I'm in the process of working up a load for a custom 308. Today, for the first time, I did some shooting, including a ladder test at 200 yards. I also shot a number of groups with the same charge (44.9gr Varget) at both 200 and 100 yards. What was odd was the 175 SMK shot very well at 200 yards (0.56" vertical, bullet edge-to-edge & 0.29 MOA being my best 5-shot group). When I took that same load and shot at 100 yards, I had increased vertical. Admittedly, my sample size of groups was small, but has anyone seen the 175 SMK shoot better at 200+ yards than at 100 yards? Does the "go to sleep" theory apply to 175 SMKs more so than lighter 168 SMKs?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
175 SMK better at 200 yards than 100?
- Thread starter hkfan45
- Start date
That is not uncommon for that to occur. Bullet stabilizing better at distance. My brothers load sucks at 100 yards. Once you hit 300 to 400 his groups go from 1.5" to 3/4" of an inch at 300 plus.
How do 168 SMK, 168 A-Max, and 168 Berger Hybrids fair at 100 yards, in comparison to the 175 SMK?
I will have to ask him that. Not sure. When we went out and shot his groupings at 100 weren't that good. At distance they grouped together nicely.
Turbo BS above... As if there is a pilot inside shrinking it.
Funny it's always new and/ or inexperienced shooters who see this happening, that a shot, which is angular either never grows, or goes in the opposite direction and the angle gets small.
In 308 I shoot 175s almost exclusively and never see this or groups over a 1/2 MOA, in some cases even better. Why my bullets never sleep or manage to sleep sooner I'll never know?
Funny it's always new and/ or inexperienced shooters who see this happening, that a shot, which is angular either never grows, or goes in the opposite direction and the angle gets small.
In 308 I shoot 175s almost exclusively and never see this or groups over a 1/2 MOA, in some cases even better. Why my bullets never sleep or manage to sleep sooner I'll never know?
All I can say is what I saw when we were out shooting. I will have to ask him the exact details of his groups. My Grendel groups at about an inch at 100 then at 300 I can get 1/2" groups with the same load. Why would that happen?
Because you can't see the holes at 300 ... Just like when you stack 3 and throw 4 then 5 stacks. The bullet just didn't decide to screw you out of a great 5 shot group, you did it.
It's you, remove your mind like at distance, suddenly you don't screw up.... Like I said always inexperienced shooters who see it.
It's you, remove your mind like at distance, suddenly you don't screw up.... Like I said always inexperienced shooters who see it.
This topic seems to come up again and again. It is far more likely you're dealing with a scope parallax issue, or sight picture/aiming issue as Frank mentioned than the bullet "going to sleep". Either of those underlying issues can cause your groups to be larger at closer distance and are ultimately shooter error, not some strange external ballistic effect.
I always hear this about 338 Lapua. My 300gr SMK load is just as tight, or tighter, in terms of angular spread at 100 meters versus 500 (minus my own screw ups).
I use a 500 meter zero on my 338 and shoot at 100 meters for load development (closer drive from my house), but leave my scope at the 500 meter zero so I'm not looking directly at the group in my scope and chasing it as described above.
I use a 500 meter zero on my 338 and shoot at 100 meters for load development (closer drive from my house), but leave my scope at the 500 meter zero so I'm not looking directly at the group in my scope and chasing it as described above.
Last edited:
Interested in hearing more about this topic. About 8 months ago I was spending a lot of time playing with load development with 308 SMK's in 168 and 175 at a local 100 and 200 yard range through a 26" 1:10 twist. Four different powders were part of my testing. A couple hundred rounds down range each session and three sessions so decent sample size even for four powders and two bullets.
In general I noted at these shorter ranges that groups got a bit tighter as I hit closer to max powder (up to a point) and the lighter 168's consistently grouped tighter.
This summer as I moved out to longer ranges (and warmer temps) using my best loads from development as you would expect the heavier, higher BC 175's performed exponentially better as distance increased. At no point have I had tighter groups as distance increased. Have seen similar group sizes at 100 and 200 yards with 168's and at 3-500 with the 175's.
From everything I've read what I've experienced is normal. Tighter groups at greater distances has my head spinning.
Is this barrel harmonics specific to some barrels? Twist rate and length combo's ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In general I noted at these shorter ranges that groups got a bit tighter as I hit closer to max powder (up to a point) and the lighter 168's consistently grouped tighter.
This summer as I moved out to longer ranges (and warmer temps) using my best loads from development as you would expect the heavier, higher BC 175's performed exponentially better as distance increased. At no point have I had tighter groups as distance increased. Have seen similar group sizes at 100 and 200 yards with 168's and at 3-500 with the 175's.
From everything I've read what I've experienced is normal. Tighter groups at greater distances has my head spinning.
Is this barrel harmonics specific to some barrels? Twist rate and length combo's ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The short answer is recoil, which us why you hear about it with magnums more often and from novice shooters.
If you can't manage the recoil consistently and properly, you run into accuracy issues. It's compounded at close distances because you have a scope full of target and you can what is happening. At distance the perception is lessened by the change in the visual input.
