Filter

Hypothetical: 1x fired --> annealed

No, you misunderstand. Didn't disregard your data, and in fact, thank you for sharing it. It's just a very small sample size. That data may prove out over a thousand rounds, or ten-thousand, but you know 10 rounds isn't a large enough sample size to make any declarations. I've shot 10rd groups back to back with no changes and seen noticeable changes in group size and SD and the like. Thank you for your spreadsheet, and it does as much as anything I've seen as far as reasonable testing, just needs more. Ten groups of ten shots each way would probably be enough to tell the truth.
I agree about 10 rounds given the statistics for that number. That's why I combined each of the 10 sets for 20 on my spreadsheet as 20 is a much better telling figure. There's an error factor for 20 too, but. . . but it's getting pretty small and I think, small enough to answer the question as to whether the theory(s) is valid . . . especially given the many testimonies from some pretty good sources. It just doesn't seem to me that something like a 1,000 round test is going to answer the question any better. After all, we're not trying to put a lander on Mars. ;)

Hmmmm??? I wonder if a Monte Carlo simulation software could answer the question well?

You're very welcome, about the spreadsheet. As I've collected my own data or the last 8 years, it's been interesting to me to see what works and what doesn't. When I initially started annealing, I saw a distinct improvement in my overall data. But, because I was (and still am) playing with various components, I think it would be too confusing for anyone to look at my data and draw any conclusion about annealing since I didn't actually record this aspect for annealing.
  • Like
Reactions: Hecouldgoalltheway

Accessories WTB,looking for brakes for 6.5s


Looks like a couple in this ad.