What MOA is my Rifle? Bryan Litz on Expectations of Precision

[@RMM--uv7uk]

Hornady went into GREAT GREAT detail on this subject in a series on their YT channel. If you want to go down the rabbit hole give those videos a watch. They are very long and detailed.

[@outdoorswithcam]

Yes but Bryan came out with this therory first. Then Hornady jumped on the wagon. Blows my mind. All these years I have been chaseing my tail also explains some of my results. One week this was the best group next week it wasn't.

[@jaredjensen2343]

If you want the same subject in even more detail Bryan Litz went into incredible detail and great lengths to go over this on the science of accuracy podcast of his on his website several months prior to the hornady discussion

[@willo7734]

Yes we all know that Bryan basically wrote the book on this and came out with it first, but doesn’t change the fact that Jared did a great job explaining it in easy to digest terms on the Hornady podcast.

[@JimYeats]

@@outdoorswithcam It’s not a theory, at least as theories are scientifically defined, nor is this data or information new. It’s just come to the forefront.

[@outdoorswithcam]

@@JimYeats Sure sells lots of powder and bullets. I was always led to believe if you get your podwer charge right and seating depth all the bullets go in the same hole.

[@brentrasmussen2440]

"This entire city is a testament to how poorly humans understand statistics" - best quote of the podcast!

[@LastCaress7]

Im glad this conversation is being had more and more. This is great information not just for beginners but seasoned shooters as well. Thanks.

[@edwardabrams4972]

Great topic! See a lot of misleading info on internet but Bryan seems like he really knows his stuff!

[@unclebob540i3]

Entire marketing departments exist to contradict this conversation.

[@kellysatterfield5384]

I think this is the most realistic information I have heard. I have purchased 2 new rifles in the past 2 years. I might get one MOA grouping out of 6 groups of shooting. I am not the best shooter by any means. I feel, I allowed myself to be misled by the marketing MOA guarantees that manufacturers use. Not saying they are incorrect. I just feel that now I am more at ease with my results after watching this video. Thanks for this content.

[@johnred7792]

I glad he said what he said at the end. IMO, You can have the best loads the best guns. BUT, if you don’t learn to read wind. If you’re no always practicing good fundamentals.. Setting your bags up perfectly every time. The time you’re spending making sure every little thing in your reloading is perfect , would be time better spent out on the range practicing.

[@ronmartblog]

Hornady podcasts 50 & 57 go deep into this and Erik Cortina interviews Jayden to ask a bunch of questions shooters have Everyone is saying the same thing and that message really needs to be heard. I’m glad you added to the list.

[@bradbarley6639]

I always say my rifle was as good as I could be on this day. For me... it's all about the monkey on the trigger

[@rubennasser6907]

Outstanding explanation and discussion. Thanks!

[@TheParkingLotGarage]

How many shots do you need before you feel you have a solid average? It shouldn’t take a barrel’s entire life to figure that out. How much is your *average* going to change after 50 shots? After that many shots, if you change something in your system and go shoot another 50 shots, I’d say you have a pretty good idea of whether or not that change had true benefit or not by looking at the average of each group. It’s hard to believe you’d need to work through multiple barrels to be able to have reliable data that backs up the changes you’ve made.

[@Nuke8401DaveE]

One thing that I don't remember being discussed the shooter's input to the data. If I'm not consistent then what data I have means even less. I did just come to the conclusion (= I don't have enough data to chase the small stuff, .2gr changes, weighing and sorting bullets, seating depth, neck vs full length, etc.) after discussions with some members on THR. So, I'm changing my expectations to

[@DLoh2o1]

Incredible insight. Not all will buy in to the stats (to each their own) for me I'm hoping I can mentally accept the fact I will have an occasional larger group than the norm and will as well have an occasional tighter group than the norm

[@robwebster2562]

Everyone needs to see this. Bryan is an incredible wealth of information. The best advice is Manage expectations and use of terminology. Too many people will waste their time chasing their tails.

[@SABjork]

So impressive to get Bryan on your channel, I assumed he would be much older. He is truly a legend among the marine snipers and Raiders that I know. Well Done, Sir! PS I appreciate that he is dumbing it down for us since his math brain is off the charts.

[@calculusentropy]

I remember spending most of a year testing bullets and powder with my competition 9mm pistol. The results were astonishing. Some like Montana Gold and Hornady HAP being amazing not surprising, but weight, twist, burn rate shocking in what minute changes make. The 'magic' bullet load almost always twice as precise and accurate than average, and yet loads and weights highly unexpected.

[@chrisviking428]

I absolutely love this topic. And Brian (and you)is the man. The information on reloading and how to test in general ammo can get very confusing and frustrating. I chased my tail for a long time trying to find good results from a high dollar rifle and in the end my reloading game and knowledge grew tremendously but I paid for like I was going to trade school 😂😢😅

[@superseries7007]

I consider 6 moa a great result with my mini 14. 😎

[@rustynut1967]

I've found quality components and a great barrel it's kind of hard to shoot bad groups testing different powder weights and seating depths. It's almost impossible to develop a load to make a crappy barrel shoot good. The moral of the story is, if you want small groups spend the money on a quality barrel. It will probably be cheaper in the long run than wasting components trying to make a cheap barrel shoot.

[@BuckFama]

And buy good brass!!!

[@excelsior6365]

People on line lie shamelessly about their abilities. A trip to a public range and a look at the groups others are getting will reveal the truth.

[@The340king]

I would be interested in the “Bell” curve used for getting accurate statistics for accuracy. I believe the distribution of shots is a skewed distribution data set which requires different math and much more complicated than using standard Bell curve math. The reason is that you can’t go below zero offset from perfect. This assumes you measure from the point of aim to each bullet impact and not the randomized sizing up the groups.

[@jayvanleeuwen7713]

Joining the Science of Accuracy and listening to Bryan is the cheapest investment that you can make. He was saying this stuff way before hornaday ever did.

[@jimcheatham8306]

This is one reason I think reloading isn't for everyone. Some people worry too much . I'm still going to sort, deber flash holes, tap my powder pan three times on the funnel...etc. lol I'm doing it because I enjoy reloading the way I do it almost as much as I do shooting.

[@youngsmith5647]

great discussion, love it , Bryan always give great opinions of long range shooting, learn so much each time,

[@markvanderbeek3292]

This is all fantastic information! Managing realistic expectations is always best. Also, understanding the impact that it has on ballistics at long range can be little to none if the shooter doesn't have the fundamentals to find consistency in their shooting. The key is to pull the trigger more. Hit more targets more consistently at longer ranges. We don't get any better at consistent accuracy at longer ranges by shooting groups at 100 yards, trying to eliminate the one odd funny flier or outlier grouping. Thanks for the great content!

[@Terry80801]

