Experts please explain this.

[JohnKSa]

I think I was out of line asking for opinions with such a small sample size.

So I apologize.

Don't be silly! Think of all the 'Experts' who got a nice warm feeling out of "helping" a fellow shooter out...

Uhhhhh... Not ME of course--I'm talking about all those OTHER folks who posted on this thread.

 

[Warren]

Thanks, John.

UPDATE: My wife found a double hole that I overlooked on the 147s target.

So that one is 30/30 as well. Though only scoring a 285.

 

[JohnKSa]

I've got to admit that I've fallen into the same trap.

I used to swear up and down that brand A pistol ammo was really accurate but that brand B wouldn't group at all.

Recently I've been going back through my ammo "stockpile" and getting rid of lots of my old stuff (shooting it up ).

I found that some of that stuff I used to swear at now groups great! I seriously doubt the ammo has improved with age , and I'm shooting the same guns--darn the bad luck--that only leaves me as the source of the problem.

Evidently I was letting my head tell me that brand B was cheap ammo and so it couldn't possibly shoot as accurately as the expensive stuff. The sad truth is that I'm not a good enough shot to tell the difference between the accuracy of the ammo I own. It all shoots better than me from a good gun.

I've quit shooting matches with high-dollar JHP (used to do that because I was sure it grouped better doncha know) and am using up my steel-cased Chinese surplus 9mm. Hasn't hurt my scores a bit...

I remember finding a really good deal on a case of bargain ammo about 15 years ago. The owner of the shop talked up the ammo and I had never head of the brand so I swallowed his spiel--hook, line and sinker. I took the ammo to the range, and it was like MAGIC. That stuff would SHOOT! I've still got targets that I shot using it... For years I sang the praises of that ammo. I'm thinking now that it shot well because I was convinced by the shop owner that it was great stuff. I guess he was right, depending on how you look at it.

JohnKSa,
(Finally beginning to resign myself to the reality that my accuracy problems are mostly me...)

 

[NMshooter]

Most accuracy problems come from not shooting a particular gun enough. If you shoot 200 to 300 rounds a weekend through the one you want to improve on (actual practise, not just blasting) you will see a noticeable improvement after the first month. It takes a lot of shooting to get out on the "edge", and a lot of shooting to stay there. If you look at the top competitors, they shoot 50,000 rounds or more each year! Not that you need to shoot that much to be pretty good, but I sure would like to shoot more than I currently do.

 

[Heraclitus]

Simple. The answer is speed.

A bullet's velocity at the muzzle depends on many factors: propellant, case load, bullet mass, barrel length and barrel friction, to name just a few. Everybody knows this.

But wait!

In a constant gravitational field -- such as exists at your shooting range, and anywhere else on the surface of the Earth for that matter -- bullets follow a parabolic trajectory toward their target. An arc, in other words. Gunmakers know this.

Now speed has the uncanny ability to scale the arc up. The higher the speed, the "flatter" the trajectory (that is, the shorter the parabolic segment). And the flatter the trajectory, the closer the POA and POI are likely to be.

If you really want a straight trajectory, then get as far away as you can from the Earth, Moon, Sun and planets. Even then, the bullet will follow an eccentric path about the Milky Way.

Not an expert here, but physics I, II and III were on my college curriculum.

 

[WhoKnowsWho]

Simple. The answer is speed.

So how do different weights affect the windage? Eh?

 

[Heraclitus]

So how do different weights affect the windage? Eh?

They don't. Windage works horizontally. Gravity works vertically.

Weight (mass x gravity) has absolutely no effect on the vertical speed component of a bullet's parabolic trajectory. Acceleration toward the ground remains the same for all bodies.

One of Aristotle's "laws" of nature -- namely, that heavier objects fell faster than lighter objects [in a vacuum] -- had long been accepted as gospel truth, and there had been few attempts to actually test his conclusions.

Then came Galileo.

Dropping musketballs and cannonballs of different weight and size from the top of the Leaning Tower of Pisa, he observed that they all reached the ground exactly at the same time. Aristotle was wrong.

And so are some people, 380 years hence.


P.S. > Had Galileo chosen to, he could have simultaneously dropped one ball and fired another parallel to the ground, and they STILL would have landed exactly at the same time: one at the foot of the tower and the other somewhere off in the distance.