Five shot groups

[Madang185]

I have a question about 5 shot groups.

The expert among us claim loud and long that 5 shot groups are the only way to honestly measure a loads performance.

Can anyone honestly tell me that having shot 3 shots of a 5 shot group that the group size will not expand.

Further, can this be done consistently with a top class competition shooter and rifles?

I merely ask the question because no one else will!

[deanp100]

Absolutely yes, the likelihood of the group getting bigger with more shots is real. It is usually guaranteed that it will increase.

[bladeracer]

I have a question about 5 shot groups.

The expert among us claim loud and long that 5 shot groups are the only way to honestly measure a loads performance.

Can anyone honestly tell me that having shot 3 shots of a 5 shot group that the group size will not expand.

Further, can this be done consistently with a top class competition shooter and rifles?

I merely ask the question because no one else will!

Depends how many groups you shoot.
You can shoot ten 3rd groups and overlay them over the top of each other to get a realistic idea of the accuracy over a reasonable data sample.
Or you can shoot ten groups and declare the tightest to be how amazingly the rifle will always shoot, which is stupid. It's fine if you just want to brag, but it's stupid if you accept it and take that broken knowledge into the field.

If you're zeroing a large game rifle that will likely see single-shots only, or perhaps an occasional quick follow-up shot, then groups sizes are virtually irrelevant. If it's a varmint rifle that you want to blow rabbits heads off consistently at 300m then you need to shoot enough to determine it will maintain that group spread over that many shots.

Simply put, the only way to know with any degree of certainty where your rifle will consistently place it's bullet when you ask it to is to shoot as much as possible. You might find after ten rounds it starts to spray them, which you won't discover if your testing has all been 3rd or 5rd groups with cool-down in between. Test it the same way you intend to shoot it.

[Larry]

Statistically 3 shot groups are a very low confidence level that those 3 points are an acurate result of all the points that could be represented in a true group. Even 10 shots is still a low level of confidence to get a 95% level you need 21 data points.

[in2anity]

Statistically 3 shot groups are a very low confidence level that those 3 points are an acurate result of all the points that could be represented in a true group. Even 10 shots is still a low level of confidence to get a 95% level you need 21 data points.

Yar what Larry said. OCW tests over largish sample sizes, at multiple distances, should be carried out to find the most resilient “sweet-spot”. We are talking at least 20 rounds at each distance, with each charge weight. Takes time and diligence - the more data you gather the more factual the result.

[bigrich]

years ago , i had a model 70 with a maddco barrel in 6.5x55 . and i shot a slow but consistant 10 shot group with accurate handloads . and the first three where a great little clover , then the next shots went in a ever increasing reverse spiral pattern . that's the most consistant example of grouping in a sporter weight barrel i've seen . a lot of rifles when put to increasing shots get erratic . high, low , left right . not that i do this to my rifles very often . i think maddco uses old "seasoned" (destressed), barrel blanks which would explain my grouping with that rifle

in a sporting/hunting rifle i only test three shot groups . with more barrel heat the group just spreads and besides, everything has buggered off after three shots anyway

[on_one_wheel]

I'm loading for Max speed and leaving the hair loss for the F brigade.
Watching a few Eric Cortina videos showed me how I'm simply wasting my time, those guys load rounds to suit the barrel temp, for the weather conditions as they change over the course of the day and the colour of their competitors socks.

Our .3 MOA groups on a Monday are 1.5 MOA by Tuesday. I challenge someone to prove me wrong because I've given up chasing that "best" load.

As a hunter, the only shot that matters is that one shot from a stone cold barrel, whose doing load testing from cold barrel shots only? I've never done it, imagine how long that would take.

[animalpest]

Statistically three shot groups don't mean much. But then over the course of the past 3 days I have shot many groups with my .375 h&h and all measured 1 inch. So that becomes statistically robust.

