5rd groups aren't statistically significant! Wanna bet?!!

[Ronin22]

Has anyone mentioned that all this “statistical data” is skewed by that monkey pulling the trigger every shot who can’t be relied upon to pull it the exact same way every time? Because it is.

I can pretty much bet none of us is mounting our guns into a rigid, immobilized rest and using some type of device to break the trigger exactly the same for every single shot… so one’s got to remember to be honest about the fact that our performance and imperfectness is added into the equation whether we like it or not.

All the wonkiness/variability we add to the mix due to being imperfect meat puppets should be enough for most to see why we need to shoot more than a handful of rounds in order to be confident in what we’ve really got.

Anyone can shoot a couple of good groups in a row with almost anything if they’re even a little lucky… that’s why it takes more than a few rounds to rule out whether what we’ve got is legit or not.

Shoot too few and it’s a Rorschach test, period (and guys will see what they wanna see).

“Scope is bad, won’t hold zero”

 

[Doom]

I believe that as we are gaining more insite provided by more chronograph data we are going to find that what has previously been considered a powder node is really the points in barrel time where the barrel is moving slowly and imparting very little cross velocity to the bullet. The concepts of combustion/ignition in the powder don't support the existence of "sweet spot" where things change for bad to good then back to bad, with the assumption that case fill is sufficient to support consistent ignition.

 

[LR1845]

I just baked 12 dozen shit chip cookies.

How many do you eat to determine that there is a deviation from the norm?

If I’m understanding it would be 3-5 to taste good…20-30 if you want to know they kinda taste like shit….and 30 to 100 to be sure they taste like shit.

So in conclusion you have some more baking to do.

 

[Ledzep]

See @Ledzep even if your employer makes some wack 204 40gr ammo, it can shoot ok. I mean, I’m a pdog shooter and not some sniper, so it frees up time for me to enjoy my kids and the stakes are low.

Yeah man that's pretty bad I meant to comment on that earlier, feel free to call tech support and tell them I sent you. I might guess a powder drop issue with such a small neck ID? We've also run into some powder consistency issues here and there over the last couple years especially. Hard telling. Tech support is a job I do not envy and I hate seeing on here where people get fucked around by tech support because I see those comments often enough, too...

However... in their defense, I've listened to recorded calls of "customers" (some that actually purchased our product and some that never even did) and then read their online sob stories here and elsewhere and they do not always match up as much as they'd like everyone to believe and before working here I would have never in my life believed how many losers there are skimming for free shit and it forces them to be very careful about "liability". There are also some helplessly mis/uninformed people that call in.. Unfortunately sometimes good intentioned knowledgeable people get caught in that crossfire. It's a human operation.

 

[flogxal]

This is helpful practical guidance and as a non-maths person, it might be the only thing I halfway understand in this thread haha!

Yessir.

Thanks a ton, JB.IC

 

[carbonbased]

Yeah man that's pretty bad I meant to comment on that earlier, feel free to call tech support and tell them I sent you. I might guess a powder drop issue with such a small neck ID? We've also run into some powder consistency issues here and there over the last couple years especially. Hard telling. Tech support is a job I do not envy and I hate seeing on here where people get fucked around by tech support because I see those comments often enough, too...

However... in their defense, I've listened to recorded calls of "customers" (some that actually purchased our product and some that never even did) and then read their online sob stories here and elsewhere and they do not always match up as much as they'd like everyone to believe and before working here I would have never in my life believed how many losers there are skimming for free shit and it forces them to be very careful about "liability". There are also some helplessly mis/uninformed people that call in.. Unfortunately sometimes good intentioned knowledgeable people get caught in that crossfire. It's a human operation.

I actually like Hornady stuff, for the most part. During the Corona times, I ran into some boxes of 22-250 50gr Superperformance that chambered hard and Hornady replaced them (obv didn’t fire them).

Maybe I like Hornady only because they make ammo that’s the fastest or near-fastest (or shoots the best) for the wimpy non-SH calibers I like: 22 Hornet, 17 Hornet, 204, and 22-250. I wouldn’t call myself a “fan”, but Vmax bullets do the explode-y stuff I like lol

I have read that Hornady doesn’t have the best brass, but since I don’t reload I don’t know shit.

