ACCURACY

  • 540 Views
  • Last Post 08 August 2018
joeb33050 posted this 29 July 2018

I represent accuracy by "the last set of groups shot"; so if I have data on17 groups, and last time out I shot 3 groups with average of .950", then .950" is accuracy for that combo.

Another way is to sum all groups shot, thus:

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
joeb33050 posted this 29 July 2018

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 29 July 2018

And another way:

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 29 July 2018

This with the Shilen, good accurate barrel Note the variation. good days, bad days, hot, cold, but I can't connect bad days with anything else.

It is a puzzlement. 

Attached Files

RicinYakima posted this 29 July 2018

Joe, I am finding at my age, I can not repeat groups over a multi-day test. While I take my BP every morning, some days eyes, trigger finger, hand shake is different. I appear to be a about the limit of shooting sub MOA on demand, even with a rifle and ammo that is capable. And I am not strong enough to build a machine rest and then set it on the bench. Good luck on your tests. Ric

Attached Files

Geargnasher posted this 30 July 2018

Titegroup and jacketed bullets.  You were expecting something other than dismal?

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 30 July 2018

"Titegroup and jacketed bullets.  You were expecting something other than dismal?"

 

I don't understand your comment.  What is dismal here?

John

Attached Files

BigMan54 posted this 01 August 2018

Dismal is when you realize you have to start shooting at 50ft because you can no longer see the 25yd targets.

Long time Caster/Reloader, Getting back into it after almost 10yrs. Life Member NRA 40+yrs, Life S.A.S.S. #375. Does this mean a description of me as a fumble-fingered knuckle-draggin' baboon. I also drool in my sleep. I firmly believe that true happiness is a warm gun. Did I mention how much I HATE auto-correct on this blasted tablet.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • pat i.
  • RicinYakima
Geargnasher posted this 05 August 2018

"Titegroup and jacketed bullets.  You were expecting something other than dismal?"

I don't understand your comment.  What is dismal here?

John

 

Joe is noting irregularities in accuracy which are "a puzzlement" to him. It isn't a puzzlement to me, using a powder which is so far out of its intended case volume, bore/chamber proportion, and shot start initiation pressure design parameters is bound to get some very inconsistent results.   Maybe if he used a propellant which wasn't so good at responding to every gnat's hair difference in temperature, neck tension, neck friction, speck of dirt in the throat, burr on the case mouth, etc. under the conditions he's loading it, he would have more consistent results.  Why not use AT LEAST 2400?  The reason for using Titegroup with Jacketed bullets (or any bullet other than intentionally crafted sub-sonic loads for use with a suppressor) in a .22-caliber centerfire is......at the least "a puzzlement" to me.

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 05 August 2018

"Titegroup and jacketed bullets.  You were expecting something other than dismal?"

I don't understand your comment.  What is dismal here?

John

 

Joe is noting irregularities in accuracy which are "a puzzlement" to him. It isn't a puzzlement to me, using a powder which is so far out of its intended case volume, bore/chamber proportion, and shot start initiation pressure design parameters is bound to get some very inconsistent results.   Maybe if he used a propellant which wasn't so good at responding to every gnat's hair difference in temperature, neck tension, neck friction, speck of dirt in the throat, burr on the case mouth, etc. under the conditions he's loading it, he would have more consistent results.  Why not use AT LEAST 2400?  The reason for using Titegroup with Jacketed bullets (or any bullet other than intentionally crafted sub-sonic loads for use with a suppressor) in a .22-caliber centerfire is......at the least "a puzzlement" to me.

 

Do you know why I used Titegroup? I've written the reason, here, several times. Haven't you been paying attention?

Attached Files

John Alexander posted this 06 August 2018

Gearnasher,

You seem to have some very arbitrary and restrictive ideas about when certain powders should be used. I'm not sure how you know the proper "case volume, bore/chamber proportion, and shot start initiation pressure design parameters" or even what that means. I do know that several folks have found TiteGroup a clean burning power that doesn't seem to be either position or temperature sensitive and works very well in reduced loads for cast bullets.  I have been using it in CBA competition in a 223 for several years in exactly the range of weight used in the above experiment and have managed to be competitive in my class. Dismal seems an overly harsh word.

i would be very interested in your reference or test results that show that this powder responds to "every gnat hair difference in temperature, neck tension, neck friction, speck of dirt in throat, burr on case mouth, etc.", Because, although I have chronographed thousands of shots fired, I have not found any of these claims to be true during several years and over ten thousand shots, and I shoot neither subsonic loads or with a suppressor.

John

Attached Files

Geargnasher posted this 06 August 2018

I do know that several folks have found TiteGroup a clean burning power that doesn't seem to be either position or temperature sensitive and works very well in reduced loads for cast bullets.

 

John, Joe was not shooting cast bullets in this particular test.  Don't you suppose that makes a difference?

 

Attached Files

joeb33050 posted this 06 August 2018

I do know that several folks have found TiteGroup a clean burning power that doesn't seem to be either position or temperature sensitive and works very well in reduced loads for cast bullets.

 

John, Joe was not shooting cast bullets in this particular test.  Don't you suppose that makes a difference?

 

 JACKETED BULLET TEST-SOME CONCLUSIONS

 

I used one lot each of 223 and 22-250 brass. All were neck-chamfered and trimmed to length. The 22-250 cases were neck-turned in the distant past.

 

The primary question prompting the test is: “With everything else the same, at cast bullet velocities, with a cast bullet powder; do jacketed bullets shoot more accurately than cast bullets?”

 

The answer is clearly “Yes”.

 

You gotta read more and type less. Much less.

 

Attached Files

OU812 posted this 07 August 2018

Titegroup and jacketed bullets.  You were expecting something other than dismal?

Do not knock it until you try it. Titegroup is a very good powder for lower velocity and medium velocity 223 Remington loads...lead or jacketed. Much better than 2400. smile

Attached Files

frnkeore posted this 07 August 2018

I've used Titegroup in a couple of thing, both lower pressure <20k. I found it to burn dirty, anyone else found that? It also, wasn't as accurate as B'eye.

Frank

Attached Files

Geargnasher posted this 07 August 2018

I haven't found TG to be any more dirty than BE at low pressures.  It does burn hot, like the new purple Universal, Longshot and Lil' Gun, causing colored scorch marks on brass.  One reason it doesn't work as well as BE in many instances of cast bullet shooting is the pressure curve of TG is just about a vertical line, BE has a very long curve (relatively) in just about any case it is used in.

I took a shine to TG for two reasons:  Very little sensitivity to position within a large case, and very low muzzle pressure.  Both extremely positive attributes in certain situations.

Attached Files

Larry Gibson posted this 08 August 2018

 I've used Titegroup in a couple of thing, both lower pressure <20k. I found it to burn dirty, anyone else found that? It also, wasn't as accurate as B'eye.

Frank

Agree with Frank, I also found TG to burn dirty with lighter loads.  BE always worked so I stick with it......if it ain't broke why fix it?   "New and improved" isn't always better......

LMG

Concealment is not cover.........

Attached Files

OU812 posted this 08 August 2018

Joe,

Bullseye vs. Titegroup in the 223 Remington. Which is better would be a good test?

I do know Titegroup meters more easily/accurately from powder measure than Bullseye.

Attached Files

Categories
Search
Popular Tags
This Weeks High Earners
Hot Topics
Close