Maggie’s Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

[Sean the Nailer]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Big Bo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I never miss, alldaylong.</div></div>

...if I do my part.

 

[LWILLIAMS]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

The local gunsmith who can shoot a standard silloette target at 3200yds and hit it 48 out of 50 times. I guess he added some realism with the 2 misses.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

That's true, but if you have never seen a group fired, or known anyone who has fired one, that is smaller than what you think is the smallest possible, how do you determine whether you are standing in a "pile of bullshit?"

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tigerhawk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That's true, but if you have never seen a group fired, or known anyone who has fired one, that is smaller than what you think is the smallest possible, how do you determine whether you are standing in a "pile of bullshit?"</div></div>

Well since apparently you need this spelled out...

First evaluate the technical requirements of accomplishing the task. This usually eliminates most of these claims outright as the laws of physics would not permit such.

If the logos of the claim is sufficiently ambiguous to prevent direct evaluation, consider the relative difficulty of the claim. Is the person claiming performance far exceeding that demonstrated by the worlds top competitors? Equal to? Below, but still quite impressive?

Finally consider the ethos of the claimant. Is this some yahoo sitting behind (or in front of) a gun show counter, or is this a NRA master rifleman?

Quite honestly, though, if you need me to explain to you how to evaluate the following claim and determine that it is bullshit you probably have greater problems in your life that this.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ewoaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">someone actually claimed this to me...no shit...ex army douche.
"i was a delta qualified sniper, not a delta sniper mind you, but I qualified to their standard. But anyhoo, when I was in Isreal serving with the IDF special forces snipers we were taking guys out at 5 miles away."

So I asked, with what?

" A .50 cal sniper rifle. Special ammo though that didn't use gunpowder. It's propellant was, well, pretty close to the same thing as c-4"</div></div>

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I think you have misunderstood my intent. The claim you used for an example is obviously bullshit, and I did not need you to tell me that. But, since you mention such "qualifiers" as whether a person is "claiming performance far exceeding that demonstrated by the worlds top competitors," I would point out that competition is not the only venue where highly accurate shooting takes place.

Let me make this simpler. For example, let's say that the smallest group fired at 300 yards with a .308 that you have ever seen or heard of is .75," or .25 moa. If you then heard of a group fired at 300 yards with a .308, fired by someone who you never heard of, who was too far away from you for you to go see, that was, let's say, .33," or .11 moa, would you automatically assume that that group was bullshit? How about .3," or .06 moa, at 500 yards? What I am asking here is, when a claim merely exceeds your "comfort zone," and you have no way to verify it, do you assume that it is bullshit?

Too much of what passes for knowledge in our society is merely opinion, and at least some of that is opinion based on nothing more than the opiner's prejudices. I suggest that, in the absence of either personal experience, or one or more obvious disqualifying factors (such as in your example), you might not (in some cases, unlike your example) be able to legitimately determine if a given claim was true or not. If, because of that, you decide that it is bullshit, your conclusion is not necessarily accurate. Your claim of bullshit might, in fact, itself be bullshit.

 

[Strangedays]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ewoaf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">someone actually claimed this to me...no shit...ex army douche.
"i was a delta qualified sniper, not a delta sniper mind you, but I qualified to their standard. But anyhoo, when I was in Isreal serving with the IDF special forces snipers we were taking guys out at 5 miles away."

So I asked, with what?

" A .50 cal sniper rifle. Special ammo though that didn't use gunpowder. It's propellant was, well, pretty close to the same thing as c-4" </div></div>
I used to work with a guy who claimed to be a sniper in Iraq, the first gulf war. He said he was a Helicopter pilot, tank and helicopter mechanic but did a lot of sniping on the side. He would always say how working on machines was nothing but shooting some dude three miles away is enough to F*** anyone up. He was only forty said he spent 15 years running a nursery, twenty years as a mechanic in the army and three tours as a sniper. He also had over twenty years in construction. I don’t know how he over lapped all his jobs in such a short while but the truth got thinner with every conversation.

 

[BountyHunter]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: c_bass16</div><div class="ubbcode-body">fellow coyote hunting buddy claimed to shoot .15 MOA side to side group at 100m with his 6mm AI.
I had to ask how he managed to shoot a hole that was smaller than his bullet diameter. </div></div>

that one is easy. You actually are supposed to subtract the bullet diameter from the edge to edge for the group size.

BH

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

BountyHunter, c_bass16 said the buddy claimed 0.15 MOA side to side. You are thinking of center to center. A center to center group that is smaller than bullet diameter is possible. A side to side group that is smaller than bullet diameter is not.

