Who wants to boycott 3 shot group reviews & reviewers?

[Barelstroker]

I'm a lifelong lover of all things pistols, rifles & shotguns & have been all my life.
I have subscriptions to all the gun stuff channels that I'm aware of & I love to look, listen & learn about everything guns.
Lately though, I see so many channels pissing & shitting on every rifle manufacturer you can think of based primarily on accuracy & repeatability using as little & more often than not on one single, piss poor 3 shot fucking group.
I've finally lost my shit over this bullshit 3 shot group toss that so many no-nuffs think is all telling & conclusive. They upload this garbage to YouTube & think they know WTF they are talking about.
I'm asking for opinions on what you guys really think.
Should these no-nuff plonkers continue to blame powder, primers, barrels, actions, brass & projectiles or, whatever they see fit with, nothing more than one dogshit 3 shot group?
Fuck em I say. From now on, I'm calling these plonkers out in their comments sections. No longer will I say nothing.

 

[TurdFerguson]

Anyone who views content creators/influencers as realistic/serious are retarded.

Any content creator wearing a flat brimmed hat is retarded. Flat brimmed hats are dunce caps of this generation.

 

[Ronin22]

Boy howdy, that is some firehose tism.

 

[AllenOne1]

I think you should run your own tests the way you think it should be done and post them up to prove that the 3 shot testing is inaccurate.

 

[Maurygold]

I'm a lifelong lover of all things pistols, rifles & shotguns & have been all my life.
I have subscriptions to all the gun stuff channels that I'm aware of & I love to look, listen & learn about everything guns.
Lately though, I see so many channels pissing & shitting on every rifle manufacturer you can think of based primarily on accuracy & repeatability using as little & more often than not on one single, piss poor 3 shot fucking group.
I've finally lost my shit over this bullshit 3 shot group toss that so many no-nuffs think is all telling & conclusive. They upload this garbage to YouTube & think they know WTF they are talking about.
I'm asking for opinions on what you guys really think.
Should these no-nuff plonkers continue to blame powder, primers, barrels, actions, brass & projectiles or, whatever they see fit with, nothing more than one dogshit 3 shot group?
Fuck em I say. From now on, I'm calling these plonkers out in their comments sections. No longer will I say nothing.

99% are shooting factory ammo anyways and they all shill.

I do really like winning in the wind though - he’s as good a precision shooter channel as they come.

 

[diggler1833]

98% of content creators want to be able to shoot for a living, so they'll put out whatever is necessary to get the "like, share, and subscribe, or consider following me on Patreon".

I tired of all the "INSANE" rifle builds, shot groups, and performance review click bait pretty quickly. I do like a few channels though from guys who actually compete with what they're saying/doing.

 

[BurtG]

First groups out of my installed with 10lb sledge hammer and 20 ton press “thermofit” 6 arc build :

Legit 0.1” gun here

 

[Wormydog1724]

Nice crash out. Now post some groups.

 

[ShtrRdy]

Don't you have something better to do?

 

[Supersubes]

 

[KYAggie]

After waking up in the morning it’s coffee, coffee and contemplation; then speaking. Violating this often results in one going full retard according to my wife; not sure if she’s talking about her, or people in general.

I haven’t seen the reviews you are referring to, so I can’t comment specifically, but I suspect few YouTube sensations are good shooters not to mention they are probably testing light barreled hunting rifles and 5 shot groups would likely be even worse.

Best thing to do is smile and wave boys, smile and wave.

 

[supercorndogs]

 

[BurtG]

Multiply a 3-shot group by 1.28 to get your expected 5-shot group?

I saw this on LaRue's Instagram and thought it was interesting.

www.snipershide.com

 

[mark5pt56]

I say you do you and don't dwell on most of the world. Big thing is consider the sources, the intended use of the rifle being tested, does it apply to you? if not, like the above post-smile and wave.

 

[BurtG]

 

[Baron23]

I do really like winning in the wind though - he’s as good a precision shooter channel as they come.

I too like Glasscock's content. He's totally data driven and no BS.

As for 3 shot group shills....I'd kind of like to add people who consistently shoot REALLY, REALLY small groups with the rifles they build but never say they use a mechanical rest/fixture (like BR shooters) to do it. Just a thought.

 

[hlee]

2 more shots isn’t going to make a lousy 3 shot group better.

 

[Barelstroker]

Most of these reviewers seem to be able to rubbish any & all ammo manufacturers products as well as rifle manufacturers, projectile manufacturers, powder, primer & brass manufacturers, all based on one 3 shot group.
Apparently, a 3 shot group tests all of these things whenever they want. They just choose a subject & there's a 3 shot group to prove their point.
The damage some of these reviewers can & must do to companies due to their influence is real & I think they have a far greater impact than most of us realize.
When I venture into their comments section, there is a flood of ass licking comments agreeing wholeheartedly with whatever determination the reviewers last flurry of 3 shot group wisdom showed them.