[bigrich]

Statistically three shot groups don't mean much. But then over the course of the past 3 days I have shot many groups with my .375 h&h and all measured 1 inch. So that becomes statistically robust.

when i'm doing load development, after i've laddered up my powder charges i'll play with COL a little and by then i know if i've got "hunting" accuracy . some rifles have habits . my tikka throws the first shot more than a inch high at 100 then settles down by around 5-6 shots to really amazing accuracy . i allow for this in the feild . i'll just digress a little AP . you've done quite a bit of larger animal control . can you recommend a good projectile for 9.3x62 for top end work ? cheers

[Bello]

Hi All
I haven't shot any comps. So I can not speak for comps or comp rifles.
I do reload for "hunting accuracy".
I used to try and get 5 and 10 shot, tight groups, after reading lots of replies on shooting forums. Drove me crazy

Most of my larger calibre hunting rifles have lighter barrels, such as the sako Finnlight. I am a hunter, so I need the first shot to constantly hits its mark, maybe a possible second shot.
I now only shoot 2 or three shots and let the barrel cool. Its extremely rare that I get to take a second shot, so MY logic is why shoot 5 to 10 shot strings when in the field I only ever taker one shot.
This is MY experience and MY opinion.

First pic is my 270 at 100 meters
Second pic is one of my 300 Win mag's at 100 meters
Third pic is one of my 308 rifles at 200 meters

[animalpest]

Bigrich - I actually shoot a lot of the Sierra 250gr out of the .375 as I do most of my shooting now on camels with it.
Thankfully I have a good stash of Woodleigh 300gr RN and these are perfect for the big stuff. Full power loads are not fun to shoot off the bench with an 8lb rifle but they consistantly group into an inch (3 shot groups) which is as accurate as I can shoot it.

Any heavy bonded bullet is fine - Accubond is fine but Barnes I like too. The 9.3 has less power than the .375 but SD is higher so that's an advantage.

I don't need more energy for hunting and if I had a choice I would go for the 9.3

[bigrich]

Bigrich - I actually shoot a lot of the Sierra 250gr out of the .375 as I do most of my shooting now on camels with it.
Thankfully I have a good stash of Woodleigh 300gr RN and these are perfect for the big stuff. Full power loads are not fun to shoot off the bench with an 8lb rifle but they consistantly group into an inch (3 shot groups) which is as accurate as I can shoot it.

Any heavy bonded bullet is fine - Accubond is fine but Barnes I like too. The 9.3 has less power than the .375 but SD is higher so that's an advantage.

I don't need more energy for hunting and if I had a choice I would go for the 9.3

thanks for the advice . trying to get woodleigh or partitions in 9.3 at the moment is impossible . i do have some 285gn sako hammerhead projectiles coming , but i believe their not stout enough for buff . the only available is possibly the 250gn barnes . i realise i have to reduce powder charge for these as they are full copper . have you had any experience with the barnes ? i was talking to a guy who used them out of 338 mag on buff and reckoned they went well . cheers

[animalpest]

Haven't used Barnes on buff, just camels. They worked well. The only problem I have with Barnes is that I can get the same or better velocity out of a 300gr Woodleigh as I can with a 270gr Barnes until I hit pressure issues

[bigrich]

Haven't used Barnes on buff, just camels. They worked well. The only problem I have with Barnes is that I can get the same or better velocity out of a 300gr Woodleigh as I can with a 270gr Barnes until I hit pressure issues

i bought a box of the 250gn barnes tsx , flat base hollow points . i'll see how they load up

[animalpest]

Good stuff Bigrich. I would be confident with them on buff.

[Bill]

I'm a big fan of the 4 shot group, way more statistically relevant than a 3 shot group and removes operator error from stuffing up on the 5th shot and ruining the 5 shot group

[bigrich]

I'm a big fan of the 4 shot group, way more statistically relevant than a 3 shot group and removes operator error from stuffing up on the 5th shot and ruining the 5 shot group

[linkoln]

The three shot group is probably a military thing. I can't remember all the acronyms but you need three shots to find the central zeroing point you ignore any other flyers and look at the three closest shots to work out where your rifle is aiming.

[bladeracer]

The three shot group is probably a military thing. I can't remember all the acronyms but you need three shots to find the central zeroing point you ignore any other flyers and look at the three closest shots to work out where your rifle is aiming.

That will only find you a "centre" if the three shots happen to be spaced around the centre. If the three shots are all along the bottom right edge of what would be the 20rd group then you are not zeroing to the centre. I think most militaries zero at 25m anyway though, it'd be close enough to get you onto paper at 100m.