If you can't manage the recoil consistently and properly, you run into accuracy issues. It's compounded at close distances because you have a scope full of target and you can what is happening. At distance the perception is lessened by the change in the visual input.
Where do I find these sleepy bullets? Mine always start wandering off further and further as the distance goes up. Maybe its because I'm shooting a little 308 and they get bored on their slow journey way out there, and start wandering off in a fit of A.D.D.? I'll have to see if the same bullets in a 300WM have enough attention span to get to the target.
Seriously though, physical impossibility. Lets just start a hypothetical scenario here, and say that bullets can be unstable and then stabilize after 100yds. In reality, some bullets might need some time to stabilize after they exit the barrel, given the right set of circumstances, but this is in feet, not in hundreds of yards. But for this case, lets pretend.
So lets say we have a bullet that is unstable until at 101 yards. It deviates to a 1.5" group at 100yds. Then, lets say it stabilizes at 101 yards and flies perfectly straight for the rest of eternity. We would have a 1.5" group all the way out as far as we wanted to shoot. But it still wouldn't be tighter than 1.5".
Add in the fact that I think everyone can agree that we will NEVER get a perfect bullet flight. So we would still expect some deviation after it was perfectly stabilized at 101yds, so it should still open up SOME as it goes out even if it perfectly stabilizes. Right? Nothing will be perfect as it travels another few hundred yards.
Now. To make the group smaller at a given further distance (linearly, not angularly for this argument, though both are true here), we would have to have a water-in-to-wine type miracle. Because not only would we need a perfect flight from 101yds out, but we would actually need some sort of a reverse trajectory force pushing the bullet back towards the center. It was already heading away from the center, something needs to move it back in towards the center, rather than on the straight path from the 1.5" spread. Right? So lets say the bullet is not stable, and it is 'wobbling' so to speak throughout the path. It would be a huge coincidence if that wobble was off at 100yds and brought it back in at longer ranges the exact same amount and distance it was off before at 100yds.
Now. Lets talk about those that say "AFTER xxx yards it will group". SO now we are talking about an additional force needed. The first described above, to move it back towards the center of the target at further ranges, and an additional force to square it up to the flight path and keep it there as it goes out to max range. Its headed away (1.5" @ 100), we push it back towards middle (to tighten the group), but unaltered it would just keep going past center as it traveled. Something needs to stop it right when it is back at the center and put it back on a straight path for it to be precise at all ranges past a set distance.
Hopefully this sheds some light to those that think this is possible. It was meant to show just what kinds of things you would have to concede in what you know about motion from every day life to make this possible; just throw them out the window.
When in doubt, question the human element.
Seriously though, physical impossibility. Lets just start a hypothetical scenario here, and say that bullets can be unstable and then stabilize after 100yds. In reality, some bullets might need some time to stabilize after they exit the barrel, given the right set of circumstances, but this is in feet, not in hundreds of yards. But for this case, lets pretend.
So lets say we have a bullet that is unstable until at 101 yards. It deviates to a 1.5" group at 100yds. Then, lets say it stabilizes at 101 yards and flies perfectly straight for the rest of eternity. We would have a 1.5" group all the way out as far as we wanted to shoot. But it still wouldn't be tighter than 1.5".
Add in the fact that I think everyone can agree that we will NEVER get a perfect bullet flight. So we would still expect some deviation after it was perfectly stabilized at 101yds, so it should still open up SOME as it goes out even if it perfectly stabilizes. Right? Nothing will be perfect as it travels another few hundred yards.
Now. To make the group smaller at a given further distance (linearly, not angularly for this argument, though both are true here), we would have to have a water-in-to-wine type miracle. Because not only would we need a perfect flight from 101yds out, but we would actually need some sort of a reverse trajectory force pushing the bullet back towards the center. It was already heading away from the center, something needs to move it back in towards the center, rather than on the straight path from the 1.5" spread. Right? So lets say the bullet is not stable, and it is 'wobbling' so to speak throughout the path. It would be a huge coincidence if that wobble was off at 100yds and brought it back in at longer ranges the exact same amount and distance it was off before at 100yds.
Now. Lets talk about those that say "AFTER xxx yards it will group". SO now we are talking about an additional force needed. The first described above, to move it back towards the center of the target at further ranges, and an additional force to square it up to the flight path and keep it there as it goes out to max range. Its headed away (1.5" @ 100), we push it back towards middle (to tighten the group), but unaltered it would just keep going past center as it traveled. Something needs to stop it right when it is back at the center and put it back on a straight path for it to be precise at all ranges past a set distance.
Hopefully this sheds some light to those that think this is possible. It was meant to show just what kinds of things you would have to concede in what you know about motion from every day life to make this possible; just throw them out the window.
When in doubt, question the human element.
Last edited:
175 SMK better at 200 yards than 100?
Commander & Chief explained it very clear. Groups will be as tight as they come out and spread from there. Smaller groups at a distance (Coriolis and windage help)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Commander & Chief explained it very clear. Groups will be as tight as they come out and spread from there. Smaller groups at a distance (Coriolis and windage help)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Yeah I have done this and the only way to counter is not to try and see the holes coz every time I did it I pulled one about an inch or so,
John
Don't discount cold shooter problems.
