New to using a 'PEEP & GLOBE' at 50 yards...

[303Guy]

I like your new target layout. There are some tantalizing groups there! My hopes are to move out to 100m since that's the next step up for me. Going into winter with the winter rain might be a bit of a problem though.

Could you figure out what those numbers mean on that guy's targets?

[OS OK]

I like your new target layout. There are some tantalizing groups there! My hopes are to move out to 100m since that's the next step up for me. Going into winter with the winter rain might be a bit of a problem though.

Could you figure out what those numbers mean on that guy's targets?

I think they are his 'center to center' measurements of the groups?
Those pro's get down to the decimal thousandths...me, 'the redneck backyard shooter', hahaaa...a ruler will do and usually in 1/16'ths is good enough.

[303Guy]

This what is puzzling me. A group of 0.139 inches would a shade under 1 1/2 bullet diameters. This group is 3 bullet diameters. What am I missing?



Is it being standardized to 100 yds?

[OS OK]

This what is puzzling me. A group of 0.139 inches would a shade under 1 1/2 bullet diameters. This group is 3 bullet diameters. What am I missing?



Is it being standardized to 100 yds?

You got me on that...I'd guess that bughole around .250"+

[tazman]

In one of the threads in that link, that guy posts his measuring method.
He uses a dial caliper and measures the outside dimension then deducts .222 to give the center to center group size.
The bottom center target is the average size for the five groups.

Some of those groups look to be somewhat larger than his posted size. That last one he lists as .332 is at least three bullet diameters wide the narrow way. Center to center would be .444 minimum.I have to question his measurements.
Still quite good groups though.

[303Guy]

Here more ammo tests, this time with a machine rest mounted rifle.

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/...3/m/3411019852

These tests are an eye opener. I've had unrealistic expectations all this time. Even with the machine rest, there is some POI drift between groups. CCI subsonic HP's did quite well. I used to use those, then thought I could do better with better ammo. Well, now CCI are more expensive than the 'better ammo'. I just hope my 'better ammo' lives up to expectations (make that hopes). I just bought 1000 rounds of Geco Target and 500 rounds of Eley Club. None of which I have tested beyond 25m. Well, worst case scenario is I will be stocked for the 25m range for some time.

[tazman]

The only thing about these links that makes me wonder is the fact that the first link was originally posted eleven years ago. I have to wonder how much ammunition has changed in that period of time.
The last link was posted just a year ago so the data is more current to time.

[ulav8r]

It would be measurable with the right instrumentation. Working in the machine tool business as I once did, I saw this happening to the column of a 20 ton horizontal jig mill, (a deVlieg), and it wasn't even direct sun. It was too close to an outer wall that got hot in the afternoon, (if it was sunny).

Never mind whether the barrel touches the stock, the thermal bending alone will move the POI.

I have seen no indication that OS OK would be able to measure the change in the barrel though he could quite possibly see a shift in point of impact.

The reason that stock contact was mentioned was one case was mentioned where contact was noted on one side of the barrel. In that case if the barrel bent toward the contact one time and away another time there would be even greater variation in point of impact. Whether there would be an affect on group size, I have no idea and won't speculate.

[OS OK]

Here more ammo tests, this time with a machine rest mounted rifle.

http://forums.accuratereloading.com/...3/m/3411019852

These tests are an eye opener. I've had unrealistic expectations all this time. Even with the machine rest, there is some POI drift between groups. CCI subsonic HP's did quite well. I used to use those, then thought I could do better with better ammo. Well, now CCI are more expensive than the 'better ammo'. I just hope my 'better ammo' lives up to expectations (make that hopes). I just bought 1000 rounds of Geco Target and 500 rounds of Eley Club. None of which I have tested beyond 25m. Well, worst case scenario is I will be stocked for the 25m range for some time.

This 'machine' testing...my friend...did my heart a world of good!

Since I am basically a hermit & don't get out and mingle at the local gun clubs & I don't compete at various events...I have not had any shooters to compare my progress with. In other words, having observed good shooters to set a benchmark or set the bar so I would have a target out there in the future to try and achieve.
Well . . . seeing this machine rest mounted rifle shooting all these brands of ammo has given me an even better set of benchmarks than I could ever have gotten from the local gun club or watching some event.
The mechanical rest is pure machine, bing-bang over and over again...so long as it stays adjusted and maintained it's going to be a very steady test platform.

