Large sampling

[nmkid]

I’ve just learned recently that nodes don’t exist, tuners don’t work and seating depth is irrelevant.

How did we not know that??

I have known that for over 25 years. Then...I joined this forum!

 

[Bill Norris]

Slow day in the office, so maybe this will ruffle some feathers!

I'm not a statistician, but have done enough with statistics and worked with many statistician I feel confident saying they roll their eyes when we shoot 2, 3, 4, 5 shot groups and even when we shoot the same 5 shot group load 3-4 times over, at any distance, as the data set is too small to make meaningful conclusions.

With that said, I would be the last to argue with the results of the likes of Erik Cortina and Jack Neary and other accomplished shooters who know how to quickly develop loads. Results trump calculations.

I will argue with those that say something like, "larger data sets are not necessary", although how large is large would also be in the discussion. Are their any shooters who develop a load for a new rifle or new barrel, use 3 round groups, select the 3 round group that bug holes, say they got it, then put the rifle back and never shoot it again? If there are any, I would think not many and not the norm. Instead, we go out and shoot the snot out of that combination and when we do, we are in fact shooting a larger data set.

I still wonder how the author, Mr. Freel, of the article thought he was selecting a good sample of rifles for the test. For example the Remington 710 30-06. This is not to gig at the M710 I'm sure they are fine rifles, but surely Mr. Freel's 710 isn't in the precision rifle category. 3" groups with handloads I would consider marginal for hunting even larger game, although that may be close to typical results with that rifle, and component combination. My point being, I have never known a hunter, hunting with a 30-06 that will sit down at the bench and blast off a group of 30 rounds of a specific load. Typically what I have seen is 3-4 3 round groups, select the best, shoot another 3-7 to zero and go bag their deer. And that would be a lot of shooting for most. Next season, 1-3 rounds on a pie plate to confirm zero and go bag their deer! Maybe I haven't known that many shooter, but I've been shooting over 60 years and seen all kinds, but I could be wrong!

As for powder charge and seating depth isn't that important, from reading the article, the test procedures, the rifles, the loads and conclusion I understand why they are not important to Mr. Freel. But he sure does burn a lot of powder and bullets to not prove a point.

And finally, I sure would be interested in watching his bench shooting techniques during his testing!!

Exactly. If one is looking for the most from a given rifle/load combo it don't make much sense to do these test with less than best quality rifles, extremely top handloading practices, best quality components, and a shooter that has the capabilities to extract the most from the whole set-up.

 

[Dave M.]

ROFL , if mine shoots 3-5 bullets in a very small circle I am done and moving on to something else... The crono and target tell me all I need and never goes out of style...

Unless, of course, your chronograph is a Labradar, that my friend is definitely out of style.
Dave

 

[NZ_Fclass]

What do they say...after the 2nd shot your groups will not get any smaller.

nah - it's 50 BMG - shoots one shot 1/2 MoA groups.

 

[Rsadams]

Unless, of course, your chronograph is a Labradar, that my friend is definitely out of style.
Dave

Lol , it is and it works great for this old redneck...

 

[JMayo]

Writers have to have something to write about. So this is nothing new. A long winded topic covers a lot of space in a magazine.
Benchrest shooters seem to know what they're doing. Scores are the test results.
I don't know about hunting rifles. I'd be less of a stickler for that i suppose.

 

[qldreloader]

The 80/20 rule that was mentioned on the Hornady podcast is worth considering. As shooters we often focus on the 80% of things that make small differences instead of the 20% that make big differences. The example they gave was bullets and powder and my experience tells me they have that right. If I can't get a rifle to shoot acceptably with a bullet/powder combo that is loaded to either SAAMI max COAL or mag length and a charge that is about 5% below published max then I don't start trying to tune it. I change bullets. This has generally led me to an accurate load fairly quickly. Over the years it also leads to a few opened boxes of bullets for future testing. I am simply amazed at how some rifles simply will not shoot with some bullets.

 

[CharlieNC]

I just watched half of that Hornady podcast. They concluded brass prep, seating depth, charge ladders, positive compensation, etc that the winning shooters utilize and report don't matter. So they continue to shoot incredibly large sample sizes to prove they are noncompetitive!

 

[Bill Norris]

I just watched half of that Hornady podcast. They concluded brass prep, seating depth, charge ladders, positive compensation, etc that the winning shooters utilize and report don't matter. So they continue to shoot incredibly large sample sizes to prove they are noncompetitive!

Dang, that's funny right there.

 

[Idaho-Lefty]

It's interesting how many articles and posts mention statistical significance, but very few discuss carrying out a test for signficance ( including Hornady ).

@ Charlie, YUP,..
Shoot 10 Shots at, 200 or, 300 Yards then, lets SEE, what kind of, Rifle / load,.. you really, Have !
A 1/4 MOA Rifle, usually becomes, a 1/2 MOA Rifle or, MORE at, Distance with,.. 10 shots !

 

[CharlieNC]

@ Charlie, YUP,..
Shoot 10 Shots at, 200 or, 300 Yards then, lets SEE, what kind of, Rifle / load,.. you really, Have !
A 1/4 MOA Rifle, usually becomes, a 1/2 MOA Rifle or, MORE at, Distance with,.. 10 shots !

Well fclass matches are at least 60 shots at 300yd minimum, and nearly all the guys I shoot with are High Master. Plus until their recent education Hornady said there was no such thing was a 1/2 moa rifle, maybe they finally checked the bench reset scores. The preponderance of the evidence is there.

 

[Bill Norris]

Well fclass matches are at least 60 shots at 300yd minimum, and nearly all the guys I shoot with are High Master. Plus until their recent education Hornady said there was no such thing was a 1/2 moa rifle, maybe they finally checked the bench reset scores. The preponderance of the evidence is there.

The Hornady guys simply have not gotten their hands on the right rifle. LOL. The right gun will wake them up from their slumber.

 

[RabbitSlayer]

I have always shot 5 groups of 5 or 5 of 3 with a sporter weight gun before getting too excited amd declaring sub moa.

After watching the Hornady podcast I have been shooting 20 at 1 aiming point for zero and 20 for es and sd. So far, the ES and SD are way closer with bigger samples. Hope to learn a lot more now with a garmin instead of a magneto. Wish I had a shot marker to get all the stats for 20 shot groups to get the average center of the group, I cant think what its called. The phone app that does it is a pia.

I takeaway 2 things:

1. Its true that after 2 or 3 shots it is not getting better. Small samples help eliminate some bad loads quickly. So they are not totally useless.

2. Bigger changes like 1 grain or more or changing components makes a difference. Small changes like .1 grain in a creedmoor size case probably dont matter. Once you fire 20+ they are not different. I likely don't have the setup or skills to shoot the difference if there is one.

Here is a 20 shot zeroing group with my final load. Stable table probably introduces about close to .25 moa of error.

 

[VA_XTC_Shooter]

It's interesting how many articles and posts mention statistical significance, but very few discuss carrying out a test for signficance ( including Hornady ).

care to elaborate? What would be a test for significance you are referring to?

 

[JFrank]

TLGB:
My question is, if the gurus at Hornday really believe an anti node is as good as a positive node with no statistical difference then why do they have a specific charge weight for a cartridge ? Why not just throw any ol charge in the case ?Why do reloading manuals list their most accurate powder and charge rate ?

 

[CharlieNC]

care to elaborate? What would be a test for significance you are referring to?

I am actually in the final phase of writing this up for discussion, as it's a lengthy topic to get into. The bottom line is it's straightforward to compare two shot dispersions ( not group sizes) and test for statistical difference, and the primary challenge becomes answering why. Because we all know many factors are involved, thie depends upon a well thought out approach to mitigate the effects of extraneous variables. Group size is a statistic, not an observation!

 

[wkdickinson]

I looked at where the OP’s article was published and decided not to waste my time and being retired, time is not all that valuable to me .

 

[Idaho-Lefty]

Well fclass matches are at least 60 shots at 300yd minimum, and nearly all the guys I shoot with are High Master. Plus until their recent education Hornady said there was no such thing was a 1/2 moa rifle, maybe they finally checked the bench reset scores. The preponderance of the evidence is there.

Agree that,10.5 LV up to the 17 pound, $ 10,000.00 Bench Rest and F class, Rifles, ARE,.. in another, League !
I was thinking about Common Factory Rifles and Varmint Rifles, costing LESS than,.. $2,500. or, so.
My $3,000 Total, Scoped, L V 10.5 Pound, Criterion Barreled Rem Age, in 6 XC is glass Bedded, in a H-S Prec Stock and has, a Jewell Bench Rest Trigger and 6x-24x Scope,... produces, One Hole, Group's, in the LOW 2's to 3's at 100 Yds and I get, about, a One inch, 10 Shot group at,.. 200 Yds ( = 1/2 MOA ) YIKES !
But then again, I'm NOW, 77 y/o, so that, "May" account for,.. the Larger, 200 yd groups ( LOL ! ).
It's HARD to Concentrate for,.. 10 Shots !!
BUT,.. I'm "Good'" for,.. 5 shots, tho !

 

[VA_XTC_Shooter]

And in the recent Hornady Load Development podcast, they praise this article as someone who "gets it"