The_Fit_Ness_Monster
Well-Known Member
For the people that are debating that shot groups need to be 10 min are they gunna buy my ammo? Even in the military we set zero with 3 or 5 rnd groups. Anything more is ridiculous and a waste of ammo.
-
The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
-
We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules
help me pick my next rifle
- Thread starter Dmathews87
- Start date
For the people that are debating that shot groups need to be 10 min are they gunna buy my ammo? Even in the military we set zero with 3 or 5 rnd groups. Anything more is ridiculous and a waste of ammo.
Fuse Dude
Well-Known Member
Tikka t3 in 308. Good luck, and spend the money on a scope
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2019
- Messages
- 6,280
you'll never find a bad review of these
the worst anyone says is "the magazines and trigger guard/floor plate are polymer"....big deal, so is a Glock...you can replace the guard/floor plate with metal....but if a gun drives tacks the last thing i'm gonna do is unscrew it from the stock, change stuff, and then try to torque it back down to factory specs
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2023
- Messages
- 646
Not only that but it’s less accurate. A 3 shot group is already warming the barrel and doesn’t accurately reflect a cold barrel shot placement. 3 shot group and if you’re really serious, let the barrel cool completely and do a single shot.
I have a Tikka and wouldn’t hesitate to buy another. Very accurate and awesome action. I thought it felt much smoother compared to anything else I held.
Believe me, I thought the same thing my entire life until I went out and tested it myself and it changed my mind. Try this simple experiment sometime, shoot a 3 shot group and mark the center of the group. Same point of aim, put 12 more rounds down range and look where the center of the group is. It's possible the center is the same but virtually guaranteed that it isn't. It's the basic statistics of random distributions.
People can say I'm full of it all they want but I put almost 500 rounds down range challenging my own beliefs by shooting different group sizes, shooting composite groups, etc. I'm not saying what anyone else should do but personally I'll never look at 3 shots groups the same way again.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2019
- Messages
- 6,280
Trigger is amazing too. It breaks like a glass rod at around 3 lbs or less. Perfect hunting trigger for me.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2020
- Messages
- 540
I know opinions are like, well you know…but why would anyone looking at these calibers not just buy a 30-06. You can load, or in most cases buy factory ammo that will produce the same ballistics as the 3 calibers you are looking at. You can push a 30-06 to almost the same ballistics as a 300wm if you know what you are doing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dmathews87
Well-Known Member
I already have a 35 whelen which is similar to the 30 06. I just want a new bolt action in one of the calibers mentioned, no other rhyme or reason.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2019
- Messages
- 6,280
Some folks want a dedicated deer rifle and will buy bigger if they need it. Also, some folks don't like any more recoil than required. I consider a 30-06 to be borderline overkill on a deer. I don't have a 30-06 right now, but I'd buy one if I was going for elk.
The concept you're flirting with is called statistical significance, and really your argument is that a 3 shot group is not statistically significant. Three shot group, five shot group, 15 shot groups, it's all arbitrary. A statistically significant group (accurate representation of the random shot distribution) is based on the variance of your shot dispersion.
Worded another way if you shoot a 3 shot group and they're all in the same hole, what is the likelihood that your next shot will also be in the same hole? (probably fairly high) However on the other hand if you shoot a 5 shot group and you're over 2 MOA, what's the likelihood that your next shot is going to be near the center of your shot dispersion? In other words, observe your group and use your best judgement to determine if it is a sufficient representation of your shot dispersion.
I don't know about you but I don't have a hunting rifle where I can shoot 15 shots back to back and still hold point of impact. You'll need to wait between shots and let your barrel cool to have any kind of consistent results. When taking that into consideration why chase diminishing returns verifying my shot dispersion with some arbitrarily large sample size when I can achieve the same results with much less?
Stated simply: when I go to verify zero before rifle season if I have 3 holes touching, I'm going to use my best judgement and call it good enough for my use case.
You believe you're getting the same results. So did I. Until I challenged my own beliefs and actually went out and tested it and it changed my mind. It's all good. I know y'all are just going to shout at me about being wrong but none of you are actually going to go out to the range and put rounds down to test it yourselves
Or................Get an AR-10 lower and AR-15 lower.....and you can just switch out the upper for any caliber you want. But they are heartless effective hunting machines, not for everyone's taste.
Dmathews87
Well-Known Member
I like bolt actions and lever actions...just something about em for me...feels more engaging. I do have AR15s, but they are for blowing money at the range lol
Exactly, only rifle I ever took hunting was a Marlin 336 that my father in law gave me or the .270 Savage 711 which was the first rifle I purchased. Sold all my AR stuff, no more time for adult legos...
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2023
- Messages
- 646
Well I don't think it's the same results at all, and that's my point. With my preferred deer rifle, by shot 3 the barrel is heated and point of impact changes from the first two. I want to know where the first(and hopefully only) shot for the day is going to hit, because I'm not going to be out there warming up my barrel in the deer woods.
On a competition rifle, a larger shot group can be better. But when you want to know where your frozen barrel is going to throw that one bullet, a smaller group is better - especially with a lightweight barrel like on most hunting rifles.
All that aside, I'm not throwing 15 rounds of Barnes downrange to improve shot placement by a half inch at 200 when my typical shot opp is at 50.
On a competition rifle, a larger shot group can be better. But when you want to know where your frozen barrel is going to throw that one bullet, a smaller group is better - especially with a lightweight barrel like on most hunting rifles.
All that aside, I'm not throwing 15 rounds of Barnes downrange to improve shot placement by a half inch at 200 when my typical shot opp is at 50.
You’re right, at 50 yards it doesn’t make any difference. A smoothbore musket with round balls is plenty accurate.
But if you ever shoot further than that you might be surprised what the rifle is actually doing compared to what we think it’s doing. Everybody assumes this is about rattling off a bunch of shots in a row but that’s not true. Clean every 3 shots, 5 shots, let it cool for 10 min, 30 min, a day, a week in between shots if you want. Test it in whatever way you believe is most representative of your shooting conditions. Just put them all onto the same target with the same point of aim and see what it looks like at the end compared to the single 3 shot group. It’s an eye opener.
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2019
- Messages
- 6,280
cleaning mid group will usually open the groups up....i find there are two separate groups, in a sense, with the "wet/clean bore" group being in a different spot
i ran into this when doing a (probably unneeded) bare break in....the shots after cleaning were in a group an inch or so above the main group
I don't disagree necessarily. However; if my group size was such that center of dispersion (with minimal human error) varied enough, at a typical zero distance, to argue with; I would be searching for a better load. I do believe that a 3-shot group, while load testing/development, may not give a "true" representation of group size, hence why most of my competition oriented groups are based off of a 5 or 10-shot group. I will also say while testing multiple loads at a single point in time, I do prefer a timed "round robin" method, as there is also the issue of many factory rifles stringing groups out as they warm up... Obviously, angular measurements being what they are, distance matters, and I would hold the initial statement more true at 600 yds. than 100 yds. taking into account the ES and SD of the actual muzzle velocity.
There's a lot to unpack here lol. Most "clean" bores shoot differently than "fouled" bores! I'm that weird person who fouls their rifle after cleaning and prior to storage with the amount of rounds needed to bring that specific firearm back to optimal accuracy (based off of my log sheets, which also tell me at what round count the accuracy degradation starts). I do not foul my handguns or muzzleloaders after cleaning and prior to storage.