What does Gaylord know about groups?
Or statistics?
I was reading his blog the other day (I thought I might hear more about “Mr. Condor” 🙄 ) and he was going on and on about how many shots belong in a group. He made quite a show of his two semester’s worth of statistics and also referred to a manufacturer who shows 3 shot groups and must therefore be mis-leading folks as the guns don’t really shoot that good.
His main point apparently was that a 3 shot group tells you nothing about the rifle and should only be used while sighting in a scope. He went on to say that a 5 shot group doesn’t tell you much more or give you a great deal of confidence but he’s going to continue to use them in his reports. You see, a guy who is paid to write about guns clearly doesn’t have time to shoot big groups. 😕
According to Gaylord, you need a 30 shot group to be able to have confidence that you know the gun is accurate. Well, I agree that a good 30 shot group will give lots of confidence in how the gun shoots but I don’t think you need to see a 30 shot group to say a gun is accurate. Why? Well, in my limited experience with guns I’ve found that accurate guns will usually shoot a good 3 shot group and inaccurate guns will almost never shoot a good 3 shot group. The first few shots don’t really prove accuracy so much as they prove the gun is not inaccurate. Pretty soon you find that an accurate gun shoots one great 3 shot group after another and a medicore gun almost never shoots a good group.
Giving Gaylord the benefit of the doubt that maybe he was talking about looking at one group in isolation vice a history of good but small groups, I thought I’d have a little experiment.
My Prairie III will routinely shoot sub-MOA groups but I never shot a 30 shot group to see if its an accurate gun! Well, I cast a few extra rounds and had a go.
That’s just 3 at 43 yards. Not a record by any means but a nice group.
Same group with a dime for scale.
Well, that tells us nothing… Better move to a 5 shot group. I actually shot this group the night before with a different slug that the gun might like a touch more. I forgot to shoot a 5 shot group today with the Bishops. 😳
In any case this 5 shot group is not much bigger… It’s actually smaller…yes, I know..better slugs and so on… But still, if I used the 3 shot group to say the gun was accurate and then followed up with this group….
Again, the dime for scale.
Well, the above would have made me pretty darn happy had I not read that those groups meant NOTHING! The only way to really know that the gun is accurate is to shoot a 30 shot group like a manufacturer. Damn, this is going to take a while. Good thing I have not adjusted the scope and I can keep the cross hairs on the bull for every shot.
Here’s 30 freaking shots plus an extra.
For a second I thought I was hosed as the flyer was the third shot. Now most folks allow for the occasional flyer that is the shooter’s fault or maybe a pellet with a flaw. I don’t know which this was but i ask your indulgence and just to make the point, I shot a 31st slug into the group.
OMG!! It takes a nickel to cover this! Yes, 30 shot groups will be bigger than 3 shot groups. But, if you can shoot a good 3 shot group consistently, there’s no need to go and waste 30 shots to prove your gun is accurate…
All Replies
No doubt both gun and shooter are quite capable to get that one.
Good shooting.
Funny, that looks like one of those wierd guns made by ******** that I read somewhere were not accurate enough ……….. guess that myth is busted shock: 😯 😯 🙄 🙄 🙄 😉
Thanks. I’m sure that group was shot with the fill line attached. Since it was shot on medium power (about 190 FPE with that slug) I would have had to fill once to get that consistent. I don’t think I got up and did any filling for that group.
Yeah, it’s pretty accurate for one of those guns that just doesn’t lve up to the hype… 😆
… not that I’d kick it out of bed for leaving crumbs tho !
ROFLMAO….sorry but i agree that is one ugly rifle, at least its a good shooter 😀
Jery thats some very good shots,I was looking at that barnes sight and that is a beautiful rifle! I did not see any price, what is it like 5 grand.
Looks like a USFT’s ugly red headed half sister……
… not that I’d kick it out of bed for leaving crumbs tho !
Holy shit Jerry. Now thats a good looking rifle.
I am impressed.
Thanks!
VERY nice Jerry. Is that on a single fill or shooting with a remote line attached?
No doubt both gun and shooter are quite capable to get that one.
Good shooting.
Funny, that looks like one of those wierd guns made by ******** that I read somewhere were not accurate enough ……….. guess that myth is busted shock: 😯 😯 🙄 🙄 🙄 😉
So now Weatherbys can’t shoot because they are supplied with a test target having a 3 shot group. There is going to be many decades worth of very satisfied customers really upset to hear that thee rifles suddenly no longer shoot!
Well I’m no stranger to competition shooting. Hand Gun, Rifle, Bow.
I have a target here shot on the range at Ft. Hood Texas. Witness by the Range Officer, and several others. Signed and dated. The results were sent to Barns bullet manufacturing co.
