-attributes="member: 4191"><p>Every one of the variables you identified are taken out of play if the very same bullets fired from the same rifle have their group sizes measured at a shorter and longer range. Which is the beauty in Bryan's method of testing. His method doesn't require theoretical speculation. Shoot the rifle, any rifle with any bullets and loads, and measure groups at the two separate ranges. Then calculate moa precision at both ranges.</p><p></p><p>Winds is the variable that would seem to be in play, since groups should expand more down range under changing wind speeds and directions, compared to shorter ranges. Because the wind will have a longer time to force the bullet to one side or the other.</p><p></p><p>Besides, if convergence downrange is for real, as many shooters claim to have commonly experienced/witnessed, then the degrading "variables" must not be terribly degrading to downrange precision. In fact, they must enhance downrange precision. In spite of all the claims of improved angular precision downrange compared to close range, no one has yet to deliver that special rifle to Bryan for testing and confirmation that it's the goose that lays the golden eggs.</p><p></p><p>So other than wind, let the testing begin. Whoops. Testing can't begin until rifles have been presented for testing. Those rifles are proving to be very elusive. Sasquatch and Bigfoot elusive.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pdvdh, post: 1109019, member: 4191"] Every one of the variables you identified are taken out of play if the very same bullets fired from the same rifle have their group sizes measured at a shorter and longer range. Which is the beauty in Bryan's method of testing. His method doesn't require theoretical speculation. Shoot the rifle, any rifle with any bullets and loads, and measure groups at the two separate ranges. Then calculate moa precision at both ranges. Winds is the variable that would seem to be in play, since groups should expand more down range under changing wind speeds and directions, compared to shorter ranges. Because the wind will have a longer time to force the bullet to one side or the other. Besides, if convergence downrange is for real, as many shooters claim to have commonly experienced/witnessed, then the degrading "variables" must not be terribly degrading to downrange precision. In fact, they must enhance downrange precision. In spite of all the claims of improved angular precision downrange compared to close range, no one has yet to deliver that special rifle to Bryan for testing and confirmation that it's the goose that lays the golden eggs. So other than wind, let the testing begin. Whoops. Testing can't begin until rifles have been presented for testing. Those rifles are proving to be very elusive. Sasquatch and Bigfoot elusive. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Applied Ballistics 'Shoot Thru Target' Challenge
Top