Don't try to divert the focus of discussion. Why are you doing that? Are you the Original Poster of the thread? No you are not.
The Ransom Rest has this same problem ... That's one advantage of using a revolver in a Ransom Rest. The barrel is attached to the frame, so it does return the barrel to the same pointing position for every shot.
Who cares? I do not have a Ransom Rest nor do most of THR members. I also do not own any revolvers.
Glock is probably not the best tool for testing accuracy. One needs a tool that is reliable, consistent and can produce repeatable results ... But a better tool is a better choice.
Once again, yes it would be nice to have strain gauge set up to measure chamber pressures and dedicated private indoor range with laboratory controlled conditions. Guess what? I don't have either.
And as to needing a better tool, well, plenty of reloaders and match shooters over the decades have successfully developed loads and won matches without the use of chrono or laboratory grade test equipment.
So stop.
I don't want it to sound like I'm badmouthing Glocks, but they are not designed to be precision shooting instruments. They are combat accurate because that's all they need to be.
But you are. Are you upset because I post sub 2" 25 yard groups (even verified by fellow THR member) on par with 1911 groups?
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ick-plated-bullets.761471/page-4#post-9646469
And tell me, why wouldn't Glock on their 3rd, 4th and 5th generation models not want to produce accurate pistols? BTW, some Gen5 Glocks have Marksman barrel that are supposed to be match grade. Did you know that?
I don't think it's easy to assess accuracy. It requires proper methods in order for the results to have any validity. I've tried to point that out, but some people don't get it or are offended by direct statements of that fact.
No, you don't have to use "some people". Just say I get offended by another THR member who barge into a thread posting accusations that are not reflective of what's been posted.
If you started a thread and another THR member did the same thing you are doing, you'd be upset too.
The methods matter. I've said this many times. If the methods suck the results are meaningless. Honestly, many people on this forum don't appreciate how important the methods are in producing results that one can trust.
Well then why don't you start a new thread and show us the methods that we should all be using. Please.
And they think any critique of the methods is somehow insulting.
No, your behavior on THR is up to the moderators/staff/administrators to decide whether you are complying with THR forum rules.
The subject matter of accuracy is based on facts, and feelings have no place.
And I am posting "factual" details of the test rounds (case headstamp used, bullets used, powders/charges used, OAL/taper crimp used, pistols/barrels used, distance to target, group pictures, etc.)
Original Post of this thread is various retirement reloading projects I am finally getting to do now that I am retired.
As expressed in Range Test #1, #2 and #3, I am
illustrating factual findings of load development and equipment testing as they are demonstrated. And BTW, the holes on target do not have my "feelings".
Which shot was your first shot? The one to the far right or the one you excluded next to the 10 shots you circled?
How many shots did you fire at that target?
If you actually read my post, you would have known that.
It is you who barged into an ongoing thread of load development and range testing of equipment after Range Test #3 post. Had you read Range Test #1, #2, and #3, you should have seen the technical issues I was addressing and that I was posting "factual" data as they happened.
It is you who accused me of making "assumptions"
From what I gather from your comments you're making lots of assumptions and only accepting data as 'real' if it meets your assumptions. If it doesn't, you fabricate a reason for excluding hits.
Can't you not read?
So once again, I am calling you out by your words. Why are you continuing to attack me even though I am simply posting my load development and range test results?