.300 AAC Blackout

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Don't get your logic here.


Then let me simplify it for you. Take away most any field shooters AK-47, and hand them a custom built .300 AAC Blackout. Nothing will improve.


It HAS to improve...that's statistics

I challenge you to go to any range, and take a random group of shooters (in field positions), and hand them identical firearms with accuracies from 1MOA to 3 (or 4).

You WILL get different distributions on the targets. Obviously...It's not that hard a concept really is it ?

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
It HAS to improve...that's statistics.....


Not enough to matter in the field. The world is full of shooters who are not capable or consistent enough to utilize good equipment.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Shannow
It HAS to improve...that's statistics.....


Not enough to matter in the field. The world is full of shooters who are not capable or consistent enough to utilize good equipment.


A poor shooter will statistically hit the point that he's aiming for +/- his inherent error.

Throw in a gun whose own inherent error is greater, and the overall accuracy of the combination goes further away.

So a 2" group becomes a 6"group...that's meanginful, whether you are trying to kill humanely, or stop a threat.

Again, it's not THAT hard a concept, is it ???

 

[billt460]

What "concept"? There is none. Equipment is the same in most any sport. And "statistics" are meaningless when applied to individuals with a poor skill set. Simply because they don't possess the talent or consistency to use the equipment properly. Regardless of it's cost or quality. The average shooter is simply not talented, or consistent enough to be able to extract any benefit out of an expensive accurized custom hunting rifle. To make much, if any measurable difference in their inconsistent performance. You can either shoot well, or you can't. It's much the same with golf, or any other sport. Give a PGA touring pro a set of garage sale golf clubs, and he'll still beat 99.99% of the hackers he runs up against on the course who are carrying $4,000.00 custom fit clubs, that they think makes them better golfers. It will only matter against other touring pros who are all at the very top of their game.

It's no different with shooters. Shooters and golfers like to run out and spend like drunken sailors on the best equipment they can possibly afford. All thinking it will improve their game. When the reality is if they had spend the same on ammo, and attended a reputable rifle shooting seminar, they would improve more with the very same rifle they've been missing with all along. The same with golf. It all boils down to a classic case of putting the cart before the horse. Learn how to shoot...... Or golf first. Then worry about getting better equipment. Not the other way around. Because the fact is very few shooters or golfers will ever achieve the ability for it to matter anyway. Regardless of how much we like to think, or argue differently.

 

[Shannow]

OK, regarding the concept...

take the best shooter that you know, and give him a 3MOA rifle...he's perfect, what can he shoot ? 3MOA.
take the same guy, and give him a 1MOA rifle (like myCZ527)...what can he shoot ? (insert answer here).

Take a 3MOA shooter, give him a 3MOA rifle, and what's his spread ?
Give him a 1MOA rifle, and it's clearly reduced over the 3MOA rifle case.

Simple isn't it ?

Do YOU shoot better groups with a 3MOA versus a 1MOA rifle ?

When you were a bad shooter, how did you know that you needed to practice, and it wasn't the rifle's fault ?

Back to your Cemetary and AK example...how many of those shots were deliberately aimed for your stated outcome of fatal hits ?

Golf is a stupid game...unless played with golfballs and .22 rifles...is THAT why you brought it into the discussion ?

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
When you were a bad shooter, how did you know that you needed to practice, and it wasn't the rifle's fault?


Because when I practiced I got better with the same rifle, shotgun, or pistol. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Golf is a stupid game...


And golfers say the same about shooting. That doesn't change the skill level required to play it well. Give Rob Leatham a $500.00 box stock Springfield G.I. 1911, and he'll beat anyone on this forum on ANY course of fire, who goes up against him with a $5,000.00 custom built race gun.

Give Tiger Woods a bag full of garage sale golf clubs, and set him up in a foursome on any public course, with a bunch of suburbanites playing with their $5,000.00 custom fit clubs, and he'll wipe up the course with them. You like "concepts"? Absorb those.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Golf is a stupid game...


And golfers say the same about shooting. That doesn't change the skill level required to play it well. Give Rob Leatham a $500.00 box stock Springfield G.I. 1911, and he'll beat anyone on this forum on ANY course of fire, who goes up against him with a $5,000.00 custom built race gun.

Give Tiger Woods a bag full of garage sale golf clubs, and set him up in a foursome on any public course, with a bunch of suburbanites playing with their $5,000.00 custom fit clubs, and he'll wipe up the course with them. You like "concepts"? Absorb those.


OK, so the scores, on a target of a 3MOA shooter with a 3MOA rifle will be the same as a 3MOA shooter with a 1MOA rifle...a 1MOA shooter will get 1MOA with a 3MOA rifle.

I learn new stuff from you every day billt460.

Now as to your golfing analogy...back to the graveyard and the AKs...and aimed shots.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
OK, so the scores, on a target of a 3MOA shooter with a 3MOA rifle will be the same as a 3MOA shooter with a 1MOA rifle...a 1MOA shooter will get 1MOA with a 3MOA rifle.


