Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by WVsig, Mar 28, 2019.
Picture taken at my range on Friday:
Oh, THAT"S good! I have noticed a trend on all of the gun forums I visit where guys post targets and never mention the range - as if the range is somehow not important.
Targets are relative. No matter how well the gun can shoot everyone has good and bad days. Especially me.
Because they can?
For some time now I try to take pictures of my range trips. I always put the distance, rounds fired and round type on my targets. I do this so I can look back on my shooting range trips for my various guns.
At least for handguns I always shoot unrested, standing. All first shots per mag are double action if a DA/SA gun and the vast majority of my revolver shooting is DA only.
Most of my shooting is 8-10ish yards.
It mostly seems like a very "safe" way of competing, just like a lot of what happens on social media. People will post a favorable outlier (i.e., the one time they "shot like I normally do" or the one time "I did my part") without sharing the targets where the rounds went into the 5 ring or the D-zone or halfway off the paper. Just like guys will go to the driving range and hit a zillion golf balls, and then post the shot-tracer video of the one 2-iron stinger they managed to get flighted just right. And just like the instagram models who will take about 5,000 selfies and pick the one where their waist looks most unrealistically tiny. Heck, go to the website of an NFL football team - they're not posting video of the time they ran for 2 yards and got called for holding.
1. Target: proud of their marksmanship skills
2. Handgun: proud of their handgun
3. Handgun with Bic Pen stick in trigger guard: proud of their safety habits
4. Target with handgun and box of ammo: proud of their handgun, ammo buying skills and marksmanship skills
5. Target with a Turret press and box of fmj bullets: proud of their handgun, handloading press and bullet buying skills
6. Target with handgun and edc pocket knife: proud of their handgun, marksmanship skills and knife purchasing skills
7. Handgun with leather holster and belt: proud of their handgun and leather buying skills
8. Handgun with rail mounted light/laser sight: proud of their handgun and ability to attach things to it
9. Kids or Grandkids at the range with smiling faces: a good parent/grandparent
10. Spouse with handgun: a happy couple
11. Spouse smiling while at the reloading bench: liar
12. Spouse with cleaning kit: does not exist
Not all pictures of targets are brag groups, but I get it - It's a forum. There will always be those people that whenever an applicable thread occurs, will post their same old "good shot" groups. It's like if you searched a specific topic, you might see the same photo(s) in every thread.
Credibility is a factor too. The individual who posts groups or ammo combinations that didn't work as well along with the ones that did provides far more information and attains a greater level of trust than the poster who just shows a "highlight reel" of cut targets with bughole three shot groups.
Just like Thomas so hilariously posted above, most picture posting is really compliment fishing. Somebody always: has something nicer, bought it cheaper, and shot a smaller group. If it didn't perform, it's just an excuse reel where it's always the equipment and not shooter. Similarly, I immediately mistrust group data or any accuracy claim who uses the magic words, "All day, if I do my part." Either they don't shoot enough or they don't understand heat transfer.
I will say that with rimfire, there can be significant deviations just with the lot number of the ammo. Even so, seeing someone shoot certain brands in smaller groups and other brands in larger groups does provide generic info about what a certain make or model of rimfire gun may like. Especially when coupled with chronograph data. That can be really helpful in debunking manufacturer's advertisements. Even so, when someone posts a lone brag group with some midrange priced ammo, I immediately have to think about how many groups they had to shoot in order to get that one brag group. Believe me, I've been there in ammo testing. I have gone out to shoot 50 groups, most of which are 1.5-3moa. Then I get one out those 50 groups that ends up being 1/2moa or less. Do I have a 1/2"moa rifle? Nope. I have an anomaly, but I could claim that I did my part
Here's some pictures of my targets.
there are way better editing programs out there I'm sure but i got filmora online for 30 bucks and you can overlay 2 video clips next to each other and achieve that result.the harder part is synching the footages. i just discovered by tapping on the shooting table before a string i can look for the sound wave(?) from the 2 feeds and line them up and you can get it close. it's a lot of trial and error since it doesnt come qith a tutorial.
same issue with videos. it was always fun before to watch pov footage of somebody shooting a target. when i finally got a gopro and tried to do the same thing i could hardly see my target at 25 yrds on the video. the videos i was watching were shot much closer. even indoor range videos. stating the range qould be much appreciated.
I just assume that a picture without any info is just that.... a picture.
With the exception of some known shooters (follow the reloading forums, etc) I just
believe that most pictures are fantasy.... 25' not 25 yards, off a rest, not free hand, etc.
Exaggerating is a part of the human gene pool. Recognize it, accept it and move on.
Interesting thread... Those that really can do, like to see pictures of targets... (Braging rights)... Those who can't shoot their own big toe off always challange ... What does it matter?
I take pictures of nearly every target when I go to the range because I'm usually working on a new load and I need to track the results. I include the distance, firearm, load data, and group size. Though for some reason I failed to mark this target as a 20yd attempt.
Or I'm trying out a new firearm to see how it does with factory ammo...
But if I get a crappy group, I still take pictures, lol. I was making sure my red dot was still on target the day before a match and the first shot was impressive...
The subsequent shots were not...
A big part of the hobby to me is striving for the best accuracy from the equipment and doing the research to improve it. When someone states this works or that works ect, pictures of the targets is better than someone saying "it shoots good." Likewise the target photo is only valuable if the distance is included and most everything under 20 yards (further is better) is not helpful for my use. Groups shot from the bench or a machine rest are the most valuable to me as it minimizes the shooter error and tells more about the equipment. Another benefit of reading posts is that you create a mental list of whose posts are more worthwhile. For example: someone posting groups shot with bullets sized at 0.357" and then others sized at 0.358" for comparison is something I will follow. Conversely someone thinking they are profound saying things like "It is the Indian not the arrow" adds nothing to the discussion there Capt Obvious and I value as much as hearing about their favorite color.
I think that posting a target of a nice grouping is a “I am tickled with myself” because all of the planets aligned and I had a good day. I never sense any bragging or ego - no different than the pleasure of a new gun - just excited about a good moment in time.
Unless he claimed they were shot off-hand, why does that matter?
It matters in the same way that the actual distance matters, in the same way whether you are offhand or prone or sitting. If all you care about is the mechanical accuracy of the firearm then it doesn't matter. In the real world it all matters. I think it's called sport, competition, doing the best you can.
What is the context here? If bench testing for accuracy or developing loads, the mechanical accuracy of the firearm is all that matters. As I said, unless he claimed the groups were shot from an unsupported position, I fail to see why it matters whether a benchrest or lead sled was used.
Of course it matters whether a sled/benchrest was used. Both are valid.
Posting quarter mile times is valid in the context of racing. It matters a great deal whether the times were generated by running or by driving a car! Both are valid.
But the question here is not sled/benchrest vs unsupported but sled vs. benchrest. I'm curious as to why the sled was singled out. Or maybe I'm reading too much into it.
I guess maybe it's still relevant (sort of stick-versus-manual in the 1/4 mile analogy?), but that's obviously a finer distinction. But if the objective is to demonstrate mechanical accuracy of a gun or load, anything that removes other variables is good.
That is the entire point of the OP. CONTEXT is everything. A target without relevant information is meaninless.
Like when I did a video of shooting at a 3/4 steel IDPA at 200 yards standing with a red dot? Wouldn't impress anyone who is a REAL rifleman, but I was tickled pink that this fat old man could do it.
Check out this Group! First time I shot a Ruger LCP about 10 years ago.
Separate names with a comma.