[bigrich]

Three shot groups are consistent and fine in my hunting rifles. And I’ve had some like my 222 that would make one hole with monotonous regularity. Five shot groups are overthinking it from my perspective

[bladeracer]

Three shot groups are consistent and fine in my hunting rifles. And I’ve had some like my 222 that would make one hole with monotonous regularity. Five shot groups are overthinking it from my perspective

With the .222 when I was a kid I would get out and fire 30-40rds very regularly (at least a couple times a week) over perhaps an hour, dropping either rabbits, galahs or crows at long distances (get out there and set up before daybreak and wait for them to come out to play). Knowing bullet number 40 is going to hit within the same group as bullet number one can only be learned by firing 40rds in a test session. I carried three very tatty 20rd Winchester boxes in my Vietnam-era web kit when I went out, but I rarely burned the lot as I always kept some for anything popping up on the way home. If you're only ever likely to fire five rounds then I agree, pointless even wondering whether round number six will hit the same spot if you're never going to fire it.

Nowadays I only live in hope of finding such a rabbit situation again

[9.3x64]

I am a big fan of one shot groups, the first shot from a cold clean barrel.

[Shootermick]

Three shot groups are consistent and fine in my hunting rifles. And I’ve had some like my 222 that would make one hole with monotonous regularity. Five shot groups are overthinking it from my perspective

With the .222 when I was a kid I would get out and fire 30-40rds very regularly (at least a couple times a week) over perhaps an hour, dropping either rabbits, galahs or crows at long distances (get out there and set up before daybreak and wait for them to come out to play). Knowing bullet number 40 is going to hit within the same group as bullet number one can only be learned by firing 40rds in a test session. I carried three very tatty 20rd Winchester boxes in my Vietnam-era web kit when I went out, but I rarely burned the lot as I always kept some for anything popping up on the way home. If you're only ever likely to fire five rounds then I agree, pointless even wondering whether round number six will hit the same spot if you're never going to fire it.

Nowadays I only live in hope of finding such a rabbit situation again

I’ve shot 222’s years ago, but never owned one.
So Blade, for small game, are they really that consistent, shot after shot? I know they’ve lost popularity due to the 223, but it seems they might still have a place today.?

[bladeracer]

Three shot groups are consistent and fine in my hunting rifles. And I’ve had some like my 222 that would make one hole with monotonous regularity. Five shot groups are overthinking it from my perspective

With the .222 when I was a kid I would get out and fire 30-40rds very regularly (at least a couple times a week) over perhaps an hour, dropping either rabbits, galahs or crows at long distances (get out there and set up before daybreak and wait for them to come out to play). Knowing bullet number 40 is going to hit within the same group as bullet number one can only be learned by firing 40rds in a test session. I carried three very tatty 20rd Winchester boxes in my Vietnam-era web kit when I went out, but I rarely burned the lot as I always kept some for anything popping up on the way home. If you're only ever likely to fire five rounds then I agree, pointless even wondering whether round number six will hit the same spot if you're never going to fire it.

Nowadays I only live in hope of finding such a rabbit situation again

I’ve shot 222’s years ago, but never owned one.
So Blade, for small game, are they really that consistent, shot after shot? I know they’ve lost popularity due to the 223, but it seems they might still have a place today.?

I have only owned one and it spoiled me rotten. It was my first centrefire and I expected everything to be able to do what that $200 788 did with its bullets, the .204 probably comes closest now for me. If I still had the 788 I doubt I'd ever take the .204 out.

Absolutely, the .222Rem is still a great cartridge, with built-in accuracy. But it lacks versatility in today's world due to the 14"-twist rates commonly used. A short fat 60gn bullet is about the heaviest lump it'll throw (70gn in a 12"-twist), and with fairly poor long-range ballistics. I found the 52gn and 53gn HP's were the best for extended ranges (300m max for me), and those are still quite low in today's BC figures (.168 compared to .485 for the 80gn ELDM). With a tight-twist .223 being so common now it's a stretch to buy a .222 as well, but lots of people do buy the .204 just for varminting (myself included). With today's bullet consistency, even fairly cheap VLD bullets shoot remarkably well in the .223, giving you the flexibility from 30gn bullets up to short 90gn bullets with the basic 8"-twist. And the high-BC of the heavy bullets means they're still going fairly hard out there, unlike the light ones that haemorrhage velocity very quickly. To really get the .223 VLD's moving though you also need a long throat and/or feed system, not a Mini-Action where you're seating the bullet more than half into the length of the case. I also found I had to put in special effort to load something that the .222 didn't shoot very well, load development was dead easy, pick a number out of the sky, load some up, test shoot them, load a bunch more exactly the same, go find some bunnies.

