You're not going to believe this.

K

kawasakifreak77

New member
Or maybe you will.

I got my .35 Remington Handi rifle ('02 SB2 frame & wood, new barrel & Simmons 4x) together & out to the range Friday morning to break it in. Ammo was off the shelf Federal 200gr stuff.

The second group I shot (@100m) measured at it's widest point, 9/16"!

No trigger job, free floated forearm, etc.

Of course I wasn't sighted in yet, so I had to keep shooting & my groups went back to my usual 2 moa.

Still. I'm amazed. I've been trying to shoot a sub moa group for what feels like an eternity. Then to do it with a $200 rifle & a cheap scope. Now I just have to remember how I did it...
 
I've been trying to shoot a sub moa group for what feels like an eternity. Then to do it with a $200 rifle & a cheap scope. Now I just have to remember how I did it...
Click to expand...

How many shots was it? If it was three, you did it by random chance, proved by the follow up groups being 4 times larger.
 
Yes, I will.

One guy holds the smallest 5-shot benchrest record group at 100 yards; .0077 inch. That rifles' other groups go up to about .375 inch or bigger.

Welcome to the world of statistical reality of assessing accuracy.
 
Last edited:
I once stepped up to the line, raised my .45, and put a bullet dead center in the 25 yard X ring, a true pinwheel. Unfortunately, I kept shooting.

Jim
 
Those occasional groups are nice. I shot a 3 shot .181 MOA group at 200 yds. With my remington 700 .308 not long ago... id never claim the rifle shoots groups like that, but ill still pin it on my wall.
 
Nice, my first Ruger surprised me in the same way. After reading how everyone claims that Rugers aren't very accurate, and me not having much experience, with shooting, at the time, I wasn't expecting my holes to even touch. Much to my surprise, my first group after sighting the rifle in, was likely sub MOA. Two bullets, pretty much through the same hole, with the third one touching at 100 yards, with Remington factory ammo. 130 grain core-lokts in .270 cal.
I had less luck with the round nosed 150's (though they had devastating performance on pumpkins)
Then I tried some 150 grain spitzers and pretty much got the same results as I got with the 130's.
 
Of course I figure a certain percent of it was in fact luck.

I just find it odd the first time I take this rifle out I shoot that one good group. It never happened with my other two rifles that I shoot quite often & have dialed in handloads just for those rifles.

I'm going to keep trying. Now I have a goal to duplicate.
 
This thread may show some folks why using the smallest group, or even the average of several groups, may not be the best indicator of what the accuracy of shooting stuff is that can be counted on all the time.

Arsenals use the mean radius of many dozens of shots calculated from the group center for small arms ammo. Good example for rifles is the 1965 National Match lot of .30-06 M72 ammo had 270 shots in its qualifying test group. Mean radius was about 1.9 inch; the probable average of all the 5 or 10 shot sub groups fired is about 3.8 inch. Extreme spread of all shots was about 10 inches. Most of the shots were inside 6 inches. There was 1 bullet hole closest to dead center in the group. The group with that hole and 4 others next to it had a spread of well under an inch.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with a ballistics man at Lake City Arsenal regarding a bad lot of M118 7.62 NATO match ammo back in the 1960's. We were discussing accuracy and he told me about a funny incident with a new hire. They had just shot over 200 rounds of M118 ammo from their test barrel at 600 yards and were inspecting the target. The new kid said: "Wow, look at all those 5-shot groups under an inch." The experienced ballistician said: "Yes, there's a few dozen of them scattered all over that 15 inch composite." Or something like that. . . . .
 
Last edited:
Agreed bart,

I'll extrapolate on my previous post to help illuminate that point.

On the day I shot that .181, I was just sighting that rifle in to a load I had developed. I shot 3 groups. 1st was half off the target. 2nd was .5ish MOA, 3rd was .181. I mentioned it to some guys as work telling them "I am exited to see how this load will do when I can put some more groups up" I got a lot of "dont bother trying anything else, stick with that load, thats awesome"

I have since shot it some more and it has averaged about .95 MOA across a still very small statiatical set. It is by no means a bad round, but it has shot 3x the group size of that first day's average, and with a larger set of groups to tally, it will surely grow a bit more too.


I dont mean to be discouraging though. I will always be looking to shoot the smallest group I can, and there is nothhing wrong with it... and even if you only shoot that tiny group once, you still shot it.
 
9/16" is awesome, even if a bit flukey.
I love Handis and the 35 Rem, just never found a 35 Rem Handi. Don't ever let yours go. (if you do, it's OK to sell it to me)
 
There are a lot of variables which can affect each individual group and the greatest of these is the human factor. Sometimes we pull it together and shoot nearly to the potential of the gun and load. I absolutely count those groups as a indicator of what the gun and load a are capable of.

The only 'given' is that I cannot repeat them on demand. It'd be a sorry gun, that couldn't shoot better than I do.
 
Barrels heat up during the first few rounds fired, then start whipping a little because of the temporarily softer steel and the combustion pressure wave traveling through the barrel. True accuracy of the rifle is the first three-round group when the barrel is cool. This is most noticeable on a hot 90° f. day
 
Sarge said:
There are a lot of variables which can affect each individual group and the greatest of these is the human factor. Sometimes we pull it together and shoot nearly to the potential of the gun and load. I absolutely count those groups as a indicator of what the gun and load a are capable of.

