I have a theory but I'm not sure what's going on. I worked up a load for my 6.5 Creedmoor. At 150 yards, I put 5 rounds in the same hole. At 400 yards, the group size expands to 4-5". At 1000 yards, the group is 4.5 and 5.5 inches. I shot 400yrd and 1000yrd groups 3 different times with the same results. Any ideas?
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Group size goes small to large and back to small
- Thread starter MR&R
- Start date
Your 1000 yard groups are likely more luck. Bullets don’t return to point of aim if that’s what your theory is
Parallax being incorrect would be about the only thing that would cause this otherwise
Parallax being incorrect would be about the only thing that would cause this otherwise
What are you shooting at 400 yards and what are you shooting at 1000 yards?
If you're shooting steel, steel gives a false sense of accuracy. Most shots if they land close enough will take out a huge area of paint and at the end it'll look like just one spot of paint has come off. Thus, giving the impression that all shots stacked on each other.
I suggest you shoot at 1000 yards again on paper and go measure groups.
If you're shooting steel, steel gives a false sense of accuracy. Most shots if they land close enough will take out a huge area of paint and at the end it'll look like just one spot of paint has come off. Thus, giving the impression that all shots stacked on each other.
I suggest you shoot at 1000 yards again on paper and go measure groups.
I've shot iron sight groups better than some of my scoped rifle groups.
I've shot better 100yd groups with low power than at max power.
I routinely shoot better groups at distance to 1500yds, sometimes a mile, than 100yd groups.
I think the phenomenon is due to less anxiety because the less we see the crosshairs wobble, the more relaxed we are.
I've shot better 100yd groups with low power than at max power.
I routinely shoot better groups at distance to 1500yds, sometimes a mile, than 100yd groups.
I think the phenomenon is due to less anxiety because the less we see the crosshairs wobble, the more relaxed we are.
You can routinely shoot better groups at 1500yds, sometimes a mile, than you do at 100 yards?
Define better...
Better meaning dealing with the conditions and still laying them in MOA and under when I got my mojo on. Not dealing with much anything for 100yd groups, just getting an idea of the precision potential of ammo & rig.
Would you agree a 1/4 MOA group at a mile is considered "better" than one at 100yds?
I disagree with "luck". There was 2 shooters on the same gun, 3 different days, same groups sizes. 4 shots each with 4.5" to 5.4" groups. Day 1, we shot 400yrd an went to 1000. Day 2 and 3, 500yrd then 1000.
Possible wind doing weird shit at the 400-500 from terrain features? We experienced a 1 mil deflecting vertical wind coming up and off a creek that was 300-400yds in front of a 1 mile target line once. None of the 6 of us were hitting anything. No impact no Idea, so we knew we had to be high. One guy yelled out, "Go 1 mil low from app data". We were all bangarang once again. Just an idea.
My theory is based on gyrations. Depending on the size of at spinning top and the speed you spin it, the top will
A. Start out wobbly and come to center, then back to wobbling until it stops.
B. Start centered then start wobbling till it stops.
C. Start with slight wobble, come to center, the back to wobbling until it stops.
I tried this on my bar and those were the results. I know a bullet isn't the same as a spinning top, but the gyrations of the 2 may be the same.
It's a theory that i am willing to give up for a better explanation. I KNOW my results on target are consistent. My reload average SDs are below 5 (some groups are at 2)
A. Start out wobbly and come to center, then back to wobbling until it stops.
B. Start centered then start wobbling till it stops.
C. Start with slight wobble, come to center, the back to wobbling until it stops.
I tried this on my bar and those were the results. I know a bullet isn't the same as a spinning top, but the gyrations of the 2 may be the same.
It's a theory that i am willing to give up for a better explanation. I KNOW my results on target are consistent. My reload average SDs are below 5 (some groups are at 2)
It’s clearly bullets going to sleep.
So you’re one of those guys who believe bullets change directions mid flight, huh?
That's not what I said. There is a difference in direction and gyration. My direction is the same. What I theorized was the rotation and the changing in the range of the wobbling. I'm not bragging cause I know others may have more experience and knowledge but I fire off more than 5000 round per year, I am not an uneducated, inexperienced shooter. I thought this would be a good place to get some insight to this issue. If you don't know the difference in gyration and direction, please move on, you can't help me.
By the way, both depictions you gave earlier on flight paths are incorrect.
You need to shoot Bryan Litz’ challenge. Maybe you’ll be the first to prove groups can get smaller with distance.
What you’re suggesting would go against most everything any actual expert in external ballistics has observed.
You’re basically saying you’ve figured out with a few groups what literal rocket scientists with radar haven’t.
That’s why you’re going to get condescending remarks. This comes up a couple times a year.
I came for a load development issue, and ended up with a “bullets go to sleep” thread.
Positive compensation is probably the effect that is happening. It is quite common to see this in 1000 yd Benchrest .
Timintx
This what happens when people who joined yesterday pipe up with their, "follow the science" bs.
It’s all about the gyrations fellas. Get a clue. 
OP: let’s see some pics: the rifle, the firing position looking down range, at least two targets from each range with 5 round groups with a ruler laid across them for scale.
I, for one, don’t believe you‘re shooting 4.5” groups at 1000.
OP: let’s see some pics: the rifle, the firing position looking down range, at least two targets from each range with 5 round groups with a ruler laid across them for scale.
I, for one, don’t believe you‘re shooting 4.5” groups at 1000.
I know. Its Aggravating when you try to have an informative, intelligent conversation and you end up argumentative, condescending, uninformative, BS
You joined yesterday and are blabbering about stuff that has been verifiably proven to not occur.
Here is the difference in parallax error if you have it parallax free @ 100yds and then shoot out to 1k. Also the difference when you have it parallax free at 500yds and shoot at 100 and 1k yards. This is with a 56mm optic.
Keep in mind, that is the maximum error. Meaning you'd have to basically have scope shadow for the entire FOV except just the edge where you could see the center of your crosshair.
Isn't it? It's like watching dunning kruger in real time...
If your reload SDs are 2, you can probably just ignore us here and go shoot more. Or go drop this in the pit or ELR forum. They know more about ballistics there.
ETA: I fear I have been far too subtle.
Last edited:
It’s all about the gyrations fellas. Get a clue.
OP: let’s see some pics: the rifle, the firing position looking down range, at least two targets from each range with 5 round groups with a ruler laid across them for scale.
I, for one, don’t believe you‘re shooting 4.5” groups at 1000.
If I tell you I'm have 4 kids and one is acting out, do you want a sex video, pics of each birth, and birth certificates for me to prove I have kids before you will give advise? I right, I probably made all this up just to start a thread so I can have a couple of people come back with their sarcastic remarks.It’s all about the gyrations fellas. Get a clue.
OP: let’s see some pics: the rifle, the firing position looking down range, at least two targets from each range with 5 round groups with a ruler laid across them for scale.
I, for one, don’t believe you‘re shooting 4.5” groups at 1000.
I think people just want more info because you're making some interesting claims. Sub 5sd (actual sub 5sd) ammo would be some of the best ammo on the planet. 4-5" groups @ 1k consistently would be extremely good. And you're claiming you're very well educated in shooting and external ballistics.
All those things put together, generally means you wouldn't be thinking gyrations or using the spinning top example. So, people are going to want a bit more info to figure out where something is going wrong in your theory/thinking.
And of course, it's the internet and it's all in written word. So people are going to be harsh and the ones that aren't are still going to come off pretty harsh since there's no inflection/tone.
I was thinking of touching base with Hornady with this question. I work hard and long hours getting my load technique and spent a lot of money too.its aggravating to get the technical data tight then get the results on paper like I have.
I get what your saying, but I never claimed to be well educated in external ballistics. I told Tokay444 he knew nothing about external ballistics. I also said that I was only trying to show that I wasn't an inexperienced, uneducated shooter and that there are others that know more than I do.
Hornady is going to tell you the same. They haven't been able to consistently show positive compensation or any other phenomenon that allows for smaller angular group size at further distances.
There are Hornady employees who post on the site. You can find their opinions in some of the searchable threads. As well as their podcast.
There are Hornady employees who post on the site. You can find their opinions in some of the searchable threads. As well as their podcast.
This was worth the price of admission. What program did you use to generate the charts? I've always know to set correct parallax and check with the head bobble, but I never saw the deviation.
Here's the link to a parallax error calculator.
The cliff notes: parallax can absolutely be the reason for bad groups at 100yds or a bad 100yd zero. However, the further you move out, the less parallax matters as it's not just an angular value. The error is limited by the linear value of the objective lens. So, for most people shooting steel/prs type stuff, once you get out past a few hundred yards, you can basically use the parallax adjustment as a "focus". Because if the target is in focus and your 100yd zero is correct, it's not possible to have enough parallax error to miss the size targets we shoot.
Parallax Error Calculator - Leland-West Insurance
This quick calculator shows the amount of parallax error that may occur using a fixed-parallax scope to sight onto an object placed at a known distance.
www.lelandwest.com
I never claimed to have figured out anything. I said I had a theory, and came to this site to have like minded conversations with people who could help me find out why I am getting these results. My opening statement was, "I have a theory" then followed that up with the results in question, then asked for ideas. I didn't give my theory until later. But I instantly received condescending remarks/questions/statements. I DONT know what's going on and came for input. You and 1 or 2 others have been engaging, the others posting on this thread are only here for the nonsense.
You are making claims that would put you in a pretty elite tier among reloaders and shooters and ballisticians….on a site wherein a guy just claims to have shot a red-bull can at 23 miles or some stupid shit. You joined yesterday to make your elite claims. On a site that’s currently enjoying an uptick in AI/bot nonsense. SDs of 2? Repeated sub 1/2 MOA groups at 1000 yards? A system that somehow goes from 1/4 MOA to 1 MOA and back down to 1/2 MOA despite all previous evidence which suggests that’s not how it works?
Im not saying it’s an impossibility. I’m saying it’s so improbable as to require a lot more evidence and something to establish your credibility…like your name at the top of a benchrest or f-class leaderboard or a filmed shooting session with Litz or Speedy or Erik or David or John in which you discuss how to get near perfectly loaded bullets into a tiny group at 1000 yards.
Theory has been debunked many moons ago, but I’m just a troll. Derp.
Keep in mind barrel cold vs warm, fouling, mirage, updrafts in wind etc can come into play
However the 1000 accuracy you’re claiming is hard to believe. There’s only a handful of shooters in fclass or benchrest who can honestly hold 1/2 moa at 1000 yards with consistency
However the 1000 accuracy you’re claiming is hard to believe. There’s only a handful of shooters in fclass or benchrest who can honestly hold 1/2 moa at 1000 yards with consistency
Things to keep in mind with parallax (apologies if you already know this):
1: if you're looking through the center of the optic (basically clear edge to edge sight picture) then your parallax knob doesn't matter much (in theory).
2: Since we are looking through the center......parallax can only be half of the objective lens. So, even if you move your head as far as you can to barely see the center of reticle up against the edge of your sight picture, you are still only at 50% of the objective lens (center to edge).
3: most people are going to have mostly clear sight picture. Maybe a touch of scope shadow. So you're now only at a very small % of the total maximum error (which again, is only half of the objective).
So, that basically just means.........pay very, very close attention to your parallax when you zero the rifle. If you have an optic with parallax adjustment, make sure it's adjusted out via the head movement thing as well has making sure you have clear edge to edge sight picture. If you don't have a parallax adjustment, then pay very, very close attention to your edge to edge sight picture.
After that, you can basically just treat the parallax knob as a focus wheel as long as you have good edge to edge sight picture. And the further distance, the less it matters.
Honestly, it doesn't matter what people claim...OP can claim he shoots one-hole 10 shot groups at a grand all day long with him using his big toe to squeeze the trigger...That stuff is largely irrelevant but he's saying that his groups are 1 MOA at 400m or so then 1/2 MOA at a grand....
Since he doesn't seem to want to answer my questions above, my guess is that he shot a few groups where this occurred and is prematurely drawing conclusions about this being an actual hard-n-fast pattern attributable to his weapon system (him, platform, his ammo) and not just happenstance...My guess (and it's just a guess until he chimes in) is that he's shot only a very small handful of groups at those distances on a realatively new barrel and is jumping to conclusions...If he were to fire another 30 groups at 400m and 1000m the overall spreads would normalize to expectations (consistently smaller groups at 400m vs 1000).
I could post pics of the target and the chronograph data but after reading most of the post on this thread I'm sure I will be accused of punching holes in the paper with a pencil and manipulating the chronograph. Honestly, this whole thread has been a waste of time.
Garvey and Rio Precision, thanks for your input.
Ok fine. IF he makes ammo with SD of 2 and IF he makes numerous sub 5” groups at 1000 and IF he also can only manage 5” groups at 500 with the same setup, then yes, I reckon it’s luck (too small a data set) no matter what he says….or claims….or however you want to say the same thing with different words.
Sorry, your post got buried in all the BS posts. The barrel has about 1000 rounds. About 100 rounds at 100yrds, 700 rounds at 600yrds, 200 rounds at 400 yards and 100 at 1000yrds. I shoot prone from the same place on the ground