5 rounds, 2 tents” ctc 100 yds. .257 Weatherby Mag. Shot with Barns 87 gr. hollow point solid copper expanding bullets loaded here in the Lovett Custom Knife Shop.
Weatherbys shoot just fine thank you!
I ember Gaylord putting down some info from bb pelliter a few years back. Funny as Gaylord finally admitted being Pelliter. 🙄
He puts down every ones opinion. Even if it agrees with his own. He will instantly change his expert opinion just to argue and put someone down!
Here you go RiffRaff
Here with its new tripod mount and tripod.
An older group.
hee, heee, heee
he’s a strokin at 850 fps…
hee, heee :10
Wow Jerry. Awesome shooting, would love to see pics of your rifle.
I shot a complete fill one windless day this summer with my .25 condor @ 50 yards.
The first 20 were under an inch, then they started drifting down the target as the velocity dropped.
40 shots later I had a 2.5″ group and I was damn happy with it.
I like to aim at one hole until I hit it, the gun is better than I can be 7 out of 10 times. I did get a dime bullseye 3 times yesterday at 50yrds. When I see a group like the one shown, I realise the person is a very good shot, and the gun works good too. I can tell in 2 shots if a gun shoots good, cause thats what I do all the time, after I blow out the center.
I think “largest” would be the most accurate adjective in this case… 🙂
I didn’t write this post just to bash Tom Gaylord but I’m not opposed to folks getting their shots in as he takes plenty of his own. I wrote the post because once again Tom has used his forum to put forth an incomplete, misleading analysis on a topic while making it sound like the last word. In addition he snuck in a comment about some mystery gun maker who posts groups. The comment doesn’t say that the maker is deceptive, it just implies it. Tom doesn’t mention the maker’s name but since very few gun makers actually test all their guns and post groups, I’m pretty sure who he was refering to. I’ve seen him slip in negative comments and implications about this maker before but I’ve never seen him admit to the personal falling out they had… So, if folks here want to remember all the insulting things Tom has said about them and the modifications they make to their guns; well, I’m not going to shed any tears.
Regarding the original premise of Tom’s post: The fact is that a 3 shot group can tell you a bunch. For instance, if you are shooting off a bench and get a 4″ group of 3 at 25-50 yards, you know right then that you have a bad gun or slug! There’s no need to shoot more before you look for a change. Or, if you have a known gun and you try a new slug and shoot 3 into the same hole at 25-50 yards; you know right then that this slug is going to be good. Bad slug and gun combinations just don’t shoot trophy groups! If you want to go into statistical minutae, how many times has anyone heard of an inaccurate gun shooting the first 3 slugs into the same hole (at a decent range)? Particularly since it takes several shots to get on paper and reasonably sighted in. By the time someone is shooting for a group, they already have an idea if the gun is going to be accurate or not. Yeah, one great 3 shot group does not tell the whole story, but you can’t get to one great group without knowing more of the story already.
My other point, if only sarcastically made, was that if small groups are not good enough to give us a feel for the guns accuracy, Tom ought to be shooting large groups! He is getting paid to report on the accuracy and features of airguns. He says it takes a large group to tell if a gun is accurate. He reports small groups and says he will continue to do so. I’m sorry but I can’t understand a guy telling me I can’t have high confidence in what his 5 shot groups say while at the same time telling me that he plans to keep giving me low confidence information! I doubt anyone here would go to their boss and tell them they just don’t have time to do their job right. BTW, I shot that 31 shot group in maybe 10 minutes tops and had the post with pictures done in an hour or so. I’m pretty sure Tom has plenty of time to shoot 30 shot groups. Time is not the problem.
FivePointFive said
Perhaps it is a Variable Consistant…. 😆 😆
jba
I get there’s a lot of bad history…then. This is now. A statement was made and the source got bashed, not for what he said but for who he is. This is not the first time we’ve seen this. Last time I commented there were two “experts” throwing more fuel on the fire, one decrying his ignorance by mentioning production issues on m1 carbines with Winchester. Not ‘carbine’ Williams, who was in fact an employee of Winchester at the time and ironically not working on the m1 at all. TG may well have been telling the truth. The other expert (topic escapes me at the moment) was equally venomous in his attack, and just as wrong with his ‘facts’. Seems some guys look for problems with TG.
Doesn’t change the point of my post, though. Basically Gaylord is right if I understand the point.
Doug Owen
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
… not that I’d kick it out of bed for leaving crumbs tho !
ROFLMAO….sorry but i agree that is one ugly rifle, at least its a good shooter 😀
Aw c’mon… Shees bootiful.
I must like weird stuff… goes without saying. But my original opinion stays, I think the rifle looks awesome.
Probably has its game staring at it like a deer in the headlights.