Back in 1983 the 788 also offered the .223Rem, so I did toss up which to get, but the .223 did not have the reputation for accuracy that the .222 had at that time, and we didn't have the enormous selection of bullets that really light the .223 up nowadays. I have more than twenty different .224" bullets from 30gn to 95gn on the shelf. When I was a kid the lightest I knew of was the Winchester SJHP 40gn WMR bullet sold in bulk 500rd lots wrapped in cling-film, and the heaviest I ever tried was a 55gn FMJ I stumbled upon somewhere. I know I still have quite a few of the 52gn and 53gn HP's somewhere in my old reloading stuff - I should dig them out and see if they're the same as what's being sold currently. I left my gear in SA when I moved back to WA, but my brother brought me down a box of goodies a couple years back that he'd hung onto for 35+ years for me.

Dammit, now I'm going to be making some calls to see if I can find a 788 in .222Rem

[solarpak]

All major manufacturers 'guarantee' Sub MOA with three shots under 28mm at 100m with premium ammo. What does this entail?? Probably shooting in an underground shooting range with no external elements and the rifle clamped to a gun vise - and the trigger pulled with a bit of wire!! Yep!

In the real world for a hunting rifle, if you can shoot 3 or 5 shot groups at 100 metres and they group at less than 1.5 MOA (roughly 40 mm or so) then that is plenty enough for any game animal out to 300 metres - which is a long way indeed.
I will leave the long range stuff to the snipers and heroes ........not for me.

C.

[bladeracer]

Bryan Litz posted this on FB today, thought it might be relevant here.

Bryan Litz Group Variation.jpg (150.12 KiB) Viewed 2804 times

Yesterday he talked about the extra windage required when shooting across valleys.

[Oldbloke]

To check zero, 1 or 2 shots.
To work up loads, 4 shot groups.

For hunting (foxes or bigger) upto about 150 mtrs near enough is good enough.

I don't think I could reliably shoot a 1" group @ 100mtrs hunting on foot or sits in the bush.

[NTSOG]

Oldbloke: "I don't think I could reliably shoot a 1" group @ 100mtrs hunting on foot or sits in the bush."

Recently my Weihrauch .22 Magnum started spraying shots like a shotgun. It's less than a year old and, when I checked the action screws, the tension on the screws was 17[F] and 12 [R] inch pounds. I believe that the beech stock dried out a bit over summer and the wood shrank. I tightened up the screws to 20/20 inch pounds and started testing different screw tensions by firing three shot groups to get a basic idea of what was going on. For a start I was shooting off the rest I use for hunting as it was more convenient than carting a shooting table out into the paddock. Once I was certain I was on the right track with the action screws I did take a shooting table out to get a steadier aim and then finally had to re-zero the night sight, again off the table.

The last thing I did was to go out and shoot a few 3 shot groups off the light-weight hunting rest to check that my findings off the much steadier bench were similar. [They were very close - just under an inch, but I would not expect such accuracy at night out in a paddock when hunting.] I tend to shoot several 3 shot groups with a 'mental' rest of 4-5 minutes in between groups and then average the results of all the groups. I do this as I believe 'target' sports like shooting, archery, ten-pin bowling, etc. have a very high mental component, i.e. require great concentration and consistency, and my mind is likely to wander after a few shots causing shots to also 'wander'. Of course when hunting I don't shoot 3 shot groups at a fox. I just need one accurate shot off the light-weight portable rest. [Several years ago I actually shot a 5 shot group from one of my .222 Rem rifles over 5 days to test both myself and the cold rifle. That's not practical for many people, but was a useful test of my own physical and mental consistency under different daily conditions. I had to concentrate; I only had one shot each day - just like when hunting.]

Jim