Show us your 0.0XX" 5 shot groups - .22 groups at 50 yards

[Precision Quest]

This week while shooting I thought I picked up the elusive 0.0XX" group with my .22 at 50 yards. Turns out after properly measuring the group it was a 0.1XX" group, and in conclusion I am still a fair ways off an honest 0.0XX" group.

I used to shoot benchrest competitions (6 PPC) back in the 90's and thought I shot a 0.0XX" group there, but after checking all my targets their were none.

At the benchrest events, the competition scorer would measure all the groups as follows:
1. The person would flatten the target.
2. Measure the group size by taking the largest measurement of the outer most edge of the black ring on both sides of the group.
3. Subtract the bullet diameter and arrive at the overall group size.

So I did a little check and arrived at the following conclusions:

- In order to shoot a 0.0XX" group with a .22 at 50 yards, you would need to have all your 5 shots outer black edges fall with a circle that's outer limits are 0.322 or less.

- Aside from the overall maxmum group size of .0322, in order to get a legitimate 0.0XX group - the group size can be no larger than 0.099" beyond the diameter of a .22 bullet (presumed to be 0.223"). So what does that really look like? See the pic below that shows what a measurement of 0.099" looks like.

Appended are a few of my recent .22 groups and it is deceiving as you look at the small void in the middle and think it is a really small group, until you accurately measure the group.

So in wrap up, I know that likely many people on here have shot legitimate 0.0XX" groups. So can you please post them so we can marvel at them and maybe even have some friendly discussions.

To those who have shot one or more 0.0XX" 5 shot groups - congrats to you as that is an amazing achievement.

 

[grauhanen]

Keep in mind that a .22LR bullet hole in a paper target is invariably less than the bullet's diameter. It's actual size will depend on the nature of the paper itself. For example, in the paper used on the target below, the bullet hole is .205".




In fact, when using .223" as the size to subtract from the outside dimensions of a group, it's conceivable that a group's size may have a negative dimension.

In any case, if too large a size is deducted there's more chance to see groups that are less than 0.010".

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

This week while shooting I thought I picked up the elusive 0.0XX" group with my .22 at 50 yards. Turns out after properly measuring the group it was a 0.1XX" group, and in conclusion I am still a fair ways off an honest 0.0XX" group.

I used to shoot benchrest competitions (6 PPC) back in the 90's and thought I shot a 0.0XX" group there, but after checking all my targets their were none.

At the benchrest events, the competition scorer would measure all the groups as follows:
1. The person would flatten the target.
2. Measure the group size by taking the largest measurement of the outer most edge of the black ring on both sides of the group.
3. Subtract the bullet diameter and arrive at the overall group size.

So I did a little check and arrived at the following conclusions:

- In order to shoot a 0.0XX" group with a .22 at 50 yards, you would need to have all your 5 shots outer black edges fall with a circle that's outer limits are 0.322 or less.

- Aside from the overall maxmum group size of .0322, in order to get a legitimate 0.0XX group - the group size can be no larger than 0.099" beyond the diameter of a .22 bullet (presumed to be 0.223"). So what does that really look like? See the pic below that shows what a measurement of 0.099" looks like.

View attachment 8196880

View attachment 8196881

Appended are a few of my recent .22 groups and it is deceiving as you look at the small void in the middle and think it is a really small group, until you accurately measure the group.

View attachment 8196885

View attachment 8196887

So in wrap up, I know that likely many people on here have shot legitimate 0.0XX" groups. So can you please post them so we can marvel at them and maybe even have some friendly discussions.

To those who have shot one or more 0.0XX" 5 shot groups - congrats to you as that is an amazing achievement.

since you are subtracting the bullet diameter as .223 you are looking for CTC groups? Here is my personal best shot 7 years ago with SK Rifle Match. I use Ontargets software to measure. 0.007 CTC came close a few times but never beat this. here are some back-to-back one came close.
I don't shoot groups anymore except when tuning a rifle. in the end i want something that can repeat like this last 5 consecutive 5-shot groups.

Lee

 

[grauhanen]

In the history of shooting sports there has never been a group of negative. Lmfao

Indeed. No one should be so lacking in judgement as to post one. That should cause wonder as to how it would be possible.

__________________________

To elaborate for anyone who may misunderstand, however, here's how it may be possible. Assume it's possible to shoot what's truly a one-hole group -- regardless if it's only a group of three rounds. (The math says such groups can exist but must be quite rare.)