How many shooters do you think are out there, who are capable of shooting ANY rifle into a 3" group at 100 yards consistently from field positions?

 

[BobsArmory]

My hunting buddies and I can shoot 1 MOA from field positions all day long. With a rifle or pistol. As long as we have a gun that shoots 1 MOA or under. I wouldn't even entertain heading out to the hunting grounds with a 3 or 4 MOA firearm.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: BobsArmory
My hunting buddies and I can shoot 1 MOA from field positions all day long.


Then you are in an extreme minority. And not of what represents 99.9% of the average hunters in the field today. What do you have tied up in guns, glass, rangefinders, and other assorted specialized equipment seen in those photos? Not to mention all the reloading equipment, along with the skill it takes to use it, that makes it all perform?

Do you think that is an accurate representation of the average hunter who shoots 2 boxes a year, and buys their guns and ammo from Wal-Mart? It's about as accurate as using the shooters, guns, and scores in the Bianchi Cup, as a comparison of what you'll find at your local indoor pistol range. Remember, it's never a case of, "It can't be done". But rather a simple case of, how many can actually do it?

 

[billt460]

And while we're on the subject, and using visual aids. These are actual in the field hunting shooting positions. No Bi-Pods in any of them. And forget MOA. Back to my original question. What percentage of license holding hunters in the field today, can consistently shoot a 3" group at 100 yards from any of those positions with ANY rifle?



OFFHAND



KNEELING



SITTING



PRONE

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: billt460
How many rifle shooters can hold and shoot 3 MOA from field positions? I'll go way out on a limb and say very few.


Which field positions are your basis for the 3MOA comment though? I'm quite accurate crouched, shooting off my knee, but nowhere near as good standing. Better bracing a tree of course. I'm very good from prone, but that has always involved a bipod.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: billt460

Then you are in an extreme minority. And not of what represents 99.9% of the average hunters in the field today. What do you have tied up in guns, glass, rangefinders, and other assorted specialized equipment seen in those photos? Not to mention all the reloading equipment, along with the skill it takes to use it, that makes it all perform?

Do you think that is an accurate representation of the average hunter who shoots 2 boxes a year, and buys their guns and ammo from Wal-Mart? It's about as accurate as using the shooters, guns, and scores in the Bianchi Cup, as a comparison of what you'll find at your local indoor pistol range. Remember, it's never a case of, "It can't be done". But rather a simple case of, how many can actually do it?


My .308 would shoot sub MOA from a picnic table on box ammo all day long. Rifle wasn't some unicorn, just a Savage 10FCP-K with a decent scope on it. Eventually I had a fair bit of money into it, but it shot great from the day I bought it. My Savage 14/114 in .270 was also a great shooting gun.

This is a 10-shot group (with 1 flyer) from the .308 shot from a wooden picnic table at 100 yards. Ammo would have been Federal Blue Box IIRC in 150gr. I get similar results with Hornady Whitetail:

This was not a "best effort" attempt and there was no cooldown between shots. I do not have thick fingers, the tip of my finger is slightly less broad than a dime if that helps with dimensions.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
My .308 would shoot sub MOA from a picnic table on box ammo all day long. Rifle wasn't some unicorn, just a Savage 10FCP-K with a decent scope on it.


Off I rest or bench I believe it. I also have many rifles that will cut one ragged hole all day long off a bench. My Savage Model 12-F/TR among them. But shooting offhand, sitting, kneeling, or even prone with a sporter hunting rifle is a whole different ball game.

 

[billt460]

Even my .338-378 Weatherby Accumark with a fluted sporter barrel will do much the same off a rest with handloads. Again it's not shooting from field positions. So it really proves nothing.

 

[bigj_16]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Even my .338-378 Weatherby Accumark with a fluted sporter barrel will do much the same off a rest with handloads. Again it's not shooting from field positions. So it really proves nothing.








Is that rifle just for plinking?

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Which field positions are your basis for the 3MOA comment though?


Those pictured above your post.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Is that rifle just for plinking?

I bought it back in 1999. It's been a good shooting rifle. It performs even better with 300 Grain Sierra Matchkings over a heavy dose of WC-872 Surplus Ball Powder. It's got a 1 in 10" twist, so it stabilizes the 300 grain bullets nice. I took a couple of Elk with it back in early 2000's. I no longer hunt, so now it doesn't get too much use. It's fun to crank up once and a while.

My club range goes out to 500 yards when the High Power guys are practicing. The biggest issue is the cost of the brass. I get the .338-378 Norma brass from Huntington's Die Specialties for $62.00 a box, (20). Factory ammo is both too expensive, and much too anemic. The only way you can achieve what the cartridge is capable of is with handloading.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Which field positions are your basis for the 3MOA comment though?


Those pictured above your post.


OK, but in my experience position #2 and #3 yield significantly better results than say position #1 and of course #4 is better than all of them, particularly with a bipod. I can be quite consistent with the rifle against my knee for example, but I'm nowhere near as good standing up without a tree to brace against.