“Your groups are too small” vs barrel life

[Barrelnut]

I believe Hornady is talking about 20 shot groups to determine your final zero NOT working up a load. A good zero that is centered inside the your rifles true probable group size in very important at long range. A 20 shot group will show you that. You could even dial the scope down 2 MOA while shooting the group so that you can easily shoot at a precise aim point on the target without blowing the center out of the group and loosing your precise aiming point.

 

[cajun]

I believe Hornady is talking about 20 shot groups to determine your final zero NOT working up a load. A good zero that is centered inside the your rifles true probable group size in very important at long range. A 20 shot group will show you that. You could even dial the scope down 2 MOA while shooting the group so that you can easily shoot at a precise aim point on the target without blowing the center out of the group and loosing your precise aiming point.

They talked about both in the podcast. They basically said the same thing that holds true for load development applies to your zero.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

If you have a 1 moa rifle and shoot a 10 shot group, how many shots are at 1 moa? How many are at .5 moa? What are the odds of the hunting rifle shooting the 1st shot at .5 moa? Asking for a friend....

 

[Shane Lindsey]

One shot groups for me…all my rifles are amazing

 

[Jon Bischof]

This is the LRH HUNTING forum and Not the F Class competition forum.
For us, the first cold bore shot is primary. Cold bore shots are the only shots that matter for hunting.
Regardless of whether you shoot 3 shot groups or 50 shot groups, they should all be cold barrel shots. The first 2 are primary.

All warm barrel shots must be discounted as false data that have no application to big game hunting.

Warm barrel shots are an exercise in self deception in regard to hunting.
How many of you have made a decisive killing shot on big game on the 5th shot? Seriously

 

[SmokinCrow]

I have found that the Hornady Advice has helped my load development. I don't feel I'm constantly tinkering thinking I get small gains when I keep shooting and see that nothing really changed.

I do get frustrated with these posts about the Hornady Podcast because I feel no matter what they say or do someone blows it out of proportion or puts things out that they really didn't say. I have heard many times how Hornady claims their bullets are better or they say seating depth doesn't matter and blah blah blah. But if you listen they say we found with our bullets and our cartridge design when we shoot statistically significant groups we see this. They have said at the same time we can't say the same thing with other manufacturers' bullets and other cartridge designs as we haven't tested their bullets. The one podcast said it would be interesting to test a .308 with other manufacturers bullets and see what happens. It would also require taking statistically significant groups to see. Testing seating depth and only shooting a 3 shot group doesn't provide statistically significant data. They also said likely to see big changes bigger changes in seating will make bigger differences.

They really do put the caveats out there between what they have found with their bullets and cartridge designs vs others. But Haters want to hate and its because they can't stand that there are "Fan Boys" out there who think Hornady or the Creedmoor can do no wrong. I like Hornady, and have had great success with their products. I didn't really agree with their Podcast on groups being too small, but I tried their method and it worked for me. I wasn't chasing my tail like I feel happened before. I wasn't shooting a kick *** group testing, and then going back to validate said kick *** load only finding that it wasn't shooting near as well. Then making tweaks and getting a kick *** group and finding the validation not going as planned or when going out to shoot after a validation group having it open up. I learned a bit, and it helped me. Good deal. If its not for you, ok great. Just go about doing things your way. Your way doesn't work for others. Its ok to share your experience but doesn't mean its the only way or the right way for everyone. I think we need to get over the Hornady Hatred because of the need to overcompensate for the "Fan Boys" out there.

 

[Huntnful]

This is the LRH HUNTING forum and Not the F Class competition forum.
For us, the first cold bore shot is primary. Cold bore shots are the only shots that matter for hunting.
Regardless of whether you shoot 3 shot groups or 50 shot groups, they should all be cold barrel shots. The first 2 are primary.

All warm barrel shots must be discounted as false data that have no application to big game hunting.

Warm barrel shots are an exercise in self deception in regard to hunting.
How many of you have made a decisive killing shot on big game on the 5th shot? Seriously

Not sure if this is a joke or not? A well built rifle doesn't have a cold bore shift. Cold bore always lands within the cone of fire. It's not some mythical thing that lands 2" away that you need to map. If your gun does that, it's garbage.

 

[quandary]

I love the posts on this Hornady podcast. I'd be willing to bet good money that less than 10% of those posting on these threads have actually listened to the whole podcast and less than that actually comprehend what they are saying.

 

[bluedog69]

Maybe seating depth makes more difference on a factory crap gun. It may not have been chambered as true as a good custom. Etc etc etc
I have several times done rough seating depth testing jumping .025 at a time. I have had that make a rifle go from 1.75 to 1.25 to .75 back to 1.25 back to 1.75(in inch size groups at 100). Five, five shot groups. So I am a believer that you do need to test like Berger says to on their website.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

Maybe seating depth makes more difference on a factory crap gun. It may not have been chambered as true as a good custom. Etc etc etc
I have several times done rough seating depth testing jumping .025 at a time. I have had that make a rifle go from 1.75 to 1.25 to .75 back to 1.25 back to 1.75(in inch size groups at 100). Five, five shot groups. So I am a believer that you do need to test like Berger says to on their website.

You have long legs blue dog 69!

 

[SmokinCrow]

I looked through most of the posts but don't think anyone mentioned the theory behind sample size has nothing to do with shooting. I am in no way an expert on the subject but I believe for any data that is believed to follow a normal distribution in order for any statistics to have a confidence level 90% or more the usual minimum sample size is 30. If someone is better versed in this than I am please feel free to correct me.

In my experience the thing small groups lacks most is to account for the movement of POI between groups that will drive the group size higher.

I will not pretend to say I know what to believe. Shooters who win world championships don't use large group sizes. Yet the theory and the math say it will tell you more. Maybe the equipment, reloading and technique are so good the variation is very small so no matter the number of rounds in the group the team overall size does not change.

Don't think that would apply to me.

JB

What I find interesting is the Hornady Guys talk about the guys that don't use large sample sizes and success. They say there is often something to say about just having confidence in yourself and your method. Doesn't matter what anyone says or does. If it works for you and you have confidence in it than that's great. Confidence always plays a role. When we have confidence in what we do that's half the battle.

 

[Phil Rizzo]

What I find interesting is the Hornady Guys talk about the guys that don't use large sample sizes and success. They say there is often something to say about just having confidence in yourself and your method. Doesn't matter what anyone says or does. If it works for you and you have confidence in it than that's great. Confidence always plays a role. When we have confidence in what we do that's half the battle.

I agree totally.

 

[RegionRat]

If you have a 1 moa rifle and shoot a 10 shot group, how many shots are at 1 moa? How many are at .5 moa? What are the odds of the hunting rifle shooting the 1st shot at .5 moa? Asking for a friend....

This is an easy one to give a rough answer Rocky.... Just for fun.

(Although I can say that in my professional life, I have rarely ever seen a hit probability distribution that was actually a "normal distribution".)

Since we called it a 1 MOA rifle, that means it would be for 6 SD worth of the group. So, from that starting point, the probability for the first part of your question is roughly 100 percent because you are covering that with your definition. For this to be called a 1 MOA rifle, all 10 of those shots are within the 1 MOA.
If we keep looking for the probability of the inside 0.5 MOA, then roughly speaking there would be roughly 80% of them. Your probability is roughly 7/10 - 8/10 should land inside the 0.5 MOA zone with an 1 MOA rifle. So any given single shot has about 7 to 8 out of 10 chance of landing inside 0.5 MOA, but only in a perfect world....

 

[Phil Rizzo]

By now it's still a theory? Hell we want some FACTS