 

[flogxal]

I say you do you and don't dwell on most of the world. Big thing is consider the sources, the intended use of the rifle being tested, does it apply to you? if not, like the above post-smile and wave.

...but how do I validate my "knowledge" unless I come onto the internet and tell folks "Joe Pumpkinhead over there, he's a dunce, and you should know that I AM THE SMART ONE"?

Maybe I'm being sarcastic here, or maybe I'm being honest?

 

[Buzzinga]

So…you’re saying spending too much time on social media is having a negative impact on your psychological well-being. Huh who’d have thunk it

 

[Bakwa]

I'm a lifelong lover of all things pistols, rifles & shotguns & have been all my life.
I have subscriptions to all the gun stuff channels that I'm aware of & I love to look, listen & learn about everything guns.
Lately though, I see so many channels pissing & shitting on every rifle manufacturer you can think of based primarily on accuracy & repeatability using as little & more often than not on one single, piss poor 3 shot fucking group.
I've finally lost my shit over this bullshit 3 shot group toss that so many no-nuffs think is all telling & conclusive. They upload this garbage to YouTube & think they know WTF they are talking about.
I'm asking for opinions on what you guys really think.
Should these no-nuff plonkers continue to blame powder, primers, barrels, actions, brass & projectiles or, whatever they see fit with, nothing more than one dogshit 3 shot group?
Fuck em I say. From now on, I'm calling these plonkers out in their comments sections. No longer will I say nothing.

Yeah!
Let's tie them up, peel their eyelids back, and force them to read Bryan Litz.


LOL
In all seriousness, I shoot 5 shot groups and sometimes don't trust the results. 5 shot groups are my personal minimum for getting data. I've spent far too much effort trying to explain this mentality to "good enough" shooters.
Sometimes, though, less is good enough...

 

[DeathBeforeDismount]

I rather boycott people who bitch about listening to the advice of other idiots or carrying enough about them to make a thread about it.

Do your own testing and research and stop following morons.

 

[Baron23]

I rather boycott people who bitch about listening to the advice of other idiots or carrying enough about them to make a thread about it.

And I would rather boycott people who would rather boycott people who bitch about listening to the advice of other idiots or carrying enough about them to make a thread about it.

 

[carbonbased]

As others have said, don’t waste time on the super-oversponsored and/or controversy-stoking hacks. But most people that have content that you actually want to watch/read have some sort of industry tie-in, including most of those below.

Spoiler: Long boring recce w/out boob pics

Heck, I started my shooting journey watching über-hack Tiborasaurus Rex. Viewers either push through the doofuses or are forever stuck in doof-land.

The following have acceptable levels of potential outside influence. To me.

9 hole reviews is good (9 shots is what they suggest to evaluate a gun). Not outside sponsored, usually. But they say Slate Black Industries (SBI) is a sponsor, but they also own SBI (tax write-off?).

Haven’t watched too much of Small Arms Solutions to form a strong opinion other than he seems to know what he’s talking about. Could be wrong though.

Phillip Velayo is a good shooter and I think he has some especially good technique vids (like bipod use). He is a sponsored shooter, so that is something to be aware of.

Erik Cortina can be interesting, although he’s into tuners (he sells his own). His challenge vids are fun…it’s amazing how many shooters haven’t sorted their mag feeding before showing up!

He also runs an interview YT channel called Believe the Target (I think that’s a subtle reference to tuners). Anyway, the interviews can be interesting.

Our own @koshkin has good scope evaluations on the Dark Lord of Optics (YT) and write-ups on OpticsThoughts (he runs that site). You can also join his Locals site where he helps people.

The only guy that seemed completely out of the industry was Paul Harrell, but he’s recently dead and I’m not sure about his brother’s content on the channel (haven’t really watched his stuff). Paul’s old vids are gold, however.

See if a reviewer ever has something very negative to say about a product (and not just once or twice). Do they always (or usually) get free product? These are signs, but not absolutes.

For example, @koshkin gets many free scopes to review but he poops on a lot of them…don’t think he keeps the scopes but eventually returns them once done.

I also like: X-ring, Mark & Sam After Work

Used to like F-Class John until he turned into a Shill-Tuber Deluxe with Cheese.

If you’re going to watch a shill-tuber, watch one that is honest about his intentions like Camera Conspiracies. Obv not a gun channel. Dude cracks me up.

I am probably just an idiot, but that’s my take.

Ok I lied. Here’s a boob pic for your time.

 

[Baron23]

As others have said, don’t waste time on the super-oversponsored and/or controversy-stoking hacks. But most people that have content that you actually want to watch/read have some sort of industry tie-in, including most of those below.

