made my own challenge.

[tinker]

I am by no means one of those guys like eric cortina or the 1moa at 1,000 yard guys.

But after what seemed like a few people agreeing that most people should be able to shoot a 1 moa or better group, I decided to make a little challenge.

so far I have had two buddies try this weekend and plan on letting a bunch of people try. I had 100 custom poker chips made. I shot it for fun as well.

Here is a link in case you guys want to laugh and remember not to take it too serious. It was all in good fun.

 

[Ronws]

That looked like fun. I remember some years back that Jim, such a big fan of Ruger that he named one of sons that, was getting 4 and 5 inch groups with a Mossberg Patriot .308 in walnut stock. Most other people testing that rifle at the time averaged 1.5 MOA to 2 MOA. And a few really good shooters could get 1 MOA or less at 3 shots, since it is a super cheap hunting rifle.

But I know that Mossberg is super cheap on the Patriot and Predator stocks. Their rifles and actions are okay and the triggers are good.

This latest challenge he had was not just 1 MOA dispersion but 1 MOA dispersion in the intended 1 MOA target zone, like you did on the last one.

But I think, along with sandbagging, there might be cases where a rifle is chosen and none of the torque is checked. And so, you get scope movement or even action movement.

As opposed to choosing a favored rifle where all the torques are checked.

Then, he had that Mike the Marine a few episodes back and I think that was just for clicks and views. He knew it was going to be a Especticaculo del Feces.

 

[diggler1833]

At some point you'll have a couple of the kids who never understand why they got bullied in school - chime in to explain to you why you're doing Backfire's challenge all wrong.

Even though you are calling it your own challenge.

 

[tinker]

At some point you'll have a couple of the kids who never understand why they got bullied in school - chime in to explain to you why you're doing Backfire's challenge all wrong.

Even though you are calling it your own challenge.

View attachment 8428392

And that is ok.

For me the point of this is to show just how common shooting 1 moa is. I think most people will be able to do it or come very close. I don't expect everyone to be able to do it every time either. But we had fun and plan on doing it more.

 

[Ronws]

And that is ok.

For me the point of this is to show just how common shooting 1 moa is. I think most people will be able to do it or come very close. I don't expect everyone to be able to do it every time either. But we had fun and plan on doing it more.

That was the take-away. The average shooter may not shoot sub-MOA, even with a well-built rifle. But an average shooter can get within 2 MOA, I would think, off the top of my head.

The guys in that Backfire challenge were shooting more popular rifles and some who had spent a bit. So, how do they get that dispersion? I mean, theoretically, it is possible to bad enough at shooting to get that. But it does beg the question, is this dispersion on purpose? Or are guys slapping triggers?

 

[tinker]

That was the take-away. The average shooter may not shoot sub-MOA, even with a well-built rifle. But an average shooter can get within 2 MOA, I would think, off the top of my head.

The guys in that Backfire challenge were shooting more popular rifles and some who had spent a bit. So, how do they get that dispersion? I mean, theoretically, it is possible to bad enough at shooting to get that. But it does beg the question, is this dispersion on purpose? Or are guys slapping triggers?

my son is 12 and is excited to try it now. I did a review of a spotting scope and at the 4 min mark there is video of him dropping 5 turkeys in a row at 421 yards so I think he should do ok.

 

[Ronws]

my son is 12 and is excited to try it now. I did a review of a spotting scope and at the 4 min mark there is video of him dropping 5 turkeys in a row at 421 yards so I think he should do ok.

I watched that. I went ahead and subbed your channel. And then watched a few others. Like the budget build with the Remington 700 ADL that turned into longer and more involved rebuild. However, it was about a budget rebuild, which I think has different parameters than just a budget rifle off the shelf.

I watched your episode on the tuner. Those are nice groups but I agree, they only make good rifles shoot a little better. A crap rifle will still be crap. But I do know from experience that different weight on the barrel changes the groups.

I watched the Hornady podcasts and they never stop at just three. It helps to know that Jayden is a ballistician. It is his job to gather statistics. Which means lots of shots. There findings were that a tuner make better groups but they cannot tell if changing the tuner setting helped any.

Someone like me engaging in just hunting, I only need a 3 shot group and my muzzle brake is doing fine. My 7 PRC got .64 inches in 3 shots. Now, if I ran 40 shots, it could probably widen out. I have not done that.

Anyway, enjoying the content.

 

[tinker]

I watched that. I went ahead and subbed your channel. And then watched a few others. Like the budget build with the Remington 700 ADL that turned into longer and more involved rebuild. However, it was about a budget rebuild, which I think has different parameters than just a budget rifle off the shelf.

I watched your episode on the tuner. Those are nice groups but I agree, they only make good rifles shoot a little better. A crap rifle will still be crap. But I do know from experience that different weight on the barrel changes the groups.

I watched the Hornady podcasts and they never stop at just three. It helps to know that Jayden is a ballistician. It is his job to gather statistics. Which means lots of shots. There findings were that a tuner make better groups but they cannot tell if changing the tuner setting helped any.

Someone like me engaging in just hunting, I only need a 3 shot group and my muzzle brake is doing fine. My 7 PRC got .64 inches in 3 shots. Now, if I ran 40 shots, it could probably widen out. I have not done that.

Anyway, enjoying the content.

Thank you I appreciate the kind words.

I do traditionally use 5 shot groups for data. But for load development I start out with three and then as I fine tune i go to 5. In my view 5 shots won't make a bad group better so three can give me a good ballpark for tuning, but I definitely confirm with much more. I typically will load 20 rounds and do 4 five shot groups to confirm a decent load.

I was skeptical about tuners making a difference. But they do make a small difference. What I wonder now is will a tuner take a decent rifle and make it shoot as well as hand tuned loads but using factory match ammo? I just finished a couple of barrels for someone who plans on just using bulk purchased match ammo. He asked me to test the barrels out and find which factory match ammo they (the two new barrels) perform best with. I was just doing some break in and after 20 rds I ran 5 of my load that I happen to have with me because I was also shooting my rifle of the same cal. that day.....and It like them well enough to put out sub 1/2 MOA 5 shot group. But that got me thinking if a tuner would be useful in that situation? I imagine it would likely show improvement with factory loads.

 

[Ronws]

Thank you I appreciate the kind words.

I do traditionally use 5 shot groups for data. But for load development I start out with three and then as I fine tune i go to 5. In my view 5 shots won't make a bad group better so three can give me a good ballpark for tuning, but I definitely confirm with much more. I typically will load 20 rounds and do 4 five shot groups to confirm a decent load.

I was skeptical about tuners making a difference. But they do make a small difference. What I wonder now is will a tuner take a decent rifle and make it shoot as well as hand tuned loads but using factory match ammo? I just finished a couple of barrels for someone who plans on just using bulk purchased match ammo. He asked me to test the barrels out and find which factory match ammo they (the two new barrels) perform best with. I was just doing some break in and after 20 rds I ran 5 of my load that I happen to have with me because I was also shooting my rifle of the same cal. that day.....and It like them well enough to put out sub 1/2 MOA 5 shot group. But that got me thinking if a tuner would be useful in that situation? I imagine it would likely show improvement with factory loads.

I read or heard someone else say the same thing. A device, either tuner or brake on the rifle can help with some barrels a little bit. But what helps most is consistent loads. So, meticulous handloaders measuring each charge weight precisely and sorting projectiles to match weight as closely as possible will get the best results. So, do all that with a medium bull barrel and that would make for good shooting, I think. As opposed to a thin tapered barrel that was meant for taking no more than two shots at an elk.

The one thing I have not seen anyone able to account for is CoG. Mass distribution in the projectile could make variances in the center of gravity as far as the spin goes. One might get a wobble and with aerodynamic jump, that could produce dispersion.

Jayden at Hornady said we should group a rifle for the job. So, a hunter needs only 3 shots at most. But a sample of 20 is considered more relevant than just one set. So, take 3 shots, let the barrel cool. Take 3 more. Do this 7 times. Overlay and average those and see what the dispersion is. Because here is the deal. What if each group is giving .61 MOA. But the perceived center of the group shifts each time. You might be shooting .61 MOA but not in the same location, even with the same point of aim. So, whatever that is, there is your actual possible dispersion, which can very well set your range. Along with, in my choice, impact velocity.

 

[tinker]

I agree the larger the sample size the more accurate the data.

I can't speak for others by I know myself, I can't focus for a string of 10-20 shots at the same target. I use a target I found a while back. Using these targets, I can get a decent mental picture of dispersion as well as record accurate groups. If I fill this target with a string of 5 shot groups, it becomes very clear to me if a load is consistent, not just in group size but dispersion as well.

For example in this target, the fowlers would not have given me any more useful data is I shot 2 more rounds at it.

 

[Ronws]

I agree the larger the sample size the more accurate the data.

I can't speak for others by I know myself, I can't focus for a string of 10-20 shots at the same target. I use a target I found a while back. Using these targets, I can get a decent mental picture of dispersion as well as record accurate groups. If I fill this target with a string of 5 shot groups, it becomes very clear to me if a load is consistent, not just in group size but dispersion as well.

For example in this target, the fowlers would not have given me any more useful data is I shot 2 more rounds at it.

And I learned from someone else that in finding results in say a ladder test, the object is, rather than exact muzzle velocity, look for minimum spread for a usable charge weight.

And yeah, seating depth is going to help. In my limited understanding, factory ammo will have average results partially because of seating depth. The factory has to be conservative in that because they do not know which brand and model of rifle that is going in.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the box MV is based on a premium rifle with a carefully chosen seating depth. So, really, the box MX is the ideal, all things being considered. Actual mileage of consumers will vary.

If one is hunting deer on Aunt Reba's 10 acre bean field, grab .308 in anything and don't shoot past 300 yards. Even a 1 MOA dispersion will be effective.