Range reports B.S.?

[AlBeight]

I look for key phrases in most people’s written range report reviews:
“It’s a (insert miniscule numerical measurement here) MOA gun ALL DAY LONG”.
AND
They ALWAYS feel the need to add the exact same qualifier - “as long as I do my part”.

The small MOA number is always intended to shock or surprise the reader or viewer, usually given that’s is almost always in reference to a firearm that by our experiences or by history isn’t known to be quite that accurate.

Their qualifier is so that if any of us challenges that person to duplicate those results in person or with witnesses, well they were simply “off their game that day” or they “didn’t do their part”.

I tune out or off whenever the above statements are made during a written or video review. As soon as someone includes these sentences in the review, I know they’re lying or at a minimum, exaggerating.

 

[E.Shell]

In my observation:

1) People will pick the best group of a series and call that potential fluke "average" or "what the gun can do" and neither is true. After shooting 10 straight 3" groups, the shooter accidentally shoots a 1" group and says "when I do my part...", which is clearly bullsh!t.

2) People often/usually measure groups incorrectly. The customary measure is 'center-to-center, widest two shots'. To arrive at this without special tools, they measure the outside-to-outside of the group and subtract bullet diameter, which is wrong and causes groups to look smaller than they really are. Bullets do not make bullet-diameter holes in the target, the holes are always smaller than bullet diameter, even wadcutters, especially spitzers. The correct method is to subtract the actual measure hole diameter or 'grease ring' (easier) diameter from the group's total spread (measured to the actual holes or grease rings).

3) I gave up on gun rags years and years ago. Worst case: Transparent shills for advertisers... Best case: Tiptoeing around the harsh truths... Knowing some manufacturer's reps personally and getting the occasional inside info, I even know of a specific instance where a new rifle in a new caliber was not even in production yet and received a glowing write-up in a gun rag nonetheless. The same rifle pictured in the flattering article later appeared at the SHOT show with the new caliber markings on a different bore-size rifle because the barrels in the new caliber had not yet been received by the manufacturer. Hard to fairly evaluate a product that hasn't even been made yet, but I have seen for myself that it is possible.

 

[Alea Jacta Est]

Can we merge this with the truth thread?

 

[Park ranger]

Same here, Supermatch 54, model 1413. Are you the original owner?

No its probably older than me.

 

[2flhun]

Looking forward to posting my range report with this pistol.

Bad eyes, minuscule sights, .22short at a 100yds.

If I did get one hit on paper at this range, I would not believe me.

I will predict my actual range report....I had fun

 

[DanGuy48]

No its probably older than me.

I’ll be 75 soon. I bought mine new with what I earned working one summer at a lumber mill. I think I bought it from a place called Buckeye Shooters Supply; long gone I’m sure.

 

[lazarus]

I think people rarely show their worst thats for sure!
I know I always dont show the worst, but I only really shoot against myself and I'm not into kidding me.
I dont care much about some things anymore.
Shoot enough and one would soon realize shooting groups and then making hits are two different things.
And hits aint always pretty.

That’s for sure. I still improve, but I’ve for sure managed shots in the field that if it was part of a group would have been a dinner plate where it would have been a silver dollar at the range at the bench. Some’s cause it was off hand. Some’s adrenaline. Some’s the animal moved as I squeezed.

That’s gotten better over the years and most have been within 2” of where I intended to put it. But I doubt I’ll ever get to perfection in the field where the only limitation is the mechanical accuracy of my rifle or pistol. Feces happen.

 

[outrider58]

In my observation:

1) People will pick the best group of a series and call that potential fluke "average" or "what the gun can do" and neither is true. After shooting 10 straight 3" groups, the shooter accidentally shoots a 1" group and says "when I do my part...", which is clearly bullsh!t.

2) People often/usually measure groups incorrectly. The customary measure is 'center-to-center, widest two shots'. To arrive at this without special tools, they measure the outside-to-outside of the group and subtract bullet diameter, which is wrong and causes groups to look smaller than they really are. Bullets do not make bullet-diameter holes in the target, the holes are always smaller than bullet diameter, even wadcutters, especially spitzers. The correct method is to subtract the actual measure hole diameter or 'grease ring' (easier) diameter from the group's total spread (measured to the actual holes or grease rings).

3) I gave up on gun rags years and years ago. Worst case: Transparent shills for advertisers... Best case: Tiptoeing around the harsh truths... Knowing some manufacturer's reps personally and getting the occasional inside info, I even know of a specific instance where a new rifle in a new caliber was not even in production yet and received a glowing write-up in a gun rag nonetheless. The same rifle pictured in the flattering article later appeared at the SHOT show with the new caliber markings on a different bore-size rifle because the barrels in the new caliber had not yet been received by the manufacturer. Hard to fairly evaluate a product that hasn't even been made yet, but I have seen for myself that it is possible.

I gave up on all magazines of specific subject matter. All magazines, actually. They can be great learning tools for the beginner, but eventually, you learn that you are reading the same articles, making the same claims, year after year. That's when yo know it's time to ditch the rags, you've gleaned all the usable info you can from them. As you said, their main purpose is to sell product.

I have never measured a shot group. I've never seen the need.

 

[4g64loser]

I gave up on all magazines of specific subject matter. All magazines, actually. They can be great learning tools for the beginner, but eventually, you learn that you are reading the same articles, making the same claims, year after year. That's when yo know it's time to ditch the rags, you've gleaned all the usable info you can from them. As you said, their main purpose is to sell product.

I have never measured a shot group. I've never seen the need.

Yes. Most gun rags are bullchips.

Fortunately for me, I have the ability to do a lot of my own gun work, testing, etc. Within certain limits, I usually make the data available to students and.shooting buddies. I won't give out data that's intentionally outside of book load limits or for wildcats I've done simply because if you are venturing into those areas you should know what you are doing.

Just today I was doing some velocity testing on 357sig ammo from my glock 33. I was impressed with Underwood 125s, 1478avg, 39es, 16.3sd. my normal load, speer gold dot 125, ran 1304avg, 87es, 33.7sd. I'll have to weigh the bullet I recovered from water jugs later but it may have actually lost mass (highly unusual for a modern defensive hollow point in a handgun caliber).

 

[gizzard]

when practiced, i could keep a scoped redhawk in the black at 100, never really had 22 pistol perform like that at maybe 30-40 yards, unscoped, offhand. i have 55 years or so experience, age issues and lack of practice would likely prevent that kind of performance now

 

[DanGuy48]

Anyone else wonder if some of the range reports aren't a bit exaggerated? Not necessarily on this forum, but some of the range reports I've seen really make me wonder if someone isn't being entirely honest regarding their results. I recently saw on another forum someone showing a target with groups that you could cover with a quarter shot from a .22 pistol at 100 yards. Really? I can see doing that with a .22 rifle with a scope, but a pistol? Maybe with a long barreled scoped pistol with match ammo shot from a Ransom rest. Otherwise, that's some amazing marksmanship. Maybe it's just me be suspicious and jealous.

I think this puts that into perspective.

 

[Headedthere]

I think it also has to do with what type of shooting you are doing. If you are a bullseye guy, then I can see 2 inch groups off hand at 25 yards. If you are practicing defensive handgun and that is claimed....look hard for the powder residue on their target.

Ha!!

 

[Russ D]

Anyone else wonder if some of the range reports aren't a bit exaggerated? Not necessarily on this forum, but some of the range reports I've seen really make me wonder if someone isn't being entirely honest regarding their results. I recently saw on another forum someone showing a target with groups that you could cover with a quarter shot from a .22 pistol at 100 yards. Really? I can see doing that with a .22 rifle with a scope, but a pistol? Maybe with a long barreled scoped pistol with match ammo shot from a Ransom rest. Otherwise, that's some amazing marksmanship. Maybe it's just me be suspicious and jealous.

Not to mention that .22 ammo in the absolute best guns is barely capable of doing that consistently, and if it’s outside any amount of wind makes it pure luck.

I zeroed my new to be Bergara B14r last weekend with someone who has posted in this thread and put down a few 5 shot groups with CCI standard. It was too breezy to waste the good stuff.

I had one group out of three sub moa. The other two were around 1-1.5 moa. Of course I’m going to talk about the sub moa group but the truth is I’d be super happy if it hovered around 1moa consistently with that cheap ammo. I’d probably not even bother with the expensive stuff because rarely are the conditions going to be good enough for there to be much of an improvement.

 

[slsc98]

Heck, I envy anyone with the time to read range reports by others, let alone give a flying _ _ _ _ what comprises them.

I have a tough enough time slicing range time out for myself, haha!

 

[august1410]

I’m painfully honest in mine. Some times I’m good. Other times I’m lousy. Most of the time, I just hope for some middle ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Billcw]

I have an anshultz exempler with 14 barrel and king tube sight .. using tennexcan should those kind of groups

 

[Garet Jax]

I would love to show you my groupings from range trips. To do so though, I would have to take other people's targets - I have tried and they generally frown on that.

 

[4g64loser]

I would love to show you my groupings from range trips. To do so though, I would have to take other people's targets - I have tried and they generally frown on that.

My floor is covered with them. Some in piles around the bedroom too. How many used targets would you like?

I used to bet one of the RSOs that when someone stapled a target over mine (wrong target backer) that I could shoot the staples out in the number of staples used plus one rounds fired using one of my assorted varmint guns. I thought it was hilarious. He liked watching their target blow away in the wind. And it saved him venting his considerable distaste for stupid on the offender.

I use the past tense because, unfortunately, that man has passed away. A Green Beret who fought in at least three countries, he never lost his hard edge. He suffered no fools on his range line and neither old age nor disease could break his will. it was a privilege to hear him talk about the wars in southeast asia as we cooled off gun barrels between strings. He was my friend.

 

[Occam]

I can cover my groups with a quarter. A quarter of an apple pie, bit it’s still a quarter.

 

[4g64loser]

I can cover my groups with a quarter. A quarter of an apple pie, bit it’s still a quarter.

Haha. That's my pistol shooting, but I need the whole pie!

One of the guys shoots bullseye and he refers to my 25yd work as "patterning board" quality. I remind him that by the time he pulls the trigger, the fights over and the winner is deciding if he should smoke or not.