Thread: Some reasons why it often goes bad.

You guys are using the wrong definition of variable. It is anything that can change. There are a lot of them. Some are relevant, meaning the effect your desired outcome, some are not. Some can be controlled by the shooter, some need to be handloaded to where you want them. Variables are just all the things that are happening. Some can be eliminated, but the only way to get rid of all of them is to get rid of yourself and the rifle. Some of them you need.

@Micky Duck keeps explaining that the barrel and action should be attached to the stock, over and over and over and over. Yes it should. Bed the rifle, you don't want it to rattle.

You have now dealt with maybe 10% of the issue of harmonics in a rifle. Could everyone stop implying bedding "solves" harmonics. Bedding solves bedding. Bedding makes sure the rifle does not rattle. Good. Job done.

This is what I call a storm in a tea cup argument. You don't know the full picture, so you take a small part and make out it is everything.

The great myth repeated over and over is the rifle is jumping around like a mad woman. We have bedded the rifle, so it is no longer broken. Lets forget about when you were silly enough to shoot a rifle that rattled.

The rifle is still waving about, just not at random. If it is, it shoots very very very very very badly. You need to tune your loads to get it to a point where the vibrations are not random which is not that hard and true for most accurate rifles. Almost all rifles since maybe the mid 1800s are accurate.

Not all of them are precise and the definition of precise is what keeps people coming back to the internet.

To achieve the modern definition of precision you need to tune your rifle to an accuracy node, which is a harmonic sweet spot where everything is just so.

My Ruger is not precise, because Ruger do not make precise rifles (relative to others) but it is very very accurate. It does the same 1.5" group, day in day out, in any conditions. Some Rugers I have handloaded for, my brothers one for example, shoots the same 1.5" group all the way through load development. That rifle is a stone cold killer with a hell of a reputation out to 500m (re-barreled tang safety in 280 I built from scrap).

What the hell is the point in everyone shouting at each other, while everyone has a different definition of each word? I'm using the technical definition. I assume everyone else is going on what they think these words mean.

In science class the text book definition of accuracy and precision frequently uses shooting as an example.

Originally Posted by Tussock

You guys are using the wrong definition of variable. It is anything that can change. There are a lot of them. Some are relevant, meaning the effect your desired outcome, some are not. Some can be controlled by the shooter, some need to be handloaded to where you want them. Variables are just all the things that are happening. Some can be eliminated, but the only way to get rid of all of them is to get rid of yourself and the rifle. Some of them you need.

@Micky Duck keeps explaining that the barrel and action should be attached to the stock, over and over and over and over. Yes it should. Bed the rifle, you don't want it to rattle.

You have now dealt with maybe 10% of the issue of harmonics in a rifle. Could everyone stop implying bedding "solves" harmonics. Bedding solves bedding. Bedding makes sure the rifle does not rattle. Good. Job done.

This is what I call a storm in a tea cup argument. You don't know the full picture, so you take a small part and make out it is everything.

The great myth repeated over and over is the rifle is jumping around like a mad woman. We have bedded the rifle, so it is no longer broken. Lets forget about when you were silly enough to shoot a rifle that rattled.

The rifle is still waving about, just not at random. If it is, it shoots very very very very very badly. You need to tune your loads to get it to a point where the vibrations are not random which is not that hard and true for most accurate rifles. Almost all rifles since maybe the mid 1800s are accurate.

Not all of them are precise and the definition of precise is what keeps people coming back to the internet.

To achieve the modern definition of precision you need to tune your rifle to an accuracy node, which is a harmonic sweet spot where everything is just so.

My Ruger is not precise, because Ruger do not make precise rifles (relative to others) but it is very very accurate. It does the same 1.5" group, day in day out, in any conditions. Some Rugers I have handloaded for, my brothers one for example, shoots the same 1.5" group all the way through load development. That rifle is a stone cold killer with a hell of a reputation out to 500m (re-barreled tang safety in 280 I built from scrap).

What the hell is the point in everyone shouting at each other, while everyone has a different definition of each word? I'm using the technical definition. I assume everyone else is going on what they think these words mean.

In science class the text book definition of accuracy and precision frequently uses shooting as an example.

Yes. Vibrations are movement and can be broken down into harmonics. If the vibrations in the barrelled action were truly random then load development could not do anything. But because they are not random a consistent load can be developed to minimise the effects by producing consistent harmonics. Good bedding CAN (but may not always) improve the consistency of the generated harmonics, along with pressure bedding a portion of barrel, which COULD provide dampening. This CAN improve precision.

