standard of accuracy testing?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I go with impromptu bench testing, usually from the hood of my car, to check the load and zero. From there, it's practical, as that's the way the guns are used.
For open site pistols, it's all practical, because I can't carry a rest with me, and it's hard to mount a bipod on a P-95. Guess I could hang one on the picatinny rail, eh?
I appreciate the mention about firing a "group" with a hunting rifle, as the previous poster says. As for "clean" and cold, it's always been my practice to do the impromptu bench test before heading out for a hunt. The idea for me is to establish a true 200 yd (or whatever range the location calls for) zero in that temp and elevation. This also fouls the barrel for that load, which I find to be very conducive to accuracy.
Back to bragging on those ultra long-range shots.... In 45 years of shooting, I can assert with some authority that the man who takes such a shot without having carefully zeroed his rifle on that morning is a fool who has no business in the field.
 
PULSE
how does your gun do if you shoot all 10 rounds in less then a minute?
and did you have worse groups then what you quote here or are all comparable?

because, the the marines just spend a couple millions to get a bunch of Knights SR-25 marksman rifles, with all the tools, armorer training and gunracks it was somewhere around 7k each rifle.
the SR-25 is rated at 1 MOA accuracy at any given practical range.
why would the US armed forces spend so mutch money on Rifles that are barely half as accurate as your AR?
Click to expand...

Good question, as I am not using my AR for battle I don't fire 10 shots in a minute. I have never fired more than 5 in a row, yeah I know a .223 isn't a barrel burner but I just don't have a desire to do it. Yes I did have worse groups than that, after 3 they start opening up as I stated but 5 are still under an inch and 10 would likely grow larger, but if I fire the first three cold I'd bet my next paycheck they're near the 3/4" mark.
 
If you want to know how well your gun shoots you must record all shots and include them in your measurements.
On the other hand, if you want to know "generally" how your gun shoots, you can use "statistics".
If you are happy to know that by shooting 3 shots at a target (and subsequently measuring the extreme spread, or dispersion), that you have determined the largest group your gun will fire at that range in those conditions, you are "Golden". If you fire 2 more shots at that target and find (as most do) that your group has grown larger, then your previous assumptions about your gun's accuracy have been dis-proven.
I have a little nit to pick with the NRA rifleman's magazine using 5, 5 shot group averaging. Why not use a single 25 shot group? Would that possibly make their reviewed guns look less accurate? I think it would.
Using a 25 shot group may preclude measuring each shot for a standard deviation measurement (roughly: average shot distance from the center of the group, or target) and that is a valid measure and argument. Ultimately you want to know where the average bullet you shoot is going to land and how far to expect the worst one you shoot is going to deviate from there.
If you shoot 10 shots at a target, you should be about 90% sure your 11th shot will be within that group. Shoot 100 shots into a target and you should have a 99% expectancy of landing your 101st shot within that group.
All you have to answer is: what is your comfort zone?
Most one box a year guys: 3 shots on paper is good!
Silhouette shooters: 8-9 shots on a gong? Good!
High Power shooters: What? 10 in the black? Good!
Benchresters: 5 touching x 5 targets? (Not my game. I don't know)
Dangerous game: One shot, one kill? (Same: I don't know)
Like you say: "Relative term"
 
All I can say is several tiems I have checked my gun at 100 yards with the first 3 shots and they are 1 1/2" high and somewhere between 1/2" -3/4". Most of the hunters I hunt with will agree that this is very good, why do I need to be able to fire 10 in a target in a row? That is why when asked I tell people a 3 shot group will usually be in the 1/2-3/4 range.
 
well if you make clear that you shot 3 round groups from a cold bore, then you dont need to shot more.

but my initial question was if there is a generaly accepted way to test accuracy.

i allways shot 30 round groups on our B-target at 300meters/330yards:

bscheibe2zg3.gif


and i normaly score somewhere in the 280's with highest beeing 293and lowest as low as 200.

overall that equals to about ~2.5MOA and i was allways wondering how peoples can shot insane sub MOA groups with a "crappy assault rifle" and allready suspected diffrent ways of shooting and measuring.

you shoot 3 round groups, i shoot 30 round groups .. appels and oranges i guess.
 
I am not going to spend hard earned cash on a precision rifle because I am not going competition. I don't need a precision rifle to do a hunting job. Furthermore I have met very few people in my lifetime who have ever taken any of their weapon/gun to any of it's limit in the accuracy dept; however I have met more than a few who were accurate. One who was uncanny accurate. I am accurate to a certain degree but nowhere close to what I consider as accurate as I want to be. I am confident with the ability I have whether it be a pistol shotgun or a rifle.
If you are confident in the ability to shoot a rifle off the bench rest and hit a target then you might want to consider yourself accurate enough.
You and only you can determine that. This is what I understand. I see shooters all of the time and most that I see do the shooting without goals. They either benchrest a rifle and move out or shoot the hell out of ammunition for the fun of it. Very few might be improving on their riflemanship, their stances. I have never noticed one single individual on a range using a natural point of aim. Setting up to use a a natural point of aim. Going through a consistant system of setting up to fire each and every time to fire a round in a methodical manner. Proper use of a sling.
Its been an extreme few times I have seen the proper positions with a rifle.
You will never achieve accuracy except at the benchrest if you never learn the basic positions.
 
