This is a statement that is used way too much in the wheel gun community. When you bencherest with irons or mount a scope, you can readily detect the accuracy limitation of a particular revolver at 25yd. In this day and age of bad factory qc and loose “it’s in spec” tolerance, there’s a decent chance that it’s the guns fault and not the shooter’s skill.
The gun always outshoots the owner...
- Thread starter TxFlyFish
- Start date
You set up an artificial environment.... Ie. you found the 'limitations' of the gun. Might as well put in a ransom rest. Great for finding 'the' load that works for the handgun... But now use the gun as you would normally... no scope, standing off hand shooting one handed or two. With a 'known' good load, you usually can't quite shoot as good as the revolver is capable of... I know I can't.... Hence the saying.
NoSecondBest
New member
The gun does "always outshoot the owner". I've never seen anyone who can shoot off hand as well as they can off a rest or ransom rest. The meaning of that statement, or similar statement, simply means the limitations of the gun are dictated more by the shooter than the inherent accuracy of the gun.
The gun has a certain accuracy limit, and so does the shooter (but more variable). The combination is what is reflected on the target. If you take a 1" gun and shoot a 1.25" group or a 3" gun and shoot a 3.25" group, I'd say you are a better shooter than either of those guns are capable of printing. But it is really still a combination and the whole assertion that "the gun always outshoots the owner" is flawed in premise. A poor shooter still shoots a larger group with and inaccurate firearm and a smaller group with an accurate firearm. It is more a mental settling for "just okay" than anything else.
Just need to clarify a bit. This is only related to testing accuracy of the revolver not for general real life stances and environment. While not everyone has a scope, most people have access to simple rest or bag at the range. If the revolver is rested and not able to say shoot under 3 inches at 25yd with a variety of loads, there is a good chance something is wrong with the revolver.
FrankenMauser
New member
Absolutely.
It's usually the owner.
stinkeypete
New member
I had a nice day at the 15 yard indoor range yesterday. They are nice fellas, it’s convenient, it was 3 degrees outside and it’s $5 an hour on Tuesdays.
I shoot at 10 meter Airgun pistol targets at 15 meters, bullseye hold. (One hand).
For my Bearcat, CCI Quiets.. it was like a shotgun! Only two even made it on the paper.
Aguila SV was on the paper.
CCI mini mags were all scoring points. Not great points, but old eyes and not much target radius. I guess I am sticking with the mini mags. I had previous good luck with Velocitors and felt silly driving big tacks with a tiny hammer, but clearly the gun likes that ammo.
My new-to-me Single Six shot great with both CCI and Aguila Sv. More testing to do. I thought I might sell that gun but it’s a good shooter and has grown on me.
My dot sighted norinco tt Olympia put all it’s SV in the black.
From elbow-benching, the Olympia makes a big ragged hole while these revolvers do not.
The bearcat... it’s not shooting like that. Maybe not yet, maybe never... but I could walk 10 miles, ride a horse for a couple hours, tumble down a hill in to a creek, roll in the mud and I am sure that once rinsed out it would still shoot to point of aim. And look good doing it.
But ammunition makes a very big difference.
I wish I could shoot the bearcat like my very little Norinco. 20 years ago, the norinco was my rabbit gun but it was never holstered. I mean, it has an ultra dot on it.
Then again, I’m whining about group sizes on 10 meter bullseye targets shot at 15 yards, and some of the fellas next to me are pumping pizza pan sized groups in to their fbi body targets at 5 yards, checking to see if their 20 round 9mm mags work, I reckon.
Bless em, they are helping the range stay in business via ammo sales, and they are having fun.
Now to my point... there are young folks that don’t remember and old folks that forget...
Today’s factory tolerances are far better than anything back in the day. Those beautiful Smiths and Colts were not “factory” guns, they were hand fitted by craftsmen and might cost a fella a month or two in wages.
The affordable guns were “Saturday Night Specials” and we had a few when I was a kid. They were terrible, shot loose in a couple boxes of ammunition, often barely fit together. My neighbor gave his to his 4 year old for a toy after making it inoperable... “it’s not safe to shoot, makes a good toy though.”
You can still get a work of art handgun, if you are still willing to spend a month or two wages for it. You get more for your money now, though.
What makes me sad is that the sport of shooting seems to me corrupted by black assembled guns with lots of firepower yet no actual use other than blasting stuff just after being bought then going in the closet or being carried around in your pants.
There used to be a shooting organization that organized hunter safety classes, got kids shooting at itty bitty targets in a safe way, got us interested in doping wind and learning holdovers... I loved the cowboy action boys- sure it was a lot of movie make believe, but we did study real cowboy life and got old metal out and making smoke again. It took a lot of work. There used to be these things called “gun shops”. A man that knew how to repair firearms was the owner. There were all manner of rifles and shotguns in there and a few pistols, too. Ammo and gun cleaning solvent, maybe even real black powder if you knew to ask.
Now you go to a huge warehouse that sells clothes and fudge and there are cases and cases of black semi-autos, racks and racks of black semi-auto rifles you can dress up like gi-joe meets the man from UNCLE, and they have 8 revolvers and 6 bolt action guns. In this warehouse, they sell factory guns with the scopes already mounted because the kid in back can’t mount a scope straight, let alone tap a receiver.
“Bolt action” is this old school technology. It’s utterly useless because when you keep pulling the trigger after you miss, you can’t complain to your pals online about stovepipes and failures to feed or bad plastic 30 round magazines. They are for old coots that learn how to work a “bolt knob” and therefore learned to hit stuff the first time.
Okay.. I am off on a drive in the country. I am looking for a “gun shop” that has a selection of these ancient “bolt action” .22s as.., the dog says my old eyes need to stop trying to shoot small game with a pistol as he wants to actually fetch something next autumn.
Rant off.
I do need to find a new gun shop. Mine closed. It’s the modern world and I’m an old geezer now.
I shoot at 10 meter Airgun pistol targets at 15 meters, bullseye hold. (One hand).
For my Bearcat, CCI Quiets.. it was like a shotgun! Only two even made it on the paper.
Aguila SV was on the paper.
CCI mini mags were all scoring points. Not great points, but old eyes and not much target radius. I guess I am sticking with the mini mags. I had previous good luck with Velocitors and felt silly driving big tacks with a tiny hammer, but clearly the gun likes that ammo.
My new-to-me Single Six shot great with both CCI and Aguila Sv. More testing to do. I thought I might sell that gun but it’s a good shooter and has grown on me.
My dot sighted norinco tt Olympia put all it’s SV in the black.
From elbow-benching, the Olympia makes a big ragged hole while these revolvers do not.
The bearcat... it’s not shooting like that. Maybe not yet, maybe never... but I could walk 10 miles, ride a horse for a couple hours, tumble down a hill in to a creek, roll in the mud and I am sure that once rinsed out it would still shoot to point of aim. And look good doing it.
But ammunition makes a very big difference.
I wish I could shoot the bearcat like my very little Norinco. 20 years ago, the norinco was my rabbit gun but it was never holstered. I mean, it has an ultra dot on it.
Then again, I’m whining about group sizes on 10 meter bullseye targets shot at 15 yards, and some of the fellas next to me are pumping pizza pan sized groups in to their fbi body targets at 5 yards, checking to see if their 20 round 9mm mags work, I reckon.
Bless em, they are helping the range stay in business via ammo sales, and they are having fun.
Now to my point... there are young folks that don’t remember and old folks that forget...
Today’s factory tolerances are far better than anything back in the day. Those beautiful Smiths and Colts were not “factory” guns, they were hand fitted by craftsmen and might cost a fella a month or two in wages.
The affordable guns were “Saturday Night Specials” and we had a few when I was a kid. They were terrible, shot loose in a couple boxes of ammunition, often barely fit together. My neighbor gave his to his 4 year old for a toy after making it inoperable... “it’s not safe to shoot, makes a good toy though.”
You can still get a work of art handgun, if you are still willing to spend a month or two wages for it. You get more for your money now, though.
What makes me sad is that the sport of shooting seems to me corrupted by black assembled guns with lots of firepower yet no actual use other than blasting stuff just after being bought then going in the closet or being carried around in your pants.
There used to be a shooting organization that organized hunter safety classes, got kids shooting at itty bitty targets in a safe way, got us interested in doping wind and learning holdovers... I loved the cowboy action boys- sure it was a lot of movie make believe, but we did study real cowboy life and got old metal out and making smoke again. It took a lot of work. There used to be these things called “gun shops”. A man that knew how to repair firearms was the owner. There were all manner of rifles and shotguns in there and a few pistols, too. Ammo and gun cleaning solvent, maybe even real black powder if you knew to ask.
Now you go to a huge warehouse that sells clothes and fudge and there are cases and cases of black semi-autos, racks and racks of black semi-auto rifles you can dress up like gi-joe meets the man from UNCLE, and they have 8 revolvers and 6 bolt action guns. In this warehouse, they sell factory guns with the scopes already mounted because the kid in back can’t mount a scope straight, let alone tap a receiver.