Originally Posted by Tussock

What would you like to see?

This entire discussion is about precision, not accuracy. I have accurate rifle in the cupboard now, but none that are overly precise. I have a donor rifle for a build that should be both accurate and precise.

Am I expected to demonstrate I am a benchrest or F-class shooter?

This does not interest me. What interests me is hitting what I am aiming at. Does isolating all the variables help me with this?

I will state this very plainly. How do you get better at dealing with the variables shooting throws at you, by avoiding them?

Isolating variables requires me to make assumptions. I assume they don't matter. A hunter who shoots his groups and zeroes his rifle off a bench rest assumes that when he shoots if off his field rest, it behaves the same. This is an assumption, and assumption is the mother of all fuckups.

While everyone else is reducing variables, I am reducing assumptions.

So, shall I get my 7mm rem mag out, unbedded, barrel un-floated, its a Ruger and it has the thinnest whippyest barrel you ever saw? It also cost less than a set of mounts for a benchrest rifle.

Two words come to mind, money, mouth. How about a single hole in a paper plate you can choose the range.

Originally Posted by Tussock

You guys are using the wrong definition of variable. It is anything that can change. There are a lot of them. Some are relevant, meaning the effect your desired outcome, some are not. Some can be controlled by the shooter, some need to be handloaded to where you want them. Variables are just all the things that are happening. Some can be eliminated, but the only way to get rid of all of them is to get rid of yourself and the rifle. Some of them you need.
@Micky Duck keeps explaining that the barrel and action should be attached to the stock, over and over and over and over. Yes it should. Bed the rifle, you don't want it to rattle.

You have now dealt with maybe 10% of the issue of harmonics in a rifle. Could everyone stop implying bedding "solves" harmonics. Bedding solves bedding. Bedding makes sure the rifle does not rattle. Good. Job done.

This is what I call a storm in a tea cup argument. You don't know the full picture, so you take a small part and make out it is everything.

The great myth repeated over and over is the rifle is jumping around like a mad woman. We have bedded the rifle, so it is no longer broken. Lets forget about when you were silly enough to shoot a rifle that rattled.

The rifle is still waving about, just not at random. If it is, it shoots very very very very very badly. You need to tune your loads to get it to a point where the vibrations are not random which is not that hard and true for most accurate rifles. Almost all rifles since maybe the mid 1800s are accurate.

Not all of them are precise and the definition of precise is what keeps people coming back to the internet.

My Ruger is not precise, because Ruger do not make precise rifles (relative to others) but it is very very accurate. It does the same 1.5" group, day in day out, in any conditions. Some Rugers I have handloaded for, my brothers one for example, shoots the same 1.5" group all the way through load development. That rifle is a stone cold killer with a hell of a reputation out to 500m (re-barreled tang safety in 280 I built from scrap).

What the hell is the point in everyone shouting at each other, while everyone has a different definition of each word? I'm using the technical definition. I assume everyone else is going on what they think these words mean.

In science class the text book definition of accuracy and precision frequently uses shooting as an example.

I'm interested in those definitions. I've come across this before but always though it a bit arbitrary, like "aims and objectives".

Accuracy is ...

Precision is ...

Originally Posted by Cordite

I'm interested in those definitions. I've come across this before but always though it a bit arbitrary, like "aims and objectives".

Accuracy is ...

Precision is ...

The "precision" is the level of measured 'angular dispersion' the rifle generates with the group it fires.
The accuracy is how well that group is positioned relative to the aiming point.
I believe.

Originally Posted by 2post

Two words come to mind, money, mouth. How about a single hole in a paper plate you can choose the range.

More than two words come to mind.

Accuracy is when I point/aim said rifle at target/animal, it’s going to make a hole relative to wear I aim it.

Precision is ...a fuck load of money. I don’t have a fuck load of money. That’s why I want my rifle to be accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A flawless practical explanation

Originally Posted by tiroahunta

Accuracy is when I point/aim said rifle at target/animal, it’s going to make a hole relative to wear I aim it.