I love the fact that you did this interview. I know so my hand loaders that say I have a 1/4 moa. I say you mean your median is 1/4? I don’t think I have ever said what my median is (median=average). Like my rifle best is .077 and biggest is .34. I think that is great for me. They look at me like what? So I explain. Any hand loader should know just by principle that you will never shoot a 1/4 every time. They should know this because if you have ever weighted your bullets or brass, or measured bullet lengths, then you will notice you have one or two rows that run up fast then the adjacent rows are a bit lower and the row next to that are even smaller. This is a bell curve. That right there should have told you that your shot groups will do the same thing. Even if every single round is exactly identical you will still get a bell curve. Then every now and then you get what is called an outlier. Where you weight or measure and your like what the hell. So you weight or measure again and still the same. You kick these out of the test and explain why you are doing so. So an outlier if you are shooting is you know you pulled it. Explain that kick it out and move on. I do statistical analysis on everything. I am not talking about your sd on your es. Let’s say you do an es of 15 and a sd of 9. Well that is fine but let’s say you go back and do another run and your es is 19 and sd is 11. Guess what that 9 means nothing. The probability has just gone up from one test to the other. Like Bryan said the bigger the test sample the more accurate the test will be on probability. So if you have a computer and you have excel you have an entire statistical analysis program right there. You will have to google how to show it because it is not on at default. I believe it will be under data when you show it. You don’t have to know how to do it. Excel will tell you what to do. I would say put one measurement in then another and another if you are running the same load. Then you can do a probability test on that load. If you change something then you can compare it to your other load with a T-test. All you need is the two and you will be off and running. So the reason we do this, is we don’t want a bell curve 5 rows wide and god forbid 10 rows (like some Winchester brass I have sorted lol). We want to do small things and test to see if it helps, were we can get down to say 3 rows in the bell curve (not sure you can get 2 rows I never have). Hope this helps to understand this better. So this is way longer than I thought it would be. Sorry maybe some of you will read it all. Lol One last thing. Do not confuse the standard deviation or sd with probability. A low ad is good but you want a high probability number. For example you are getting a probability on your median for your load and it come back as 88.25 this is not really good lol. You want that in the high 90s like 98,99. Let’s say you are comparing a load change to what you had and you are using a T-test. If you compare and the number is below 97 do not make the change. You make a change when you are above 97 on probability. So you can keep the change and add something to it and see what happens then, that would be just fine. Remember a T-test 97 or higher. If you run a square matrix like the chitee then the number has to be even higher (I believe, it’s been awhile since I needed to run that test). What I am saying is even different statistical analysis test requires a different probability number to be considered good.

[@brunoterlingen2203]

A long read, however your fundamentals are flawed: the Median is NOT equal to the Average, nor the Mode - learn your basics.

[@biggsy..215]

Very interesting pod ...this has answered alot of questions for precision shooting with a particular rifle chasing lands ,seating depth shoulder bump and powder charges projies etc etc makes me feel a bit better now and collecting data is the secret. Thankyou for this info.

[@jonathanross4184]

Great video! I got some great direction on how to up my reloading game.

[@ryanhenderson4395]

Just having shooters understand THEIR contribution to the total noise in a shooting system will open a lot of eyes….the shooter is usually the dominate noise source!

[@redrock425]

Followed by the wind 😉

[@trevorkolmatycki4042]

I chased my tail doing seat depth testing with a couple of factory rifles… It was a waste of time and components. One rifle was in a crappy stock causing dispersion… the other the brake was loose during the testing… 😂… and… trying to resolve differences with 3rd groups… I could tell that was statistically silly… but boy it sure is nice to have folks like Bryan sharing his statistical testing results… His info has influenced me in a very positive way.

[@johnroberts9311]

Late to the party, but this video covers an excellent topic, and you two (Litz and Toobe) are to be commended. Great questions, great answers! It seems like this happens whenever you two sit down and record the discussion. Speaking as a engineer (BSME) I completely agree that a more methodical approach with statistics should be used and spread more among the community. The misuse of the term 'accuracy' to describe what is actually 'precision' is a perfect example. And IMO (ignoring wind) accuracy is easy - most of us have turrets on our scope to fix that. Precision is harder.

[@TheOptimi5t]

Sharp dude with some great insights. Thanks for sharing!

[@keithhawkins1966]

Ty for the information.

[@208bowmaddnneess]

This is sooooo good. Between this and the Hornady podcast I’ve really been able to validate what they’re saying and what I’ve learned over the past 5 years of chasing precision. My most accurate rifle is one that I threw a powder and bullet together and just happend to land on gold. Lots and lots of .2-.3 and will easily shoot .5’s for 10 shots. If I throw a slightly different bullet in there or powder it’ll add several tenths to my average group size. Cool thing is it shoot the load it shoot best at any powder charge I’ve tried and seating depth doesn’t matter. Like Litz said the first 5, 5 shot groups is gunna be the way that combo shoots. If it’s not what your looking for swap components.

