This is a great thread. I’m of the opinion that a true flyer in the box, will be a flyer no matter what gun it is shot from. By flyer I mean a bullet that by nonuniform velocity, weight or shape is destined to hit outside the group unless by pure chance of wind or jerk, it happens to be thrown into the group.
I have wondered whether the fact that flyers exist, regardless of the gun, tends to call into question whether there is a “best” lot for every distinct gun, which needs to be thoroughly tested to determine, or on the other hand, there are simply better grouping lots.
My thought would be that .22 bullet accuracy can’t really be an exception to our common sense understanding of ideally uniform products.
If the conditions are controlled so tightly that flyers outside a group can only be attributable to different 1) velocity, or 2) a nonuniform bullet, then I’m challenged to understand how the ranking of several lots of the same match bullet could be ordered differently, from one good rifle to another.
I would be supposing that the rifles will shoot different sized groups than each other, but that it is not realistic to expect a rifle to shoot a better group with an inferior lot than a superior lot. Yet something along these lines seems to be implied in the acceptance by us as shooters that the most popular lots and the least popular lots all have to be sold, and all at the same price.
I can fully appreciate that different designs are better suited for different guns and justify that particular purpose of testing. But what I am wondering is different, how a certain lot of identically made bullets that groups biggest in most guns, and is passed over again and again, will ever group the smallest and be the best choice for a different gun?
To my thinking it would be like dyno testing high performance engines coming off the line, they are not truly identical, but none of them are able to do better with low octane, watered gasoline than they would have done with premium.
I have wondered whether the fact that flyers exist, regardless of the gun, tends to call into question whether there is a “best” lot for every distinct gun, which needs to be thoroughly tested to determine, or on the other hand, there are simply better grouping lots.
My thought would be that .22 bullet accuracy can’t really be an exception to our common sense understanding of ideally uniform products.
If the conditions are controlled so tightly that flyers outside a group can only be attributable to different 1) velocity, or 2) a nonuniform bullet, then I’m challenged to understand how the ranking of several lots of the same match bullet could be ordered differently, from one good rifle to another.
I would be supposing that the rifles will shoot different sized groups than each other, but that it is not realistic to expect a rifle to shoot a better group with an inferior lot than a superior lot. Yet something along these lines seems to be implied in the acceptance by us as shooters that the most popular lots and the least popular lots all have to be sold, and all at the same price.
I can fully appreciate that different designs are better suited for different guns and justify that particular purpose of testing. But what I am wondering is different, how a certain lot of identically made bullets that groups biggest in most guns, and is passed over again and again, will ever group the smallest and be the best choice for a different gun?
To my thinking it would be like dyno testing high performance engines coming off the line, they are not truly identical, but none of them are able to do better with low octane, watered gasoline than they would have done with premium.
Last edited: