Originally Posted by
CFJunkie
I apologize for the long post, but I hope my experience will help those who are into equipment 'tuning' to cure accuracy issues to consider another thing to tune also.
When I really got into shooting for accuracy, like many of the guys I shot with, I figured that if the reticle was on the desired aim point, then the bullet should go there.
So, I generally blamed the rifle, ammo, stock, trigger, bipod, bags, etc. for the variations. However, even I could recognize the variation if I jerked the trigger.
I tried all kinds of 'improvements', including taking the rear sling studs off all my rifles so they wouldn't bounce on the rear bag.
Sometimes, the equipment was a cause, but after finding stocks that fit me, getting all my target triggers to have about the same pull, using an F-Class bipod and the right size rear rest, and realizing which powder and ammos worked with each rifle barrel, I still wasn't shooting as accurately as I wanted to.
Having the reticle on the desired aim point didn't guarantee small groups. I was plagued by groups with outliers that increased my group sizes.
About 9 years ago, after years of shooting and trying to blame what were really my 'shooter induced variations' for all kinds of trivial 'problems' with equipment, powders, bullets, etc.
I finally deduced that most of my variations were caused by the 'nut behind the trigger' and started to work on finding what I was doing to cause 'shooter induced variations'.
Fortunately, all my shooting has been outdoors using very stable benches on a covered firing line.
After over 18 months of concentrating on improving my trigger discipline and eliminating variations in my set-up procedures, eye relief position, and making a sure as I could be that I was in the center of the optical plane, my average group sizes reduced by 50% over a sample of 7 different rifles. It took almost 7,000 rounds of shooting to improve that much, but since I determined that I had improved, my group averages have remained about the same for more than 7 years, even as I approach 80 years old in three months.
I probably will always be susceptible to recoil causing me to get out of position and then not returning to precisely where I was set-up.
To provide some data for rifles purchased after getting my procedures improved:
My .223 Savage has averaged 0.291 for 806 5-round groups.
The best 25 loads have averaged 0.235 with a standard deviation of 0.041.
One Savage 6.5mm CM has averaged 0.339 for 618 5-round groups and the other Savage 6.5mm CM has averaged 0.364 for 541 5-round groups.
(The "other" rifle was my first 6.5mm CM and the overall average is skewed because it was used to find the bullets and powders that didn't work great that were never shot in the newer 6.5mm CM.)
The best 25 loads with the 6.5mm CMs for both rifles have averaged 0.276 with standard deviations of 0.047 and 0.040, respectively, which sort of bears out that observation.
One Savage .308 has averaged 0.419 for 301 5-round groups and the other Savage .308 has averaged 0.420 for 373 5-round groups.
The best 25 loads averaged 0.350 and 0.327 with standard deviations of 0.48 and 0.050 respectively.
I won't claim to be a great shot because I'm not, but my consistency has remained pretty good since I have worked on my set-up procedures.
I will admit that lately I have begun to notice more lapses in my concentration, and I have to work a lot harder to complete all my set-up process every time I pull the trigger, but, so far, my averages have been holding steady, maybe even improving by a few thousandths over the last few years.
When I leave something out of my set-up, I get a flyer that messes up an otherwise average group.
The variations in powder, velocity, bullet variations, etc. cause group averages to grow by 0.025 and up to 0.050.
But my severe screw-ups can cause groups to grow by 0.200 or more.
Those screw-ups are very visible in corresponding increases in the standard deviations I calculate for the groups in every load.