The only 'given' is that I cannot repeat them on demand. It'd be a sorry gun, that couldn't shoot better than I do.
Click to expand...

I agree, for the most part, but a true fluke would be that random chance shot where you are pulling your POA just enough in the opposite direction of where your gun is trying to send the bullet, canceling out the guns natural "inaccuracy." The chance of this happening on consecutive shots becomes exponentially less likely as you increase the number of shots you put in a group.

That is why, occasionally, you can shoot a smaller group than your rifle could, on average, if you wete to remove the human factor.
 
Random chance? The rifle did it. Nothing random about that.

Now, can the shooter do it on demand? That's another question. But now he knows the rifle is capable of doing it.
 
Random chance? The rifle did it. Nothing random about that.
Click to expand...

sure there is some chance to it. I'm not saying this group is all chance, and skill ALWAYS plays a part, but an anomalously small group is a chance happening, here's how:

first, imagine your rifle is in a perfectly rigid vise, shooting at a target using a theoretical load. Many factors determine the average group size that rifle will shoot including imperfect charge weight, neck tension, case thickness, case hardness, seating depth, bullet weight, bullet concentricity, primer, flash hole, barrel rigidity, stock rigidity, the symmetry of barrel and stock rigidity, bore imperfections, etc...
Lets say a rifle under these circumstances will shoot a group like this:
gun_zps54d171cb.jpg


Next, imagine a shooter is shooting a theoretically perfect version of this gun with a perfect load that would always go through the same hole if shot from the vise. the shooter's skill, habits, physical condition, eyesight, etc... as well as atmospheric conditions will determine the shooters average group size.
lets say this shooter would shoot groups like this:
shooter_zps88a63e2a.jpg


now if we combine the guns inherent grouping with the shooters effect on the grouping, the average will tend to increase the overall group size because, half the time, the shooters input will be drawing the guns point of impact away from center. Occasionally, however, a shooter's input will counteract the guns point of impact for a specific shot in just the right amount and direction to put a shot dead center. This becomes exponentially less likely with each shot added to a group.
Lets say it happens with 3 shots, like this. purple is the gun's deviation. green is the shooters deviation. red is the combination of those 2 inputs and shows the resultant group (approximately), which is anomalously smaller than the gun's average theoretical grouping with the ammo being used.
group_zps3bc33551.jpg


this group size cannot be directly attributed to the shooters skill because there is no possible way for a shooter to know, on any given shot, where a shot would fall within a gun's average grouping, and thus, cannot knowingly compensate to bring a given shot closer to center.

So if a group is only 3 shots, and is significantly smaller than average for the gun/shooter, it is chance... skill plays a part... but chance is what causes the significant deviation from average.
 
Every barrel I know of whips and wiggles at the same frequencies and amounts for every round fired. They don't heat up enough to change their resonant and harmonic frequencies.

http://www.varmintal.com/amode.htm

Every bullet of a given type I know of is not exactly the same shape nor perfectly balanced nor leaves at exactly the same speed. Nor is the air they go through constantly stable for each one fired.

If these weren't true, then a test made with bullets selected for perfect balance shot from a rifle clamped in a machine rest shoot several 10-shot groups well under 1.5 inch at 600 yards. And a 40-shot group under 2 inches. Each group started with the barrel cool and shots fired once every 20 to 30 seconds. All done at dawn when the air is most stable.

Commercial factory barrels walk shot impact as the heat up from poor fit to receivers. Refit them to a squared up receiver face and that won't happen. If they're properly stress relieved.

Every rifle fired will once in a great while shoot a very tiny group. Even a few record setting benchrest rifles do that once in their life. A lot fewer do it twice.
 
Last edited:
Or maybe you will.

I got my .35 Remington Handi rifle ('02 SB2 frame & wood, new barrel & Simmons 4x) together & out to the range Friday morning to break it in. Ammo was off the shelf Federal 200gr stuff.

The second group I shot (@100m) measured at it's widest point, 9/16"!

No trigger job, free floated forearm, etc.

Of course I wasn't sighted in yet, so I had to keep shooting & my groups went back to my usual 2 moa.

Still. I'm amazed. I've been trying to shoot a sub moa group for what feels like an eternity. Then to do it with a $200 rifle & a cheap scope. Now I just have to remember how I did it...
Click to expand...

Outstanding! Just ignore all the gabblings about statistical significance and truth, pin that target to your cubicle wall and tell everyone you always shoot that well.

That’s what I do. :)
 
pin that target to your cubicle wall and tell everyone you always shoot that well.

That’s what I do.
Click to expand...


lol!

but seriously, despite my ranting, I am not trying to say not to be proud of it. I hang my smallest groups out for all to see regardless of how anomolous they are.... there would not be much point in hanging your most statistically average group up. ;)
 
Thankfully you got a Handi rifle that was put together right. My .35 Remington TC contender pistol shoots 2.5" at 200 yards; so the .35 Rem in break action definitely has accuracy possibilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top