BS Wasted Testing

  • 288 Views
  • Last Post 11 August 2018
OU812 posted this 09 August 2018

First off you need an accurate bullet and rifle to do any serious testing. Then you can decide what works and what does not work.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • R. Dupraz
Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
David Reiss posted this 10 August 2018

However you must define an accurate bullet and accurate rifle. By whose standards or definition. One rifle may only be accurate with one bullet, if it meets your definition of accuracy.

It seems to me each person has their own definition, so there is no definitive answer to this question for all.  

David Reiss - NRA Life Member & PSC Range Member Retired Police Firearms Instructor/Armorer
-Services: Wars Fought, Uprisings Quelled, Bars Emptied, Revolutions Started, Tigers Tamed, Assassinations Plotted, Women Seduced, Governments Run, Gun Appraisals, Lost Treasure Found.
- Also deal in: Land, Banjos, Nails, Firearms, Manure, Fly Swatters, Used Cars, Whisky, Racing Forms, Rare Antiquities, Lead, Used Keyboard Keys, Good Dogs, Pith Helmets & Zulu Headdresses. .

Attached Files

frnkeore posted this 10 August 2018

First off you need an accurate bullet and rifle to do any serious testing. Then you can decide what works and what does not work.

I have to agree, the only way that you can really discover things that can be considered improvements, is if you have a rifle that shoots at a upper degree of accuracy, so that you know if a flier, is actually a flier.

i. e. sporter type rifles, suffer more from barrel harmonics and that is their biggest barrier. So, if you improve your groups by changing something, how do you know if it because of the change in loading data or, if the change just effected the barrel harmonics? Either way, it's a improvement but, it may not be a universal  improvement that will be the same in other rifles, especially in the target classes, with heavy barrels.

My point being that testing like JoeB does, probably won't be a reliable standard for anything but his own rifles.

Where testing with a heavy or UN classes, can prove out what the limits are and discounting barrel harmonics, may carry over to other classes, especially as regards primer, powder and bullet selection.

Testing 10,000 rounds in a inaccurate rifle, only produces results of that rifles and shooters ability. Testing 200 or 300 rounds with a rifle that is capable of CBA target class accuracy, will produce more reliable info.

Frank

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • TRKakaCatWhisperer
  • RicinYakima
RicinYakima posted this 10 August 2018

"Either way, it's a improvement but, it may not be a universal  improvement that will be the same in other rifles, especially in the target classes, with heavy barrels."

This is why I have stopped being the "tester". I report about what works in my rifles, almost all 1903 Springfields with issue barrels, and know that it will not work for Model 1917's or Mausers without some tuning for others.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • R. Dupraz
John Alexander posted this 10 August 2018

"First off you need an accurate bullet and rifle to do any serious testing. Then you can decide what works and what does not work.

I have to agree, the only way that you can really discover things that can be considered improvements, is if you have a rifle that shoots at a upper degree of accuracy, so that you know if a flier, is actually a flier."

+++++++++++

It seems that Joe's efforts to say there are truths for different levels of accuracy hasn't soaked in yet. David is right if we don't define the level of accuracy we are talking about we can't talk intelligently about this topic.  

I don't agree that useful research can only be done with super accurate rifles.  Research with the kind of rifles 99% percent of our members have can be valid  for the 99%.  And maybe valid for the 1% as well but that takes additional testing and I don't see that being done by the 1%.

The old cry "if I only had a rail gun" is more of an excuse than a real limitation. Yes a rail gun would make it easier but it's not necessary to do something useful.

Good design of the research can elimination most of the limitations of less than perfect equipment and human ability.

The old saying that whatever is true of one rifle only applies to that particular rifle and all rifles are individuals is true to some extent but  much exaggerated.  Probably true for an individual load. But not at all true for many of the principles that govern accuracy.

John

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attached Files

Geargnasher posted this 10 August 2018

Too many people seek general truths that they can carve in granite and apply to every rifle.  There are some of those, but with cast bullets, each rifle has its unique tastes when it comes to care and feeding if you want the very best results possible. 

Understanding that a rifle, shooter, bench, and ammunition is a SYSTEM, and that a change of one part affects virtually every other, is and important key to testing, particularly when attempting to isolate a variable.

Sporting rifles, like any other rifle, can be made to do amazing things if you feed them what they want.   Light rifles are more challenging for the shooter and support system accuracy-wise, not necessarily from an ammunition standpoint.  The only real disadvantage I've found to lightweight barrels is limitations due to heat.

 

Attached Files

Scearcy posted this 10 August 2018

John unfortunately I agree with you that the 1% that have a $3000 full on bench gun with all of the goodies don't write many articles for TFS let alone participate here. Its a pity as they could at least debunk or prove some of the conventional wisdom.

 

Attached Files

frnkeore posted this 10 August 2018

The testing results of the target class rifles is published, all year long. You need only look at the match results, on this forum.

You can also see what the other classes are doing to improve there scores, in the same place.

Go down the equipment list and pick out the items that you have and you'll also be exposed to things that you might need. Go from there to start your exploration and testing.

Articles can be pulled from the match results, to help new and experienced shooters. Interview some of the winners or constant higher placing shooters, by phone and add that to TFS articles.

Get the info out to the general membership, in some way. Very few read the match results, that aren't match shooters. General membership, may not even know what some of the terms are in the results. Match shooters do well, because they associate with other match shooters and talk about what helps and don't help.

Frank

Attached Files

Ed Harris posted this 10 August 2018

I gave up on and sold all of my dedicated benchrest and target rifles because I found benchrest shooting boring. 

I find it a much greater challenge to get repeatable, consistent and realistic performance from classic firearms of walnut and blued steel, publishing my results so that others can shorten their learning curve with the heirloom firearms they have.  

Based on the feedback I get from readers, others seem to like that approach. 

73 de KE4SKY In Home Mix We Trust From the Home of Ed's Red in "Almost Heaven" West Virginia

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Redleged
  • Geargnasher
R. Dupraz posted this 10 August 2018

You can add one more to your list Ed. Over the years, I have routinely used many of your suggestions and techniques with success. And continue to do so. 

Beginning with "Ed's Red"

 

R.  

Attached Files

45 2.1 posted this 10 August 2018

However you must define an accurate bullet and accurate rifle. By whose standards or definition. One rifle may only be accurate with one bullet, if it meets your definition of accuracy.

Now isn't that the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have several that won't shoot 2 MOA with jacketed or the wrong cast bullet. Put in a cast bullet that actually fit the chamber neck and throat and the thing is an entirely different rifle.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • RicinYakima
45 2.1 posted this 11 August 2018

I, like Ed, gave up on benchrest rifles due to boring repeatable accuracy. I went to normal production rifles, either single shots, levers, bolts or semi-autos to find what it took to get them to shoot. Not all production rifles are put together well, but there are enough of them to allow unlimited experimentation and some surprising results. every one of them teach you something.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Geargnasher
Close