Gun shoots better than I can

[Tatume]

How many times have we heard people say “the gun shoots better than I can shoot it?” By the very nature of the way errors add, this is true of every gun and every shooter. No gun is perfect, and no shooter is perfect. On average, the errors add in the manner of Pythagoras (the square root of the sum of squares). Say a shooter is capable of holding one MOA, and is shooting a one MOA gun. Then in a long run of groups, the average would be about 1.4 MOA (square root of two). Also consider the case where another shooter capable of holding 1/4 MOA shoots the same gun. The long term average this shooter can accomplish is about 1.03 MOA; she cannot shoot the gun to its potential. So, there is no need to say “I can’t shoot the gun as well as it can shoot.” We already know that.

[ku4hx]

Maybe it's just an innocuous euphemism offered by shooters to acknowledge we're getting older, our eyesight is not as good as it once was and our hands aren't quite as steady as they once were. Sort of a harmless compensatory comment to help us not think about the inexorable march of time and the fact that we're losing some of our physical prowess more rapidly than we want to face directly.

Just sayin'

[**oneshot**]

Thats the reason we buy Ransom rests and the like to squeeze as much human error out of the picture when testing a pistol.

[45-70 Chevroner]

I hope I have never used that phrase, as I think it is a given. I also consider my self to be a pretty good shot.

[popper]

Tatume - maybe we are admitting we are human, not a machine. I have good and bad days, I have good loads and bad loads. If I have a gun that can't 'outshoot' me, I'd get rid of it. Fortunately, then gun can't say it wants a better shooter!

[44man]

First the gun must be accurate. Nothing else counts.
Second you will never hold still. Third, all shots should be called according to where the sights were. When you shoot at a bottle at 100 yards you should say the shot was a little right or left and a spotter should confirm.
The gun only shoots better then us when you can say where the shot went. When a boolit hits somewhere else, the load is wrong.
On a good day I can hold 6" at 100 yards with a revolver and call every miss. A bad day and groups get larger but there is the exceptional day too.
My premise is that you will never shoot good if your gun can't. 20 years later and you get no better. Shots MUST go to the sights no matter where you have them. A wide miss when you can say where the sights were is just fine. Don't fret over it, it was you. If you were right on and missed wide, go back to the bench
For instance, I called the last 3 shots I had for my .44 at 100 yards. I said all were good at trigger break. This is what I had off hand.
No, I can not do it all the time but I can tell you where I missed to.

[felix]

It's a matter of personal concept at the time the shot is made. It takes years of building confidence of KNOWING when a gun is NOT shooting according to expectation AND what can be improved about the gun with zero doubt (no change-out testing required). Re: Houston Warehouse proprietor of years past. ... felix

[felix]

A Ransom rest is for the typical shooter shooting a typical gun. Only a specialist knows when the trigger breaks and where the sights were at that exact moment. Another attaboy for the 44man! ... felix

[Tatume]

Thats the reason we buy Ransom rests and the like to squeeze as much human error out of the picture when testing a pistol.

The Ransom rest is not perfect either. I can easily outshoot mine. It's still useful, as with the Ransom rest I can shoot a statistically significant number of shots with each of two loads (without exhausting myself) and test for a difference. But the fact remains, the error is distributed between the gun (including the load) and the Ransom rest (the shooter).

[Char-Gar]

I don't know about all of the added errors and ancient Greek stuff, but I do know something a bout shooting a rifle for accuracy.

If I am shooting in my normal mode, I can call my shots and know if it was good or off and off which direction and about how much. On a good day, I can fire groups without having to call any shots out of the group.

On the days, and strings when I don't call any rounds out, I can give the rifle a run for it's money and shooter better than many rifles can deliver. There are plenty of rifles out there, that can't deliver all the acuracy a good rifleman can use. That is why top level competitors go to great length and spend large amounts of money for high quality match rifles. Yes, they are easier to shoot well, but they also deliver better accuracy. The rifle can challenge the man, and the man can challenge the rifle.

Handguns are a different subject.

[btroj]

If the gun only holds 9 ring and you have a shot in the 9 ring, was it a bad hold/ shot or the gun? You don't kno! How can you learn to shoot without knowing what was fun induced vs human induced error?
Same thing with crappy ammo. If your ammo only holds 8 ring how can you possibly learn to shoot 10 ring size groups?

Saw this way too much shooting hipower. A new guy needs equipment and ammo that is as good as what the top shooters have. That way you know it was a shooter error. The gun puts them where it was pointed.

44 man is dead on. Gun has to shoot where it was pointed. Anything less and you can't possibly learn to be a better shot.

[44man]

A Ransom rest is for the typical shooter shooting a typical gun. Only a specialist knows when the trigger breaks and where the sights were at that exact moment. Another attaboy for the 44man! ... felix
Thanks my friend. It does take time.
But most of what I shoot will destroy a Ransom! :bigsmyl2:
Tatume is correct. A good load and shooter can out shoot a Ransom. Just sandbags really does better.
But to tell the truth, a revolver or single shot from off hand is not any harder then a rifle off hand. Rifles wobble like mad too. You still need to call shots and misses are common.
There are only a few rifle shooters that hit long range and it is because they wobble less. Trigger control is needed but wobble is from our wiggly bodies.
You only need to put a beer can at 100 and aim at it with a rifle to see truth. It is no better then a revolver! We are frail hunks of blubber. It is why we have rifle rests.
Look at it like this. If you are 2' off target, and the boolit hits 2' off target, the gun is good. If you hit the target, something is wrong and you are not a good shot and yanked or your gun and load is wrong.
I remember my friend at an indoor archery range. He pulled so bad he hit another mans target. His second shot Robin hooded his first shot. Can I call him a good shot? No but his bow sure did shoot!

[Char-Gar]

When I am hitting on all eight cylinders I know it and can hold the 10 and even X ring. On those days, bullets that land in the nine or eight ring are due to the rifle, or the ammo.

When one of my cylinders is not firing, I know it and have to take the blame for any rounds not in the 10 ring with a rifle and load capable of putting them there.

It is 100% correct that a man can't learn to shoot unless he has a rifle that can put them where he wants them if he does his thing right. There are lots of rifles that won't do that.

[Cadillo]

Just another case of someone with two much idle time on his/her hands.

[softpoint]

The Ransom rest is not perfect either. I can easily outshoot mine. It's still useful, as with the Ransom rest I can shoot a statistically significant number of shots with each of two loads (without exhausting myself) and test for a difference. But the fact remains, the error is distributed between the gun (including the load) and the Ransom rest (the shooter).

I've outshot a Ransom rest shooting off hand with a 1911 a couple of times. The gun had a good barrel and barrel fit to slide, but the slide was some what loose on the frame. And, since the sights are mounted on the slide, I was re-aligning them with the target rather than re-aligning the grip frame. Never tried it with a revolver, though. I can see where it might be difficult to do with a revolver, as the sights and frame are rigid. Incidentally, I still have that 1911, and it stills shoots well, even though it rattles like someone dragging a trash can down the street. :lovebooli

[mdi]

Tatume, yer makin' some assumptions that don't apply to all those you address. I have a gun that I know I can shoot better than; no matter what load, what type of ammo, who shoots it, my Rossi .38 cannot keep a group smaller than 3" @ 25 yds. I am a more accurate shooter than that gun! Besides, what's yer point?

[MrXrings]

Sounds like there's a few bullseye shooters in the crowd. It takes quite a bit of practice before a decent gun becomes a significant limiting factor. The human part of the equation is so large. I'm working hard to make the gun look bad. LOL.

[popper]

MrXrings I totally agree, but it does take a good gun and ammo to know the difference.

[Tatume]

Just another case of someone with two much idle time on his/her hands.

There is no educated or polite way to respond to this.

[adrians]

Maybe it's just an innocuous euphemism offered by shooters to acknowledge we're getting older, our eyesight is not as good as it once was and our hands aren't quite as steady as they once were. Sort of a harmless compensatory comment to help us not think about the inexorable march of time and the fact that we're losing some of our physical prowess more rapidly than we want to face directly.

Just sayin'

you said it ,,,,,,, i agree :drinks:

[captaint]

As usual, there are no absolutes here. I think all we have to do is go shoot a good rimfire pistol at 60 feet to easily see what's up. When we blow one, we know it. Don't even have to look. When we let a good one go, we know it. Don't even have to look.

I do have a Rem Rand 1911A1 that I can outshoot. I don't care. I love that gun. I have other 1911's that make me laugh at myself. That's just the way it is. As long as it remains a good time, I'll keep doing it. enjoy Mike