How would you interpret these down range results?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think taking handloading out of the equation entirely and shooting 168gr FGMM is a good idea. It's not really possible to debug the shooter AND the rifle AND unproven handloads all at once. Time to cut down the number of variables and I suspect that's the load the rifle is throated for anyways.

This load generally shoots well for me but your suggestion is a good one and I will shoot some GMM tomorrow. I keep some around just for that purpose

I'm also makeing some more of these hand loads to try again as well
 
I agree with the others.

Check everything up including action screws, mounts, glass, bypod...
Don't discard the most obvious reasons that we might have missed when cleaning and what not.
Regarding the groups something tells me you have some accurate loads so lets assume you can produce
rounds that one after another are all carbon copies of the previous one. It seems you are in the zone
so not sure you want to do ladders nor change anything there at this point. up to you.

Now regarding mechanics lets try this too... IMO if you are shooting from a bench, get out of the bench and
down on the ground asap. This would naturally allow you to get into a push position to be a lot more
consistent with a bypod.
Properly driving the heavy rifle is a lot more consistent from the prone and also look for the natural point of aim
and lean on the rifle and follow routine. Make sure you have a good anchor always, otherwise you
might be pulling vs pushing and get out of position. Take your time to cool off. 5 shot groups are more
than plenty. make more of those and average them accordingly as it might apply with different loads.

Also make sure to avoid too much coffe!!! LOL

Good luck. You will get where you want to go. No doubt. Don't over think it, One with the arrow!

also... At some point if you can go to some training if you have not done yet. I find one on one once in a while
is very productive as you can have an instructor looking at you and get some tips during the workout.
 
One thing. You stated new cases. I'd prep and trim; then weigh. If you have a chronograph, start writing the FPS with a sharpie on them after firing. That will help spot cases that are out of the "norm".
There's more muzzle velocity spread caused by inconsistent rifle shouldering than those prep and check case things produce. Typical bench positions used by most people cause 3 to 4 times the spread than if the rifle was shot free recoil or fixed in place.
 
I agree with bart's diagnosis. In order of likelihood my guesses would be:

1. small changes in rifle position and/or finger not straight back
2. loose rings/scope issue

less likely explanations
3. change in lighting conditions
4. inconsistent seating depth or neck tension, but new lapua brass should be fine and you say you measured oal to .001

any of the 4 could cause groups like that on paper, but from what you said, and the order of the shots, that's my guess
 
4. inconsistent seating depth or neck tension, but new lapua brass should be fine and you say you measured oal to .001

Actually, I measured run out to be less than .001

I only spot check OAL which is generally consistent. These loads worked best with an OAL .010 off the lands
 
IMO if you are shooting from a bench, get out of the bench and down on the ground asap. This would naturally allow you to get into a push position to be a lot more consistent with a bypod.
A good marksman correctly slung up in prone resting the rifle on bags will outshoot an equally competent marksman shouldering the same rifle as it rests atop something on a bench as he sits at it.

Ever wonder why benchrest matches are won and records set with the rifle fired in free recoil? That's with the rifle untouched by humans except for a finger lightly pressing its 1 ounce trigger. If they handle the rifle in any way when shot, its groups change from tiny to the other "T" word: Tremendous. The big definition thereof. The rifle has to move repeatably during barrel time. It moves less in the position and method I mentioned. Such position enables groups darned near as small as shooting it in free recoil will produce.

The more us humans hold and support the rifle, the less it shoots where we want it to. Centerfire rifles tested in machine rests producing 1/2 MOA groups shoot at best a little over 1 MOA slung up in prone but average about 1.5 to 2.0 MOA. Which means they shoot 2.5 MOA sometimes. Rimfire rifles shooting 1/2 MOA in good tests will shoot groups half those centerfire group sizes from prone. Even with their barrel times 2 to 3 times longer. The reason is they move less during barrel time; a lot less recoil. You just have to hold still three times longer with smallbore rifles compared to centerfire ones.

Properly driving the heavy rifle is a lot more consistent from the prone and also look for the natural point of aim and lean on the rifle and follow routine.
Very important.

