Strive for accuracy, don't settle for grouping

[mazda3gun]

-Move this thread to the proper place if needed, not sure that it "technically" belongs here-

Accuracy over Grouping

I'm not a genius shooter, algebraic phenom, or world class shooting champ, but I'm noticing a trend here. Site-wide it seems, more of you folks are concerned with a good Group under 1-.5+/- MOA/MIL over Accuracy. I'm not following the reasoning.

I do get that in competition, especially long range, merely hitting the target is equally important as the glass you're using even. For instance, someone will post a thread "Range day with my ________ rifle" and post a picture of the target/targets they shot that day. Nine times out of ten, those bullet holes will be SOMEWHERE else other than the bullseye on the target. I do not understand this concept and method.

IMO, accuracy and grouping go hand-in-hand. If I'm aiming at the bull, and I hit low right, I'm adjusting for that. Not gonna fire off 4 more rounds and say, "Hey, look at my grouping!"
Anytime I shoot, I aim for the bull, every time. Hitting the bull is accuracy, if I do it repeatedly, that's grouping. If I aim 2 inches behind the front shoulder of a buck, I expect my bullet to land there, if not, I'll be at the range trying to figure out why it didn't make a clean kill.

Everyone talks about "tack drivers", yet settle for 5 bullets in a 1/2inch grouping. Make them all touching or one big ragged hole! I wanna see more bullseye, less off in left field playing with grass! Who cares about the group, take out the middle.
There, I said my peace.:behindsofa:

[ebrown]

I agree with everything you said above, but look at it from a different perspective. I'm a hunter, or trying to be. Shooting at targets is just a step in setting up my rifle. I'm currently setting up a Trophy Hunter 116 XP in 30-06. Completely standard except a walnut stock. First time I've ever done that, and I think I've done everything possible wrong once and then had to fix it. When I get to the point that it's making a series of holes close together, the hard part will be done. The holes are in a different place with each different load. That means I have to make those sets of holes with each cartridge or load I am considering. Then I'll pick the cartridge I want to use.

At that point I'll have a bunch of clusters, hopefully small ones. I think it's perfectly reasonable to be proud, or just want to share, that achievement. By telling others what you did to get to that point you make their task a bit easier.

The very final step, which is about a tenth of a percent of the work, is to turn the scope adjustments knobs to move the pattern over the center. I've heard people say they only shoot once to confirm that. They don't have to shoot more if they already know they're shooting a half-inch circle. I expect to shoot a complete group of five. Once I have everything adjusted I don't expect to shoot from the bench again until next year.

Then I have to shoot a lot more from all the different shooting positions to make sure I can actually hit a kill zone. But at that point I'm not testing the rifle. Just the hunter.

[stomp442]

I always shoot for group to test the load. If its a good group and a good load I post it for others to see so that they have some data to use for their rifle. Once I know that its shooting good and consistent I center up on the bull. As long as I'm on the paper during load development I don't really care.

[mazda3gun]

Well, I won't be posting any pics of my 64 sight in progress. Kinda silly to show a 8" target that's completely ragged all to the high right and then suddenly dead center. I'm more proud of just the center being blown out than showing how scope clicks moved me to bullseye.

My 110 issues and kinks are being worked out. Put a new scope on, went out to sight in. It shot dead middle 4" low from the bull, could've fired 4 more times and called that a "good group", but that's not good enough. A "good group" is an accurate group all centered on the bull.

I guess what I'm saying is, How can you aim off in lala land with no bearings to hold the cross hairs on? It's just dead space over there, no lines to hold over with the crosshair as a reference. No, deer and squirrel don't have lines like a target, but I know where the stinking lungs/heart and head are!
"One shot, one bullet, one kill"

[mazda3gun]

I always shoot for group to test the load. If its a good group and a good load I post it for others to see so that they have some data to use for their rifle. Once I know that its shooting good and consistent I center up on the bull. As long as I'm on the paper during load development I don't really care.

In this instance, it makes sense. You're testing a handload. I shoot factory loads*gasp*, don't have the means or desire to reload. I'm a hunter at heart, not a comp shooter. So, finding how the round performs is more important than accuracy, at the start. You should be striving for accuracy once you know the trajectory though.

[JackinSD]

The old accuracy vs precision shooting conversation.

[fgw_in_fla]

When load or bullet testing I move the POI a few clicks off center. I try to use the bullseye as the POA and shoot 4 different loads around the bullseye. It helps save paper...

On most of my known accurate loads, I know if I have to move the elevation or windage to accommodate the bullet weight and keep the POI on the bullseye as I like to have 2 different weight bullets for each caliber. One light / one heavy.

[fgw_in_fla]

The old accuracy vs precision shooting conversation.

Ay Laddie, that it is.
I wish I had a dollar for every time someone said to me "if you move your scope a few clicks your shots will be on the red dot"...

[stomp442]

I have a box that a copier came in that is about 18" wide and 30" tall. I am a drafter by profession and use a custom target that I drew up in cad that has 1" squares in a light line and every 3" there is a darker thicker line and where ever the thicker lines cross I have a 1" dia red dot. I end up with 3 dots across and 6 down for a total of 18 bulls eyes on my 18x24 paper. I use the red dots for aiming points and the 1" grid makes for easy scope adjustment and scope tracking checks. The scale is doubled for a 200 yard target. Also makes for a quick way to estimate group size with the 1" grid lines.

I am also a hunter, a long range hunter to be more precise. Factory loads don't cut it and I treat every one of my rifles as though it is a match rifle in fact all of my serious hunting rifles have a match grade aftermarket barrel installed for peak performance and accuracy. Attention is paid to every detail from brass prep through trigger pull. To assume that because a group is located left or right a couple inches that the rifle and shooter won't hit what they are aiming at whether it be a target or game is absurd as the point of impact will no doubt be adjusted to the point of aim before the shooter or hunter will be satisfied.

[rjtfroggy]

I shoot the way you describe, but there is a reason. Myself and many others shoot this way for practice,we don't hit the bull because we don't want to destroy our aiming point, so the bull stays intact but the group is juat off a bit. When in competition it is only a matter of one or two clicks each way and we are centered.

[drybean]

I shoot the way you describe, but there is a reason. Myself and many others shoot this way for practice,we don't hit the bull because we don't want to destroy our aiming point, so the bull stays intact but the group is juat off a bit. When in competition it is only a matter of one or two clicks each way and we are centered.

+1

drybean

[bflee]

I usually shoot 500 yards + so if they are all in a tight group two inches off the bull I am really happy. Thats meat in the freezer.

[Texas Solo]

I never mess with my windage during practice. It's dead on perfect on a calm day, so why would I change it to hit the bull during practice? I'd rather leave it alone and gain experience on how much the wind, both speed and direction, are affecting my bullet. That way I know for fact what to expect at a match and simply dial in that correction. Sighters only serve to verify my corrections.

[yobuck]

There are different types of benchrest shooting. With some only group size matters regardless of where it is on the target.
There are some where an award is given for high score, "meaning centered", and another award in the same match for best
group. Most of the groups your referring to here would be from guys bragging about their groups i mean testing ammo. lol.
prior to hunting where a centered group would be important, check your zero and make sure its on. otherwise who cares, its the group size that counts.

[BarrelBurner]

Well said..

[foxx]

Personally, 99% of the time, I consider shooting for the bull a waste of time, targets and ammo. If I shoot a good tight group one must assume I am aiming at the same spot for each shot or else my group is nothing more than pure luck. More importantly, as rjtfroggy said, at close range (100 yds), once I hit the bull, I've torn-up my aiming point and I am less able to concentrate/focus on the same spot. Sometimes, when I only have one target, I intentionally adjust my scope so as to hit at various points around the face of the target just so I can have multiple sets of 5 shot groups even though I have only one bull to aim at. Of course, before taking the rifle hunting, I will always return the scope to "zero" (1.5-2 inches above the center of the bull at 100 yds).

[mazda3gun]

I don't shoot competitions, yet. I'm interested in pistol over rifle in that regard. It seems that everyone voicing an opinion is a comp shooter, and I'm not hearing much logical or practical either. IMO, wherever my crosshair sits, is where that bullet will come to rest/impact. Not 5 inches left and 5 inches down from the bull...
But here in KY, I don't plan on shooting further than 200yds any given hunting trip. Until I go West or North and go after mulies and elk, I won't worry about windage, you fellas shooting 500yds at p'dogs and comps have issues with that.

It just makes absolute zero sense to me that you would ever, for ANY instance or reason, want that bullet to impact somewhere other than where you're aiming. In a nutshell, what I'm gathering and how I'm interpreting, you aim at the heart and shoot the guts, ruining the meat. I aim for the heart, and decimate the thing. Clean shot, clean kill. Dead deer.

I shoot for fun at the range, to see what my capabilities are as a shooter, and how well my mostly bone stock rifle shoots. When my rifle is in my hands, I equate fun to being able to punch out the bull every time I squeeze the trigger. There's still an "aiming point" - a ragged hole in the paper! My scope is always set to deliver the lead wherever those crosshairs sit, be it a pop bottle at 50yds or a deer at 150 yds.
Grouping is what you do with a pistol or shotgun. Accuracy is what you do with a rifle.

[foxx]

I agree with 99% of what you're saying, Mazda, certainly the sentiment. But, when PRACTICING or testing or developing loads, I also prefer to have my shots hit just off of my aiming point so I can aim at a precise point, as small as the head of a pin if possible. Adjusting a few clicks when done and firing a couple shots to confirm my results and point of aim is correct is easy to do and always done before hunting.

I cannot test my ability to shoot precisely if I aim at a point bigger than my bullet. It is also difficult to judge or evaluate just how precise all my shots are if I am not always aiming at a clean target.

[foxx]

Also, Mazda, you might not realize that the scopes we are using are very precise and repeatable, adjustment wise. Part of that game is having equipment (and the skill to use it) that can reliably hit a spot on the target inches away from the point of aim and know, precisely, what adjustment must be made to make it hit precisely at the point of aim. Being able to do so allows one to predict and therefore correct for other variables such as wind and range.

For example, I know where my scope is set for "zero", and I know if I want to move it 1 or 2 or 10 MOA, I can do so and confidently return it to zero or any other point within its range. Knowing this allows me to aim off center, if necessary, so as to adjust for conditions, or adjust my scope for those conditions.

[mazda3gun]

I should look into getting the 'Zero Reset Turrets' from Nikon for my Prostaff scope.