Tight necks

More expensive to feed, but worth it.
User avatar
Trent
Expert Master Poster
Expert Master Poster
Posts: 1636
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:39 pm
Location: Columbus, Georgia

Re: Tight necks

Post by Trent » Thu Jan 29, 2015 2:28 pm

Exactly OldRanger. These other guys are doing it all wrong.

So... how do I make my gun less accurate?? Kevinbear, you should know all the answers to this. Its what you're good at. =)) =)) =))

kevinbear
AAA Poster
AAA Poster
Posts: 943
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:16 am
Location: Parker Colorado

Re: Tight necks

Post by kevinbear » Thu Jan 29, 2015 3:39 pm

OldRanger wrote:So what I'm hearing is, since I rarely break inside the animal I want a less accurate gun. That way I have a better chance of hitting them, right?
Hold the gun down at waist level and launch the bullets downrange!
AAA Shooter politically incorrect and loving it

kevinbear
AAA Poster
AAA Poster
Posts: 943
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:16 am
Location: Parker Colorado

Re: Tight necks

Post by kevinbear » Thu Jan 29, 2015 3:42 pm

Trent wrote:Exactly OldRanger. These other guys are doing it all wrong.

So... how do I make my gun less accurate?? Kevinbear, you should know all the answers to this. Its what you're good at. =)) =)) =))
Spend all your time trying to teach idiots how to shoot and load ammunition and not on your own equipment! =))
AAA Shooter politically incorrect and loving it

User avatar
Trent
Expert Master Poster
Expert Master Poster
Posts: 1636
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:39 pm
Location: Columbus, Georgia

Re: Tight necks

Post by Trent » Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:46 pm

kevinbear wrote:
Trent wrote:Exactly OldRanger. These other guys are doing it all wrong.

So... how do I make my gun less accurate?? Kevinbear, you should know all the answers to this. Its what you're good at. =)) =)) =))
Spend all your time trying to teach idiots how to shoot and load ammunition and not on your own equipment! =))
I resemble that remark.

DennisC
B Poster
B Poster
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:50 pm
Location: SE Texas

Re: Tight necks

Post by DennisC » Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:01 pm

jask wrote:Trent, OK, that blows up my first claim.

How about this.

Lets say you have 1/2 MOA accuracy. If you break all shots at 1/2 MOA inside the animal, all shots hit. If you have 1 MOA accuracy and you also break all shots at 1/2 MOA inside the animal, 25% of those shots would miss. With the more accurate rifle, you hit all 10 animals. With the less accurate rifle, you statistically miss 2.

A more simple way to look at it is a competitor with a 1/2 MOA rifle only needs to break the shot at least 1/2 MOA inside the animal. A 3/4 MOA rifle would need all shots within 3/4 MOA inside the animal. A less accurate rifle effectively reduces the size of the animal for guaranteed hits however, I like the idea of shooting at larger animals. It just makes me feel better thinking I am shooting at larger animals.
Let me take a little different direction with your line of reasoning....I'm shooting 1/2 min dot in HP, both rifles will very closely hold a group either under the dot or edging pretty close under it. If it doesn't I'm looking to my spotter for what's happening down range. This is not only on the hits, but on the misses. If I call low turkey breast and get over the back nk body junction...what happened? (assuming good break/follow through) Same thing I call over the back nk body and hit low breast.... L/R- mirage - boil ? what condition did I shoot in? Of course at this point in my shooting there are too many shots where I just turn and look at Chad with a ????? couln't tell you where it went....in those circumstances all the prepping, tuning really don't make much difference. It's when you're on, the dot walks into the animal, and the rifle fires almost by itself, you see it sitting there when the rifle recoils. That's when the whole accuracy thing can make a difference between winning or not. And yes I totally agree, the more accurate rifle does make the target bigger... :-bd

DennisC
B Poster
B Poster
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:50 pm
Location: SE Texas

Re: Tight necks

Post by DennisC » Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:12 pm

Trent wrote:The edge shot idea, while sound... may not be. With a big group size, when I break on the edge of the ram or just off the edge 50% of my shots are still going to hit, and 50% of my shots are going to miss (assuming evenly random dispersal). Imagine a pie plate taped to the edge of a ram, half on and half off (sometimes more off than on). That is the group radius. Now, humor me if you will, if I shrink my group size by half but still break in the same place... less of my bullets will hit! Technically... we need less accurate rifles! :mrgreen:

Or just break inside the animal. 8-x
We beat that idea to death years ago at Paris range matter of fact. We reached the conclusion that while the concept is sound, there is an unknown variable...murphy's law if you will, that almost guarantees that 50% will turn into a +85% miss every time. It was determined that a center break was the EASIEST method to get more hits. =)) Man I love this game...

User avatar
Bigfoot
AA Poster
AA Poster
Posts: 407
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Seattle WA

Re: Tight necks

Post by Bigfoot » Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:52 pm

So for what it's worth I agree that a 1/4 minute of improvement doesn't on paper really spell out to winning matches. Hell, I shoot with a few guys that have holds so much better than mine it's as if they are using benches and they to a man throw their stuff on a Dillion and load up 1000 rounds and forget about it.