 

[i_Adam_i18]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

This stuff is too funny. I particularly like the C-4 propellant. What's a typical C-4 load for a .308? I think I'll give it a try and see if I can push a 175 SMK @ 5000 fps out of my savage. I just happened to pick some up at wal-mart in the explosives isle.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

WASP7067, I think you just shove in as much as the case will hold, and be sure to compress it as much as you can...lol.

 

[dar1246]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

A guy I know told me when he was priare dog hunting with hiw 22-250 50gr factory ammo. He shot a sign and didn't know how far it was. SO him and his buddy drove to the sign and it was 3/4 mile to it. WTF I didn't agrue with him. Just told him nice shooting. What was the point.

<object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bECV_yF_I0w"></param> <param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bECV_yF_I0w" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"> </embed></object>

 

[Rafael]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sean the Nailer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Big Bo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I never miss, alldaylong.</div></div>

...if I do my part. </div></div>

 

[SmokeRolls]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

A friend said he takes out coyotes at 1000 yards with a 16" bushmaster carbine......He may be killin coyotes but his 1000 yards is more like 350 yards if even that.... I know him... He is a spoiled rotten mamas boy that always feels like he has to prove himself..It's okay, the world is full of them....SmokeRolls

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tigerhawk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think you have misunderstood my intent. The claim you used for an example is obviously bullshit, and I did not need you to tell me that. But, since you mention such "qualifiers" as whether a person is "claiming performance far exceeding that demonstrated by the worlds top competitors," I would point out that competition is not the only venue where highly accurate shooting takes place.

Let me make this simpler. For example, let's say that the smallest group fired at 300 yards with a .308 that you have ever seen or heard of is .75," or .25 moa. If you then heard of a group fired at 300 yards with a .308, fired by someone who you never heard of, who was too far away from you for you to go see, that was, let's say, .33," or .11 moa, would you automatically assume that that group was bullshit? How about .3," or .06 moa, at 500 yards? What I am asking here is, when a claim merely exceeds your "comfort zone," and you have no way to verify it, do you assume that it is bullshit?

Too much of what passes for knowledge in our society is merely opinion, and at least some of that is opinion based on nothing more than the opiner's prejudices. I suggest that, in the absence of either personal experience, or one or more obvious disqualifying factors (such as in your example), you might not (in some cases, unlike your example) be able to legitimately determine if a given claim was true or not. If, because of that, you decide that it is bullshit, your conclusion is not necessarily accurate. Your claim of bullshit might, in fact, itself be bullshit.

</div></div>

I'll believe anything happens once. You can pull a rack grade M4 off the shelf and fire 5 shots from the hip. Theoretically there exists the possibility of the 5 rounds forming a group in teens. This is called fluke luck. This is not what we are discussing here. The claims posted here include at least the implication by the claimant that the results were not simply the result of a one time random event.

 

[ddubas]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Had another customer and his buddy say they shot a coyote at 500 yards with a .17 Remington. One shot dead in his tracks. I asked if they had a range finder and they both said no. But used the fence line to measure the distance. Growing up on a farm we always referred to the quarter mile line or half mile line but those aren’t exact. And to say they used a fence line to measure 500 yards. Come on.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I understand that. I am not talking about one-time events. If, in my previous post, the examples I gave (such as .11 moa at 300 yards, or .06 moa at 500) had been done 3 different times, or 5, but you still did not know anyone who knew the person, they were too far away to go see, and the groups were not shot in any match whose records you could check, would you say the claim was bullshit?

 

[Timberwolf]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Had a guy at the range tell me that you only put scopes on inaccurate rifles and thats why his Mosin Nagant didn't need one - of course his definition of accurate was to put all three shots in the black on an SR-1 at 50 yards from sand bags.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I would imagine that you see a certain amount of ridiculous stuff at any public shooting range.

 

[SmokeRolls]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Timberwolf</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Had a guy at the range tell me that you only put scopes on inaccurate rifles and thats why his Mosin Nagant didn't need one - of course his definition of accurate was to put all three shots in the black on an SR-1 at 50 yards from sand bags.</div></div>
He was oozing with knowledge. You should have stroked his ego even greater. He might have given you an even greater story to tell.... hahahahahahaha. .......SmokeRolls

 

[Tigerbikes]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WASP7067</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This stuff is too funny. I particularly like the C-4 propellant. What's a typical C-4 load for a .308? I think I'll give it a try and see if I can push a 175 SMK @ 5000 fps out of my savage. I just happened to pick some up at wal-mart in the explosives isle. </div></div>

Be careful when you pack it in... if you compress it too hard it can go off.
And try to keep the pressures under 870,000 psi.

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tigerhawk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I understand that. I am not talking about one-time events. If, in my previous post, the examples I gave (such as .11 moa at 300 yards, or .06 moa at 500) had been done 3 different times, or 5, but you still did not know anyone who knew the person, they were too far away to go see, and the groups were not shot in any match whose records you could check, would you say the claim was bullshit?</div></div>

I'm not sure what you're getting at with this argument, and we don't seem to be getting anywhere so I'm going to drop out of the thread, but to answer your question if some random guy is claiming 0.11MOA @ 300yds then I'd believe them about as much as I'd believe the letter in my inbox from the finance minister of nigeria concerning the 100million he needs converted to USD.

 

[Dagsta]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Rat I'm in on that bet bro!!lol

Tigerhawk, hard to believe you'd actually come on this site with that BS!! And that is exactly what it is BS!!

 

[InTheWeeds]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

A police officer shot a suspect in the neck from 30+ yards, while the suspect was walking backwards..



....then I saw it confirmed on the news a few days later.

 

[Lazlo]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I spent a few hours on a public range near Cold Mtn, NC, which is only a 100yd max. I watched two guys shoot a scoped 300WM from no more than 30yds, and miss almost 12" to the left.

I listened in amazement as they spent the next 10 minutes convincing themselves it was "the wind".

 

[flyboy]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lazlo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I spent a few hours on a public range near Cold Mtn, NC, which is only a 100yd max. I watched two guys shoot a scoped 300WM from no more than 30yds, and miss almost 12" to the left.

I listened in amazement as they spent the next 10 minutes convincing themselves it was "the wind". </div></div>

I hear that quite often here at the 100yd public i visit.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Tigerhawg. I think you're missing the point of the thread. Lighten up brother. There's world class marksmen all over this board of which I am not. However, I have seen some claims here and at other sites, as well as heard some, that are either b.s. or lucky as hell and being attributed as either great marksmanship or great rifles. Either way b.s. That's the point of the thread. You want to say you shot a 5 shot group through one hole at 500 yards in a full crosswind? Fine. But if it's not CONSISTENTLY REPEATABLE then it's b.s. because you are leading one to believe it was not luck. Hell even a blind hawg finds an acorn every now and then. My granny used to say "the bit dawg squeals" so why are you squealing on something so menial?

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Dagsta, I was asking a hypothetical question, to see what kind of thinking Rat was doing. I never said I had shot those groups, I said if someone had, then...

Therefore, it cannot be bs, because bs is false information, and hypothetical information cannot be true or false.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

SemperFiDawg,

I am not at all bothered, so I don't need to lighten up, but thank you for your suggestion to do so. I did not say I shot those groups, but I am a very good shot. If I told anyone who did not see me shoot what groups I have shot on quite a few occasions (but not reliably, before you ask), they would almost certainly not believe me. That is not my point. I was asking about Rat's logic. My point is that, before something is called bs, the caller should ascertain that it is in fact bs, not just that they think it is. Although a lot of the posts on this thread are completely ridiculous, as they are supposed to be, I just wanted to point out that standards have gone up in the past few years, and just because one or more of the people on this site think something is impossible, does not necessarily mean that it is.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Ratbert, I did not think we were arguing, and I certainly was not trying to do so. I thought we were having a friendly discussion. But, at least you answered my question, for which I thank you. You have demonstrated that your belief stems more from what you are willing to believe, than from what actually could happen. That is my point. Instead of thinking that something may or may not have occurred, you decide, based on how it sounds to you, whether you think it is true. That is what I referred to as opinion, not fact.

 

[jr81452]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I can do a .308 edge to edge group any day, under any conditions, and at any distance. And, (unlike you posers) I only need one shot to do it.

 

[USGUNWORKS]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

My hilbilly buddy- doe on a dead run 487yds. Shot her right through the ear. Just led her a couple feet with the 300wm.

 

[flyboy]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Gun sales(boy) at Collectors Firearms swore that a "buddy" has a M1A with a kriger bbl that shoots .19moa at all highpower matches. Really, You mean to tell me that he can outshoot most benchrest guys with an iron sight M1A. The messed up part is he didn't relise he'd been called out on it. Its what I've come to expect from that store.

 

[quickstealth]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I shot a stupid small 3 shot group at 300 some meters ONCE with a Romanian SSG97 and Wolf 148gr. Don't remember the specifics because it was a fluke and I dismissed it as such but it was I think CTC inch and a half. It was a 1.25 MOA rifle with quality ammo. Everything in that instince threw the three shots together instead of apart I guess...

I met a guy that's "on watch lists" cause he owns a hi point carbine and was a Scout Sniper for 10 years. I watched him scope ring his right eye so bad he had to leave the range after I handed him a 91/30 sporter I built that I had been shooting. He claimed he could outshoot me with my own rifle....I'm just glad he saw me shoot it first so he knew which way to point the little metal part with the hole in the end of it...

 

[flyboy]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Anybody hustel at the range. I'm thinking it might make some decent $$$ here in the east TX minute of deer ranges.

 

[MEDICGORDO]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

A guy i was in a rope rescue class that said he was a PJ at one time in his life decided to be that guy,i was talking to a friend of mine about a 338lm build and he told me i needed a .50 for the normal douche reasons you know them all.then it got knee deep when he informed me that normally they would qualify at 3k with m-16 ect. ect. of course he had all his HALO jumping story's and ect. So i just looked at him and said WTH are you doing in a lame ass fire dept. rope rescue class for.

 

[i_Adam_i18]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tigerbikes</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WASP7067</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This stuff is too funny. I particularly like the C-4 propellant. What's a typical C-4 load for a .308? I think I'll give it a try and see if I can push a 175 SMK @ 5000 fps out of my savage. I just happened to pick some up at wal-mart in the explosives isle. </div></div>

Be careful when you pack it in... if you compress it too hard it can go off.
And try to keep the pressures under 870,000 psi. </div></div>

Ok I got it in there, should I roll crimp to boost the pressure? And I'm using magnum primers just to make sure I get full ignition. I'm not sure my chamber is rated for 870,000 psi, so I wrapped the chamber area in duct tape (I saw on myth busters that it would hold up a car).

I'm on my way to the range now so I'll report back in a while with the data I get.

 

[tigerhawk]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

In case you haven't left for the range yet, if you have time, tumble the loaded rounds with moly lube. That way, the cases will have less chance of sticking in the chamber.

 

[68GT]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

my old boss was a Ranger "Master Sniper" with a 2100 meter confirmed kill in Iraq, weapon was a 16/203 with an ACOG...

 

[coldbeerchief]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

all of the above, all day long, as long as I "do my part"

 

[Ratbert]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RQI</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my old boss was a Ranger "Master Sniper" with a 2100 meter confirmed kill in Iraq, weapon was a 16/203 with an ACOG...</div></div>

Using the 16 or the 203?

 

[68GT]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ratbert</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: RQI</div><div class="ubbcode-body">my old boss was a Ranger "Master Sniper" with a 2100 meter confirmed kill in Iraq, weapon was a 16/203 with an ACOG...</div></div>

Using the 16 or the 203?
</div></div>

16, he also claimed to have shot down a blackhawk with a 203 flare while on maneuvers, but they just gave him NJP because the Col. was so embarraseed.

 

[cpt.creedmoor]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

standing in the local shop, ordered pizza from around the corner, pizza dude shows up and tells us he holds the record at Paris island.............5 mile headshot! i was gonna laugh but then realized that this was the future of my country....

i cried!!!

 

[Ghost3x7]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

1) Ex-wife told me she was pregnant, I neglected to tell her I couldn't have kids, lol

2) "...1000 yard head-shot with a stock Savage .308 and (wait for it) a 'Swat-Force Tactical Sniper scope'..." Laghed so hard I dropped my beer.

 

[sobrbiker883]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: leagle</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Minute of Duck </div></div>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All time best!!!!
I almost posted the same after looking at pg 2-3, but thought I'd better scan through and see if anyone else did first!!

 

[Basher]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Some dude has an ad over on ARFCOM stating that he's getting 1/2" groups at 300 yards with his Burris FastFire MRDS.

So for a second I thought I was misreading that, and he was using his scope which is still nearly impossible, though. But then I read that the scope on there was a CounterSniper, and I just laughed a hearty belly laugh and closed the window before I read anymore. LOL!

 

[Mag 300]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I was told by a guy once

Shot an Elk at 800 yards using a 340 Weatherby magnum and watched the bullet thru the scope impact the animal .

Shit I have a hard tome watching anying thru the scope much less a 340 weatherby

 

[iklepp]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Lol... good shootn'

 

[gunsnjeeps]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Ghost3x7</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1) 2) "...1000 yard head-shot with a stock Savage .308 and (wait for it) a 'Swat-Force Tactical Sniper scope'..." Laghed so hard I dropped my beer. </div></div>

Which stock Savage?

 

[Ghost3x7]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

Savage 110, (great Rifle don't get me wrong) stock meaning older "Ramline" type polymer stock, with a standard taper barrel. We're not talking about the "new and improved" 110s.

 

[Catzass]

Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen

I had to listen to the same story...guy was hunting down in Mexico over corn on a scendaro, shooting a gun he never used before "The Ranch .270 w/ factory ammo" They put the corn out and drove exactly one mile. 2nd round hit on a doe using a hold over