What I'm getting to is the groups it shot with the various ammo. Take for instance the ELey 'tenex & Match' that I have been using. My observation now is that they are not guaranteed hole punchers, not going to get you cloverleafs & one-holers every time, if you were doing your part like this machine.
I have been expecting to see a set of 5 spots w/5 shot groups 'all' be single 'one ragged hole' groupings & somewhere around 1/2"...if I had done my part right.

What I'm seeing is that even with the most expensive ammo, it still varies, it still has fliers in a machine rest.

My expectations, like yours have been 'unrealistic' . . . also, my observations of all the testing thus far has been skewed to some extent.
I have many thoughts rolling around in my head at the moment but the main thought is that as an 'old' human being, I can't expect to achieve this magical 5spot/5shot grouping I described earlier because of a host of different things that influence the groups...mainly me.

The bottom line on that thought... I think that I should purchase from the next shipment of Eley a much cheaper line of their ammo and get a much higher quantity to work with...I just need to keep in mind what 'that ammo' is capable of in the machine rest and use that as the benchmark for 'measuring' personal progress behind the rifle.
I tend to take too much responsibility on myself with this ammo and it's limitations...I have to keep that in mind, and by 'calling' my shots, it will do me much more good than just expecting to see that one hole group 'if I do well'.
Calling your shots will immediately show you a flier when they occur...calling the shots helps segregate mistakes and who or what is responsible for that flier. What I mean is that...I know when I'm pushing the breath window, I know when my shoulder is trying to steer the POA & I know better...it is that little demon on the shoulder that's saying, "go ahead, you can do it...go on shoot!" that I have to eliminate by becoming the machine.
I need to factor in and give more weight to the fact that all these other variables have much weight in shooting these groups.
It may be that I am such a Neophyte at this game that I haven't realized this before.

I don't know . . . it's early yet this morning and I think I need another cuppa-Joe, I'm starting to ramble.

[tazman]

Trying to become a machine is all well and good but can't be achieved. Particularly for an old fart like me.
I need to try and do the best I can and accept the fact that I will always be outperformed by a machine.
The fact that the machine is only a small bit better, under ideal conditions, than what I am doing myself, makes me feel a lot better about things.
Yes, I still get flyers but that is part of being human.

[OS OK]

Trying to become a machine is all well and good but can't be achieved. Particularly for an old fart like me.
I need to try and do the best I can and accept the fact that I will always be outperformed by a machine.
The fact that the machine is only a small bit better, under ideal conditions, than what I am doing myself, makes me feel a lot better about things.
Yes, I still get flyers but that is part of being human.

Perhaps I didn't write what I meant too well and you misunderstood?

When I say 'be the machine' I mean to say...'develop my skill-set so that as that old'fart human, I am being the machine by repeating the shots over and over again without flubbing up too badly.
I used that term, I suppose poorly . . . it was a 'figure of speech'.

Sorry taz. I agree with everything you said.

[Forrest r]

You got me on that...I'd guess that bughole around .250"+

You are supposed to take the diameter of the hole the bullet leaves in the target and subtract that from the outside to outside group measurement to find the actual group size.

A typical 22lr target with 4 different 5-shot groups on it shot @ 25yds. You will also see 4 independent shots, each of them high right of the four groups. There are also measurements of those holes/high right hits.
[IMG][/IMG]

On the left side of that target you will see those 4 #'s added together (.798") Divide that # by 4 and round up. That is where the .199" comes from. The bullet I was using that day left a .199" hole in the paper. Top left group measured .333" outside to outside at it's widest point. .333 -.199 ='s .138" That is the actual group size.

If I shot 5 shots and put them all in the same hole my group would be .000" even though there would be a .199" hole in the target.

When scoring shots on targets the bullet hole is always smaller then the diameter of the actual bullet. Scoring plugs like these are used to score targets
[IMG][/IMG]

A friend borrowed my 44cal scoring plug but there is a .177cal, 22cal, 30cal, 35cal & 45cal plugs in the picture. Between the 30 & 38 plugs is the stem of a scoring plug tilted at an angle. You can see the round ring on the bottom of the plug. The plastic ring magnifies the shot. The round pointed bottom centers the scoring plug in the hole in the target. Where the edge of the ring touches is the score of that shot.

That is why it's simply easier to say my x shot group was xxx" outside to outside measurement.

[OS OK]

Thanks forrest r... I saw 'scoring plugs' on the Eley site and wondered how they used them? https://www.killoughshootingsports.c...chrest-targets

[303Guy]

Thanks for the explanation Forrest r. So I measured one of the bullet holes and got .210 across the blackening on the target. That won't be too far off actual even though I'm measuring off my screen. I then measured the outside to outside at the widest point and got .536 - that gives a .326 group. If I assume that the scaling is wrong and correct it to .199, then the group I measure would be .309. That's double what is shown on the target. And indeed, his group appears to be double yours. I should add that now I'm not going to be able to sleep at night pondering how I'm going to get anywhere near your groups!



Looking at your comparative group, that being .138, it looks like a .138 group with the bullet holes overlapping each other. His group looks like a three bullet hole diameter. What am I missing?

I keep going back to your target and thinking "Wow! That's awesome!"

[OS OK]

Thanks for the explanation Forrest r. So I measured one of the bullet holes and got .210 across the blackening on the target. That won't be too far off actual even though I'm measuring off my screen. I then measured the outside to outside at the widest point and got .536 - that gives a .326 group. If I assume that the scaling is wrong and correct it to .199, then the group I measure would be .309. That's double what is shown on the target. And indeed, his group appears to be double yours. I should add that now I'm not going to be able to sleep at night pondering how I'm going to get anywhere near your groups!



Looking at your comparative group, that being .138, it looks like a .138 group with the bullet holes overlapping each other. His group looks like a three bullet hole diameter. What am I missing?

I keep going back to your target and thinking "Wow! That's awesome!"

303Guy . . . I for one am glad you got this measuring thing down pat ... I got one for you to measure, I'll post today's follies soon.



"Ever old'dog eventually finds a bone!"

[303Guy]

That one's easy to measure - it's one hole! Awesome!

I gotta go off to do a job in town but I'll be back. Maybe I can frame that one for you?

[OS OK]

Started out this morning . . . just like any other morning, headed out with a new routine doing this 'pre-warming' thing and aiming to gather some meaningful data.

After 30 minutes in the sun the thermometer was only 79ºƒ and the ambient air temp. was 62ºƒ. I thought I might see a little shifting of the groups, prolly see about the same size groups as the day before only shifted some?



This was not at all what I expected to see...those rounds were skipping back and forth between the POA and somewhere out in left field 9 to 11:00.
I started to think I have something loose? Maybe it's the scope mounts, yah...maybe them, when I finished, I headed to the shop to find out about that...



Nope...everything still as I installed it, snug as a bug.
Obviously, the thing to do was crack a cold brew and start 'mulling on the mystery' at hand. I had nothing, I checked the stock clearance around the barrel, checked the stock screws...nothing, everything snug!

Well...I'm thinking that this should repeat itself if there's something wrong. So, I put the rifle and a box of tenex out in the sun with the big thermometer and wait another 30 minutes for the pre-warm.
As I'm heading out to the 50, I'm now thinking that I might see a POA/POI shift also since I took the scope off and put it back? No biggie, right? It can't be that much of a shift.
Ready for some confusion? This time the rifle warmed to 91ºƒ and the ambient air was up to 64-65º...the sun is up a little higher so that made sense to me.
When I saw that first warmer shot I thought I misjudged how far off that scope might really be...then the spots played out like you see them below...



Working those spots with that 24 power scope, those rounds looked really spread out and I was less than impressed with how I was grouping. When I got to the last spot I was pleasantly surprised...I thought..."Ever old'dog finally finds his bone!" That was nice to see...I got me my first 'redneck one-holer', kinda oblong and technically not a perfect one-hole but that was good enough to put a big smile on my mug for the day!

Now...if I could only measure it accurately. I think it's a small group but I dare not try to measure it with a rule and call it what I'm thinking it is. Someone for sure would call "BS on that!"



It may be a once in a lifetime group for this MKII but it made me proud of this cheap little target rifle today.

[Conditor22]

That's a great group. more like 1/2", you measure center to center

[303Guy]

I work that group to be .202 - Heck, even if it's .25 that's still 1/2 MOA! So I get .4 MOA.

What looks like 1 inch on the rule is 1/2 inch. By the rule that group is very close to 6.75 sixteenths.

Now is the time to stop. Put the rifle away and destroy all previous evidence.

In any event - do not clean that bore!

[tazman]

OS OK--- If you have a dial caliper, use it to accurately measure the holes. Shouldn't be very difficult. Unless, of course, you don't have calipers.