“Bolt action” is this old school technology. It’s utterly useless because when you keep pulling the trigger after you miss, you can’t complain to your pals online about stovepipes and failures to feed or bad plastic 30 round magazines. They are for old coots that learn how to work a “bolt knob” and therefore learned to hit stuff the first time.
Okay.. I am off on a drive in the country. I am looking for a “gun shop” that has a selection of these ancient “bolt action” .22s as.., the dog says my old eyes need to stop trying to shoot small game with a pistol as he wants to actually fetch something next autumn.
Rant off.
I do need to find a new gun shop. Mine closed. It’s the modern world and I’m an old geezer now.
Or the ammo selected.
And define what you mean by 'something is wrong'. Not all guns are built to the same tolerances. Perhaps a better statement is that 'the gun is not capable of the accuracy you desire'.
"...“it’s in spec”..." Nothing new about that. Head space is a speced tolerance.
"...decent chance that it’s the guns fault..." Lotta variables involved, but it's rarely the machine, other than a factory trigger, that causes any kind of issue. Unless the shooter has tried to fix it.
"...decent chance that it’s the guns fault..." Lotta variables involved, but it's rarely the machine, other than a factory trigger, that causes any kind of issue. Unless the shooter has tried to fix it.
NoSecondBest
New member
Mechanical error + human error = more error. No magic involved. I have known and shot with some of the best long range precision handgunners in the world, and without exception all of them could shoot the same gun better off a rest than off hand. Some of them were truly amazing to watch off hand shooting and they still tested loads off a rest to see what worked best. No one shoots absolutely perfect standing without a rest....no one.
Bought a new 4" bull barrel 9mm aluminum frame comander. It shot 5+ inches at 25 yards from a rest. I can shoot 3" -4" two hands offhand with a decent 1911.
It can happen.
Later, I replaced the slide stop, link and barrel bushing. It now shoots better than I can.
David
Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk
It can happen.
Later, I replaced the slide stop, link and barrel bushing. It now shoots better than I can.
David
Sent from my SM-T900 using Tapatalk
Especially when you have a scope and the revolver is rested. I’d say for many human error contributes very little in this situation. If it is unable to keep it under 3 inches at 25 with various loads it’s no good. If it is picky with ammo and you have to try bunch of loads and do a load development just to keep it under 3 inches, also no good. Usually somethings off with cylinder throat, bore, timing etc
Last edited:
Onward Allusion
New member
Logically this statement is false. Even with the worst gun on the market in the hands of an experienced shooter, the gun will always outperform the man from a mechanical standpoint. Don't believe? Put ANY gun in a ransom rest and compare its accuracy with the man shooting it.
NoSecondBest
New member
Exactly what I'm saying too. The shooter always adds error to whatever the gun is capable of. No one is better than a mechanical rest is for measuring the absolute best accuracy from the handgun. Even a lousy handgun will shoot better in a rest than being shot off-hand. I've easily owned a hundred handguns in my life, several were custom built and most were store purchased. I never found one yet that I could shoot better off hand than I could shoot off a rest. Adding the human factor into it, it only gets worse.
Haha I think we’re taking this too literally. We’re not taking about whether a person can magically shoot an inherently inaccurate gun accurately.
What I’m referring to is that there are shooters that can hold excellent accuracy on an inherently accurate gun. And when given a gun with poor mechanical accuracy, a resulting poor grouping is not the fault of the shooter.
Sometimes we forget that with rifles many shooters can hold sub moa groups at 100, 500, 1000 or beyond. If that same person is incapable of wringing out a ragged hole at 25yd with a scoped revolver, the accuracy limitation is on the revolvers end. Off the rack semi autos can achieve this with a red dot
What I’m referring to is that there are shooters that can hold excellent accuracy on an inherently accurate gun. And when given a gun with poor mechanical accuracy, a resulting poor grouping is not the fault of the shooter.
Sometimes we forget that with rifles many shooters can hold sub moa groups at 100, 500, 1000 or beyond. If that same person is incapable of wringing out a ragged hole at 25yd with a scoped revolver, the accuracy limitation is on the revolvers end. Off the rack semi autos can achieve this with a red dot
I agree, I cannot out shoot a ransom rest.
I did show an example of a gun that did not shoot as good as I can. If the gun shoots 6" at 25 yards and I can shoot a more accurate gun 3" @ 25 yards, then I can shoot better than the gun can. Just not THAT gun.
