I frequent a few boards, and always marvel at the number of folks who shoot one hole groups with their home spun stick, custom, or factory rigs. Folks shoot these groups easily clear out to at least 500 yards all day long with their tack-drivers. Maybe more. I got to wondering about that as I sure can’t do it, not sure if it’s me or my equipment. So some research is in order. Here is the latest at the measly distance of 100 yards’ bench rest record group with a 10.5# gun. 5 shot group confirmed by moving backer, measured and signed by at least 2 officials. I believe this is light varmint class which is 6mm caliber or greater.
Specs:
It’s extremely evident that this is a great group, but not a 1 hole group.
I’m staring to think there is some BS being spouted about
I only see one hole in either target. Don't confuse "one hole" with "one bore-diameter hole".
What used to kill me was scoring 60 round PPC targets. You see a 3" chopped out center and assume all 60 rounds went into the same ragged group; but if it overlaps a ring do you score at the higher or lower value?
I made it easy for the scorer by finding fresh paper for each of my bullets. ;-)
"They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance." Last words of Gen. Sedgwik
Ok, I am guilty as charged. If there isn't any paper separating multiple bullet impacts, I have been known, on occasion, to call it in the same hole. Fortunately, my groups don't normally look that good, which limits my opportunities to show up on the BS radar.
A sheet of standard notebook paper is around .0035" thick .007" larger hole would be a 30 cal bullet with a piece of that paper wrapped around it once. The .0007" part of this gets me. .0007 is 1/5th the thickness of a piece of NB paper. How do they measure that in a piece of paper or backer accurately. I call BS.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
Ahh, that’s what I’m missing. The caliber hole part.Originally Posted by Stumpkiller
Ha! Could be.
I measured a couple of times at a good sized short range BR match. We were issued a caliper with a see through fixture attached to it that had circles sized at the precise bullet diameter that were held over the target and measured. I could see getting to within .003-ish with that method. There must be something more precise today. I did get called out by one pretty upset competitor that challenged my measurement so the other guys did it and the group got bigger
It took 40 years or so to break that record, which was previously.009”. A picture that was left out of this thread was the electronic photo measurement. That shows the accomplishment much more clearly. I know that this record was not announced lightly and every means possible was used to get it right.
My shooting buddy DQ’ed in a 600yd relay, where He had a small group of 4 holes on the inside edge of the 9 ring. The scorers, knowing His shooting history, felt it was unlikely He shot 4 that well but missed the paper entirely with one. They bent over backwards to find a 5th hole but could not. Did He put 2 in the same hole at 600yds, or did one miss the paper entirely? We will never know.
Before anyone calls BS on this record, do YOU have a group that challenges any current records?
For me the record is not the issue. It is the ability to measure .0007 (.0001) in a piece of paper. I measure metal everyday with almost everything i do looking for .0005 or better. Where 10 seconds with 320 grit sandpaper at 350 rpm makes a measurable change. It is very subjective. When the design a type of paper or target medium that does not tear then it means something to me.Before anyone calls BS on this record, do YOU have a group that challenges any current records?
I have never used any scoring tools or devices so maybe Im speaking out of ignorance but .0007"... come on.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I too am not unfamiliar with small measurements. I also understand the paper issue. Would You feel better about it if they called it .0075”or .008”? Was the old record not indeed broken?
Im not sure what would make me feel better or even if my feelings mean anything. I have this opinion however that unless I see some trick measuring device, I call BS on anything to the 4th decimal place. I don't believe in Magic or Fairies either.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is alive and well.
I don’t think there was mention of the measuring device in the write-up (ok it is more like an advertisement if you ask me). I’ll see if I can link it.
https://kriegerbarrels.com/smallestgroup
You didn't read the fine print.....That 5 shots were fired was verified by use of a moving backer, and the .0077 IN group size was an average of the measurements from multiple judges.
"As long as there's lead in the air....there's still hope.."
Who didn’t read the fine print? I think they were just wondering what means and methods were used to get out to 4th decimal on a paper target which is a fair point regardless of how many different times it got checked? The next one could be .0076.
Either way, darned good shooting especially with a .30 cal that isn’t a 6.5# Tikka from Sportsman’s Warehouse. Those do it all the time...just no record of it
Scoring is measured to the one thousandths of an inch in registered matches, however when a target has the potential to become a new record, it is forwarded to the sanctioning body for verification. The official records scoring committee will use the method they choose to measure such groups. Today's technology will utilize measuring techniques that will go to the 4th decimal. Margin of error for group measurements is officially .009" for protest purposes, so if one protests a target and gets a re-measurement, it must be outside the margin of error to get the benefit. In this case, anytime a 40 yr old record is in jeopardy, it will be scrutinized before verification.
"As long as there's lead in the air....there's still hope.."
So does the old guy still rule? Lol
yep
Here’s one for all the .5 inch all day long shooters and their factory sticks:
https://www.fieldandstream.com/10-mo...mlnDic8Pyv9ok0
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks