D
derek casey
Guest
what is a exceptable 25 yard group size? my suhl is producing .25 and .26 out side edge to outside edge consistantly. what would you consider a exceptable 25 yard group from outside edge to outside edge?
D
derek casey
Guest
right now i'm just trying out test lots. i'm getting ready to take it outside next week and start testing at 50 in the wind to see what the bullets are doing. i notice m groups went south when i opened the basement door while testing tonight. so far the fiocchi i have is bucking the wind better than anything. and it groups outstanding inside as well. that might end up being the magic bullet for this gun
!!
!!HuskerP7M8
Member
Okay, somebody tell me what I’m missing here.
.25” (Edge to Edge) – .223” (Bullet Diameter) = .027”(C to C) @ 25yds
----------------------------------------------.054”(C to C) @ 50yds (Assumption)
Even if you decrease the bullet diameter for the type of paper used, aren’t we looking at potential world record groups? I’m not a math professor, so someone “Clue me in” to what I’ve done wrong.
.25” (Edge to Edge) – .223” (Bullet Diameter) = .027”(C to C) @ 25yds
----------------------------------------------.054”(C to C) @ 50yds (Assumption)
Even if you decrease the bullet diameter for the type of paper used, aren’t we looking at potential world record groups? I’m not a math professor, so someone “Clue me in” to what I’ve done wrong.
Fiddler
Steve Lloyd
He's saying
at 25 yds your looking at 1/4" groups and it would relate to 1/2" at 50 yds. At 25 yds you are not really able to tell the true potental of what your gun can or can't do. That size groups won't get you anywhere in competition. Current World record for 50Yds (ARG) is held by Ron Lewis @ 0.066 .
at 25 yds your looking at 1/4" groups and it would relate to 1/2" at 50 yds. At 25 yds you are not really able to tell the true potental of what your gun can or can't do. That size groups won't get you anywhere in competition. Current World record for 50Yds (ARG) is held by Ron Lewis @ 0.066 .
C
cpeters
Guest
At 25 yards with a real good rifle and ammo, you should be able to get to a group size that will hold a spent case. Yea, looks like a single shot hole.
Figure out all you want, but I don't believe the math works out between 25 and 50 yard groups.
As some have said on here.....at some point you have to shoot 50 yards outside....but shooting 25 yards inside can help you cull lots or testing of rifle changes.....it if throws shots all over at 25 it sure aint going to get any better at 50.
Good luck.
Charlie
Figure out all you want, but I don't believe the math works out between 25 and 50 yard groups.
As some have said on here.....at some point you have to shoot 50 yards outside....but shooting 25 yards inside can help you cull lots or testing of rifle changes.....it if throws shots all over at 25 it sure aint going to get any better at 50.
Good luck.
Charlie
Dave S
NRA Benefactor Member
Derek:
What everyone has said about testing at 50 yards is correct.. Until you shoot at 50 yards you have no idea how your rifle will do in competition.. I have always believed that, unless your rifle will shoot groups of .200" ctc or smaller at 50 yards, you will not win very many matches.. A few yes, but more than a few is very doubtful.. This has been my findings, for what it is worth..
Oh, and by the way, get yourself a good set of wind flags, at least three and maybe four, and then practice,practice practice..
Dave
What everyone has said about testing at 50 yards is correct.. Until you shoot at 50 yards you have no idea how your rifle will do in competition.. I have always believed that, unless your rifle will shoot groups of .200" ctc or smaller at 50 yards, you will not win very many matches.. A few yes, but more than a few is very doubtful.. This has been my findings, for what it is worth..
Oh, and by the way, get yourself a good set of wind flags, at least three and maybe four, and then practice,practice practice..
Dave
Last edited:
To Beau....
It's kinda funny but look at it again.The 50 yard group would not be double .027 but instead it would be .5 - .233 or .277. It's just a little "math quirk". The explanation is that as you go from 25 to 50 yards the group size doubles but not the bullet hole size.
(Hey Tim, I know you are out there! Don't pay any attention to this , it's just old book math, if you just shoot your gun it won't come up this way!)
To Dave S and others,
I have always believed that, unless your rifle will shoot groups of .200" ctc or smaller at 50 yards you will not win...
I'm going to assume this means an average of .200. So I have a question: Will a gun that shoots groups of .150 to .250 be better than one that shoots groups .100 to .300. Remember, both guns are averaging .200. Also remember that second gun is shooting some .100 groups, which by most shooters standards, means that is a really good gun. I'm suggesting, just suggesting, AVERAGES DON'T MEAN MUCH, it's the MAXIMUM you need to look at. However shooters don't like to talk much about the big groups their gun shoots, they always talk about the average, or sometimes only the small groups!
