My feelings toward shooting lots of 3 and 5-shot groups with a big game rifle are apparently in the minority. I shoot 2-shot groups starting with a fouled, stone cold barrel. And I'll do "24 hour" 2-shot groups: shoot my 2 quick shots, wait a day or so, shoot another 2-shot group at the same target, wait another day or so, and repeat 4 or 5 times. Result, 1 target with lots of holes showing the accuracy my rifle exhibits over days or weeks, rather than over an hour or two. To me, this is my rifle's REAL WORLD accuracy. This simulates true hunting conditions I encounter when I hunt in the fall and winter.

I never get more than 1 shot at deer and elk size game. When I put the crosshairs on one animal in a group of say three or more, I squeeze off one shot, they all take off like rockets, one falls over, and even if I wanted to shoot at another animal (or the same one), they are running like crazy through the trees and there is no way I can take a second aimed shot. I know someday I'll need that follow-up shot, but I minimize the need for it because I won't shoot unless I know I can make a one shot kill.

In the past, I've tested my hunting rifles with 3-shot groups, with and without a 1 or 2 minute interval between shots. I've also shot 5 to 7 shot groups with 2 to 5 minute intervals between shots to keep the barrel temp relatively constant. And I've always questioned the necessity of this with medium size caliber hunting rifles. But, like everyone else here I am sure, shooting at the range is just too much fun and we all need to shoot at least a box before we feel fulfilled.

So, in order to get my fill, I take two or three rifles with me when my real objective is to test only one rifle. While my rifle undergoing testing is cooling off, I shoot away with the others I brought along. Still, it is hard not to want to shoot my big game rifle more than 2 shots at a time, just to see "what she'll do".

So, I've succumbed to the itch in my trigger finger. I'll shoot my 2 quick shots at a target (the target I save for the "24 hour" groups) to give me my REAL WORLD accuracy, and then I'll wait 3 to 5 minutes, take a third shot at a second target, wait 1 or 2 minutes and squeeze off a fourth shot at that target. Even though I know those last two shots don't mean nuthin' as far as hunting goes, it just feels good to do it, like I said, to see "what she'll do". Deep down in my gut, I know I'm just wearing out the barrel and burning up ammo with more than 2 shots, but I just gotta do it.

The point of this is: when you are testing your big game rifle for accuracy, whether you are testing the rifle, scope, or ammunition, or whether you are sighting in before a hunt, how many groups do you shoot, how many shots are in a group, what time interval between shots do you wait, what time interval between groups do you wait to cool down the barrel.

Do you really feel it necessary to shoot 3 or 5 (or whatever)-shot groups to determine a big game rifle's accuracy? Or are you, like me, shooting your rifle so much because it's too much fun to quit before it gets too dark to see the targets? roy p.

Roy,

I understand your point. However, when I attempt to find the most accurate group, I will shoot 01 fouler and 03 rounds for score. The idea is consistency. When I find a group that meets my idea of accurate, I will load up 05 more rounds and try again another day. Again, I am looking for consistency. If the group is still acceptable, withour flyers, then that is the load I use.

I admit it, I shoot because it's just plain fun. Why lots of groups? The quest
for the perfect one of course!
You are correct that for hunting the rifle will be cold so first shot accuracy
is the one that counts, but I am more often testing the load than I am the
rifle. Sitting in my range bag right now are 24 cartridges consisting of three
loaded for each of eight � grain intervals. I'll shoot a fouling shot, then
fire the first three shots at one target, the next group of three at a clean
target, etc. until I am out of ammo. There will probably be a 2-5 minute lag
between each 3 shot group while I make notes and retrieve targets etc.

I'll be looking for the load that delivers the tightest group with the intent to
load up more of them for the next trip to the range and see if the result will
be duplicated.

I feel it is necessary to fire at least three shots of each load because I may
flub a shot and skew the results. But if one shot is an inch away and the other
two are touching - that tells me that the fault may be in the shooter not the
load. With only two shots I can't tell. 5 shots gives further proof. It will
either show 4 together if the load is good, or a shotgun pattern if the load is
bad.

Just my 2 cents....

It's called a hobby. Also called an obsession by our spouses.

Once you find the tightest group you can load, it won't open up enough out in the field to be a concern against a big game animal. Ive never heard of a .5" group openning up to 16" because the barrel was clean and cold.

It depends on what Im trying to do. If I have just begun sighting in a new scope mounting job for instance I will sometimes begin adjusting after only one shot, but after the first one or two adjustments I will begin to use a three shot group. Last weekend I did that with a newly mounted scope, it took 4 shots to get a bullseye @ 50 yds, 100 yds was another story but at least they were all on the paper. The more finite the adjustments become the more shots I will apply. Five shot groups mean Im getting warm.


