• Please consider adding your "Event" to the Calendar located on our Home page!

An Argument for 3 Shot Groups for Testing Precision

Up until now, I have been shooting a minimum of ten 5 shot groups (50 shots total) for each data point in a data set. So if I am testing accuracy of a pellet at 10 different velocities, I am shooting 500 shots to collect the data. I am taking this great number of shots so that I can try to tease out the real data from errors causes by changes in wind condtions and shooter error. 

However, I am currently thinking that 3 shot groups would be a better way to collect precision data. Rather than collecting 10 data points with 50 shots using 5 shot groups, I would be able to collect 16 data points with 48 shots using 3 shot groups. The reason I think that this would be better is 2 fold:

1. The odds of the subtle wind changes between a 3 shot group would be less than during a longer to complete 5 shot group. Therefore 3 shots would reduce error.

2. Any changes in the wind or shooter error that cause a flier (oulier) would have less effect on a data set of 16 than a data set of 10.

Since the consensus here seems to be that 5 shots or more is best for precision data, I wonder what I am missing?
 
Hmmm so many things to consider...and your current methodology isn’t bad at all...but my god it’s time consuming. 


I test pellets when it’s windy. And I test them when it’s calm. I can tell in ten minutes in either condition whether I have a good pellet for the rifle I’m shooting. At 50 yards you should get three shots falling into one hole occasionally. You’ll rarely get five falling into one hole. If that’s not happening with a pellet I’m testing. I MoveOn. Once I find one that shoots really good. Then I start looking at velocities for that pellet. Almost all pellets (except EBR rifles) shoot best right around 885 ft./s. A gentleman named YRRAH taught me this. He lived down under in Australia, he called it OZ. I tested for about a year, to prove him wrong. He was NOT wrong. It not only need to shoot well in Calm conditions, it needs to shoot well and at least consistently in the wind.

Then I try to find a lot and diameter of the pellets that I’ve just identified as shooting the best in this certain rifle out a certain velocity, I buy as many of those as I can get my hands on. Usually they shoot really well in all of my rifles. Good lots of pellets are very precious. I’ve been shooting what I call silver tin 18 Grain JSbs this morning. They are awesome. They haven’t made them for 10 years.

keep doing what you’re doing. Just maybe think about some other modifications.

three shot groups that are really tiny are really fun. And they mean nothing statistically. IMO. 


mike
 
  • Like
Reactions: mmahoney
3 shot group doesn't say much. So if I shoot 2 shot and its hole in hole at 100 yard. Can i say my gun shots single hole at 100 yard? How about 1 shot group. Oh I hit bullseye at 300 yards with 1 group. My gun is so accurate. No, its just luck. Ted once said that 10 shot is the min. Anyone can do .01 at 100 yards with 3 shots but can someone do .01 at 100 yards with 10 shots. Nope.
 
Thanks, Centercut.

Interesting reading. I particularly like the second link you posted. From the second article:

1596391130_276566625f26fedabf54b0.29233911.JPG


Mathematically, It appears that my emphasis on shooting 50 - 100 shots leaves me with error between 10-15%. I suspect it is still much larger than that for an air rifle because the wind affects the air rifle projectile so much more than the higher BC of a centerfire rifle. Which really drives home the need to do testing is conditions that are as ideal as possible. 

I wonder how adding wind as a variable affects this data? Ever notice how Ted Beier shoots his groups as fast as possible to try to minimize changes in wind? None of that is discussed in the articles and is a factor that I think changes things for us airgun shooters.

Another quote I found interesting:

What this means is that for five shot groups, the size of the groups will vary by about 27% on average, from group to group.

How many times do you see respected shooters on YouTube shoot one group and make definitive conclusions based on this data? Almost always, and again, since the BC of our projectiles is so much worse than the heavy centerfire bullets this data is based on, the situation is far worse than 27%.

Also, I think range would play a big part in changing this percentage. The further the range, the greater the variance in group sizes.

Also Interesting is how 7 shot groups are the "ideal" for efficiency if trying to reduce error and how 5 shots groups came to be from the boxes of 50 ammunition lined up in rows of 5.


 
It’s interesting stuff. I have the ability to shoot in LDs tunnel at 52 yards. No wind. So when I get to the point that I am undecided between two pellets, I shoot in the tunnel like the below, four 5 shot groups with each pellet. One after the other without cherry picking. What I posted is when I was trying to decide which .30 pellet to use at EBR 2018 with the FX Bobcat Mk2. I finally decided on the 44.75 since the last group I shot was lower left, the groups were slightly smaller, and it just seemed to be more “predictable” in the wind outside the tunnel at 100 yards.

1596393742_11718149655f27090e856689.98958562.jpeg