The 'ART' of accuracy

[Someoldguy]

depends on what you are trying to do.

if you are going for benchrest accuracy (.25" and less) yes and dozens of other things. But without a rifle that was built to shoot in the 1's and 2's you would be wasting your money.

Very well then. Thank you for the insight.

 

[John Russell]

question for you about the belted magnums. they were designed to headspace off the belt. With a factory round headspacing off the belt most find the shoulder of the fired brass moves forward quite a bit. many then when reloading these cases use the shoulder to headspace with and ignore the belt.

are you a belt headspacer or a shoulder headspacer?

what problems are associated with using the shoulder to headspace a belted magnum?

I have a heavy barrel, 264 Win Mag, built on a Rem 700 long action. When new cases are fired, the shoulder blows forward, 32 to 36 thou.
I treat Belted cases just like I treat standard cases. I shoot new cases wet (with light oil) for the first firing, so they fill the chamber without stretching.
Then I set the FL die (if I am using one) so it just touches the shoulder, and there is slight resistance on closing the bolt.
The cases last forever.

 

[ratbuster]

I would say that in order to to talk about "accuracy" you should first define what you mean. Accuracy, i.e. the ability to hit a particular target, is important for hunters and most target shooters as well. Sometimes the match winner is decided by group size in which case it's all about "precision". When it comes to good scores in a discipline like F-Class, it's nice to have a precision load recipe which will make small groups along with a good caliber/bullet choice featuring high MV's and high B.C.'s. But if you're looking for the kind of "accuracy" required to shoot a bunch of X's in a match, then you have to talk about properly reading the wind. Wind skills are the most important component in winning many contests and are also the most difficult to master.

Guys who are really good at reloading and shooting small groups in dead calm conditions are called technicians. Those who can read the wind better than the rest are called champions.

So if I read the tone of your post to mean you're talking about the technical aspects of reloading separately from other factors such as wind reading skills and if we're going to consider accuracy and precision to mean essentially the same thing for purposes of this discussion, then I'm OK with that idea.

I have another question to pose.

You correctly point out achieving a 1/4 MOA result is difficult. Nearly everyone on this forum has the equipment and skills to shoot a 1 MOA group. Getting to 1/2 MOA doesn't require much more than careful use of low end reloading equipment and a little experience. Getting from 1/2 MOA to 1/4 MOA is WAY more difficult, but a lot depends on how you define shooting 1/4 MOA.

Anyone, given a little time, can shoot a three-shot group at 100 yards which is 1/4 MOA or less, especially if they fire five rounds and call two of them "flyers" just because they don't like them. Half serious shooters who attend local low-key F-class matches can show you countless 5-shot groups at 100 yards which are below 1/4 MOA. But does that make them 1/4 MOA shooters? No is the short answer.

Should your precision be based on the average of your 5 shot groups? Not really because that includes load development testing where you know that some groups are going to bad and some good. Sorting out the good charge weights and seating depths from the bad ones is the whole idea of load testing. In other words, during load testing you hope some groups are really good and that means some aren't so good and some might be down right bad. Averaging in the bad ones doesn't tell the whole story. So which groups should be considered?

I would say that your ability should be defined as the NEXT group you shoot using your "good stuff". There is no standard, but I like the idea of 5 shot groups at 100 yards as a comparison point. If that is the standard, then few hunters would pay you ten bucks if their next group isn't better than 1/2 MOA. However, many half serious F-Open shooters would be willing to make that offer and a lot of short range BR shooters would be happy to do so. However, when it comes to guaranteeing the next group to be below 1/4 MOA only a tiny handful of people in the world would qualify. Keep in mind that I have countless sub 1/4 MOA groups in my files and so do all of the guys I compete against. But nobody I know thinks they and their equipment can guarantee 1/4 MOA under normal circumstances the next time they make a 5 shot group. Sometimes the bullets just happen to fall into the same hole, but most times they don't.

So what makes a 1/4 MOA shooter, or 1/2 MOA for that matter? I don't know. Is it performing to that level of precision half the time, a quarter of the time, or just once-in-a-while?