Myself I'm lucking to make the firestick go bang when I'm approaching the point I'm focusing on. Having said that. I do get extra confidence in my gear when I go to bigger matches by spending a little more time concentrating on sorting the best cases for my ram loads and have even been known to keep some of my super best loads (brass weighed before loading and weighed and measured after for concentricity) for shoot offs. Didn't help me out this last weekend in Cali (more to come on that later) but it helped me in a shoot off at Iron Man more than once (yeah I know, shoot more targets in the match and you don't have to worry about shoot offs).

So after babbling on and on. There is a sweet spot for each rifle and load as far as neck tension and definitely in extending case life by only minimally sizing your brass so find out what works for you. I went over my logs this last week and realized I've got 13+ reloads on my cheap rem .250 sav brass and that's with only loosing about 2% of brass to neck splits and loose primer pockets after 4 years. To me that's pretty cool. Knowing that off the bench my loads will shoot 1/4 min is gravy so that I know it's bozo behind the rifle loosing at the end of the day. :ymcowboy:
Res ipsa loquitur

jask
A Poster
A Poster
Posts: 128
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:56 am
Location: San Diego, California

Re: Tight necks

Post by jask » Fri Jan 30, 2015 10:25 pm

Dennis, If you ever call a low hit and it goes over the back, something is wrong. It is either inaccurate loads, too many rounds through the bore or a trigger jerk. As for my shooting, I am pleased if I can call the shot and the spotter agrees. That means I am doing everything right except being on target. A good spotter will call the wind for you when you come to the line and tell you where to aim on each shot. On a windy day, a good spotter can give you several hits.

I learned a lot of rules the hard way, experience.

What does everyone think of these "rules"?

1.There are no shortcuts.

2. 3000 rounds means you have to bore scope often and watch for chunks gone. If your muzzle velocity is greater than 2400, it happens earlier.

3. All scopes should be shimmed to use only the center area.

4. When loading, you do the exact same thing to every case every time. No exceptions.

5. Avoid removing the action from the stock and if you do, always use a torque wrench.

6. If you use a "bumped scope", never change the power setting.

Some of the above are pretty basic but I violated them all and learned the hard way.

Jerry G
Uber Master Poster
Uber Master Poster
Posts: 2706
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: Casa Grande, AZ

Re: Tight necks

Post by Jerry G » Mon Feb 02, 2015 9:07 am

Great post, rules jask. I think you have stumbled on to something a lot of people seem to ignore. Your first one is the most mis-understood of all and the most important. It is NOT an equipment race, it is a skill thing.

jask
A Poster
A Poster
Posts: 128
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:56 am
Location: San Diego, California

Re: Tight necks

Post by jask » Mon Feb 02, 2015 3:02 pm

Jerry, I began silhouette shooting in the early 80's and the matches were quite popular. You just brought out your hunting rifle and had a good time. My first time out, I got about 15 but that was because I was on the small bore 3 position team in college. There was a lot to learn but I was hooked seeing the animals go down. I was totally burned out on paper targets and hadn't shot for 20 years.

As years past, shooters got better and equipment got better. The beginner who brought out his hunting rifle and hit 5 never came back again. The reason he didn't come back was that he could not afford a rifle like the guy had who won the match. Off hand shooting is a learned skill and requires lots and lots of practice. The practice is almost all dry firing and costs nothing but the new shooter doesn't see it that way. He sees himself as a decent shooter and the fault has to lie with the equipment. Granted, a lot of it does go to the rifle. If you want decent scores, you need a riled that is bedded, sighted in and with accurate loads.

The last couple of years I ran the match, I bought a Rem 788 in .308. I did a bedding job and worked up a decent load. I talked Leopold into loaning a target scope for the rifle. I used donated Sierra seconds and donated Hornady powder from those I met at the shot show. I had someone shooting that rifle at every match but it just wasn't enough.

The final problem just came down to dollars. The club was losing money with the range tied up for an entire morning and sometimes I had less than 10 shooters. A decision was made and the match was gone.

When I went to other matches, I just began to fire only my hunting rifle and left the std rifle at home. The NRA rules did get out of hand with the top competitors in charge. I remember Troy Lawton saying, " it doesn't matter what I shoot, I'm going to win anyway so why not let me shoot what I want." If I had my way, a 12 power hunting scope would be the highest power you would see and no target turrets. Factory rifles and factory barrels. I like the IMSSU rules on that one. The sport just got too far away from the hunting rifle in the closet. That about sums it up.

Jerry G
Uber Master Poster
Uber Master Poster
Posts: 2706
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: Casa Grande, AZ

Re: Tight necks

Post by Jerry G » Tue Feb 03, 2015 10:04 am

Canada did have a limit on the power of the scope for hunting rifles and they taped your turrets after you got your zero. You had a low power scope and used kentucky windagefor elevation and wind.

Most of the people working on the NRA rules arn't even silihouette shooters.

You are right about the new shooters that never come back. They blame their poor skills on the equipment. We had 2 police snipers show up at a match once and when they found out we shot standing up they left. They wouldn't even try it.

jask
A Poster
A Poster
Posts: 128
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 4:56 am
Location: San Diego, California

Re: Tight necks

Post by jask » Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:21 am

Jerry, I was not aware of the Canadian rule. I suppose a lot of things have been tried but maybe the fault just lies with human nature. It is a tough game. There is no doubt about that and more and more people don't want to spend the time to develop the necessary skills. I just saw an article in the paper about the last dedicated piano store going out of business. Just too hard to learn. (BTW, who reads papers anymore? I suppose old people like me who can't kick the habit. Hard to call it a paper anymore. More like a leaflet.)

Post Reply