It's kinda funny but look at it again.The 50 yard group would not be double .027 but instead it would be .5 - .233 or .277. It's just a little "math quirk". The explanation is that as you go from 25 to 50 yards the group size doubles but not the bullet hole size.
(Hey Tim, I know you are out there! Don't pay any attention to this , it's just old book math, if you just shoot your gun it won't come up this way!)
To Dave S and others,
I have always believed that, unless your rifle will shoot groups of .200" ctc or smaller at 50 yards you will not win...
I'm going to assume this means an average of .200. So I have a question: Will a gun that shoots groups of .150 to .250 be better than one that shoots groups .100 to .300. Remember, both guns are averaging .200. Also remember that second gun is shooting some .100 groups, which by most shooters standards, means that is a really good gun. I'm suggesting, just suggesting, AVERAGES DON'T MEAN MUCH, it's the MAXIMUM you need to look at. However shooters don't like to talk much about the big groups their gun shoots, they always talk about the average, or sometimes only the small groups!
Last edited:
Hey Cec, if you AVERAGE .200 and they AVERAGE .300 then if you shoot 10 matches, you win more than they do, I suspect most guys are happy with that.
Another way to look at it is that if you AVERAGE 5 posts a week, but your AVERAGE post is wrong then the law of AVERAGES suggests at some point your going to stumble across something that actually correctly applies to match shooting..... but so far not yet.... Vito is coming.
Another way to look at it is that if you AVERAGE 5 posts a week, but your AVERAGE post is wrong then the law of AVERAGES suggests at some point your going to stumble across something that actually correctly applies to match shooting..... but so far not yet.... Vito is coming.
B
Bob Pekaar
Guest
group size/yards
I hate to disagree with my mentor and "gimmick" tools supplier but you're assuming a bullet travels in a staight line after 25 yards. In fact, it may be more stable at 50 yards and produce equal sized groups or smaller. Personally I think it's a waste of time shooting at 25 yards in testing ammo because it's not reality, nor is shooting in a controlled environment. That's what I love about the Luray and Aquadale barns- no wind, pretty constant humidity bunch of 250's.
Bob Pekaar
I hate to disagree with my mentor and "gimmick" tools supplier but you're assuming a bullet travels in a staight line after 25 yards. In fact, it may be more stable at 50 yards and produce equal sized groups or smaller. Personally I think it's a waste of time shooting at 25 yards in testing ammo because it's not reality, nor is shooting in a controlled environment. That's what I love about the Luray and Aquadale barns- no wind, pretty constant humidity bunch of 250's.
Bob Pekaar
You’re not missing anything, groups are measured center to center.
But a single 22 rimfire bullet hole usually measures in the ballpark of .211 in the target paper so….
.250 - .211 = .039@25
= .078@50
= .156@100
Assuming velocity was exactly the same for each shot in the group, and the bullets was@25 & remains@50 perfectly stabilized. Since conditions make a difference, groups usually get bigger as they go down range. Unless the wind blows them into a itty bitty group.
I wish the rimfire guys would shoot groups in competition with moving backers for a year or two, so people like myself out on the outskirts could get a handle on what their guns really are capable of agging.
B
BJS6
Guest
JJ-1A and mr Husker have it right.
You can't (even in theory) take the outside dimension of the group and double it for translation from 25 to 50 yards, that assume the bullet got twice as fat on it's trip over the extra 25 yards.
The 0.25 edge to edge at 25 is something like 0.04 centre to centre and translated to 50 is in an ideal scenario a 0.08.
Your guys maths based on the outside of the group is all wrong. You are multiplying the bullet diameter by the distance factor (2x) as well.
Bryce
Take an example of a 6PPC. A 100 yard group of 0.25 measures around 0.48 outside to outside assuming a hole diameter of 0.23. Take the same 0.25MOA to 200 and it is a 0.50 centre to centre plus the 0.23 bullet hole for a 0.73 outside to outside measurement. 0.73 is not twice 0.48, it is 0.48 plus the extra 0.25 theoretical extra spread. Notice the difference between 2 x 0.48 (0.96) and 0.73 is 0.23 which is the actual bullet hole diameter, that aint no coincidence !!
You can't (even in theory) take the outside dimension of the group and double it for translation from 25 to 50 yards, that assume the bullet got twice as fat on it's trip over the extra 25 yards.
The 0.25 edge to edge at 25 is something like 0.04 centre to centre and translated to 50 is in an ideal scenario a 0.08.
Your guys maths based on the outside of the group is all wrong. You are multiplying the bullet diameter by the distance factor (2x) as well.
Bryce
Take an example of a 6PPC. A 100 yard group of 0.25 measures around 0.48 outside to outside assuming a hole diameter of 0.23. Take the same 0.25MOA to 200 and it is a 0.50 centre to centre plus the 0.23 bullet hole for a 0.73 outside to outside measurement. 0.73 is not twice 0.48, it is 0.48 plus the extra 0.25 theoretical extra spread. Notice the difference between 2 x 0.48 (0.96) and 0.73 is 0.23 which is the actual bullet hole diameter, that aint no coincidence !!
Last edited by a moderator:
B
BJS6
Guest
Sure that is what you are doing, trouble is that is incorrect !
You cannot tell anything in theory or in practice by doubling the outer size of the group, doing so means nothing at all.
You cannot tell anything in theory or in practice by doubling the outer size of the group, doing so means nothing at all.
B
BJS6
Guest
That may be the case Beau but your (and others) comments to the gentleman about expected 50 yard groups is incorrect.
If his rifle is shooting 0.25 outer edge groups at 25 it is shooting better than a theoretical 0.28 at 50. It is shooting a "theoretical" 0.08 or so. Now whether or not it gets close to that and whether or not 25 yards means anything is another story. Fact is, saying 0.25 outer at 25 gives 0.28 centre to centre at 50 and thus rather average performance simply is not mathematically correct.
I know you are right about the 50 yard CENTRE TO CENTRE groups being bigger than double the 25 yard ones (entre to centre) but I feel the gentleman has been giving distorted information due to an error in the maths used. The way you did it (doubling the edge to edge) also double the bullet diameter which is just nonsense. I think he probably has a potentially better shooting rifle than some comments would lead him to believe.
If his rifle is shooting 0.25 outer edge groups at 25 it is shooting better than a theoretical 0.28 at 50. It is shooting a "theoretical" 0.08 or so. Now whether or not it gets close to that and whether or not 25 yards means anything is another story. Fact is, saying 0.25 outer at 25 gives 0.28 centre to centre at 50 and thus rather average performance simply is not mathematically correct.
I know you are right about the 50 yard CENTRE TO CENTRE groups being bigger than double the 25 yard ones (entre to centre) but I feel the gentleman has been giving distorted information due to an error in the maths used. The way you did it (doubling the edge to edge) also double the bullet diameter which is just nonsense. I think he probably has a potentially better shooting rifle than some comments would lead him to believe.
To Beau, You are right, my post should have been directed at Husker - sorry about that!
To Tim, Reread what I wrote, nowhere did I mention an AVERAGE of .300. You are not reading carefully. (Just like I did!) What I said was; if you were shooting groups from .100 to .300 and I was shooting groups from .150 to .250, which one of us should win? We are both averaging .200.
Note, I said I was just suggesting averages might not be the best way to compare group sizes - one way might be RMS. I'm really not sure right now. You, with your higher level of experience and skill, may be able to come up with an answer.
To Tim, Reread what I wrote, nowhere did I mention an AVERAGE of .300. You are not reading carefully. (Just like I did!) What I said was; if you were shooting groups from .100 to .300 and I was shooting groups from .150 to .250, which one of us should win? We are both averaging .200.
Note, I said I was just suggesting averages might not be the best way to compare group sizes - one way might be RMS. I'm really not sure right now. You, with your higher level of experience and skill, may be able to come up with an answer.
B
BJS6
Guest
pacecil said:
" It's kinda funny but look at it again.The 50 yard group would not be double .027 but instead it would be .5 - .233 or .277. It's just a little "math quirk". The explanation is that as you go from 25 to 50 yards the group size doubles but not the bullet hole size. "
That is what I am getting at here. You guys are stating this like IN THEORY he is starting with a 0.28 or so group, based on simply doubling the outer edge group size. You are talking like that is the correct way mathematically, it aint !!
Look at it this way, if we assume that the group double proportionally what outer edge group size would you have with a 6mm shooting 0.15 at 100 yards based on a 0.23 hole size. Answer is 0.38. OK, if we double that 0.38 to take the MOA groups size in direct proprtion (reality or not, simply theory) you end up with a 0.76. Now take a bullet hole off the 0.76 and you end up with a 0.53. When was 0.53 twice the size of 0.15 if all we have done is translate the angular measure to 200. It doesn't because tyhe maths you guys are using is wrong.