Yes we add to group size by our wobble zone. If the gun shoots 3" and I wobble 3" then it should be a 6" group. Same for my 6" gun, add my 3" wobble and its now a 9" group.
If its a 1" gun @ 25 and I wobble 3" then its a 4" group. This is better than my 6" commander from a rest.
I have heard this a lot of times. Shoot a 4" lever gun at 100 yards offhand with a 4" wobble zone and get 8" groups. "It shoots better than I can"
Shoot a 1" bolt gun @ 100 yards and get a 5" group. Yes I am picking on lever guns.
I can't shoot 3" @ 100 yards, so it shoots better than me and why bother with the 1" gun?
Its different for the folks that shoot steel. Its a hit or miss. 6" plate at 15 yards. Hit or miss. There is no 10 ring or X ring, its all X.
With Bullseye, shooting for the black bull of a target. If you do that then your best will be in the black. If you shoot for the X, then its different.
In the black or in the X? 1" gun or 4" gun? If its a 4" gun then I can blame the gun for a 9. If its a 1" gun then its me.
David
I did show an example of a gun that did not shoot as good as I can. If the gun shoots 6" at 25 yards and I can shoot a more accurate gun 3" @ 25 yards, then I can shoot better than the gun can. Just not THAT gun.
Yes we add to group size by our wobble zone. If the gun shoots 3" and I wobble 3" then it should be a 6" group. Same for my 6" gun, add my 3" wobble and its now a 9" group.
If its a 1" gun @ 25 and I wobble 3" then its a 4" group. This is better than my 6" commander from a rest.
I have heard this a lot of times. Shoot a 4" lever gun at 100 yards offhand with a 4" wobble zone and get 8" groups. "It shoots better than I can"
Shoot a 1" bolt gun @ 100 yards and get a 5" group. Yes I am picking on lever guns.
I can't shoot 3" @ 100 yards, so it shoots better than me and why bother with the 1" gun?
Its different for the folks that shoot steel. Its a hit or miss. 6" plate at 15 yards. Hit or miss. There is no 10 ring or X ring, its all X.
With Bullseye, shooting for the black bull of a target. If you do that then your best will be in the black. If you shoot for the X, then its different.
In the black or in the X? 1" gun or 4" gun? If its a 4" gun then I can blame the gun for a 9. If its a 1" gun then its me.
David
I agree it's a widely misunderstood principle - people often seem to use it when they (the shooter) add anything to the group size. It's misused in this way, because it implies the gun can meet any accuracy requirement, but the shooter has to be perfect.
It'd be a 3.2" group, not 4".
This is something else that's often misunderstood: The errors of the gun and shooter are independent of each other, so they're not simply additive. They are related by a root-mean-squared relationship (the squares of the gun and shooter add to the square of the group).
David R said:
It'd be a 3.2" group, not 4".
This is something else that's often misunderstood: The errors of the gun and shooter are independent of each other, so they're not simply additive. They are related by a root-mean-squared relationship (the squares of the gun and shooter add to the square of the group).
Also the difference between a ransom rest and a scoped revolver at 25 is negligible. If you’re semi decent shooter and the revolver can’t hold 3 inches at 25, it’s most likely an inaccurate revolver
3 in group at 25 is huge, are we debating whether that is now an acceptable accuracy
3 in group at 25 is huge, are we debating whether that is now an acceptable accuracy
Last edited:
In the case of my 4" bull barrel aluminum frame Commander, the MFG states anything under 4.5" is within spec for that gun. It says "Match" on the barrel.
I did get it down to 1.5" @ 25 yards with ONE light load. The rest are 3" more or less.
Mr. Boreland, I sort of understand your point. Just a little over my head. A 4" group will not be all 9s it will have 10s and Xs too.
The square root of the shooter wobble squared plus gun group size squared.
David
I have a Dan Wesson PM-9 that will shoot just under 1" @ 25 yards with a few loads. I have a Smith and Wesson 38 revolver that will do the same. My Dan Wesson Valor in 45 will do 1.5" and I saw ONE group 1.25".
I think these are all excellent.
I did get it down to 1.5" @ 25 yards with ONE light load. The rest are 3" more or less.
Mr. Boreland, I sort of understand your point. Just a little over my head. A 4" group will not be all 9s it will have 10s and Xs too.
The square root of the shooter wobble squared plus gun group size squared.
David
I have a Dan Wesson PM-9 that will shoot just under 1" @ 25 yards with a few loads. I have a Smith and Wesson 38 revolver that will do the same. My Dan Wesson Valor in 45 will do 1.5" and I saw ONE group 1.25".
I think these are all excellent.