Precision is ...a fuck load of money. I don’t have a fuck load of money. That’s why I want my rifle to be accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A flawless technical explanation

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Yes. Vibrations are movement and can be broken down into harmonics. If the vibrations in the barrelled action were truly random then load development could not do anything. But because they are not random a consistent load can be developed to minimise the effects by producing consistent harmonics. Good bedding CAN (but may not always) improve the consistency of the generated harmonics, along with pressure bedding a portion of barrel, which COULD provide dampening. This CAN improve precision.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

so I got proactive and got stuck in...removed a little wood from around recoil lug...you can see where it was touching in first photo...plurry hopeless.
used bedding compound and bedded front of action out into barrel channel so the knox is also supported. rifle now doesnt clunk or throw fliers. it will group better than I can shoot,I havent fired shots on paper otherthan to sight it in,dont need to ,it does what I ask.kills what I aim it at.Attachment 119761Attachment 119762

so Ive done my bit to remove ONE variable....... trying to make my reloads consistant is ANOTHER variable,trying to keep my hold on rifle the same each time ANOTHER variable over which I have some control,ensuring sight picture is same each time eg scope is centered is ANOTHER variable I have some control over.

Looks like a good practical way of making the Zastavas group sizes smaller, via the greater consistency it now has due to your improving its bedding ? What's not to like ? If you're now running tighter groups than say 1.5moa, which I'm sure you are, then you may well have the jump on Tussocks Ruger !

Originally Posted by Mr Browning

I'll give Tussocks first post a like just for the effort put in responding.

I know what it takes to write a lengthily reply and try and make it sound how you think to avoid it being misinterpreted.

Cheers

I’m going to Tussocks reply when I can’t get to sleep tonight

I’m never going to be a competition shooter. As @Cordite said it is about where the first cold shot lands in a humane bang flop

I love reading this thread about that elusive ability to consistently hit what we aim at. Some things ARE worth arguing about because they are just so interesting.

And we haven't even gotten to lock time. Of little interest to benchrest shooting, but important to hunting and unsupported target shooting.

All the aforementioned variables pale in comparison to the nut behind the bolt. Some people can shoot better than others. You can give the most accurate rifle in the world to an average shooter and its gonna look like an average shooting rifle. I really dont read much into all the really nitty gritty fine points of trying to squeeze every drop of accuracy y out of a hunting rifle. 100% of the time an average load will shoot better by working on technique and consistent trigger pull. I guarantee 90% of people that get frustrated about their rifle that only shoots 1moa or even a bit more, instead of tiny little groups, are incapable of CONSISTENTLY shooting tiny little groups anyhow.

Originally Posted by LRP

Looks like a good practical way of making the Zastavas group sizes smaller, via the greater consistency it now has due to your improving its bedding ? What's not to like ? If you're now running tighter groups than say 1.5moa, which I'm sure you are, then you may well have the jump on Tussocks Ruger !

OK. The shot is at a Tahr, you don't need a spotting scope to see that he's is immense. The shot is 380m, the angle is 30 degrees up and you are in a boulder field and if you move, he's going to vanish.

What you got bench rest guy?

Bedding going to save you?

Sent from my CPH1701 using Tapatalk

I started reading thi last night and decided to finish it thismorning. I have ac ouple of clarifications that I wanted to mention.

When the quote " He knows and writes about "internet" accuracy." I think he was talking about the accuracy of information on the internet.

And the precision vs accuracy debate...

They are both important. If you have a very accurate rifle, but not a precise one, you will likely have little success without luck.
Likewise if you have a precise rifle and its not accurate, you will get the same result.


Definition of precise

1 : exactly or sharply defined or stated
2 : minutely exact
3 : strictly conforming to a pattern, standard, or convention
4 : distinguished from every other


Definition of accurate

1 : free from error especially as the result of care an accurate diagnosis
2 : conforming exactly to truth or to a standard : exact providing accurate colour
3 : able to give an accurate result an accurate gauge
4 : going to, reaching, or hitting the intended target : not missing the target an accurate shot/kick The next play, Johnson fielded a sharp grounder and made an accurate throw to first.— Joe Smith
5 : tending to hit the intended target an accurate free-throw shooter


Reading these I would be inclined to sat that

-Precision is addressing all the variables that can affect the outcome of the shot - load, quality / reliability, consistency etc

and

-Accuracy is the RESULT of the precision where the bullet goes where it is intended to.....

This is turning into an English lesson. Definitions must be in context. Firing a rifle and diagnosis are not comparable.

Solving a problem with a rifle is diagnostics.

In order to perform diagnostics properly you better understand in detail how the system works, in this case the rifle.

This is why more than just me has said bed the rifle. Great. Good job.

The description of all the randomness in the rifles vibrations is misleading and will result in people cocking up their diagnostics if the issue is not solved by bedding.

There are also multiple ways to bed a rifle and my only precision rifle is sitting int he cupboard waiting for Robbie Tiffen to bed it because he is the only NZ "gunsmith" I ever trusted.

Thanks to this thread I am trying to buy back my last one.

Sent from my CPH1701 using Tapatalk