What have been your most accurate rifles?
I have used 22-250, and .308 using a 4X scope with reloaded rounds.
Both have had 1/4 inch groups.
I had a .41 magnum, but the groups have been less.
What has been your experience ?
Andy
At what range ? If at 100 yds , and with off the shelf firearms ... you're either the finest marksman that ever lived or a liar .
.41 magnum is a handgun round-- so you would expect it to be less accurate, no?
+1
100 yards.
I am no liar.
You must be a poor marksman. I suggest you practice more.
Andy
You are right. The recoil is quite a bit. :-)
When I first got the gun, I could not hit a 9 x 11 piece of computer paper.
I wanted to sell the gun, but I kept practicing and got my groups down to 3 inches.
Andy
What rifle did you use for this feat of marksmanship?
I get plenty of practice . I also get plenty of bench time working up accurate loads for different firearms . I stand by my statement , if you're getting quarter inch groups at a hundred yards you're not using run of the mill over the counter firearms . That kind of accuracy comes from purpose built and very expensive rifles .
And there you have it , even "precision rifles" costing over 1200 bucks only AVERAGE around 1 MOA . I've been working on loads for a Remington 722* (mfd in 1961) chambered for .222 Remington . My best so far is just under an inch at 100 using 21 gr of IMR 3031 with a Berger
52 gr match hpbt in 5.56 cases resized to .222 . I'm trying to match or better that using Hornady 52 gr match hpbt's , haven't quite got there yet but I'm close . Getting some "real" .222 cases might help ... as would glass bedding the action . *This rifle is equipped with a Leupold 3-9 Vari-X and a Timney trigger . I'm thinking about swapping this scope , the crosshairs completely hide a 1" bullseye at 100 yards . Fine for 'chucks or squirrels out to a couple hundred but not optimum for paper punchin' .
A .41 caliber bullet grouping less than 1/4 inch. Hmmm...
Group size is a measure of repeatability, not accuracy. Without stating the range, group size measured in inches is rather meaningless. Stating repeatability to within, say 1 MOA (minute of angle), is much more meaningful.
Accuracy is a measure of point of impact relative to point of aim. A 1 MOA group size 6 MOA away from point of aim may be repeatable, but not very accurate.
Reproducibility is having a second or third shooter perform equally well with the same rifle and ammunition.
Your claims of 1/4 MOA are impressive, although dubious. What rifles and loads do you shoot? Do you compete with world-class marksmen?
Savage does good work. When they first came out I got an Axis (maybe an Edge. There was a trademark issue and I forget which way it went) in .223. It was about $300. It didn't have the Accu-Trigger but there was a Rifle Basix drop in or you could do your own tweaking. Been a while so I forget what powder I used with the Varmit Extreme 55 gr bullets. The cases were one fired American Eagle cheapies. I could get 1 MOA prone with a bipod.
A Nikon Prostaff with a BDC reticle seemed like a good idea at the time but I didn't like all the clutter and picking the right line for 400 meters was a challenge.
I'd been doing Appleseed with ..22LR at 25 meters and wanted something with a little more range without dropping a lot of money. .223 is much more pleasant than 7.62x54R and the old three-line is good for minute of Bambi although handloading some Prvi Partizan brass helped. It preferred .
303 bullets which are .311 because of the Brits strange ideas better than the more common .308 offerings.
Wonder where he is in this lineup?
Those guys are a pain in the butt anyway :) The 1000 yard range is perpendicular to and fires over all the other ranges so they're closed when the 1000 yard guys are in town. There is a 500 meter range down by the 1000 yard target berm than I sometimes use.
On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 22:01:11 -0600, Snag posted for all of us to digest...
Remember, he has back issues so maybe he times the twitches...
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.