When you're in some stable shooting position, align the sight on target, take a few deep breaths, then close your eye and hold still for 20 seconds while holding as still as you can. Then open your eye and see where the sights are. If they're anywhere besides on target where they were before, your natural point of aim is not on the target. It's where it ended up while your eyes were closed. Readjust your position then try again.

Stock designed for hand held position shooting are different than those used in benchrest. They don't work well when fired in free recoil as the rest atop stuff on a bench. Which is why lots of folks were testing them and their ammo slung up in prone with the rifle fore end and toe resting on bags back in the '50's. They move much more repeatable from shot to shot than any hand held version at a bench. A bunch of them finally got together and formed what's now known as F Class. They shoot groups at all ranges darned near as good as heavier, free recoiling, bench rest rifles do in their discipline.

Zeros attained with hunting rifles sighted in that way will shoot much closer to point of aim in field positions than when shot hand held and shouldered atop a bench as they rest on something. Right hand folks typically shoot about 1 MOA to the right from the bench compared to positions used afield without that bench.

If you're a good marksman with accurate rifle and ammo, you can zero your rifle at 100 or 200 yards with 1 or 2 shots standing up without a sling; no artificial support whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
I only spot check OAL which is generally consistent. These loads worked best with an OAL .010 off the lands
Do you seat bullets to greater OAL as the barrel throat advances from wear? With the .308 Win, the throat advances about .001" for every 30 to 40 shots.

Note also that bullet jump to the rifling varies directly with the spread in case headspace. Rimless bottleneck cartridges have their shoulder hard against the chamber shoulder when fired. Their head will be off the bolt face and varying the amount of spread in case headspace.
 
When you're in some stable shooting position, align the sight on target, take a few deep breaths, then close your eye and hold still for 20 seconds while holding as still as you can. Then open your eye and see where the sights are. If they're anywhere besides on target where they were before, your natural point of aim is not on the target. It's where it ended up while your eyes were closed. Readjust your position then try again.

I'll try that today. Thanks
 
Do you seat bullets to greater OAL as the barrel throat advances from wear? With the .308 Win, the throat advances about .001" for every 30 to 40 shots.

Bart, I have not found that degree of erosion in this rifle. I frequently verify my distance to the lands and it's only changed .004 over the approximate 5000 rounds I've fire through it
 
Your data varies quite differently than the couple dozen barrels I've worn out. My .264 Win Mag match barrel throat advanced .001" for every 6 or 7 rounds fired. Lengthened about .100" over 640 rounds . 30 caliber magnums about 15 to18 rounds per .001". Others have mentioned the same.

I think we're using different measuring systems and standards.
 
eh...it may not be a popular opinion, but given that you've got "flier issues", it's entirely possible, IMHO, that you're simply wanting to believe the small groups are your norm; as such, you cherry pick them as representative, and write-off the "fliers" by looking for some mechanical basis. This is very common, and I admit to doing it myself. Sometimes it's helpful (when it keeps you motivated), and other times not (when you spend too much time looking for some secret, and only getting frustrated in the process).

If we're willing to believe that the odd shots "flew" in such a way to make the group bigger, it's also statistically possible (likely, even) that some shots flew to make another group smaller. In the end, all shots count, and with enough groups shot, one has to admit that "x" size grouping is what I'm likely able to shoot with my ability, this rifle and this ammo. You might tighten a screw here, tweak your load there, and the large fliers might improve, but your smallest groups might open up as well. But your groupings will be more consistent.
 
get another shooter to have a go at it and compare.

your action may be touching the stock on one side causing your angular dispersion (11 o'clock to 5 o'clock).

luck,

murf
 
eh...it may not be a popular opinion, but given that you've got "flier issues", it's entirely possible, IMHO, that you're simply wanting to believe the small groups are your norm; as such, you cherry pick them as representative, and write-off the "fliers" by looking for some mechanical basis. This is very common, and I admit to doing it myself. Sometimes it's helpful (when it keeps you motivated), and other times not (when you spend too much time looking for some secret, and only getting frustrated in the process).

You may be right. While I go to great lengths to be honest with myself, there's no denying that I have expectations that may exceed my own skill level and the capabilities of my equipment. Take the first 10 shot group for example. If I can put 7 shots in a .345" group, why can't I do that with 10? Perhaps the answer is I can't. That may be the limits of the system (me, the rifle and my loading process). I'm sure I'm like a lot of you guys when I say the satisfaction comes from learning and seeing the results of that knowledge pay off in the results.

