High expectations Re: Accuracy, A hypothetical

Jump to latest Follow Reply
L.Leon

L.Leon

Member
Aug 29, 2018
8,301
8,961
NY, Ulster County, United States
We have a table set up with a bunch of sweet PCPs rifles, bull pups, semi pups, etc., proven to be MOA shooters at 50 yards in good conditions. You as the shooter get to shoot each one in good conditions. Would you expect to be able to achieve said accuracy with each of the different platforms? If yes, please say why. If no, also why?

Reason I ask is that some shooters get a new, very capable PCP shoot a tin or less and complain it won't shoot as accurately as their (insert brand or name) other PCPs. I've always been under the impression that you have to get acquainted through lots of shooting and manipulating before you can decide if the gun shoots accurately or not. I'm speaking strictly about PCPs with proven accuracy through many users. I firmly believe that many consider themselves better shooters then they are, myself included.😀
 
I agree with what you say that many think they are actually better than they are. But i also think a good portion of the group you would present these guns to could complete the task. I think alot would depend on the age and maturity of your group. Personally if benchresting i believe i could get along with a few, a few less if off styx as im old and not as rock solid as i once was
 
Upvote 0
I’ve always believed that any well made air rifle or firearm for that matter can probably shoot better than I’m capable of getting out of it. I’ve been into PCP rifles for almost 15 years now. I started with a custom Talon Tunes Airforce Talon, then an AA S410, then a very early Edgun, an Air Ranger, Kalibr Cricket, Royale 400, Impact and just recently a Crown MK2. They all shot wonderfully and I’m sure had more potential that I achieved with them. I am capable of slightly under MOA out to about 75 yards and then slightly over MOA by the time I get to 100 yards. Every one of my previous air rifle was up to that task as well.

Kenny
 
Upvote 0
I would hope I could,it would take me some shots to do it and for some configurations a lot more shots than others.

Why,first off the techques for good shooting ,the principals do not change,what changes is the hold ,the sweet spot where you and the gun develop a relationship,what feels good ,how your head,you eyes are comfortably postioned each and every shot.

That does or may take time....the rifle is in fact capable,you can relax in that knowledge,and that is part of it ,to relax,to achieve the goals your rifle is capable of.

You made it easy,truth be told I can shoot good,but I let a friend of mine shoot my rifle and he shot it better than me,what does that say about me.LOL.
 
Upvote 0
I assume we are considering shooting from a bench, and with proper support for the rifle. In that scenario, and assuming the rifle and pellets are, at that moment capable of the proven MOA accuracy, then I would expect to be able to achieve those results with reasonable practice time. BR shooting at this threshold level is, IMO, more a test of equipment than shooting skill. As with any sport, that changes at the highest level of competition, but that's not what we are considering here. If the question was, would I expect to achieve comparable results with an accomplished BR champion under average outdoor conditions, the answer is, definitely no. He/she would embarrass me badly. 
 
Upvote 0
It took a long time into my shooting life for me to admit that a day of bad shooting was probably just me. The look on my buddies face the first time I said it might just be me was interesting because we were egomaniacs and he kinda looked up to me as a shooter. Life got easier with my gun and archery shooting when I accepted I wasn’t having a good day. I also save shooting arrows, bullets or pellets by not trying to shoot through frustration. I just walk away for the day. The key is knowing what the weapon of choice has been capable of in the past. Once a gun proves to me how accurate and consistent it is, I will always blame myself first before I start twisting knobs and changing stuff. However, I will shoot a unproven gun relentlessly and be reluctant to blame myself until it proves itself. If Joe or Bob has a proven tack driver and I don’t shoot it so well, it’s me and it’s fun to figure out why. It’s usually just familiarity.
 
Upvote 0
We have a table set up with a bunch of sweet PCPs rifles, bull pups, semi pups, etc., proven to be MOA shooters at 50 yards in good conditions. You as the shooter get to shoot each one in good conditions. Would you expect to be able to achieve said accuracy with each of the different platforms? If yes, please say why. If no, also why?

Reason I ask is that some shooters get a new, very capable PCP shoot a tin or less and complain it won't shoot as accurately as their (insert brand or name) other PCPs. I've always been under the impression that you have to get acquainted through lots of shooting and manipulating before you can decide if the gun shoots accurately or not. I'm speaking strictly about PCPs with proven accuracy through many users. I firmly believe that many consider themselves better shooters then they are, myself included.
1f600.svg
Click to expand...

I think it does take some time to learn the rifle, before I can accurately shoot 1/2” average CTC (MOA) at 50 yards. As an example, I can normally average MOA at 50 yards with my RAW HM1000x .22 HP and with my RW Safari HP .22 cal. But, I have spent a lot of time at the bench to make that claim, and learning the gun and pellet it likes best. I keep all my cards so I can track progress on my journey.

That said, I would expect ( with the caveats ELH describes) that I could quickly come up to speed and shoot ‘some’ MOA groups with these PCPS at 50 yards. Shooting MOA at 50y in some wind, is not a slam dunk. The equipment is important, but your technique, knowledge of the gun, skill and experience does come into play at 50 yards.

At 100 yards, it’s much more about having skill and reading the wind with these same guns.
 
Upvote 0
"Would you expect to be able to achieve said accuracy with each of the different platforms? If yes, please say why. If no, also why?"

I'd go so far as to say, "If anybody could, it would be me"; and furthermore, "NO!" And lastly, "I'd bet good money on that, and I'm NOT a gambling man".

Award wall.1630431937.jpg
 

I've often said, "Just as shooters have good and bad days, so, also do their guns".


 
Upvote 0
If we're going to expand the criteria from 50 yards and good conditions, to 100 yards and a challenging wind, I'm out. That's no longer learning the rifle, that's knowing how to shoot in conditions at 100 yards, no way would I average MOA, not with the best rifle in a machine rest.
Click to expand...

Don’t think the OP is expanding the criteria to include 100 yards, but that was not my intent to suggest that either. The ‘learning the rifle’ comment was more about the 50 yard original post criteria. 

I was just reflecting that most BR shooters like to shoot at distances further than 50 yards and I wholeheartedly agree that it takes a lot more skill, experience, luck, technique, and ability to read wind to shoot accurately at 100 yards. All one has to do is look at the last 5 years of BR results to examine the winning and top scores from some of the best competition shooters around to appreciate the challenge. I am sure if asked, many would say averaging MOA at 100 is a pipe dream.

Also, there is a vast difference in shooting consistent MOA groups at 50 vs. 100 yards. One is much easier than the other. 


 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu