What determines firearm accuracy

[eye5600]

The scope is adjusted to aim at the center dot of the target, but the shots are meant to miss the bullseye/center dot because once you put one, two or three shots through that tiny dot, well, it isn't there anymore to use as an aiming point. No aiming point, no group.

Reasons and excuses aside, the use of "accurate" in science would mean hitting the X.

The reason the "tiny cloverleaf" is in the 5 ring is because the sights or scope has not been adjusted to bring the bullet hits to the center of the target.

So, why didn't you do that? From my point of view, you are showing incomplete work. I bet, if you play golf, when you chip up to 3 feet from the hole, you call it a gimme, and don't putt out. Well, the pros aren't done 'til the ball is in the hole.

The point being made was about language, not shooting habits, and mostly I'm just being a wise guy, but there is a serious point. You play like you practice, as they say. If you don't take the extra step and put the holes in the 10-ring when you practice, you may find it harder than expected when it counts.

 

[M2 Carbine]

The reason the "tiny cloverleaf" is in the 5 ring is because the sights or scope has not been adjusted to bring the bullet hits to the center of the target.

So, why didn't you do that? From my point of view, you are showing incomplete work
Why don't you do that?.

Have you never worked up a load for a gun?

If you have several loads you are testing at one time it would be a big waste of time and ammo to zero in a test load to the X, only to go through the same thing with each following test load.
Initially it doesn't matter where the load is hitting, because if/when you decide that's the load/group you are looking for it's a simple thing to to adjust the sights to hit the X or where ever you want the gun zeroed.

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

Cloverleaf in the five ring> Hillarious!!

Accuracy:
Where I am from benchrest shooting doesn't count. Not worth a hill of beans. Checking the funcionality and accuracy of a gun and that's it.
Way too much benchresting going on.
For me there is no challenge in it. Sure you are checking that ammo, checking that load. I guess 95% of all shooting is testing the limits of a rifle and checking reloads?
The subject was written on how to become a rifleman by many. The NRA puts out a book called the "marksmanship primer" A compilation from some of the greats who learned over the years. Jack O Conner, Whelen to name few.
I kind of scoff at those who benchrest because they never rise to the challenge shooting.
Its a free country, defend the benchrest shooting arts.
When that rifle becomes useless in your hands and you start wondering why you missed its because you never took up the subject of being a rifleman seriously enough. I suggest you read the marksmanship primer. Accuracy will take on an entirely new meaning.

 

[M2 Carbine]

Way too much benchresting going on.

I suspect the problem is that's about all you can do on most ranges available to the average shooter.
Maybe they can do a little offhand shooting, but that's about it.

Even when shooting handguns most ranges won't allow drawing from the holster or "rapid fire" faster than a shot every several seconds.


My range is not open to the public but for the people that do shoot there they can do anything they want. I'd say bench rest shooting is done only about 10 percent of the time.

 

[wishin]

Benchrest shooting is a good way to gain confidence in your ability. Then you're off to the races.