This was a bit hard on my ego, but I think it was worth doing.

One day I decided to see just how well I could shoot first time and all the time. I've shot plenty of really good target groups using 3 rounds or even 5. But I wanted to really know how well I could expect to do every time.

Consequently, I fired 50 rounds at the same target with my .308 over a couple of hours. The temperature and winds shifted around several times over that period, and of course, I wasn't as fresh at the end as I was when I began.

Results: The target had one hole in the center that was 1-1/4 wide and 1-1/2 high. There were no holes at all other then that.

To me that is really how well I can dependably shoot each and every time I pull the trigger. And it is good enough to drop any deer or hog that gets within a 100 yards of me, and probably a lot further, so it'll do.
 
This is more of an observation than "my take" on this subject. I am just AMAZED at how much barrel heat does to a group size. I use to wonder why my groups would open up completely when I would go to the range and open up on the target. I would be so frustrated with my gun.
Obviously now I know that barrel heat changes my accuracy.
So now when I read about accuracy and group size, I instantly wonder about how quickly the shots where made and the time between shots. I am still trying to figure out my own rifles and how long between shots I should let the barrel cool to get consistant accuracy
 
Your barrel is going to heat up and your bullet placement is going to string shots. The better the fitment of the barrel to the stock the smaller the stringing should be as a rule of thumb. IMHO you are pretty much good to go.
I have a 22 mag mossberg chuckster that shoots on target but strings like the dickens, a pattern from and to positions of 2 on the clock to 8 on the clock. Shoots on the dime for the first two shots. Am I going to send 15 rounds sucessively at a squirrel at 100 yards? Of course not.
 
I think people should understand mass production of guns to understand the differences in accuracy.

Gun makers are not all the same in their tolerances when it comes to manufacturing. Some will set + an - standards and stick with them while others will run a chamber reamer more than they should.

Some make their own barrels and some don't. I know of one popular manufacture who has to put their barrels in a jig and use a press to straighten them out enough to go on a gun.

Lots of companies build "good enough" just to have something to sell. It's the lucky man that bought one that shoots real straight.

jj
 
I know of one popular manufacture who has to put their barrels in a jig and use a press to straighten them out enough to go on a gun.
Click to expand...

I know for a fact that Savage and Remington do this. I believe Winchester did it too, and assume that most if not all of the very large manufacturers do it. Not doing it means discarding a large number of barrels and driving the prices up. And for a "hunting" rifle -- one meant to fire one or two shots every once in a while -- it works just fine, which is why the average two-box-a-year hunter isn't complaining about it.
 
I know for a fact that Savage and Remington do this. I believe Winchester did it too, and assume that most if not all of the very large manufacturers do it. Not doing it means discarding a large number of barrels and driving the prices up. And for a "hunting" rifle -- one meant to fire one or two shots every once in a while -- it works just fine, which is why the average two-box-a-year hunter isn't complaining about it.
Click to expand...

The question is "why do they make crooked barrels to begin with?"

jj
 
Because it's cheaper, and because the great majority of folks who use those rifles neither know nor care. The people who do either put up with it or realize they need to spend money to upgrade things to the needed level.

Put another way, the con-rods in your family car are probably not hand-matched titanium. You probably neither know nor care, because the family car fulfills your needs and expectations. Only if you decide to take the family car to track days or the local drag strip do you begin to think about things like hand-matched titanium con-rods -- and presumably expect to pay more for your more demanding requirements.
 
Put another way, the con-rods in your family car are probably not hand-matched titanium. You probably neither know nor care, because the family car fulfills your needs and expectations. Only if you decide to take the family car to track days or the local drag strip do you begin to think about things like hand-matched titanium con-rods -- and presumably expect to pay more for your more demanding requirements.
Click to expand...

So you are saying that there is no use buying a race car to drive on the freeway?? At least that is my understanding, people get what they pay for and gunmakers sell something "good enough" for the public.

Works for me.

jj
 
so now my question is: is there a generally accepted way to test accuracy?
Click to expand...

Did you know you were opening Pandora's box with a relatively simple question? Your question points out the disparity in methodology that is used to define accuracy, and the many approaches to accuracy.

Probably the lingua franca for accuracy in a centerfire rifle in north america is a 3 to 5 shot group at 100 yards from a bench, subtracting one bore diameter from the maximum distance from the outside of one bullet hole to the outside of the farthest bullet hole. For rimfires, the usual distance is 50 yards. That is based upon my reading of the literature and anecdotal accounts.

It seems that there are many components that make up "accuracy", but we try to start with a rifle that has a reputation for accuracy. We then try a variety of loads to see which the rifle favors. Some will adjust bedding, screw tension and trigger characteristics to enhance accuracy. Others will trade the gun for one they hope will do better. Many will work with what they have.

Hunters and position rifle competitors then move to the shooting positions to see how close they can come to the "bench" mark. The bench rest competitors just keep on tweaking and dialing in their gun, load and technique. As was stated previously, a 2 or 3" gun will bring home the venison, while a benchrester will sell his soul for another 0.2moa.

It's a never-ending struggle which most of us seem to enjoy. But in the end it is man and machine pitted against the laws of physics and the environment.
 
A lot of accuracy falls to the guy pulling the trigger.

I've shot beautiful 5 shot groups, taking my time and being anally consistent. That proves the rifle- if the shooter does his part.

I've also shot hot barrel groups on everything from .223 to .338, and this is one shot every 5-10 seconds. Usually as much as 20 rounds, reloading when empty.

Depending on the rifle, bolt or semi auto, (and my inconsistentcy) those groups opened up to 2-3 inches or 5-6 inches. Including flyers- which must be counted.

This at 100 yds.

Those rifles that opened up to 5-6 inches I no longer have, I still have a couple of the ones that opened up to 2-3 inches.

For me that is my measure of accuracy.

All I do anymore is shoot to hunt, or practice shooting to hunt, or just shoot targets for the fun of it.
 
does anybody now how the US army Test accuracy?
they claim 2-3 MoA for the M16, wich is some 10 times higher then what i seen people claiming about there 650 bucks AR15s?

i realy think it would be an effort worth taking to try and establish a somewhat generaly accepted test, no?
 
The USAMU service rifles are tested by being shot from a custom built rest on Easley Range and all shoot 6" or better 10 shot groups at 600 yards with the same issue ammo. The ones that don't get another barrel. The rest is permanently secured on a solid concrete structure and weighs about 100#.

There is a duplicate rest on Maertens Range for 1000 yard testing.

I don't know about regular issue rifles.
 
i visited the site of the USAMU, some very impressiv stuff there.
very nice vid of the two guys fireing 20rounds in 50 seconds at 600 yards.
but i think those weapons are "special" as in they have there own gunsmithing shop and quote: ""you can’t consistently stay on top without the most accurate weapons,".

so if the USAMU is happy with 1moa and is willing to go to competitions with it, make me wonder even more what regular rifles can do.

on a side note: Mr. Roark, do you know what ammo the USAMU uses? i can see 600 yard shots with regular 62grains Nato Ammo, but at 1000 yards, the winddrift from a squirrel fart could probably push you off target.
 
The lightest .223 for service rifle is the 77gr for the 2&300 yard lines and 80gr at the 600 and 1K. Their 6, 8,9 and 1K yard ammo is loaded by their own custom loading facility to their own specs.

4" groups from the rest are common. That's SR, not the bolt guns. The bolt guns shoot better than that. They have had some impressive wins the last couple of years at Perry with bolt guns in the Long Range portion.
 
So you are saying that there is no use buying a race car to drive on the freeway?? At least that is my understanding, people get what they pay for and gunmakers sell something "good enough" for the public.
Click to expand...

You get what you pay for & you pay for what you need.
I don't NEED sub 0.5 MOA accuracy & I'm not prepared to pay the price that comes with it.

A $500 Savage that consistently shoots 1 MOA out of the box is more than accurate enough for hunting & a 2 MOA FAL is plenty good enough for its intended purpose.
The game changes when you're talking about competition firearms (or motors), as they're expected to perform at a far higher level than "run of the mill" stuff.

If I can get a 1 MOA three shot group out of a hunting rifle, with all shots taken inside ten seconds & the group is at POA, then it'll do for me.
I expect half that with the 22-250 for foxes but it cost considerably more than $500.

Accuracy is important but consistency is more so.
 
i try to remove all human error.
i want to see what the firearm is capable of.
that way i know if i am the weak link or not.

when i wanted to see what my new CZ452 varmint .22lr would do
after testing various ammo to find out which type this firearm liked best.
i put it in a mechanical rest and fired 25 5 shot groups at one target.
and found the average.
that is how i myself determine accuracy.
 
IIRC, the required standard of accuracy for a .58 rifle-musket in 1860 was 4 inches at 100 yards, though some would do better.

The required standard of accuracy for an M4 carbine in 2008 is 4 inches at 100 yards, though some will do better.

Any questions?

Jim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top