How to compare apples to apples in BR

[nomojo65]

Here are three cards I shot yesterday, (not proud of these scores!) can you see the correlation between these low scores and the vertical component causing this? each card would have scored 2-3 points higher if the vertical was under control. Yes a couple of the 9’s were windage, missed wind calls from me.
I only post these because of the importance of vertical impacting scores. I have been shooting poorly these last couple of seasons and have been trying diligently to eliminate as many variables impacting my scores caused from components other than poor judgment on my part.
As many understand some lots of pellets shoot better from your barrel than others? And at some point if you have shot over several seasons you run into that MAGIC lot that gives you confidence in your abilities and

 

[DennisB]

Practice

 

[nomojo65]

Here’s a card I literally just shot 5 min. ago, exactly the same set up as yesterday, except 2 things 1- different pellets that I know shoot a “little” better and 2- actual wind at a higher velocity and switching.

I marked the target with a V for Vertical and W for my obvious bad wind call. There is still a lot of vertical all through this card!

As far as practice I’ve been shooting 25m for several yrs. I’m just frustrated right now on a couple levels one I found out I’m going in for open heart surgery in 4-6wks. ( with a 8wk recovery) which means I’ll miss most of shooting season in Mi. And I might also not make it to the PAcup? If so not much time to prepare before hand.

One other thing, can you see a distinct difference in one point of scoring from this card vs. yesterday’s card? This is another clue to flyers or vertical causing low scores.

 

[thomasair]

Joe, I know the struggle. Pellets are far easier to control than slugs. Vertical is the toughest thing to deal with. I wish it was as simple as getting tight velocity spreads….as that would be easy.

I’ve been doing this a little while…haven’t found a way to practice away vertical. That would be easy too. Sure, there is always some vertical in the horizontal…but that’s not the trouble.

Mike

 

[tommyb]

Joe

First and foremost, best wishes from all of us for a successful open heart surgery and speedy recovery. Job #1 - get better soon and don’t sweat the small stuff. Once you are back and recovered, you’ll have plenty of shooting / range time.

Your cards look great to me.

P.S. I had my first baptism with my brand new Paradigm .30 at 100 yards yesterday. Windy as heck and I did lousy with both JSB 44.75g and FX Hybrid slugs in 44 g. Just wasn’t my day, but I’ll be back.

Tom

 

[drpietrzak]

The issue, it seems to me, is that it assumes the guns respond optimally in that shooting configuration. With pb I have one rifle that loves free recoil while another loves some touch.

 

[Troy Bakel]

I would do what I described I would do when I started this thread.

Groups can measure the same but be very different shapes and very different shot concentrations. I’d take a 1” wide group that is only 1/4 tall over a 1” tall group 1/4” wide. The shooter can fix the horizontal by adjusting for wind. He cannot fix the vertical with regularity. I would also take a 1” wide group that is 1/4” tall over a 3/4” round group…especially if they were not shot at the exact same times. Overall group size is not a reliable predictor of the highest number of opportunities to score a 10 with a good windage adjustment….which is why I made this thread.

Mike

Damn Mike, if you are not correct.

It took that reference you posted about POI simulation over 100,000 shots and having a rifle that will keep the majority of the POI's within a standard deviation of dead center is the rifle you want.

A 5 shot sighter with the same POA for each shot that gives you a one hole dispersion of a long oval that is less than 0.35" allows you to throw some shade to center that oval over the X and send it. My X count has been awesome.

I have been shooting the 10 meter air rifle target indoors at 20 yards and my 10s have been 100%, my Xs have been 90%.

Then today your damn rifle screwed me. I am so arrogant that I use the "SS" print on the sighter as my POA. A 5 shot group normally makes an elongated hole across the "SS' giving me my reference dispersion.

Not today. I got 1 damn nearly round hole that just covered the "SS". So by my own rules I allow just 5 sighters. As such, it took 3 of the 10 record shots to get a dispersion I could use. Now all record shots were 10s but my X count dropped to 70%.

The first penalty of arrogance is ignorance and my first posts on this thread definitely proved my ignorance.

 

[elh0102]

When I saw the age and length of this post, I didn't read it all. But, I know that my first problem would be finding two Indians, we got a lot of chiefs, but not many Indians!
Seriously, I haven't found any shortcut to simply shooting the two rifles under comparable conditions. Each rifle has features that has to be addressed by the shooter, and we don't all do that in the same way. A slightly creepy trigger might cause me to throw shots all over the place, whereas another shooter would not be bothered. I think you just have to shoot them. And many of us have ingrained biases that will raise their ugly heads.

 

[thomasair]

I have found that missing the forest for the trees is a very popular activity with active forum posters.

 

[Troy Bakel]

I have found that missing the forest for the trees is a very popular activity with active forum posters.

When I reviewed the shot model data you linked to in another post, I knew as someone who used cyclic stress modeling that models are not perfect but they are close.

As I studied the data and did the math, I realized:

1. 0.177 x 2 is 0.354
2. A group of shots that create a hole of </= 0.34 E to E is well with in two standard deviations of your referenced model data.
3. The target I am shooting indoors has 10 record bulls
4. If a 5 shot sighter produces a narrowly dispersed group of 0.34 E to E, which the Thomas does if I repeat my shot process exactly each time, then I adjust my POA to center the dispersion over the X ring.

The results for 25 targets proved the math. The X ring 90% of the time is cut.

At longer distances my theory is to ratio group size for different pellets to X ring size and use the pellet that stays within two standard deviations E to E of that ratio.

 

[thomasair]

Troy....you're shooting indoors. This thread is about how to compare guns in the absence of an indoor facility.

Mike

 

[JEFFPPC]

Hey Jeff…so which is it that you believe?

View attachment 335066

I quoted a phrase, not my thoughts or words. I am firmly in the Indian camp. Good equipment seldom fixes an incompetent Indian. But a good Indian with bad arrows will have a hard time. I have seen lots of mediocre Indians with good equipment seldom win. Usually the Indians who have put all work to develop good skills have also realized the importance of and put together good equipment. So in a word. Indian.