Thread: Shorter Barrel 223 data

Here I am derailing another thread getting on this topic, but it is really sensible to think in terms of "requirements" and meaningfully test whether the system meets those then move on, rather than thinking about precision optimisation without an acceptance threshold


For example these 3 10rd groups (of 3 different powders loaded with the same bullet) are all different sizes, however the precision of all 3 is functionally more or less the same - 0.05-0.06 MRAD mean radius.




I don't actually care if one is "better" than the others. The test is - do they meet requirements? They all do, for precision - the predictive O95 is 0.2 - 0.24 MRAD, but the error bars mean we can't say there's actually any difference. Either of these values meets my requirements threshold - neither of these values produces a meaningful difference in hit probability at long range. I can select the load that meets my other requirements. If they all do, great. Only 1 of these 3 powder loads met all of my requirements. It is the first group below the aiming point dot. Load development completed - off to kill things and compete.