Spoiler: Long boring recce w/out boob pics

Heck, I started my shooting journey watching über-hack Tiborasaurus Rex. Viewers either push through the doofuses or are forever stuck in doof-land.

The following have acceptable levels of potential outside influence. To me.

9 hole reviews is good (9 shots is what they suggest to evaluate a gun). Not outside sponsored, usually. But they run Slate Black Industries which is a sponsor (tax write-off?).

Haven’t watched too much of Small Arms Solutions to form a strong opinion other than he seems to know what he’s talking about. Could be wrong though.

Phillip Velayo is a good shooter and I think he has some especially good technique vids (like bipod use). He is a sponsored shooter, so that is something to be aware of.

Erik Cortina can be interesting, although he’s into tuners (he sells his own). His challenge vids are fun…it’s amazing how many shooters haven’t sorted their mag feeding before showing up!

He also runs an interview YT channel called Believe the Target (I think that’s a subtle reference to tuners). Anyway, the interviews can be interesting.

Our own @koshkin has good scope evaluations on the Dark Lord of Optics (YT) and write-ups on OpticsThoughts (he runs that site). You can also join his Locals site where he helps people.

The only guy that seemed completely out of the industry was Paul Harrell, but he’s recently dead and I’m not sure about his brother’s content on the channel (haven’t really watched his stuff). Paul’s old vids are gold, however.

See if a reviewer ever has something very negative to say about a product (and not just once or twice). Do they always (or usually) get free product? These are signs, but not absolutes.

For example, @koshkin gets many free scopes to review but he poops on a lot of them…don’t think he keeps the scopes but eventually returns them once done.

I also like: X-ring, Mark & Sam After Work

Used to like F-Class John until he turned into a Shill-Tuber Deluxe with Cheese.

If you’re going to watch a shill-tuber, watch one that is honest about his intentions like Camera Conspiracies. Obv not a gun channel. Dude cracks me up.

I am probably just an idiot, but that’s my take.

Ok I lied. Here’s a boob pic for your time.
View attachment 8751278

I’ve never seen Velayo pimp products and yes, I think he’s got the clearest vids on build a position w a bipod.

I like his stuff and I bet it’d be cool to meet him sometime but I believe he’s out of the clinic reaching biz.

 

[DownhillFromHere]

So if you think so much of the crap you're looking at is crap, whyinhell are you still looking at it? Boycott? The people to whom you object are living rent free in your head.

Just put the f'ing phone down and live life more unplugged. I'm pretty confident that a significant percentage of the stress in my 30-something-year-old son comes from having that goddam phone glued to his face the great majority of his non-working waking hours.

Here is a small portion of a photo my wife took at the beach last week. Notice how many people cannot.put.the.damn.phone.down.

 

[Hickswr]

I don’t watch any of the nonsense you speak of.

However if a 3-shot group is subpar, it will only get worse with more rounds fired.

The issue I have with 3-shot groups, is folks claiming to have a 1/4MOA rifle based on a single 3-shot group.

 

[Im2bent]

2 more shots isn’t going to make a lousy 3 shot group better.

Winner,winner, chicken dinner. To the op let me get this right you are complaining because tubers are shitting on a system due to a single lousy 3 shot group? Would an even worse 30 round group make you happy?

 

[BurtG]

The issue I have with 3-shot groups, is folks claiming to have a 1/4MOA rifle

1/4 hell

My rifles are sub 1/10

308 gap

 

[Rubicon Precision]

Out of all the things I lose sleep over, three shot groups ain’t one of ‘em.

 

[hlee]

Wait until the OP hears that there’s a guy in the rimfire section espousing the virtue of 1 shot groups…

 

[xxflyingturtlexx]

Boycott for what? If you don't like it don't watch it.

 

[BurtG]

Turns out 5 shot groups pretty good too

We still discarding any shot not in group as a “flyer” correct ?

 

[Emerson0311]

I don’t watch any of the nonsense you speak of.

However if a 3-shot group is subpar, it will only get worse with more rounds fired.

The issue I have with 3-shot groups, is folks claiming to have a 1/4MOA rifle based on a single 3-shot group.

Shooters bull shitting themselves and the rest of us about their rifle’s abilities is constant. I ignore online now. At the range they get a lot quieter. Those 6” gongs at 400 get a lot less play than the inter webs would suggest.

 

[Barelstroker]

Winner,winner, chicken dinner. To the op let me get this right you are complaining because tubers are shitting on a system due to a single lousy 3 shot group? Would an even worse 30 round group make you happy?

