Dansig

W

Wilbur

cook and bottle washer
You deleted that thread again...this time without much cause. Surely, you don't have to prove anything to any of us. We were simply trying to tell you that those targets you posted were measured incorrectly and the resulting agg was WAY off. You're kidding yourself believing that the agg was on the same planet with a .203. You don't have to prove anything further as the targets speak for themselves. Francis' comment about seeing the moving backer was a stab at humor because there's no need for a moving backer. You can easily count all 25 shots.

I should have just said "BS" rather than beat around the bush concerning the target scoring. I apologize for not doing that.

It's a very beautiful rifle and I wish it were mine.
 
Wilbur said:
You deleted that thread again...this time without much cause. Surely, you don't have to prove anything to any of us. We were simply trying to tell you that those targets you posted were measured incorrectly and the resulting agg was WAY off. You're kidding yourself believing that the agg was on the same planet with a .203. You don't have to prove anything further as the targets speak for themselves. Francis' comment about seeing the moving backer was a stab at humor because there's no need for a moving backer. You can easily count all 25 shots.

I should have just said "BS" rather than beat around the bush concerning the target scoring. I apologize for not doing that.

It's a very beautiful rifle and I wish it were mine.
Click to expand...


Polite and to the point Wilbur.

DanSig posting and behaiviour speak for it self so I do not need to go into that. I am also from Iceland and know him more than I would like to.

I have shot too many mediocre aggregates in my life not to recognice one when I see it. Ballpark figure of the five groups posted is around .3xxx in my opinion.

That leads me to the question "what costitutes an aggregate ? " In most peoples mind it is 5 consecutive 5 shot groups, not 5 selected groups accumulated for the purpose of aggregating them.

Furthermore the difference between .20xx aggregate and an .30xx doesnt seem to be that big, right ? Wrong, its the difference between a very good and respectable aggregate that would win many matches and put you in top 5 in most and a aggregate that would at best put you in the middle of the pack.

On the other hand if DanSig believes that what he posted is an aggregate of .20xx it is fine by me.


This does not take away the fact that the rifle is nice and well made and the groups are not bad for a beginner in benchrest. If the poster would understand that fact and behave accordingly, he would fair better in the future.
 
it was my thread and therefore my right to delete it.

I was tought to measure groups by the national BR champion, I used exactly the same method that he showed me, if that is wrong then so be it, it's the way groups are measured in competitions here.

and I will continue to delete my threads whenever I get a negative comments about me, I have no interest in letting negative comments about me flooding the internet and I haveno interest in answering them or having them answered by someone else that states he "knows" me, like previous poster states..

only one shooter in Iceland knows me and he is not on this forum, the rest might have met me on the range once, but not one of them knows me as a person, and none of the Icelanders on this forum knows me.

I do not participate on the icelandic forums due to false statements about me made by Icelanders that have never even met me, I was hoping to be able to participate here without the shi* that goes on on the icelandic forums.
 
Ok

You're spot on with your right to delete your own threads and I wish that you didn't have the problems you speak of. I would like to try to show you the correct method to measure groups if you will allow.

The easiest method to ballpark a group is to measure edge to edge of the widest dimension and subtract one bullet diameter. That won't be the exact measurement but will be close enough for discussion. I recommend you use this method rather than purchase a measuring tool.

In reality, a .243 bullet (or any bullet) will usually make a smaller hole (black ring included) in a target paper. Different rifles shooting the same caliber will make different sized holes. For that reason, the measuring tool is used to center an inscribed circle over a bullet hole and expand the caliper/inscribed circle to the furthest hole. The caliper is then read straight off for the group measurement - center to center of the two furthest bullet holes.

Small wonder the fellow that showed you how to measure is the national champ. :rolleyes: I assure you either he was mistaken or you misunderstood.
 
I do not agree that a thread started by someone should be theirs to delete. Their posts, yes. The thread, no. Once someone else posts in the thread, not just the thread starter's material is deleted. Just my humble opinion.
 
SGJennings said:
I do not agree that a thread started by someone should be theirs to delete. Their posts, yes. The thread, no. Once someone else posts in the thread, not just the thread starter's material is deleted. Just my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree. In fact, I've been distressed a time or two because of that. I'll look around to see if there's a viable method.
 
Group measurements

Dansig, first let me say, that is one beautiful rifle and I'm reasonalbly sure it will shoot a .203 agg and smaller teen aggs. As Wilbur says, for a ballpark measurement, go from outside to outside @ the widest, or longest sides of the group, subtract .243" from the measurement (if shooting 6mm) .224 for 22's and .308 for the 30's. If you have two bullet holes that just barely touch, then you have close to .243" measure. Look @ the group you had .095". Very fine group, but the group was more than 1-1/2 bullet hole long. It couldn't have been less than .120" and on target 10, the group was nearly 3 bullet holes tall.
Put the pic back up. I would like to show some of my friends the paint job.
HFV
 
according to your description on measuring groups we use the same method.

here is how I do it

I put a bullet in the caliper

1.jpg


I zero the caliper

2.jpg


I measure the group where it is widest

3.jpg


and here is the .095 group

4.jpg


and it´s barely a bullet and a quarter wide...

5.jpg



undeleting the thread is ok if you can remove all comments except my first post.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Generally, IMO, if a fellow has not insulted someone that has posted in the same thread, I view the first person that goes after someone as the bad egg, and I don't really care what someone does somewhere else (as far as posting goes) as long as he has behaved well on this forum. I would suggest that if you have a problem with Dansig on another form, that you deal with it there exclusively, or even better, face to face.....but if the only reason that you are here is to talk about how bad someone is, I suggest that that is not what this forum is for.

Now, back to the rifle and group measuring, sometimes a different size target than we are used to looking at can distort our perception of the size of a group. Perhaps that is what is responsible for what has happened here. In any case, the quality of the pictures of the rifle and these showing how targets were measured were of excellent quality, which is good to see, and rifle's paint job is amazing to me. Lets see if we can stick to shooting topics from hear on out. If I see some new "face" doing any more bashing, I will of course know who the source of our problem is and of course it won't be the person he is attacking...will it?
 
Group Measuring

dansig said:
according to your description on measuring groups we use the same method.

here is how I do it

I put a bullet in the caliper

1.jpg


I zero the caliper

2.jpg


I measure the group where it is widest

3.jpg


and here is the .095 group

4.jpg


and it´s barely a bullet and a quarter wide...

5.jpg



undeleting the thread is ok if you can remove all comments except my first post.
Click to expand...


Dansig,

No it isn't the same as Wilbur is saying

What you need to do is measure a single bullet hole on the paper as they never cut the paper at full diameter. It will be say 0.230 for an example. Always less than 0.243 in my experience.

So by measuring the bullet itself you are subtracting a little too much from your groups

Michael
 
Michael Huebner said:
Dansig,

No it isn't the same as Wilbur is saying

What you need to do is measure a single bullet hole on the paper as they never cut the paper at full diameter. It will be say 0.230 for an example. Always less than 0.243 in my experience.

So by measuring the bullet itself you are subtracting a little too much from your groups

Michael
Click to expand...

I measured 10 individual holes and they were from .242-.244 and the average was .243 so the holes are excactly the same size as the bullet.

the paper in these targets does not tear like regular paper, it does not get a black ring from the bullet, just a clean cut.

these targets are made by a company called Krüger, probably German.. look them up, you might like their targets.
 
dansig said:
I measured 10 individual holes and they were from .242-.244 and the average was .243 so the holes are excactly the same size as the bullet.

the paper in these targets does not tear like regular paper, it does not get a black ring from the bullet, just a clean cut.

these targets are made by a company called Krüger, probably German.. look them up, you might like their targets.
Click to expand...


Who wouldnt like targets that measured up like this one supposedly does ?
 
dansig's new rifle

Thought I would add them back...didn't do it well, but you get the picture.
 

Attachments

  • panda1.jpg
    panda1.jpg
    10.2 KB · Views: 319
  • panda2.jpg
    panda2.jpg
    18.4 KB · Views: 285
  • panda3.jpg
    panda3.jpg
    17.4 KB · Views: 296
  • panda4.jpg
    panda4.jpg
    9.2 KB · Views: 282
  • panda10.jpg
    panda10.jpg
    8.4 KB · Views: 289
  • panda15.jpg
    panda15.jpg
    13.7 KB · Views: 279
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top