As a truly one-hole group, it would measure exactly the same as a one-hole hole group. As shown in the image above, a one-hole group on a paper target will typically measure less than .223". The example above shows .205", but the exact size will vary by the paper used (and by whoever is doing the measuring). As a result a true one hole group -- whether it's two, three, or more rounds in number -- would be whatever a single bullet hole actually measures on paper. It will be less than .223".

When subtracting .223" from the truly one-hole group diameter on the paper target, a negative is a mathematical inevitability.

Of course, it's exceedingly difficult for a five-shot group at 50 to be truly a one-hole group -- that is, a group that isn't actually larger than one .22LR bullet hole.

The long and short of it is that if the subtracting size is larger than the actual bullet hole size, a negative is theoretically possible.

 

[Precision Quest]

Keep in mind that a .22LR bullet hole in a paper target is invariably less than the bullet's diameter. It's actual size will depend on the nature of the paper itself. For example, in the paper used on the target below, the bullet hole is .205".




In fact, when using .223" as the size to subtract from the outside dimensions of a group, it's conceivable that a group's size may have a negative dimension.

In any case, if too large a size is deducted there's more chance to see groups that are less than 0.010".

Yeah, interesting as I suspect the paper type does definately affect the group size. Under high magnification one would see that. Which I suppose is why benchrest competitions use a special type of paper target (at least they used too).

I had been using .220 as the subtracted amount, however the 6X5 uses .223 - so I applied that measurement to my groups above. For this forum's purpose, I think you have to use a set diameter for .22 (and other calibers), as opposed to a varying measurement based on the paper type used.
thks

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Indeed. No one should be so lacking in judgement as to post one. That should cause wonder as to how it would be possible.

__________________________

To elaborate for anyone who may misunderstand, however, here's how it may be possible. Assume it's possible to shoot what's truly a one-hole group -- regardless if it's only a group of three rounds. (The math says such groups can exist but must be quite rare.)

As a truly one-hole group, it would measure exactly the same as a one-hole hole group. As shown in the image above, a one-hole group on a paper target will typically measure less than .223". The example above shows .205", but the exact size will vary by the paper used (and by whoever is doing the measuring). As a result a true one hole group -- whether it's two, three, or more rounds in number -- would be whatever a single bullet hole actually measures on paper. It will be less than .223".

When subtracting .223" from the truly one-hole group diameter on the paper target, a negative is a mathematical inevitability.

Of course, it's exceedingly difficult for a five-shot group at 50 to be truly a one-hole group -- that is, a group that isn't actually larger than one .22LR bullet hole.

The long and short of it is that if the subtracting size is larger than the actual bullet hole size, a negative is theoretically possible.

WHAT? FYI you measure the outside mark not just the hole. otherwise, you are dreaming that the group is smaller than it actually is. I don't care if the hole is 0.205, we all know the bullet size is not 0.205. just because the paper made the hole size 0.205 it sure didn't shrink the bullet to 0.205 anybody measuring the hole size and not the mark the bullet makes is dreaming. math was not my best subject but last, I know 0.223 minus 0.223= 0 and zero is not a negative.

Lee

 

[Precision Quest]

since you are subtracting the bullet diameter as .223 you are looking for CTC groups? Here is my personal best shot 7 years ago with SK Rifle Match. I use Ontargets software to measure. 0.007 CTC came close a few times but never beat this. here are some back-to-back one came close.
I don't shoot groups anymore except when tuning a rifle. in the end i want something that can repeat like this last 5 consecutive 5-shot groups.

Wow, that's incredible shooting. Was that shot outdoor or indoors?

The 5 shot consecutive group is amazing. When you look at your .1XX group, one can see it just doesn't take much to get push a group to .1XX".
Good job

 

[Jeff Gahler]

Something to strive for for sure ^

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Wow, that's incredible shooting. Was that shot outdoor or indoors?
Good job

all were shot outdoors. as I noted in 7 years, I have not been able to beat that 0.007 group. you get lucky sometimes. here is what is more typical with SKRM

Lee

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Wow, that's incredible shooting. Was that shot outdoor or indoors?

The 5 shot consecutive group is amazing. When you look at your .1XX group, one can see it just doesn't take much to get push a group to .1XX".
Good job

That 5 consecutive groups were shot during lot testing. it was the last lot of 10 I was testing. it was the one and only box I could get others found it shot good too. most went to Texas I was told. I ended up with lot 8731, which really impressed the Lapua Mesa test center manager when I used it in 5 other rifles as a base lot in 2016.

Lee

 

[Precision Quest]

That 5 consecutive groups were shot during lot testing. it was the last lot of 10 I was testing. it was the one and only box I could get others found it shot good too. most went to Texas I was told. I ended up with lot 8731, which really impressed the Lapua Mesa test center manager when I used it in 5 other rifles as a base lot in 2016.

Lee

Very nice. Out of curiousity, when you find a lot that shoots- I take it people buy like 5000+ rounds of it for future use?

I'll have to go back and look at what gun / set up you were using.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Very nice. Out of curiousity, when you find a lot that shoots- I take it people buy like 5000+ rounds of it for future use?

I'll have to go back and look at what gun / set up you were using.

Yes, normally you would buy a case 5000 or more, but now it is nearly impossible. my last trip to Mesa I got a total of 5 cases. I wish now I had gotten all of the 7 cases that were available of one lot. the rifle I was lot testing with was a Falcon, I sold it to a guy in Kentucky.

Lee

 

[Precision Quest]

Yes, normally you would buy a case 5000 or more, but now it is nearly impossible. my last trip to Mesa I got a total of 5 cases. I wish now I had gotten all of the 7 cases that were available of one lot. the rifle I was lot testing with was a Falcon, I sold it to a guy in Kentucky.

Lee

Thks. Nice set up. Good ammunition is very hard to get around here and costs a fair bit of money to ship it - sign of the times.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Lee I'm not sure when the last time you went to test a center but you can only purchase 1 case per customer now. It's been this way for over 2 years now. 1 case of ammo doesn't even get me through a complete season.

Yes, I know about the limit of one case. my last trip was in 2018. I have 1/2 a case of one lot left. it was per rifle tested and now I think it is just one case period.

Lee

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Where are located? I know a shooter in Brazil who has only ELEY to shoot and not many lots to even test if any. looking at his situation, I can't really complain about not being able to get any ammo.

Lee

 

[grauhanen]

WHAT? FYI you measure the outside mark not just the hole. otherwise, you are dreaming that the group is smaller than it actually is. I don't care if the hole is 0.205, we all know the bullet size is not 0.205. just because the paper made the hole size 0.205 it sure didn't shrink the bullet to 0.205 anybody measuring the hole size and not the mark the bullet makes is dreaming. math was not my best subject but last, I know 0.223 minus 0.223= 0 and zero is not a negative.

Lee

It's curious that you take issue and it seems no one should dispute you when you say math wasn't your best subject. The bullet's actual diameter is irrelevant when its hole in the paper isn't identical. Using something like aluminum foil might yield bullet holes the same size as the bullet diameter but few shooters it instead of paper.

The mathematical fact remains that when a group such as an exactly or truly one-hole group measures smaller than the subtraction size of .223, the result must be less than zero, which is a negative. Of course, as noted above, while groups that are true one-hole groups are mathematically possible, they are very rare. Neither you nor I are likely to see one.

When the actual bullet hole size is used as the correct subtraction figure, no group size can be less than zero.

 

[Precision Quest]

Where are located? I know a shooter in Brazil who has only ELEY to shoot and not many lots to even test if any. looking at his situation, I can't really complain about not being able to get any ammo.

Lee

Canada. It can be had...but no one has any in stock. Shipping is another story and can be upwards of $100 for 30 boxes!

I did get lucky finding a bit of SK that works decent until someone gets some stock in.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

It's curious that you take issue and it seems no one should dispute you when you say math wasn't your best subject. The bullet's actual diameter is irrelevant when its hole in the paper isn't identical. Using something like aluminum foil might yield bullet holes the same size as the bullet diameter but few shooters it instead of paper.

The mathematical fact remains that when a group such as an exactly or truly one-hole group measures smaller than the subtraction size of .223, the result must be less than zero, which is a negative. Of course, as noted above, while groups that are true one-hole groups are mathematically possible, they are very rare. Neither you nor I are likely to see one.

When the actual bullet hole size is used as the correct subtraction figure, no group size can be less than zero.

You can believe what you want. fact is proper measurement is the mark not the hole. if that was the case then my 0.007 is now a -0.216 group WOW let's see anybody beat THAT! but is reality it is a 0.240 group as measured OTO

You keep spewing these wild ass notions.

The shooting world I shoot in lives by the actual bullet diameter. we use plugs to score targets, otherwise shooters like you would argue that the shot was in going by the hole size.

Lee

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Canada. It can be had...but no one has any in stock. I did get lucky finding a bit of SK that works decent until someone gets some stock in.