I appreciate all the suggestions
 
get another shooter to have a go at it and compare.

your action may be touching the stock on one side causing your angular dispersion (11 o'clock to 5 o'clock).

luck,

murf

I'm doing that today as well murf. Got to get back to the ammo plant. I'll post an updade when I'm done......
 
One other thing to remember with a scope that most people don't realize, concentrate on the center of the crosshairs as the shot goes off. Just like with open sights you need to pay attention to the natural point of aim (where the rifle's sights lay naturally) and the sight alignment (how the front sights align with each other). With a scope you don't have a rear and front sight that can be aligned with each other so you have to concentrate on where the center of the scope is pointed and you do that by making sure that the center of the cross hairs are on the point of aim. This becomes habit pretty quickly once you're aware of the need to do it but for most people it only makes a small change in the group size. While the improvement will be small, it will be an improvement and any improvement puts a smile on your face.

By the way, people get in the discussion about group sizes and flyers and how many shots are needed to build a good representation of what the rifle will do but I believe in keeping it simple, 5 shots is a good working group size for the average hobby shooter. 5 shots is a good compromise that keeps the cost of ammunition down and still provides a good representation of the groups that your rifle will do. As has been pointed out by others though, the more shots you take the better idea you get of what the rifle, ammo, and shooter can do. Statistically we normally use what is called a small sample of the whole, unfortunately the whole, for a statistician, is hundreds of rounds and it's pretty unrealistic to shoot that many rounds each time we test a load for accuracy. This is where people come up with this comment that flyers don't exist, I agree that it takes a little experience to determine what's a flyer and what isn't and most of what people refer to as flyers aren't, they are simply shooter error but flyers do exist. Sometimes a rifle will throw a shot arbitrarily and so it's important to recognize when that happens and when it's just the shooter's lack of concentration.

The hard part here is the OP isn't sure if he's getting flyers and honestly, neither is anybody that's isn't the shooter, only a shooter can make that call. And that's actually the solution, making the call. A lot of people will mention that a shooter should be able to predict where the bullet will impact (making the call) and they should, you should be shooting slow enough to say with absolute certainty that your shot will go where you intended. If you pay attention to your position, the natural point of aim, the sight alignment, the trigger squeeze, the shoulder pressure, the cheek weld, your breathing, the fact that your muscles are relaxed, the position of your feet, your shoulder alignment to the target, and all the other things that are necessary for consistent shots, then you'll be able to call your shots every time. And when your bullet impact doesn't go where you called it, then it's a flyer. It takes time and lots of practice to call your shots well and in the beginning you will find that your calls wont match the impacts very well, this just helps you develop your checklist of things that you need to pay attention to every time you shoot.

All this long winded stuff is what you need to make perfect target shots, it's not what a hunter does or what a plinker does. Unfortunately even a plinker or a hunter should use this technique when he's developing a load and he also needs to use larger groups to determine when he has a the kind of group issue that you have.

In my opinion you either have something moving on the rifle or you've got a problem with your concentration and each shot isn't exactly like the last.
 
I believe in keeping it simple, 5 shots is a good working group size for the average hobby shooter.
Even if a single 5-shot group statistically means that if 19 more groups were shot, they can vary as much as 30% smaller to 150% larger than that first one? The first one fired is not always the average; smallest nor largest, for that matter.

Believers of such should look at the many 5-shot groups fired over two or 3 days by top ranked benchrest folks at 100 yards. Results are easily found by searching the 'net for them. Here's one to check out:

http://azbrs.com/downloads/results/12-03-16-Invitational-Unl1-100yd.pdf

Pick some others from those listed here:

http://azbrs.com/past-match-results/

How many of each day's first 5-shot group was the smallest, average or biggest of all?
 
Even if a single 5-shot group statistically means that if 19 more groups were shot, they can vary as much as 30% smaller to 150% larger than that first one? The first one fired is not always the average; smallest nor largest, for that matter.

Believers of such should look at the many 5-shot groups fired over two or 3 days by top ranked benchrest folks at 100 yards. Results are easily found by searching the 'net for them. Here's one to check out:

http://azbrs.com/downloads/results/12-03-16-Invitational-Unl1-100yd.pdf

Pick some others from those listed here:

http://azbrs.com/past-match-results/

How many of each day's first 5-shot group was the smallest, average or biggest of all?

In my best Mr Spock voice: "Fascinating"

With five and ten shot groups at 100 yards the best shooters seems show about a 2:1 to 4:1 ratio of largest/smallest groups, But when your worst is 0.3" you're doing something very much right!
 
But when your worst is 0.3" you're doing something very much right!
Or, sometimes all the variables pretty much cancelled each other out. Hard to prove either way, in my opinion. But I know what odds makers would say. Still very nice performance.

Record for several 5-shot benchrest groups's average, or aggregate, at 100 yards is about .200 inch. Which means the largest one of them was about .3 inch or more and the smallest could well be under .100 inch. The numbers grow about .100 MOAfor each 100 yards to 300 yards where the biggest groups are about .5 MOA. That's 1.5 inches at 300 yards. All those thousands of other many group aggregates are larger.

Thanks, Wally, for commenting on that site's info. I've sent such results to many people showing how the most accurate rifles around shoot groups of all different sizes. You're the first one to acknowledge it. Most interesting is the guy who holds the record for a single 5-shot group of .0077" at 100 yard holds no other records. He shot it with a 30BR cartridge with 114-gr. bullets shot from a 1:17 twist barrel.

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2013/09/best-group-ever-michael-stinnetts-0077-five-shot-group/

Sierra Bullets used to shoot 10-shot test groups with their 30 caliber match bullets in their California plant's 100 yard range that sometimes were in the ones; group after group after group. Occasionally under .100 inch. When that happened, a special barrel was put under the pointing machine as formed the ogive and hollow point then dropped them into a barrel. Those super accurate bullets were sold at high level rifle matches to anyone with the money to buy them; typically about 10% below retail for those in 100 count green boxes that didn't shoot as good but still met 1/4" average specs.
 
Last edited:
Bart, I have not found that degree of erosion in this rifle. I frequently verify my distance to the lands and it's only changed .004 over the approximate 5000 rounds I've fire through it
This is not surprising. Remember - this is a very odd barrel for a match /sniper type rifle. It's a CHF barrel that's been chrome lined. I would expect erosion to be much slower. There's a spec for how long they're supposed to hold the FBI standards, and I want to say it's 10,000 rounds at 0.5 MOA. I'm sure that's with factory match loads, not handloads walked out to follow the lands.

As I said before, I've always been a little suspicious of chrome lining this type of barrel, but this rifle is shooting worse than the FBI spec. So I'd be inclined to look somewhere other than the barrel.
 
It's interesting to me that the majority of responses here assume it's the shooter, the rifle, the scope, the mounts etc but only MrBorland mentioned the load. I'm on board with MrBorland that this load might only appear to be a good load due to small round count groups. I saw something similar testing Federal American Eagle 6.5 Creedmoor ammunition. 5 round groups looked promising but 10 round groups were terrible.

After warming up, I fired this 10 shot group. Shot sequence noted:

9656ACD4-F5F0-426A-8D13-D5694CB2D57B.jpg
 
Shooting from a bipod is not as easy as off a solid bench with a good sandbag/rest setup.Shooting form is very important.If you shot groups without fliers from the bench,your problem lies in form.Trying a good constant accuracy load will also help see if there's a problem in the load you're shooting.I've shot a lot of different bullets over the course of 35 or 40 years,and a huge amount in the past 10.Two bullets that I have found to be hard to get to shoot really good are the Berger VLD and the Hornady ELD.Both have a naughty lil habit of spitting an unexplained flier once in a while.I have tried jamming them into the lands,different seating depths,etc,and they still do it,and the groups I see out of them look a lot like the ones shown here.Maybe food for thought.
 
Shooting form is always very important when you're holding the rifle against your shoulder. How your body's supported doesn't matter.
 
Any wind while shooting? I didn't see a specific mention of wind. I hate reading the wind. Drives me nuts. And thanks everyone for the good advice. I didn't start the thread, but I certainly will be reading it carefully.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top