Tell you what. Set up a target at 100 yds and another at 200 yds directly behind it. Shoot as many groups as you like, with a witness. I have $1000 for you if you show a 200 yd group tighter than the corresponding 100 yd.
KeS
Tell you what. Set up a target at 100 yds and another at 200 yds directly behind it. Shoot as many groups as you like, with a witness. I have $1000 for you if you show a 200 yd group tighter than the corresponding 100 yd.
KeS
I'm not confused about anything. Show me the same group at twice the distance and you're showing me 1/2 the MOA. Since i'm putting up the money, I get to pick the degree of "improvement".
But the principle still applies - forget different shots. Take ONE bullet coming out of the muzzle at an accurately zeroed target. People are saying this bullet can be off at 100 yards and somehow correct itself at 200. I don't buy it, particularly for any lateral deflection (you can play some games with trajectories, especially slow bullets at long distance, use mortars for an example).
The stabilization thing might account for a larger single bullet hole at given distance if the bullet is wobbling and then stabilizes, but that wouldn't affect the group size any more than shooting .223 vs .308 does.
KeS
A particular style of bullet being more accurate than another at short range is fact, to be sure. But that in no way supports your argument that late stabilization can cause a group of bullet trajectories to deviate less from the group's average at longer distances than at shorter ones.
Bookmarks