|
|
|
Discussion Forums
Forum Index
> Rifles general discussion
> "Hold that forend" vs. TOP - an opportunity
"Hold that forend" vs. TOP - an opportunity
@ 11:48 pm (GMT) |
David LenziI was making my way through the digital copy of Nathan's latest and his soft spoken, demure style got me thinking there's an opportunity created by another recent publication. The "theory of precision" (TOP gun theory) was put forth by another firearms author to model the relationship between precision, muzzle energy, and rifle weight (or mass, if you prefer). Below for reference:Precision (MOA) = .005 * KE muzzle (ft.lbf) / rifle weight (lb) + .039 That's intended to be descriptive of a five shot group average. Now, you will immediately note that the implications for most any hunting rifle are... well, they're the best argument for "Hold that forend!" you're likely to find. The same author notes/argues for a relationship between 3 shot and 5 shot average such that the 5 shot average is 28% larger (i.e. a rifle that averages .5" for 3 shots will average .64" for 5 shots, all else equal). The crux of the theory above is very clearly recoil management (made clear by some outliers)... but, you can well imagine the style in which the 17 different guns used to generate the test data were fired. The idea that's been kicking around in my head for the last month or so is to generate a body of data that represents the other side of the coin - active recoil management - and present it as such. In other words "Yes, the TOP strongly indicates potential/limitations IF the shooter fails to manage recoil with appropriate technique. With good technique, a shooter can expect significantly better results." In essence, the TOP attempts to explain what happens when a shooter does not follow Nathan's advice, but mathematically and backed with data. To throw some numbers at you, even something as modest as the .308 Winchester would need a rifle of 20+ lbs to average half MOA groups. A 7mm RM would be on the order of 30+ lbs for the same. Typical hunting weight configurations are predicted as 1.25 MOA or worse in almost all cases (or 1 MOA or worse for 3 shot groups on average). As a game of limbo goes, there is a LOT of room to get under that bar. Anyway, something for Vol 2 of the Practical Guide to Long Range Shooting if such a tome were to be forth coming. |
Replies
@ 09:24 am (GMT) |
Scott StruifRe: "Hold that forend" vs. TOP - an opportunityHi David. As Nathan states in the Knowledgebase article, “Please note that I am not talking about using a heavy rifle and weak cartridge to make a hit on a gong, but instead I speak in reference to game killing under real world field conditions using every day hunting rifles.“The experience of competition shooters obviously has some relevance to hunters, but it’s tenuous, at best. As you stated, a formula that requires a 20 pound 308 is of little use. |
|
@ 04:55 pm (GMT) |
David LenziRe: "Hold that forend" vs. TOP - an opportunityIndeed. I simply note from observation at the range (and from self-published media on the internet) the prevalence/popularity of passive rifle shooting technique. It is certainly not limited to heavy guns and weak cartridges.The requirement for accuracy/precision is certainly not less when hunting at long range... and doing so also seems, at least to me, to be increasingly popular. I think that being able to state "you can settle for 1.25+ MOA, or you can hold the damn gun and shoot less than .5 MOA" is useful in advancing the art, or at least remembrance of how it ought to be practiced. The above is predicated on the idea that many shooters simply don't know any better and there are not shortage of voices actively advocating on the part of "modern" technique. Though, admittedly, I might not have the full or useful understanding of our collective shooting population. |
|
@ 10:37 pm (GMT) |
Scott StruifRe: "Hold that forend" vs. TOP - an opportunityI’ve noticed that YouTube content creators who shoot targets from a bench, or prone with a bipod, do not grip the forend or use a sling. Some of them seem to have acceptable results, but, like you said, it depends on the weight of the rifle relative to the power of the cartridge. Also, repeatability can yield what appear to be good results, even with a considerable amount of muzzle jump. But when the forend or bipod is resting on a different surface, the point of impact will change. |
|
@ 02:34 pm (GMT) |
David LenziRe: "Hold that forend" vs. TOP - an opportunityI discovered Reddit last year. I pop onto the r/longrange section with some regularity and there are a few questions that come up frequently. Perhaps the most commonly asked question ("how do I go about putting together a rifle for long range shooting and hunting?") could be addressed simply by pinning a link to www.ballisticstudies.com in the info section.One other such question is "why are my groups so large?" It is often a less experienced shooter using a bipod. While I cannot claim definitive knowledge of this subject, I have certainly noted that poor recoil management tends to open groups horizontally when shooting from a bipod - the "bounce" ruining consistency if the rifle is not controlled. It can be difficult to explain to someone that there is a difference between the stability of the sights before the shot and the consistency of the rifle's movement during the shot. When I see linear or football shaped groups, a bipod is often my first thought for the culprit. |
Please wait
ABOUT USWe are a small, family run business, based out of Taranaki, New Zealand, who specialize in cartridge research and testing, and rifle accurizing.
|
KNOWLEDGEBASE |
KNOWLEDGEBASE |