However, I do know I wouldn’t want to run an ammo company! What a colossal pain in the ass! Hang in there.

 

[carbonbased]

Has anyone mentioned that all this “statistical data” is skewed by that monkey pulling the trigger every shot who can’t be relied upon to pull it the exact same way every time? Because it is.

Totally agree. @JR1200W3 is a much better rifleman than I will ever be, I’m sure. And he reloads, shoots more and in more conditions/positions, etc etc. Fuck and he understands more about statistics haha! He can suss out what’s going on with his system quick.

If I thought too highly of my shooting skills, it would be easy to blame the ammo (or whatever) for my inconsistent groups.

Whereas my group variability is almost certainly me getting used to bipod A, or sandbag B or forgetting to employ rear bag technique T, being a little tired, or even having a tendency of shooting better at the middle row of targets vs. the top row. (Actually can’t remember which row I tend to shoot better lol, maybe due to optimal rear bag height?)

 

[Harman117]

Highly recommend the book "Modern Advancements in Long Range Shooting Volume III" by Bryan Litz. Reading is gay, but this one is worth it. Also its easy to understand and follow along with pictures

 

[Bevan]

It depends what you intend to do with the data.

 

[Ronws]

Has anyone mentioned that all this “statistical data” is skewed by that monkey pulling the trigger every shot who can’t be relied upon to pull it the exact same way every time? Because it is.

I can pretty much bet none of us is mounting our guns into a rigid, immobilized rest and using some type of device to break the trigger exactly the same for every single shot… so one’s got to remember to be honest about the fact that our performance and imperfectness is added into the equation whether we like it or not.

All the wonkiness/variability we add to the mix due to being imperfect meat puppets should be enough for most to see why we need to shoot more than a handful of rounds in order to be confident in what we’ve really got.

Anyone can shoot a couple of good groups in a row with almost anything if they’re even a little lucky… that’s why it takes more than a few rounds to rule out whether what we’ve got is legit or not.

Shoot too few and it’s a Rorschach test, period (and guys will see what they wanna see).

Jayden Quinlan also addressed this in the podcasts. Many is the person who dismisses a outlier. "That was all me."

Was it, he asks? Did you squeeze any differently? Did you flinch? Specifically, what is it that you did differently to cause the outlier? If it really was you that caused the outlier, trash the group and start over.

It has been their experience, and they really do build a premium rig to test, that larger groups are more accurate for predicting rifle performance.

But I also get it, do a 5 round group, use whatever factor to adjust and live with that. Maybe a large percentage of the time, that will be right. And also to be fair, I think the rifle is getting really warm by the time you get to 10 rounds, certainly 30.

A long time ago, before these podcasts, before I ever came to this forum, I did 60 rounds with one of my rifles. It was a little shy of 1.5 inches but I can't prove it because I did not keep the paper. Point being, I can trust that rifle to be 1.5", conservatively. So, on a deer vitals target at less than 300 yards, I know this rifle can do the job. Certainly I like the performance of a rifle in the first 3 shots.

But I have not shot competition where these fine details may possibly matter more.

 

[Ronws]

Highly recommend the book "Modern Advancements in Long Range Shooting Volume III" by Bryan Litz. Reading is gay, but this one is worth it. Also its easy to understand and follow along with pictures

I have Volume II. I did not know he came out with another one.

 

[Ronws]

Sometimes when I see guys arguing about a tenth of a grain of powder, or a couple of thou of seating depth, etc, being the difference between a good or a bad load, acting like their performance can’t possibly be the difference… I start to think I might be the only one who remembers

There also guys who are keen into turning necks to ensure concentricity.

 

[popeye089]

I find it utterly ironic that Hornady can only seem to keep their “match grade” bullets within 1.4 grain of each other, in a box of 100. Nor can they make “match grade” brass that isn’t known as some of the softest out there and even when it is free, I toss it and buy Alpha, Lapua, Peterson or ADG. Yet they lecture folks on reloading match quality ammo. Clowns…..

This is spot on

Like going to a hooker and asking for long term relationship advice