That is your fundamentals or lack of lead you to throw your first 5 shot group at 100. You warm up and perform better at the 300.
And then there's bore conditions. If you cleaned the snot out of your barrel it can take several shots to gain accuracy back.
That is your fundamentals or lack of lead you to throw your first 5 shot group at 100. You warm up and perform better at the 300.
And then there's bore conditions. If you cleaned the snot out of your barrel it can take several shots to gain accuracy back.
LOL I said something like this over at long range hunting and they wanted to burn me at the stake as a heretic and said I was running off the good shooters by criticizing their conclusions that defy the laws of physics. I got the usual I shoot more in a month than you do all year, I run a shooting school, etc etc BS as if their credentials affect the bullet's path. My challange was that if someone was seeing this phenomenon consistently as they claim, then simply record the same group at two different ranges on cellophane and prove it. Funny how no one ever does.
I only saw this because it was my own fault and although I could shoot straight I was not being constant, A common result through an old bad habbit which took me along time to correct through blaiming the scope, and then one day I realised it was the growth behind the shoulder Pad, Problem solved,
John
To the suggestion that a bullet will trend back closer to the point of aim after passing some intermediate distance, I have to wonder - how do it know? A bullet departs the barrel in whatever direction the muzzle is then pointing and is thereafter ALWAYS pulled down by gravity, and pushed left or right (maybe even a little up or down, depending on the topography around the line of flight) by wind. Things like spin drift and Coriolis effect are too small to matter at the ranges being discussed. Neither gravity nor wind are affected by the point of aim after the bullet leaves the barrel, so what other force is out there to change the direction of flight? (Not that I don't WISH there were such a force, making my groups smaller at 600 than at, say, 200 yards - I could start winning F Class matches at my club if I had some of that.) 
I'm not going to say they are right or wrong. Simply they have a lot more time behind the trigger, and have the medals to prove it.
Just be cause we can't currently explain it, doesn't NECESSARILY mean it doesn't happen.
I for one, learn new things all the time. Maybe there is an explanation we don't know about?
I'm certainly not going to tell a world champion he is wrong. I am always interested in learning though. Which often occurs most when I close my trap and listen. lol..
In their sport then don't shoot inside 300 yards, so who the hell cares, the groups on paper don't lie. If the bullet was out of whack at 100 yards as many claim, (and I don't care who they are, they are stupid) why don't they show the oblong holes or the smaller groups at distance versus closer ? It would be easy to post a series of holes out of round vs holes perfectly round farther out.
Many people claim all sort of shit, doesn't make it valid. The proof is in the fact that too many shoot amazingly great groups inside 200 yards, or better yet, even closer with heavier bullets. Hell at the Oregon Sniper Challenge, they had an event with 10 shots at 25 yards, and my target had a single hole in it, in fact it was nearly impossible to score. I was shooting 175s factory ammo out of a factory AI --- ONE HOLE in the paper... I'll believe that before I believe what they are shoveling.
I suppose you'll subscribe to my theory that when you are shooting a group and get a single flyer, that is the bullet saying, "Fuck You" and purposely ruining your refrigerator worthy group so you couldn't cut it out and brag about it. I have a resume, so go and tell them all their fliers are purposely screwing you out of spite. It's the bullet doing it LOL I shoot over 20,000 rounds a year out of a precision rifle... never saw it where it wasn't the shooter.
Many people claim all sort of shit, doesn't make it valid. The proof is in the fact that too many shoot amazingly great groups inside 200 yards, or better yet, even closer with heavier bullets. Hell at the Oregon Sniper Challenge, they had an event with 10 shots at 25 yards, and my target had a single hole in it, in fact it was nearly impossible to score. I was shooting 175s factory ammo out of a factory AI --- ONE HOLE in the paper... I'll believe that before I believe what they are shoveling.
I suppose you'll subscribe to my theory that when you are shooting a group and get a single flyer, that is the bullet saying, "Fuck You" and purposely ruining your refrigerator worthy group so you couldn't cut it out and brag about it. I have a resume, so go and tell them all their fliers are purposely screwing you out of spite. It's the bullet doing it LOL I shoot over 20,000 rounds a year out of a precision rifle... never saw it where it wasn't the shooter.
Perhaps I will ask him more about it next time I see him.
If I remember correctly, he mentioned something about pushing the bullets too fast (or faster than normal), and the bullet doesn't go to "sleep" until it gets further out. (corkscrew effect)??
Again, I'm not saying it is or isn't true. Just one of the things I've taken in.
If I remember correctly, he mentioned something about pushing the bullets too fast (or faster than normal), and the bullet doesn't go to "sleep" until it gets further out. (corkscrew effect)??
Again, I'm not saying it is or isn't true. Just one of the things I've taken in.
Been talked about at length. This is a pile of bullshit. It's the guy driving the gun.
Similar threads
