• The AGN App is ready! Search "Airgun Nation" in your App store. To compliment this new tech we've assigned the "Threads" Feed & "Dark" Mode. To revert back click HERE.

What does 1 minute-of-angle AVERAGE look like?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
AirNGasman

AirNGasman

Member
Jul 18, 2018
3,052
3,040
Texas, United States
It looks like this-

AEA .81 at 100.1632880393.jpg




And this-

AEA .85 at 100.1632880420.jpg




And considering the two targets above were shot consecutively, six consecutive five-shot groups at 100 yards AVERAGED .83" center-to-center; shattering my 25 year quest for one MOA average accuracy with an airgun by 2/10"! Shooting pellets, in fact. So, finally, 1 MOA airgun accuracy looks like this- 

AEA FLR.1632880478.jpg







 
1 minute-of-accuracy

What the hell is that ? Sounds like sitting down and shooting accurately for 1 minuet.

Lets not mislead unknowing folks into thinking that is what MOA actually stands for .... honestly.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can do a minuet sitting down. Talk about misleading. lol

min·u·et

/ˌminyəˈwet/

noun


  1. a slow, stately ballroom dance for two in triple time, popular especially in the 18th century.

    verb

  2. dance a minuet.

    [/LIST=1]
 
Upvote 0
"What the hell is that ? Lets not mislead unknowing folks into thinking that is what MOA actually stands for …. honestly."

No misleading whatsoever, MH. Simply a typo meant to read "minute-of-angle"; nothing else.

Not sure if the typo was user error or spell-check related, but I should have caught it before hitting the submit button. Once submitted, post titles cannot be edited; so the error lives forever. My bad. Thanks for pointing out the honest error, Motorhead.

Yes, 44.75 grain JSBs. 

"I predict a run on Challengers after seeing this!" Before that potential run gets started I should mention (again) that AEA Challengers won't do that. My Challenger does that after dozens of hours of detuning, trigger work, chronographing and accuracy testing, thousands of pellets sent downrange, and many, many dozen groups shot. Oh, and unreturned communications with the online dealer.

That said, I've invested equal or greater amounts of hours, pellets, groups, and monkeying with many top-tier, high-dollar regulated PCP's that simply could not be made to shoot as well. None of them could. So though not a gambling man, almost out of sheer frustration I decided to roll the dice with a $500 long-shot bet on a cheap Chinese PCP. The bet paid off handsomely. 

Maybe I should take up gambling.
 
Upvote 0
@airngasman There’s a way to edit the titles of posts. Not sure if that’s something that changed in the recent past, but I’ve done it on a couple of occasions, yesterday being the most recent. Go to your first post in a thread and click “edit,” then scroll up to the top of the page and find the box (rectangle) where the title is. From there you can change whatever you wish and click “preview” to view how the changes will look or “submit” to publish the edited post. The only limitations I’ve noticed is a character limit on titles. 
 
Upvote 0
A&G Man, Sooo, are you willing to divulge the winning formula it took 25 years to find (reg settings, pellet type & weight, fps, etc)? Now you have me REALLY curious about that gun, dangit! I looked at it on Utah Airguns site but it gives no info on whether its barrel is choked/unchoked or type of ammo capabilities (slugs?). Are you willing to give up the "goods"?
 
Upvote 0
"What the hell is that ? Lets not mislead unknowing folks into thinking that is what MOA actually stands for …. honestly."

No misleading whatsoever, MH. Simply a typo meant to read "minute-of-angle"; nothing else.

Not sure if the typo was user error or spell-check related, but I should have caught it before hitting the submit button. Once submitted, post titles cannot be edited; so the error lives forever. My bad. Thanks for pointing out the honest error, Motorhead.

Yes, 44.75 grain JSBs. 

"I predict a run on Challengers after seeing this!" Before that potential run gets started I should mention (again) that AEA Challengers won't do that. My Challenger does that after dozens of hours of detuning, trigger work, chronographing and accuracy testing, thousands of pellets sent downrange, and many, many dozen groups shot. Oh, and unreturned communications with the online dealer.

That said, I've invested equal or greater amounts of hours, pellets, groups, and monkeying with many top-tier, high-dollar regulated PCP's that simply could not be made to shoot as well. None of them could. So though not a gambling man, almost out of sheer frustration I decided to roll the dice with a $500 long-shot bet on a cheap Chinese PCP. The bet paid off handsomely. 

Maybe I should take up gambling.
Click to expand...

First off brilliant shooting and brilliant rifle very impressive.

You can edit the title of your post if you want to I've done it many times just go to the first post in the thread and change the title.

I personally didn't see anything misleading about your post it looks great to me but maybe I misunderstood what's going on.

Great shooting and very impressive and not a rifle that is not purpose-built to shoot bench rest shooting that kind of a group at any time that's very impressive.
 
Upvote 0
I swear I tried to edit post tiles unsuccessfully in the past E4 and OC, but thanks to you guys I just got it done. "It's hell getting old"... but I assume it beats the alternative.

Gerry, I assume you're interested in "the goods" specific to the .30 AEA; rather than the whole quarter-century saga. If so, I've already shared them in bits in pieces with multiple posts over the last couple months. I think you can find those posts by using the forum search function, keying on me and keywords like AEA and/or Challenger bullpup, and searching the General Discussion, Big Bore and PCP sections. Nevertheless, here's the condensed version of the goods.

1) On arrival I chronographed to confirm claimed 1240 FPS/150 foot pound power was true (it is), and checked trigger pull on digital gauge at 7pounds, 15 ounces! 2) Dressed the muzzle crown with rubber polishing rotary-tool bits, and cleaned the bore thoroughly. 3) Then shot enough groups at 50 yards to confirm accuracy promise. 4) Dove into the receiver, hammer, and hammer spring (which was unbelievably stout). 5) Rather than buying a weaker HS from the dealer for $39.95 (not a typo), I took the original spring to Ace Hardware and bought 3 potential replacements for less than $5 (of two strengths). The weak one proved way too weak. The other two being of similar strength to the original, I started shortening one of them, reassembling, chronographing, and "lather, rinse, repeating" until getting to the 80 foot pound power level I sought. In that process I also moly-lubed the hammer, HS, trigger and sear surfaces, and installed a weaker trigger spring. The trigger action remained crisp; and as hoped, trigger let-off came down to about 3#. 6) More velocity and accuracy testing at 50 and 100 yards proved she was responding well and continuing to show promise as pellets downrange added up to a couple hundred. The much weaker HS produced the bell-curve power-band I sought at 80 FP, with a power-band of six competition-worthy shots per charge of only 120 BAR. 7) Cleaned the bore again to find lead slivers! 8) It took quite a few rounds to season the bore before accuracy returned to previous levels. And as shot-count added up, improving accuracy (enough to keep me motivated). 9) As shot-count passed several hundred rounds and dozens of groups the promising accuracy continued improving, interspersed with occasional bore cleanings producing more lead slivers. 10) As round-count approached a thousand, with accuracy approaching that of any airgun at any price, but only six competition-worthy shots per 120 BAR fill, I overcame my fear of the great unknown and ordered a Huma regulator to take advantage of the fact it would allow me to charge the rifle to as much as 300 BAR to increase shot-count per fill substantially; thereby removing a major handicap when competing against the best airguns on Earth in competitions to 100 yards. 11) Set the reg output pressure to 130 BAR and installed it... successfully! 12) Of course that affected the power produced, so more HS monkeying (to avoid having to remove the reg). 13) She simply did NOT want to shoot the 75-80 foot-pounds I needed, so "more monkeying" became MUCH monkeying, as shots per 280 BAR fill hovered around 18-19 (very consistent). 14) In the LONG process of seeking 75-80 foot pounds I started throwing o-rings and spacer-shims between the hammer and valve-stem (per 'B Staley' hammer-debounce tune); mostly to find my target power level, but also greater shot-count per charge. After many hours of such monkeying she finally landed at 870 FPS/75 foot pounds with 44.75 JSBs (my minimum acceptable level). However she now returns 34 regulated shots per 280 BAR fill! 15) That is the exact point when Ching Kong started consistently averaging sub-MOA groups at 100 yards; down from previous averages of 1.06" to 1.4". 

If you've ever heard the saying, "even a blind hog finds an acorn once in a while", and are still with me, you just lived through proof-positive of that statement! Aren't you sorry you asked? :-O Now you know why I don't mind sharing "the goods". No-one in their right mind would be dim-witted enough to invest so much time and effort in a Chinese Maxi-Blaster on the 'long-shot' it could be transformed into a competitive long-range Extreme Field Target and/or Extreme Bench-Rest Silhouette rifle. But this is how I get my kicks.

Hey, it could be worse; I could something other than Texan! ;-)


 
Upvote 0
1 minute-of-accuracy

What the hell is that ? Sounds like sitting down and shooting accurately for 1 minuet.

Lets not mislead unknowing folks into thinking that is what MOA actually stands for .... honestly.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of Andrew Jackson, who was said to exclaim “Its a damn poor mind that can think of only one way to spell a word”.

His issue was dyslexia, not a need to coin new words or revise common meanings.
 
Upvote 0
Ron,

Not sure what the title said at first, but I see no issue with the wording. Frankly if it DID say minute of accuracy, only a non-shooter would be apt to get confused, since the shooting distance IS stated in the text.

MOA is the accepted shooting parlance for minute of angle groups. A series of groups whose aggregate size average are a minute of angle or less are said to average a moa … not every group in the series need be under a minute, the average is what counts. Many think a group must be less than an inch ctc at 100yards to be a sub-minute group, but this is not so, as a minute at 100 yards is 1.047”, not an exact inch. Its a measurement of angle, not width, and means 1/60th of a degree at the stated distance. Even at 50yards, a minute is halfway between 1/ 32” and 1/64” more than the normally accepted half in group.

The pictures say it all, no need to obsess in the text I think.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu