Post by oddshooter on Feb 26, 2017 11:15:20 GMT -5
Too many variables. Three categories: Gun, Ammo, Shooter.
I believe anyone must address each category one by one. That doesn't mean there's only one problem.
It's a process of elimination. On computers, you must eliminate the hardware as the problem before starting the software. It's the process that will get you home in the end.
I always, and I mean always eliminate the gun first. It's the variable that is most consistent. Yea, yea, I know "consistent variable" is an oxymoron. I mean to say that the ammo, for example, can be inconsistent and/or just not fit the gun. We all know this one.
Before I test ammo, I must know if the test gun is consistent. There is no need to search for good ammo for a bad gun.
To discover the bad gun, I shoot multiple manufactured and reloaded ammo types for groups. I hand the gun to folks I know can shoot and do the same thing.
If the gun makes tight groups with any of the shooters with any of the ammo, it's not the gun.
Is your test gun the one you shot scoped as well? If no buddies around, a scope will tell you immediatly if the gun/ammo is good at longer distance.
Next comes one of my favorite hobbies, ammo testing. Volumes have been written here. Moving on.
And now we finally come to the tough stuff, the software; the Individual shooter.
Eyes, grips, hold, focus, trigger control, targets, colors, and psychology all play roles in accuracy. And on me, my trigger finger has a dead last digit. Eliminate one by one, one by one.
If there was a variable you mentioned that seemed critical, it was the distance you were shooting. It seems that your 10-15 yard groups were acceptable. It was when you move further out that problems arose. That's a natural phenomenon with us all.
I assume you expected that the shots at longer distance should have been a tighter group. The numbers you gave seemed to indicate the same. My groups don't get bigger by nearly as much from 15 to 25 as well.
Seems to me, there are some reports of gun/ammo combinations that can expand way beyond expectations as distances increase. I believe they are rare. If a gun/ammo groups consistently at 15, it should have reasonable groups at 50 (and beyond).
I would go toward eyes and/or focus. As I age, those are my issues. You don't seem like the type with psych issues(nervous at the line). This is the investigation stuff that makes shooting fun and continually new. And about as frustrating as falling in love with the head cheerleader.
Prescut
I believe anyone must address each category one by one. That doesn't mean there's only one problem.
It's a process of elimination. On computers, you must eliminate the hardware as the problem before starting the software. It's the process that will get you home in the end.
I always, and I mean always eliminate the gun first. It's the variable that is most consistent. Yea, yea, I know "consistent variable" is an oxymoron. I mean to say that the ammo, for example, can be inconsistent and/or just not fit the gun. We all know this one.
Before I test ammo, I must know if the test gun is consistent. There is no need to search for good ammo for a bad gun.
To discover the bad gun, I shoot multiple manufactured and reloaded ammo types for groups. I hand the gun to folks I know can shoot and do the same thing.
If the gun makes tight groups with any of the shooters with any of the ammo, it's not the gun.
Is your test gun the one you shot scoped as well? If no buddies around, a scope will tell you immediatly if the gun/ammo is good at longer distance.
Next comes one of my favorite hobbies, ammo testing. Volumes have been written here. Moving on.
And now we finally come to the tough stuff, the software; the Individual shooter.
Eyes, grips, hold, focus, trigger control, targets, colors, and psychology all play roles in accuracy. And on me, my trigger finger has a dead last digit. Eliminate one by one, one by one.
If there was a variable you mentioned that seemed critical, it was the distance you were shooting. It seems that your 10-15 yard groups were acceptable. It was when you move further out that problems arose. That's a natural phenomenon with us all.
I assume you expected that the shots at longer distance should have been a tighter group. The numbers you gave seemed to indicate the same. My groups don't get bigger by nearly as much from 15 to 25 as well.
Seems to me, there are some reports of gun/ammo combinations that can expand way beyond expectations as distances increase. I believe they are rare. If a gun/ammo groups consistently at 15, it should have reasonable groups at 50 (and beyond).
I would go toward eyes and/or focus. As I age, those are my issues. You don't seem like the type with psych issues(nervous at the line). This is the investigation stuff that makes shooting fun and continually new. And about as frustrating as falling in love with the head cheerleader.
Prescut