Yes, being outside the US seems to be much harder to get ammo and even now so.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Maybe that's why you guys cant measure groups properly. The plug for .22 benchrest is actually. 224 and we never use the hole as a measurement it's the dark ring on the paper. Again no one in history has shot a negative group EVER! so no it's not possible

Negative group, only possible in dreams like I said. can you imagine how many more 2500's would be if we went with the hole size!

Lee

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

I know I'd have a few by now Lee. I've missed a couple 2500s this year by .003, if it was by the hole they would have made it easy but that damn plug ruined both of them . I'll get one one day still chasing that sob for 10 years now.

Yes, I know you would. but until Glenn there understands what it is like to miss by 0.003, as you stand there and watch the scorer plug it out no wishful thinking will change it. shooting for score is the real world. he can believe all his fantasies he wants because that is just what they are.

Lee

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

PQ, just remember what you are doing with what you have is the most challenging. not being able to lot test and find ammo that could really make a difference. well in itself is already an obstacle to shooting those sub-0.100 groups.
what I have been able to do in the last 10-12 years I know I couldn't have if I was still living in my home state in the middle of the ocean.

Lee

 

[padom]

I've also always subtracted 0.223. Some have argued with my posted groups saying I need to subtract the actual hole size...others have said you need to subtract 0.220... This isn't competition, my testing and subtracting 0.223 has been consistent across all my rimfire testing so I have comparable data.

Now to the OP... I have only shot 1 0.0xx. group to date. It measured 0.010"...outside to outside measurement of black smudge minus 0.223.. 5 shots @ 50yd out of a 20" Green Mountain RimX barrel with my 22lr Match Eachus reamer with CenterX during lot testing..

Here is the lot testing target as well as the 0.010 group on that target. Many 0.1 groups on this target with best ammo lot 6x5 AGG 0.233". Not my best AGG barrel...but it shot the smallest 50 and 100yd groups I've ever shot!










This was a very special barrel. Not only did it shoot my only 0.0xx group but it also shot my smallest 100yd group go date as well measuring 0.187" . It also shot a very respectable 100yd 6x5 AGG 0.592" and 10x5 AGG 0.662" with same lot of CenterX that shot my smallest groups ever!

 

[HuskerP7M8]

The test targets I use in my ballistic tunnel are printed on 110 lb card stock and taped tightly to smooth cardboard backers. When I fire shots into this medium, they produce holes (as defined by the grease or grit ring) that are consistently 0.215” in diameter.

If 5 of my shots were to go thru the same hole, that hole would be the same 0.215” in diameter as a single shot. If I were to subtract say 0.220” or 0.223” (as many do) instead of the correct 0.215” to calculate the C-T-C size of this group, guess what? I have a negative group size of either -0,005” or -0.008” respectively.

This is exactly what “grauhanen” was trying to say and I don’t quite understand why it’s so confusing to some of you? Am I missing something?

That being said, there’s nothing inherently wrong with using an incorrect hole diameter if you use it “all” of the time, because it ensures your process stays consistent and allows you to make comparisons using your personal data for decisions or choices.
However, not knowing what your true hole diameter is, does make for confusion and inaccuracy when trying to compare against others using varying hole diameters to subtract with.

Landy

 

[padom]

That being said, there’s nothing inherently wrong with using an incorrect hole diameter if you use it “all” of the time, because it ensures your process stays consistent and allows you to make comparisons using your personal data for decisions or choices.

For all of my testing, using .223 allows me to keep my data consistent so I can make accurate comparisons from barrel to barrel, ammo to ammo, lot to lot. It also keeps it consistent with competition scoring. It's what I've been doing since day 1 and I have years and years of data across 50 or so rimfire barrels tested across CZ's, Vudoos and RimX's.. so data comparison is 100% consistent

While I understand what your saying, nobody is doing that in competition/benchrest. So I would say your method is simply YOUR way of keeping your process and data consistent. Can be flipped both ways. Do what works for you and your process, but subtracting .223 isn't wrong.

I also have switched to printing my targets on 8.5x11 bright white card stock and flattening it before measuring outside to outside black smudge when shooting for groups...

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

The test targets I use in my ballistic tunnel are printed on 110 lb card stock and taped tightly to smooth cardboard backers. When I fire shots into this medium, they produce holes (as defined by the grease or grit ring) that are consistently 0.215” in diameter.

If 5 of my shots were to go thru the same hole, that hole would be the same 0.215” in diameter as a single shot. If I were to subtract say 0.220” or 0.223” (as many do) instead of the correct 0.215” to calculate the C-T-C size of this group, guess what? I have a negative group size of either -0,005” or -0.008” respectively.

This is exactly what “grauhanen” was trying to say and I don’t quite understand why it’s so confusing to some of you? Am I missing something?

That being said, there’s nothing inherently wrong with using an incorrect hole diameter if you use it “all” of the time, because it ensures your process stays consistent and allows you to make comparisons using your personal data for decisions or choices.
However, not knowing what your true hole diameter is, does make for confusion and inaccuracy when trying to compare against others using varying hole diameters to subtract with.

Landy

There is no confusion. I just have one question; all of your tunnel test data is based off 0.215 bullet holes?

Lee

 

[BowChamp]

@Precision Quest

I gave your .0XX" 5 shot group a go at our local ARA Match yesterday. This was as close as I came while shooting the match.

Ammo used was RWS R-50.

 

[Precision Quest]

I've also always subtracted 0.223. Some have argued with my posted groups saying I need to subtract the actual hole size...others have said you need to subtract 0.220... This isn't competition, my testing and subtracting 0.223 has been consistent across all my rimfire testing so I have comparable data.

Now to the OP... I have only shot 1 0.0xx. group to date. It measured 0.010"...outside to outside measurement of black smudge minus 0.223.. 5 shots @ 50yd out of a 20" Green Mountain RimX barrel with my 22lr Match Eachus reamer with CenterX during lot testing..

Here is the lot testing target as well as the 0.010 group on that target. Many 0.1 groups on this target with best ammo lot 6x5 AGG 0.233". Not my best AGG barrel...but it shot the smallest 50 and 100yd groups I've ever shot!










This was a very special barrel. Not only did it shoot my only 0.0xx group but it also shot my smallest 100yd group go date as well measuring 0.187" . It also shot a very respectable 100yd 6x5 AGG 0.592" and 10x5 AGG 0.662" with same lot of CenterX that shot my smallest groups ever!

For some reason the pics are not showing on my end? It says imgur.com refused to connect.
thks

 

[Precision Quest]

pretty close.

@Precision Quest

I gave your .0XX" 5 shot group a go at our local ARA Match yesterday. This was as close as I came while shooting the match.

Ammo used was RWS R-50.

 

[BowChamp]

@Precision Quest

We had another ARA Match today and I took another stab at your .0XX" 5 shot group, except this time it was 8 shots. I was trying to make sure I had a good read on my wind flags and the condition they were showing me. This is the cheap ammo I used to foul my clean barrel with during the match then switched to Lapua Midas+.

 

[Precision Quest]

@Precision Quest

We had another ARA Match today and I took another stab at your .0XX" 5 shot group, except this time it was 8 shots. I was trying to make sure I had a good read on my wind flags and the condition they were showing me. This is the cheap ammo I used to foul my clean barrel with during the match then switched to Lapua Midas+.

View attachment 8203260

Well done. It sure doesn't take much to get into the .1's.
I am still on the hunt myself.

 

[BowChamp]

Well done. It sure doesn't take much to get into the .1's.
I am still on the hunt myself.

Thanks!!
Keep us posted on your hunt.

 

[Shoots 700's]

Best i can do with a Vudoo 18" and SK match

 

[BowChamp]

Best i can do with a Vudoo 18" and SK match

Nice!!

Do you know what it measures out at??

 

[BowChamp]

I'm still hunting!!! LOL!!! Got to the range today for some practice and shot these 5 shot groups.

I measured outside to outside of the black ring and subtracted .223" for CTC.


Top group - .193" RWS Rifle Match

Center group - .217" RWS Rifle Match

Bottom group - ..109" SK Rifle Match

 

[Precision Quest]

@Precision Quest

I gave your .0XX" 5 shot group a go at our local ARA Match yesterday. This was as close as I came while shooting the match.

Ammo used was RWS R-50.

View attachment 8198444

Oh so close. Just ever so slightly bigger than one hole is all it takes...now get er done.

 

[Precision Quest]

I'm still hunting!!! LOL!!! Got to the range today for some practice and shot these 5 shot groups.

I measured outside to outside of the black ring and subtracted .223" for CTC.


Top group - .193"

Center group - .217"

Bottom group - ..109"

You are getting real close. I like the close up views.

 

[Precision Quest]

Best i can do with a Vudoo 18" and SK match

that is close.

PQ, just remember what you are doing with what you have is the most challenging. not being able to lot test and find ammo that could really make a difference. well in itself is already an obstacle to shooting those sub-0.100 groups.
what I have been able to do in the last 10-12 years I know I couldn't have if I was still living in my home state in the middle of the ocean.

Lee

Thanks for the info. Yeah, if I am lucky, I get a good lot of what's available, but its a crap shoot here really. They keep saying, oh come end of Summer we should get some Lapua ammo in...crickets crickets crickets. It's fun trying though.

 

[BowChamp]

You are getting real close. I like the close up views.

I'm trying...I'm really trying!!!

I edited to add the ammo used for each group.

 

[Precision Quest]

I'm trying...I'm really trying!!!

I edited to add the ammo used for each group.

Thanks. I just checked and the only RWS I ever shot out of my Vudoo was Target rifle (post cleaning to foul). Maybe my gun will shoot the RWS too?

Looks like the endless wind might be dying down here this week. So I gotta get out and sort out my Kidd for competition and shoot some RWS in Vudoo and see if there is anything good in it. Who knows, maybe there is a 0.0XX in my future?

 

[Milo 2.5]

Here's mine!

 

[buffalowinter]

50 meter and 100yd smallbore targets shot prone with sling. Some with iron sights, some with Nightforce NXS. Practice for upcoming NRA TX State Prone Championship. Shot with Eley Match and Anschutz 1813 with Penrod barrel (Formerly belonging to Olympic and World Champion Lones Wigger) in a Grunig & ELmiger stock.
50m

100 yds

 

[BowChamp]

Here's mine!

I must say....that's mighty small , but I think I can beat it!!!

 

[BowChamp]

50 meter and 100yd smallbore targets shot prone with sling. Some with iron sights, some with Nightforce NXS. Practice for upcoming NRA TX State Prone Championship. Shot with Eley Match and Anschutz 1813 with Penrod barrel (Formerly belonging to Olympic and World Champion Lones Wigger) in a Grunig & ELmiger stock.
50m
View attachment 8220875 View attachment 8220876

100 yds
View attachment 8220877

View attachment 8220879


View attachment 8220884 View attachment 8220883

Fine shooting Sir!!! I like your setup.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you've done this more than once!!

 

[buffalowinter]

Fine shooting Sir!!! I like your setup.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you've done this more than once!!

Internationale Matchwoche, Zurich Switzerland, US Forces Europe Shooting Team. 300m Free Rifle 1982

 

[BowChamp]

Internationale Matchwoche, Zurich Switzerland, US Forces Europe Shooting Team. 300m Free Rifle 1982


View attachment 8220898

That right there is what shooters dream about. Thanks for sharing!

I do have a question if you don't mind. In your first post, you have an attachment on the end of your barrel. What is it? What purpose does it serve?
Okay....two questions. LOL!

Thanks

 

[Milo 2.5]

I must say....that's mighty small , but I think I can beat it!!!

It measured zero in so many aspects, lol

 

[BowChamp]

It measured zero in so many aspects, lol

That's just down right funny!!!

Thanks!!

 

[buffalowinter]

That right there is what shooters dream about. Thanks for sharing!

I do have a question if you don't mind. In your first post, you have an attachment on the end of your barrel. What is it? What purpose does it serve?
Okay....two questions. LOL!

Thanks

It's a sight extension, also called a "bloop tube". The longer sight radius lessens parallax/sight alignment error when using iron sights. Some tubes have tuners on them.

Ad for one model:
The BeeSting bloop tube is just what you’re looking for! See the excellent features of the BeeSting below:

• Custom made to your desired length and rifle's barrel diameter (requires 1.5" of straight barrel at the muzzle between 0.775" and 1.050" in diameter)
• Lightweight carbon fiber tube construction enhances rifle balance and takes pressure off the sling hand in the prone and kneeling positions
• Significantly enhanced vibration dampening with carbon fiber when compared to aluminum
• Indexing ring system allows tube to be accurately replaced with no modification to the barrel. The tube can also be inverted when shooting with a scope while maintaining the tuner setting
• Extra 2 ounce tuner weights available that won’t shoot loose
• Anschutz-size sight rail
• Included booklet contains setup and care instructions as well as tips for using a tuner
• All-anodized finish for greater durability
  

tuner

 

[Precision Quest]

Ok I thought I nailed the elusive 50 yard 0.0X" 5 shot group this am with the Vudoo...

Close but no cigar. Eeeezzzzz