It seems apparent that a lot of guys are able to shoot more often and more easily than myself. At the very least I drive a few miles and pay a fee to shoot at a range where I cant use my chronograph. I prefer waiting for the weekend and driving much farther to do my own thing in the sticks. Therefore shooting a couple shots a day is quite impractical for me. I envy you guys who can set up targets in your back yard and warm up a bbl after work.

I no longer hunt but do a lot of range firing. The primary aim for me is to shoot as small a group as possible. What I consider acceptable depends on the caliber I'm shooting. This means extra time at the reloading bench working up loads. It also means 5 shot groups being fired. I want .5" groups from 6mm and less, .75" from everything else. That doesn't always come easily. It's a lot of work, but very satisfying on good days. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Like others have stated above I am looking for a load that will give me a consistent groups. Then I work with the load to tune it to the tightest group. The final step is to shoot it in field conditions. GlennB, I follow some of your processes during this phase (24 hr groups etc). The sole purpose of all of this is to build confidence in the load/rifle combo. I find if I don�t have a certain level of confidence in the combo it is just one more thing to think about. I get way to excited and I don't need anything additional to think about when it comes to making the shot. Shot placement is King in my book.

Kind regards
Carl

You got it, Roy P. You know the right way. But almost all of us like shooting, so we do it.

Count me in on the "just because it's fun as all get out" crowd. I'd rather hunt, but when I can't, I don't have a bad time shooting paper or clays. I won't get better if I don't work at it. I wasn't one of the lucky ones born with the natural ability to hit nails every time I squeeze the trigger. It's hard and fun work.
-tlfw

For the most part I shoot to develope a good load. When I think I've found it I'll shoot 5-10 shot strings over a period of time. If it's consistant, I'm done until it's time for meat. As an Example: Ruger #1, .257 Bob. Didn't shoot 120/115/100 gr bullets well with a multitude of different powders/primers etc. So-so with Sierra 90 gr BTHP, very good with Vmax and 85 gr. Ballistic tips. So I got a varmint gun instead of a deer rifle, who cares. 22 shots, .77" @ 100 yds. works for me. It's going west with me next summer.

I don't fiddle after that. I target plink with clunkers and .22 RF's, I paper patch a Ruger 77/44 for amusement(it'll stabilize a 300 gr lead bullet w/2.1 gr of Bullseye, and bust your ass with 18.0 gr of Li'l Gun) If I need a new project, I buy a new gun.

Shooting off the bench is the most flat-out-ass boring thing I've done with a rifle.

I'd much rather be shooting highpower rifle, where real marksmanship skills that can be applied to the field are learned, practiced, and perfected.

I shoot both in service and sporting rifle matches. Sporting rifle keeps me sharp with the same rifle I take afield, while service rifle gets me to face really tough shots, like 600 yards with a crosswind and iron sights. Or 200 yards off hand while sawying in the breeze.

Roy, I think your two-shot, wait 24 hours, two-shot, etc. approach is as sound an approach to real-world big game rifle accuracy I've heard. Ross Seyfried reccomends one shot every day and that'd be equally hard to argue with.

For what ever reason, the "three-shot, 100 yard, BGR accuracy requirement" has been hammered into most of our brains to such an extent that we're loath to think of anything different. Too, I agree with the above... this IS an obsession not a real-world requirement, or even the best judge of a BGR's real accuracy potential.

Move the targets out to 300 yards and do your two shot / 24 hour test... that's an even better indicator of your rifle's potential!

I also like to see what the best group each rifle will do with a given load and shoot lots of groups based on changes to the rifle such as trigger work, scope, etc.

But I'm most interested in that first shot cold. I like to duplicate a hunting situation for that one like dropping to one knee or sitting. Then it's to the bench and usually groups of 3 at 100 yards. Once a month I have access to a 200 yard range.

-Sean

http://www.mseanbrowne.com/adl.html
http://www.mseanbrowne.com/sauer.html

Roy!

Interesting thoughts. Your method is undoubtedly a good measure of the "real world accuracy" of the rifle. You can see mean performance in different conditions. That's nice.

However, Most rifles perform better than you in hunting situations. The errors that can be traced to your shooting skills, ranging, wind estimation, e.t.c. contributes more to the real world accuracy than your rifle.

I practice three-shot groups in all positions that can be used in the field. I analyse the results: How tight is the group? How are the individual rounds distributed? How is the group positioned? What may have gone wrong? Then I think of possible improvements that can be tested on the next group. I shoot 5-6 groups each time on the range, and almost every time I find ways to improve my shooting and the real world accuracy.

As long as you have a reasonable good rifle, the greatest source of error is human. I believe that's where you truly can improve real world accuracy.