One web site has a "One MOA All Day Long" challenge. The rules say you must show them a target with five 5-shot groups all on one page with no other holes. If all five shot groups are better than One MOA, you qualify as "MOA ALL DAY". I kinda' like that idea, but given enough time it shouldn't be hard to do. What really matters is if you can perform NOW........ no mulligans. Of course, that's why shooting matches is different from hanging out at the local range shooting group after group.

Bottom line: It's really hard to define precision and accuracy in such a way that I can compare my apples with your oranges. Ill let someone else decide that. All I really know is this. Although my goal is to put ten bucks on my shooting bench and invite you to pick it up if my next 5-shot group isn't better than 1/4 MOA. Unfortunately, I'm a long way from that. But, under no-wind conditions I'll risk ten bucks at the 1/2 MOA level of precision.

I remember reading a while back that a highly accomplished national level BR shooter said something to the effect: "there are no guns that will shoot 1/4 MOA or better All the time".

 

[chkunz]

Here is the test, what will be the size of your next group and how much are you willing to bet?

 

[ratbuster]

I doubt many would bet a nickel unless they could be assured of good conditions.

 

[chkunz]

I doubt many would bet a nickel unless they could be assured of good conditions.

Then simply put the test in a tunnel and ask the same question, "what will the size of the next group be and how much are you willing to bet"?

 

[Mozella]

Then simply put the test in a tunnel and ask the same question, "what will the size of the next group be and how much are you willing to bet"?

As I mentioned earlier, I've built a couple of relatively inexpensive 600 yard F-Class guns which at 100 yards from a bench under conditions with no wind can be expected to shoot the next five rounds at 1/2 MOA or better. I'm not much of a betting man, but I'll be happy to put ten bucks on the bench and invite you to pick it up if I can't produce a 1/2 MOA group. But I would not put down $1000. And I have a couple of guns on which I devoted even more effort testing which I don't feel nearly as confident; i.e. I wouldn't risk a nickle.

I think that puts me in close alignment with many of the guys I shoot local matches with, all of whom are relatively low on the F-Class food chain. Serious short range BR shooters and big-time F-Class guys would be expected to either put down more money or claim a smaller MOA goal.

Anyone think they can guarantee with some certainty that their next 5 will be better than .300 MOA? Tell the truth now.

To get back on the track of the OP's original post which asked about suggestions to improve accuracy, I would suggest that folks make careful measurements of their results and catalog them for later study. I prefer scanning and measuring all my targets with On Target software. It's cheap, quick, and easy.

I take the detailed CVS output of On Target and put the results into an Excel spreadsheet to which I add MV and SD data as well as bullet type and weight, seating depth, and my load recipe reference number. I can sort and filter this data, make charts of all sorts, and compare most anything I like quickly and easily. For example, it takes me a few seconds to answer this question: Is the average Mean Radius of my best ten 5-shot groups using H4350 and Berger Hybrid 140gr bullets better or worse than the best 10 groups using Reloder 16 and Berger VLD 140gr bullets? It would take a week to get that information from a tattered spiral notebook.

 

[dolek]

I tell ya,you guys sure know how to suck the fun out of visiting this forum...bunch of crotchety narcissitic whiney bitches... Every thread seems to turn out to be a boast fest or some opinionated crap drifts the thread off track,all that does is ruin it for the OP that may have actually been looking for some real world experience.

 

[Greyfox]

I believe your premise is, the shooter is only as good as the group he can produce on demand. And yes, I agree with that premise. I'm not a 1/4 MOA shooter on my best day, but I'm practicing and trying to get there. And you are correct in deducing that my question relates to technical skills, and not so much learned skills such as reading wind. Thanks for the reply.

Actually, there is a fair chance that you already are a 1/4 MOA shooter if you've done a decent amount of practice. What was mentioned in a thread above is the fact that you must have a rifle capable of such a thing. Most shooters have never sat down behind a truly accurate rifle that was built to shoot groups in the .1s or to consistently win in score matches. Over the past few years we've had several new shooters come to our UBR matches as visitors and these folks have had the opportunity to shoot a match using a purpose built rifle capable of winning. I can think of one instance when a new shooters actually won a very competitive match in Custom Class. I have personally provided the rifle on two occasions that produced 2nd place for new shooters. Granted, on all of these occasions conditions were excellent and wind reading was not as much of a factor as usual. Nevertheless, these guys beat experienced shooters with competitive rifles the first time out of the chute.

