Free: Contests & Raffles.
The take away from that video for beginners should be the conversation on moa and expectations. IE "they might be .5 moa here and there but only because the stars aligned at that time"..5 moa ay 500 but might not be at 100.
Quote from: Oh Mah on September 16, 2018, 10:41:55 AMThe take away from that video for beginners should be the conversation on moa and expectations. IE "they might be .5 moa here and there but only because the stars aligned at that time"..5 moa ay 500 but might not be at 100. There's a myth floating around that some rifles are more accurate at long distance than they are up close. Brian Litz has asked for anyone who has such a rifle to show him, with no successful takers. I agree with him that it's purely a myth, and a result of people firing only a few rounds to test accuracy and thinking that is a good representation of what the rifle does.In your 100 & 500 yard example above, if one were to shoot 10-20 rounds on each target, you'd see both average out to about the same MOA accuracy level, with the 500 yard target being slightly worse. But, pick any 3 rounds from either target and imagine those were the only rounds fired, and you could see how those results might look like the rifle is more accurate at 500 than 100. That also shows how a 1.5 moa rifle might look like a 0.5 moa rifle on a lucky target.
Quote from: Yondering on September 16, 2018, 12:46:53 PMQuote from: Oh Mah on September 16, 2018, 10:41:55 AMThe take away from that video for beginners should be the conversation on moa and expectations. IE "they might be .5 moa here and there but only because the stars aligned at that time"..5 moa ay 500 but might not be at 100. There's a myth floating around that some rifles are more accurate at long distance than they are up close. Brian Litz has asked for anyone who has such a rifle to show him, with no successful takers. I agree with him that it's purely a myth, and a result of people firing only a few rounds to test accuracy and thinking that is a good representation of what the rifle does.In your 100 & 500 yard example above, if one were to shoot 10-20 rounds on each target, you'd see both average out to about the same MOA accuracy level, with the 500 yard target being slightly worse. But, pick any 3 rounds from either target and imagine those were the only rounds fired, and you could see how those results might look like the rifle is more accurate at 500 than 100. That also shows how a 1.5 moa rifle might look like a 0.5 moa rifle on a lucky target. Like the saying that the bullets need to “go to sleep” or “settle in”
Quote from: BULLBLASTER on September 16, 2018, 05:10:59 PMQuote from: Yondering on September 16, 2018, 12:46:53 PMQuote from: Oh Mah on September 16, 2018, 10:41:55 AMThe take away from that video for beginners should be the conversation on moa and expectations. IE "they might be .5 moa here and there but only because the stars aligned at that time"..5 moa ay 500 but might not be at 100. There's a myth floating around that some rifles are more accurate at long distance than they are up close. Brian Litz has asked for anyone who has such a rifle to show him, with no successful takers. I agree with him that it's purely a myth, and a result of people firing only a few rounds to test accuracy and thinking that is a good representation of what the rifle does.In your 100 & 500 yard example above, if one were to shoot 10-20 rounds on each target, you'd see both average out to about the same MOA accuracy level, with the 500 yard target being slightly worse. But, pick any 3 rounds from either target and imagine those were the only rounds fired, and you could see how those results might look like the rifle is more accurate at 500 than 100. That also shows how a 1.5 moa rifle might look like a 0.5 moa rifle on a lucky target. Like the saying that the bullets need to “go to sleep” or “settle in”Do you shoot long range competition?
There's a myth floating around that some rifles are more accurate at long distance than they are up close. Brian Litz has asked for anyone who has such a rifle to show him, with no successful takers. I agree with him that it's purely a myth, and a result of people firing only a few rounds to test accuracy and thinking that is a good representation of what the rifle does.In your 100 & 500 yard example above, if one were to shoot 10-20 rounds on each target, you'd see both average out to about the same MOA accuracy level, with the 500 yard target being slightly worse. But, pick any 3 rounds from either target and imagine those were the only rounds fired, and you could see how those results might look like the rifle is more accurate at 500 than 100. That also shows how a 1.5 moa rifle might look like a 0.5 moa rifle on a lucky target.
Quote from: Yondering on September 16, 2018, 12:46:53 PMQuote from: Oh Mah on September 16, 2018, 10:41:55 AMThe take away from that video for beginners should be the conversation on moa and expectations. IE "they might be .5 moa here and there but only because the stars aligned at that time"..5 moa ay 500 but might not be at 100. There's a myth floating around that some rifles are more accurate at long distance than they are up close. Brian Litz has asked for anyone who has such a rifle to show him, with no successful takers. I agree with him that it's purely a myth, and a result of people firing only a few rounds to test accuracy and thinking that is a good representation of what the rifle does.In your 100 & 500 yard example above, if one were to shoot 10-20 rounds on each target, you'd see both average out to about the same MOA accuracy level, with the 500 yard target being slightly worse. But, pick any 3 rounds from either target and imagine those were the only rounds fired, and you could see how those results might look like the rifle is more accurate at 500 than 100. That also shows how a 1.5 moa rifle might look like a 0.5 moa rifle on a lucky target.His book talks about projectiles can be launched unstable or marginal stability with pitching an yawing until the velocity slows enough to allow the aerodynamic overturning to be damped out by the rotational rigidity. He does make the claim that these pitching a yaws only cause slight movements relative to bullet diameter, but I think it could be more so it shouldn't be able to be measured on paper. I know .50BMGs are really bad about this and it has been photographed. Any lateral velocity should move the projectile further from its flight path as the time of flight increases (increased range); at least in theory so pretty safe bet on his part, but I have been told that the USMC has done extensive testing and proved that group size can decrease with increased range on some weapons. I hope to see that data someday.
His book talks about projectiles can be launched unstable or marginal stability with pitching an yawing until the velocity slows enough to allow the aerodynamic overturning to be damped out by the rotational rigidity.