It's not about a bigger group the more shots there is. It's about shooting enough to measure a trend.
Shoot 8 or 10 shots & you have something to work with.
A really good 3 shot group might turn to shit on the 4th or fifth. Then again you could see a 3/4" group from 10 shots. A 10 shot 3/4" group is completely different to 1/4" 3 shot group.
If you would bet $10K, would you bet on the 1/4" shot group or the 3/4" 10 shot group to shoot approximately the same size group again with 10 shots for both rifles? My guess is very few would bet $10K on the 3 shot group rifle so, why do so many think 3 shot groups tell them anything?
How many would bet $10K against the 3 shot groups they're happy to show on the hide if, they had to prove that rifle with a 10 shot group. Very few would be prepared to put their money on that bet.

 

[AllenOne1]

Those 6” gongs at 400 get a lot less play than the inter webs would suggest.

That's not the case at our range the 500 yard KYL rack gets beat to shit.

There are plenty of guys that can't shoot well of course, but there are also plenty that can shoot. If you truly want to learn how to shoot, there are a lot of guys that will help walk you up that ladder.

 

[BurtG]

A lot of people that can shoot don’t use public ranges

 

[Emerson0311]

That's not the case at our range the 500 yard KYL rack gets beat to shit.

There are plenty of guys that can't shoot well of course, but there are also plenty that can shoot. If you truly want to learn how to shoot, there are a lot of guys that will help walk you up that ladder.

Most of the poor shooters I see have no interest in improving. That would force them to admit they have room for improvement. I enjoy watching shooters better than myself. Generally that’s the only way I know they are that good, because they don’t talk about it.

 

[BurtG]

would force them to admit they have room for improvement.

Comps are the best for this.

Shrinks them big heads Riki tic

 

[carbonbased]

Generally that’s the only way I know they are that good, because they don’t talk about it.

Yeah, sounds like me. My groups are always in the zeros. Never discuss it. Won the World’s Humblest Man contest 101yrs straight.

Fucking A

 

[Im2bent]

It's not about a bigger group the more shots there is. It's about shooting enough to measure a trend.
Shoot 8 or 10 shots & you have something to work with.
A really good 3 shot group might turn to shit on the 4th or fifth. Then again you could see a 3/4" group from 10 shots. A 10 shot 3/4" group is completely different to 1/4" 3 shot group.
If you would bet $10K, would you bet on the 1/4" shot group or the 3/4" 10 shot group to shoot approximately the same size group again with 10 shots for both rifles? My guess is very few would bet $10K on the 3 shot group rifle so, why do so many think 3 shot groups tell them anything?
How many would bet $10K against the 3 shot groups they're happy to show on the hide if, they had to prove that rifle with a 10 shot group. Very few would be prepared to put their money on that bet.

Uhhhh the whole point is if the 3 shot group is shit its not going to get better.

 

[ranger43]

I typically shoot 3 shot groups. If that is not what I want, then I’ll not going to waste another 2 shots. However if the first three are where I’m hoping for, then I’ll shoot another two rounds. I nearly always load 5 and so I might have a couple left over for either plinking or adjusting seating depth if that is my problem.

 

[mi650]

I mostly shoot 5 rd. groups, but will do 3 for a hunting rifle. I guess the main reason is I have generally short shots on deer, so 3 rds. is going to give me all the info I need.

 

[Ronin22]

Uhhhh the whole point is if the 3 shot group is shit its not going to get better.

Yeah no shit. If I make up 5 different recipes, the one that’s got the tightest group gets more tweaking. No sense polishing a turd(s).

 

[diggler1833]

^ This is why I loosely test brand new combinations with small sample shot groups. If I am after half-minute performance, and a small sample throws a one MOA 2+1... I see no need to fire 27 more rounds to verify that it will still not perform as I want. As I narrow in on my desired load, the sample sizes get larger and are repeated.

The old 'Sniper's Hide 5x5' was a pretty awesome target idea. I foresee that coming back around with time. We just need to wait out the trend of guys telling each other to shoot "anudder fitty".

 

[Ledzep]

1 is enough, 2 is plenty. 3 is overkill.

 

[TurdFerguson]

 

[LR1845]

Seems like not long ago ppl were saying they could pick a random charge and seating depth go shoot a match and win or place high…so now we’re back to shooting groups?

 

[diggler1833]

1 is enough, 2 is plenty. 3 is overkill.

I dunno man, I've seen ol' @BurtG manage a single shot, three quarter-minute group before...

 

[roostercogburn98]

^ This is why I loosely test brand new combinations with small sample shot groups. If I am after half-minute performance, and a small sample throws a one MOA 2+1... I see no need to fire 27 more rounds to verify that it will still not perform as I want. As I narrow in on my desired load, the sample sizes get larger and are repeated.

The old 'Sniper's Hide 5x5' was a pretty awesome target idea. I foresee that coming back around with time. We just need to wait out the trend of guys telling each other to shoot "anudder fitty".

Or a small diameter dot drill. If I can consistently hit the dot, I’m ok with that bullet performance.

Seems to be acceptable in a lot of 22 paper target matches