The point is, if you want to shoot small consistently you must start with a rifle and optics that are capable of the same. Of course there are reloading tools and techniques that help, but first things first. Start with a rifle that will do it. Predicting group size was also mentioned. I'm considering selling one of mine and looked up match results over the past three years. On only one occasion has this rifle placed lower than 3rd place and has placed 1st in many. I would not have a problem calling a 1/4" group if conditions were reasonable. And yes, I would be willing to put some $$ on the table.

Rick

 

[Greyfox]

I tell ya,you guys sure know how to suck the fun out of visiting this forum...bunch of crotchety narcissitic whiney bitches... Every thread seems to turn out to be a boast fest or some opinionated crap drifts the thread off track,all that does is ruin it for the OP that may have actually been looking for some real world experience.

And your contribution to the thread has been exactly what?

Rick

 

[dolek]

And your contribution to the thread has been exactly what?

Rick

Nothing,jut like 99% of the other posts .Just giving my opinion,like everyone else.

 

[dolek]

Actually, there is a fair chance that you already are a 1/4 MOA shooter if you've done a decent amount of practice. What was mentioned in a thread above is the fact that you must have a rifle capable of such a thing. Most shooters have never sat down behind a truly accurate rifle that was built to shoot groups in the .1s or to consistently win in score matches. Over the past few years we've had several new shooters come to our UBR matches as visitors and these folks have had the opportunity to shoot a match using a purpose built rifle capable of winning. I can think of one instance when a new shooters actually won a very competitive match in Custom Class. I have personally provided the rifle on two occasions that produced 2nd place for new shooters. Granted, on all of these occasions conditions were excellent and wind reading was not as much of a factor as usual. Nevertheless, these guys beat experienced shooters with competitive rifles the first time out of the chute.

The point is, if you want to shoot small consistently you must start with a rifle and optics that are capable of the same. Of course there are reloading tools and techniques that help, but first things first. Start with a rifle that will do it. Predicting group size was also mentioned. I'm considering selling one of mine and looked up match results over the past three years. On only one occasion has this rifle placed lower than 3rd place and has placed 1st in many. I would not have a problem calling a 1/4" group if conditions were reasonable. And yes, I would be willing to put some $$ on the table.

Rick

The original question was about accuracy,not you.

 

[Someoldguy]

Actually, I was hoping that some tips for 'improving my game' might appear among the posts, and they have. I'm certainly not too proud or vain to listen to the advice anyone else wants to share. As to the value of the advice, I suppose that's to be determined by the reader.

 

[Will Henry]

As always, there is the necessity of establishing definitions. To me, a 1/4 moa rifle is a rifle where the shooter can say "watch this" and have a reasonable expectation of shooting a 1/4 moa group. I've had some short range BR rifles which were legitimate sub-1/4 moa rifles with which I could do just that and these rifles all shot sub-1/4 aggregates in competition. The thing is, not only is it difficult to make that step from sub-half to sub-quarter; it is so easy for that sub -quarter to turn into a half-plus. Sometimes, all it takes is to enter into a competition with that rifle! Sometimes, things just go wrong.
I remember one time, I was practising with one of my "good" rifles. This was a 6x47 (222 Mag necked up), Hart barrel, on a 40x action, Lee Six stock and was a legitimate sub-quarter rifle. On this day (in 1977) I shot five five-shot groups. Four groups were .2 or less but the third group measured .370. The second shot was a flier and, when the first two shots afe .370, nothing you do will make the group smaller. The point is, although this rifle was certainly a sub-quarter rifle, sometimes it wasn't. So, we just have to establish within what parameters we expect a rifle to perform before we are comfortable calling it a 1/4 minute rifle. For me, the "watch this" scenario is my expectation. If we loosen up the requirements to include the one group fired on a windy Sunday last March, we can have a whole bunch of quarter inchers. I have fired numerous 1/4 inch three-shot groups from my 308 Norma Mag Model 70 but the "watch this" performance level is more like 3/4. If I make it five shots, the "watch this" expectation is more like an inch but I digress. The question was what is necessary to get to that 1/4 level and my answer is, first and foremost, a rifle which has that capability.
As far as headspacing is concerned, I think it is semi-important and I think concentricity is even more so. I have had fire forming loads in 6mm PPC which shot well enough to be competitive. Of course, fire-forming the PPC is done with a crush fit on the parent case so headspacing is good and alignment is good. On the other hand, I've also had good results with new brass in 6 BR's and 308's. In these, head clearance was probably on the order of two to three thou with new brass.
In the end, it mostly comes down to the rifle. I had a friend (Bob Forslund) who told me "If a rifle in a decent caliber shooting a decent load doesn't shoot under 3/8, there is something wrong with the effing rifle (Bob tended toward colorful language)". Nothing I have seen in the intervening forty-some years would lead me to disagree with this statement. Elaborating, Bob said (more or less), "when you see a guy shoot an effing half inch group and he decides he needs to weigh all of his effing brass, then you know you are looking at a guy shooting with his effing head up his effing ass. He needs to fix the effing rifle first". I won't even try to achieve half minute with one of my hunting rifles simply because (a) it is unlikely I can shoot then that well and (b) it doesn't matter. So, if you want to shoot 1/4 moa, you have to have a rifle which can do it.
Someone always brings up the difference between accuracy and precision and I have always looked upon this as so much BS. The truth is, the only difference between shooting a five shot group and shooting five shots for score lies in the first shot. To hit five x's, one has to clip the x with the first shot then continue to do so. To shoot a "zero" group one only has to hit a pre-determined spot (the first shot) four times. If, as sometimes happens, the first shot is a flyer, it is common to "chase" that shot with the subsequent four. If shooting for score, if the first shot is a flyer, the shooter has to forget that shot, unless he is certain there was some atmospheric condition which caused it, and continue to shoot for the "x". If one is holding the rifle, whether prone, offhand or whatever, there is another, huge, factor involved. WH

 

[divingin]

Actually, there is a fair chance that you already are a 1/4 MOA shooter if you've done a decent amount of practice. What was mentioned in a thread above is the fact that you must have a rifle capable of such a thing.

That is why my rifle is being built. I have no idea how well or poorly I can shoot a rifle. But, whichever way it goes, I'll be finding out in a couple of months.

 

[Greyfox]

The original question was about accuracy,not you.

You must have some reading comprehension issues. The post wasn't about my accuracy but rather the potential of the equipment necessary to produce precision results desired. But then, this was posted to help the OP, not you. Clearly, this is all over your head and beyond your level of comprehension.

Rick

 

[Greyfox]

Actually, I was hoping that some tips for 'improving my game' might appear among the posts, and they have. I'm certainly not too proud or vain to listen to the advice anyone else wants to share. As to the value of the advice, I suppose that's to be determined by the reader.

OK, I'll make a suggestion. Shoot over wind flags every time you visit the range. It is useless to shoot for precision without shooting with flags. More than any other one thing this will improve your results. You don't have to buy a set of rather pricey flags. Surveyor's tape on 1"x's is a fine place to start. Once you begin to see what is possible you can decide whether to spring for the good stuff. There is no magic solution though. It takes good equipment designed for the purpose and lots of practice. That will work fastest in match situations with pressure. But even practice alone will help. Get some lead in the air over wind flags.

Rick

 

[Someoldguy]

OK, I'll make a suggestion. Shoot over wind flags every time you visit the range. It is useless to shoot for precision without shooting with flags. More than any other one thing this will improve your results. You don't have to buy a set of rather pricey flags. Surveyor's tape on 1"x's is a fine place to start. Once you begin to see what is possible you can decide whether to spring for the good stuff. There is no magic solution though. It takes good equipment designed for the purpose and lots of practice. That will work fastest in match situations with pressure. But even practice alone will help. Get some lead in the air over wind flags.

Rick

Good to know. I'll certainly keep this in mind thank you.

 

[Someoldguy]

As always, there is the necessity of establishing definitions. To me, a 1/4 moa rifle is a rifle where the shooter can say "watch this" and have a reasonable expectation of shooting a 1/4 moa group. I've had some short range BR rifles which were legitimate sub-1/4 moa rifles with which I could do just that and these rifles all shot sub-1/4 aggregates in competition. The thing is, not only is it difficult to make that step from sub-half to sub-quarter; it is so easy for that sub -quarter to turn into a half-plus. Sometimes, all it takes is to enter into a competition with that rifle! Sometimes, things just go wrong.
I remember one time, I was practising with one of my "good" rifles. This was a 6x47 (222 Mag necked up), Hart barrel, on a 40x action, Lee Six stock and was a legitimate sub-quarter rifle. On this day (in 1977) I shot five five-shot groups. Four groups were .2 or less but the third group measured .370. The second shot was a flier and, when the first two shots afe .370, nothing you do will make the group smaller. The point is, although this rifle was certainly a sub-quarter rifle, sometimes it wasn't. So, we just have to establish within what parameters we expect a rifle to perform before we are comfortable calling it a 1/4 minute rifle. For me, the "watch this" scenario is my expectation. If we loosen up the requirements to include the one group fired on a windy Sunday last March, we can have a whole bunch of quarter inchers. I have fired numerous 1/4 inch three-shot groups from my 308 Norma Mag Model 70 but the "watch this" performance level is more like 3/4. If I make it five shots, the "watch this" expectation is more like an inch but I digress. The question was what is necessary to get to that 1/4 level and my answer is, first and foremost, a rifle which has that capability.
As far as headspacing is concerned, I think it is semi-important and I think concentricity is even more so. I have had fire forming loads in 6mm PPC which shot well enough to be competitive. Of course, fire-forming the PPC is done with a crush fit on the parent case so headspacing is good and alignment is good. On the other hand, I've also had good results with new brass in 6 BR's and 308's. In these, head clearance was probably on the order of two to three thou with new brass.
In the end, it mostly comes down to the rifle. I had a friend (Bob Forslund) who told me "If a rifle in a decent caliber shooting a decent load doesn't shoot under 3/8, there is something wrong with the effing rifle (Bob tended toward colorful language)". Nothing I have seen in the intervening forty-some years would lead me to disagree with this statement. Elaborating, Bob said (more or less), "when you see a guy shoot an effing half inch group and he decides he needs to weigh all of his effing brass, then you know you are looking at a guy shooting with his effing head up his effing ass. He needs to fix the effing rifle first". I won't even try to achieve half minute with one of my hunting rifles simply because (a) it is unlikely I can shoot then that well and (b) it doesn't matter. So, if you want to shoot 1/4 moa, you have to have a rifle which can do it.
Someone always brings up the difference between accuracy and precision and I have always looked upon this as so much BS. The truth is, the only difference between shooting a five shot group and shooting five shots for score lies in the first shot. To hit five x's, one has to clip the x with the first shot then continue to do so. To shoot a "zero" group one only has to hit a pre-determined spot (the first shot) four times. If, as sometimes happens, the first shot is a flyer, it is common to "chase" that shot with the subsequent four. If shooting for score, if the first shot is a flyer, the shooter has to forget that shot, unless he is certain there was some atmospheric condition which caused it, and continue to shoot for the "x". If one is holding the rifle, whether prone, offhand or whatever, there is another, huge, factor involved. WH

It has been suggested by another forum member whom I highly respect to purchase a used benchrest rifle, provided an eye is kept on the components of the build. I'm currently counting pennies to make that purchase. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

 

[Will Henry]

It has been suggested by another forum member whom I highly respect to purchase a used benchrest rifle, provided an eye is kept on the components of the build. I'm currently counting pennies to make that purchase. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

I believe shortrange BR is a good way to do three things: (1) it is a great way to see the effects of reloading techniques (2) it is a good way to refine trigger technique (3) it is a good venue in which you can learn to identify and see the effects of minute condition changes. In addition, a barrel change gives you a viable "F" open rifle. Of course, BR is an enjoyable, if occasionally frustrating, pastime in it's own right.
I still have some short range rifles and enjoy shooting them though I seldom compete in that venue any more (the same is true of "F" class. I enjoy shooting prone with a sling more). It is still gratifying to achieve those groups in the one's. WH