0.15 x 2 = 0.30 plus a bullet hole = 0.53. Double a 0.15 (centre to centre) groups at 100 to 200 does not double the outer edge size. There is no "maths quirk" at play, the only quirk is created by an error in the logic.
All that said, I am not saying that 50 will be simply double 25 on a centre to centre measure basis.
" It's kinda funny but look at it again.The 50 yard group would not be double .027 but instead it would be .5 - .233 or .277. It's just a little "math quirk". The explanation is that as you go from 25 to 50 yards the group size doubles but not the bullet hole size. "
That is what I am getting at here. You guys are stating this like IN THEORY he is starting with a 0.28 or so group, based on simply doubling the outer edge group size. You are talking like that is the correct way mathematically, it aint !!
Look at it this way, if we assume that the group double proportionally what outer edge group size would you have with a 6mm shooting 0.15 at 100 yards based on a 0.23 hole size. Answer is 0.38. OK, if we double that 0.38 to take the MOA groups size in direct proprtion (reality or not, simply theory) you end up with a 0.76. Now take a bullet hole off the 0.76 and you end up with a 0.53. When was 0.53 twice the size of 0.15 if all we have done is translate the angular measure to 200. It doesn't because tyhe maths you guys are using is wrong.
0.15 x 2 = 0.30 plus a bullet hole = 0.53. Double a 0.15 (centre to centre) groups at 100 to 200 does not double the outer edge size. There is no "maths quirk" at play, the only quirk is created by an error in the logic.
All that said, I am not saying that 50 will be simply double 25 on a centre to centre measure basis.
HuskerP7M8
Member
Okay gentleman, I’ve been gone all day and have just returned home.
I was being a little facetious when I made my post this morning and was only trying to make the point that Derek had probably (inadvertently) made a mistake with his group measurement.
I was really shocked to see some of the discussion and convoluted math upon my return.
Some of you didn’t even read the post correctly and thought I was stating that group growth in rimfire was linear at extended ranges. Please notice that “Assumption” is in parenthesis!
Others didn’t even see the “edge to edge” and thought we were talking about .25” group size. If I thought the math would work for “edge to edge” calculations, I wouldn’t have bothered converting it to “c to c”.
Thank you JJ-IA & BJS6 for doing the math correctly.
I was being a little facetious when I made my post this morning and was only trying to make the point that Derek had probably (inadvertently) made a mistake with his group measurement.
I was really shocked to see some of the discussion and convoluted math upon my return.
Some of you didn’t even read the post correctly and thought I was stating that group growth in rimfire was linear at extended ranges. Please notice that “Assumption” is in parenthesis!
Others didn’t even see the “edge to edge” and thought we were talking about .25” group size. If I thought the math would work for “edge to edge” calculations, I wouldn’t have bothered converting it to “c to c”.
Thank you JJ-IA & BJS6 for doing the math correctly.
B
brad541thb
Guest
Subtracting .224 for bullet diameter is misleading to what your group size really is, and will make your groups appear smaller than what they really are ctc. .204 is just about the norm that a 22 cal rimfire bullet will print on most thicker target paper(IR50/50, USBR, ARA, or RBA targets) using plywood for a backer. That's been my finding after measuring several bullet diameters from various makes. The thinner the paper used, the smaller the actual bullet diameter will be has been my findings. Thicker paper tends to give more closer to actual bullet diameters by about -.020 from the .224 actual bullet diameter. Thinner paper will print bullet diameters down in the .190's. My theory for this is the thicker paper takes longer for the actual bullet to pass through it meaning a little bit bigger cut hole than the thinner paper. But I have yet to see a 22 rimfire bullet print a .224 actual bullet diameter hole on paper or cardboard.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
derek casey
Guest
Last edited by a moderator:
D
derek casey
Guest
and for you people who say all ammo will shoot good at 25 yards no it don't. here is the worst of the lots i've tried.
like i said i have found the ones it shot best inside and will find out witch ones it likes the most outside in the wind.
D
derek casey
Guest
this target was shot outside with a 5-10mph wind. when i shot this group it had no tuner on it. so far this rifle is very impressive. i really don't think the guy i baught it from had a clue to just how accurate this rifle truely is. he said wolf match shot the best out of it. it shot barely better than the eley target rifle ammo in this gun. the fiocchi and eley tenex eps is outstanding!!!
Last edited by a moderator: