That’s a nice target sir!My first attempt. Lost focus on a few.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That’s a nice target sir!My first attempt. Lost focus on a few.
I think those are shadows.
The targets were printed on card stock.
Parts of the paper raised up and you are seeing shadow.
Plain as day now that you said it.
I was making a joke
Ok, so now that I’m back home here is some information about the above target.
It was shot fireforming .223 AI, 69smk with 24.5 RL15. No load developent just started with a good load from another .223 and shot. Check out the brass.
You can see that the bigger dots I shot when the sight picture was good enough, as it got smaller I slowed up and focused a bit more. A big dot means a big group.
Thanks. That resource inspired me to be a bit less lazy and start collecting more data by hand (versus hunting down a program to do it for me). I feel decidedly less bad about my shooting outing yesterday having done so, too. I was messing around with H4831sc because I overlooked it during workup somehow...really solid accuracy despite shooting three different charge weights. With both outliers included, SD of .25 inches and an ES of 1.25 inches. It will be interesting to see if the group converges and the SD shrinks over time...especially once I load a single charge weight (58.3 grains, a bit crunchy).Solid article! Hadn't seen that one yet. The ballistipedia reference is some good reading material, too. I'll be looking into that for some different ways to look at the data I've collected.
This is another source I've found that gives some solid information on the subject.
And the rest of his page:
Home
bulletology.homesteadcloud.com
Just read through the article, it has a solid logical approach.Solid article! Hadn't seen that one yet. The ballistipedia reference is some good reading material, too. I'll be looking into that for some different ways to look at the data I've collected.
This is another source I've found that gives some solid information on the subject.
And the rest of his page:
Home
bulletology.homesteadcloud.com
There are modeling apps that can do this. One is free, but I cant remember its name. Some kind of ballistic simulator.At the end of the day, and after reading through all of this, before establishing a standard for anything you have to first ask, what is the actual point of the assessment? You then determine your standard. Are we always judging the rifle, ammo, and shooter simultaneously together? When do we determine that a shooter is adequately qualified to test a rifle system, the rifle itself, or the ammo? Or, conversely, when is the rifle system good enough to test the shooter?
I think that the intended purpose of the qualification very much defines what the standard should be.
From a practical and somewhat statistical limit standpoint, I think that starts with a rifle that in a no wind condition can shoot 1/2 MOA or less 3 shot groups at 500 yards (obviously this also tests ammo quality) on any given day, greater than 50% of the time. If mechanically and ballistically a rifle meets those baseline criteria and the setup “fits” a shooter then that rifle can be used to test the shooters ability. If the shooter can achieve that criteria with a particular rifle system, then it should also be assumed that the shooter can also be used to test a different rifle system to meet those same criteria.
Personally, I think that the standard should be based on target size, increasing distance, and hit percentage. That said, since the topic of this post is “The Measure of a Man and his Rifle”, and this is Snipershide I would say that the standard size target should be an IPSC target. What percentage of the time you can make a 1st round impact on an IPSC target, at a certain distance defines what kind of shooter you are and allows comparisons between shooters across multiple distances. An app to track this would be very helpful. It could also easily track the data for 2nd or 3rd round impacts as well as wind and other weather conditions you might want to track simultaneously. You could then input a reference standard (I.e. 800 yards, wind <10mph)and it would give you a hit percentage number. I.e. 85% at 800 yards in wind < 10mph, 95% 2nd round impact, 100% 3rd round impact. Obviously garbage in, garbage out and integrity would be the name of the game, but it would provide a quantifiable way of assessing a shooters legitimate capability.
If someone makes an app like this I’d appreciate some kudos. Lol.
At the end of the day, and after reading through all of this, before establishing a standard for anything you have to first ask, what is the actual point of the assessment? You then determine your standard. Are we always judging the rifle, ammo, and shooter simultaneously together? When do we determine that a shooter is adequately qualified to test a rifle system, the rifle itself, or the ammo? Or, conversely, when is the rifle system good enough to test the shooter?
I think that the intended purpose of the qualification very much defines what the standard should be.
From a practical and somewhat statistical limit standpoint, I think that starts with a rifle that in a no wind condition can shoot 1/2 MOA or less 3 shot groups at 500 yards (obviously this also tests ammo quality) on any given day, greater than 50% of the time. If mechanically and ballistically a rifle meets those baseline criteria and the setup “fits” a shooter then that rifle can be used to test the shooters ability. If the shooter can achieve that criteria with a particular rifle system, then it should also be assumed that the shooter can also be used to test a different rifle system to meet those same criteria.
Personally, I think that the standard should be based on target size, increasing distance, and hit percentage. That said, since the topic of this post is “The Measure of a Man and his Rifle”, and this is Snipershide I would say that the standard size target should be an IPSC target. What percentage of the time you can make a 1st round impact on an IPSC target, at a certain distance defines what kind of shooter you are and allows comparisons between shooters across multiple distances. An app to track this would be very helpful. It could also easily track the data for 2nd or 3rd round impacts as well as wind and other weather conditions you might want to track simultaneously. You could then input a reference standard (I.e. 800 yards, wind <10mph)and it would give you a hit percentage number. I.e. 85% at 800 yards in wind < 10mph, 95% 2nd round impact, 100% 3rd round impact. Obviously garbage in, garbage out and integrity would be the name of the game, but it would provide a quantifiable way of assessing a shooters legitimate capability.
If someone makes an app like this I’d appreciate some kudos. Lol.
The comparison man to man is kind of useless, what's the equipment, time, wind, lighting, etc. For me the huge value is the measure against yourself, honest self evaluation, practice, and progress measured. Apples to apples, we have comps to measure man to man.
I do understand but you are measuring the system not just the man, and that is fine especially if the purpose is sorting or grouping results.You guys are making this harder than it needs to be. People have access to 100 yard ranges and can print out a simple target to shoot at said 100 yard range. It is just a very basic evaluation of a man and his rifle. Think of it as a piece of paper you post up on a board and two team captains use it to pick people to be on their team.
If I have 100 rounds to shoot and the evaluation is the "venerable" 3 shot group, then I have 33 attempts to shoot a good group. If I have 100 rounds to shoot and the evaluation is the snipers hide progressive dot drill (25), then I only have 4 attempts. It is going to take a lot more ammo to try to luck my way into a good looking target.
Shooting dots is great at training fundamentals but I don’t train to shoot dots in the wild. Do those skills translate to shooting further distances? Yes of course they do but shooting targets at 100 doesn’t test a shooters ability to make a valid wind call and proficiently engage targets at distance, and the further out you go the more important that becomes. If we were to say we wanted to test a man and his rifle at 100 yards then a yes, a 25 dot target at 100 is excellent...but how does that reliably tell me how that person and their rifle system is going to do at 1000? I train to shoot fur. How many dots wide are the vitals of a deer, elk, etc? What’s the wind value of that distance? At what distance can you engage that target with > 80% certainty? Not hit probability calculated in WEZ but your personal actual hit probability?You guys are making this harder than it needs to be. People have access to 100 yard ranges and can print out a simple target to shoot at said 100 yard range. It is just a very basic evaluation of a man and his rifle. Think of it as a piece of paper you post up on a board and two team captains use it to pick people to be on their team.
If I have 100 rounds to shoot and the evaluation is the "venerable" 3 shot group, then I have 33 attempts to shoot a good group. If I have 100 rounds to shoot and the evaluation is the snipers hide progressive dot drill (25), then I only have 4 attempts. It is going to take a lot more ammo to try to luck my way into a good looking target.
Yes please do pursue an avenue to overlay for a longer time span. We could trend our info across hundreds of rounds!That would be worth talking to Ballistic X about
Would be pretty smart really, creating an overlay with a reference point
Does anyone have an example of what they are using as a tyvek target? Like a link to where to buy whatever you are talking about?...I live in the Pacific Northwest right up on the border north of Seattle. It rains over 180 days a year here sometimes, so if I want to get any shooting in I have to use a waterproof target.
I use Tyvek. It is a fucking fantastic target material. It is flexible, strong, not expensive and absolutely waterproof.
Put an orange dot on it and cover it with clear packing tape and it will withstand a day long downpour. You can shake it off, three-hole punch it and put it in a binder for next time.
Does anyone have an example of what they are using as a tyvek target? Like a link to where to buy whatever you are talking about?...
ThanksTYVEK 3 ft. x 165 ft. HomeWrap Housewrap (495 Sq.Ft) D15540828 - The Home Depot
TYVEK, the world's leading house wrap has the optimum combination of properties to deliver the best balance of weather protection, moisture management and, durability behind residential facades. TYVEKwww.homedepot.com
It is just house wrap used in construction. The back side is blank. Cut it to size, put whatever aim points you want on it and cover them with clear packing tape.
Done.
If you want a weather proof panel/backer.Thanks
I was thinking you were referring to some type of panels. This makes perfect sense though, and I believe they also have tyvek tape... Could patch over holes with that I imagine. Perhaps they have the tape in different color and could use that as an aim point as well
Guess I just need to make myself a backer board of some sort now