[@jamesbond7455]

No body said anything about group size and shooter errors, I have a bad shoulder and have rush a shot when I was not steady and yank the trigger when the cross hairs come across the mark. Up in age and lost of muscle mass and weight not as easy to hold steady. I should turn down the scope power so the wobble is gone and can do a steady trigger pull.

[@jamiekinch188]

I shall never use word "tinkering" again. My mind has been expanded. Thanks for this!

[@tekanger975]

I worked in the field of statistics for nearly 30 years isolating and analyzing sources of variation in manufacturing. I was shooter, precision shooter I'd like to say, all that time and kinda' figured out that the group I carried in my wallet (berfore grandkids photos) was not necessarily what my rifle was going to live up to. Also, the shooter is part of the system and some days I'm hot and sometimes not; but no matter what, the shooter is one source of variation as well neck tension, shoulder bump, etc, etc. Once in the very early days of computers long before the PC era, I surreptiously programmed the corporation's mainframe to "shoot" groups all night long based upon using a random number sequence to pick the "bullet's" impact point and measure the group after 3 shots, 5 shots, and 10 shots. The results looked very much like my real world experiences when at the range. I "proved" then that a relatively average sort of rifle could very well produce that incredible group that warms the heart of rifleman. It was an entertaining and instructive exercise. BTW, I do enjoy your work and this one introduces a poorly understood discipline.

[@nathanielgray4235]

Vary much enjoy these 2 discussion

[@bruiser6479]

This was very interesting and informative. It confirmed my view that how the individual actually uses their rifle informs what is important to achieve the results they want. I personally am solely focussed on field shooting for pest control in the south of Western Australia. Most of the shots I take are well under 150 metres. My main target is the red fox. If my largest group size is 2 inches or even a bit, more, that is good enough for me to kill a lot of foxes. Especially when I consider that nearly all my shooting is done at night from a rest mounted to my sxs, or off a tripod. On that basis, there is little to be gained trying to pursue sub moa precision. It would be a completely different story if I was doing long range target shoot.

[@michaeldunn150]

Great info in this video..... Thank you!

[@juhanivalimaki5418]

Three shots, five shots, ten shots? With 10 min cooling after each shot, or without breaks? Some thinner barrels start to be affected by heat really soon, after few shots. Some heavy barrels might be consistent till 10 shots.

[@fbwguy]

I want a shirt like that! Berger, SK and Lapua!!! That’s awesome

[@markl6769]

Very helpful. Thanks.

[@Grindingdust]

Nice conversation. How do you define a 1/2 moa gun? 3 shot groups 5 shot groups ? 5x5?

[@BuckFama]

Stretch it out far enough and there are very few 1/2 moa guns much less (maybe none) 1/4 moa guns out there.

[@youngsmith5647]

so, it's the reason why I decide to learn statistic, as a math tool, it's a useful for group and hit percentage analysis. i don't like math so much, but it works, i need it

[@fishynut8252]

So how do you suggest we do a "Design of Experiments" for load development that will get us close to the gun's ultimate performance in a reasonable (don't want to shoot out a barrel) number of rounds.

[@randylong8156]

Great interview now. The UR channel has more stuff to measure and track

[@JSomerled]

Great conversation.. I can see how,as a machinist,calculating exact dimensions is one mindset.Verbalizing statistical results is another.. I think managing expectations is a good way to keep yourself sane lol…

[@rodgerthackeray7978]

I understand what he is trying to say, that there will be large and small groups, and not to get caught up in diagnosing when you get a large group. However, there are other shooters, such as Erik Cortina, who diagnoses these things. You should try and figure out why there was a flier or if you had an abnormally large group. In his talking, he is also indicating harmonics don't don't change group size. Changing seating and powder charges changes the harmonics, and that is what we are trying to do when handloading to tune the load. I have seen guns go from 4" groups to .4" groups by adjusting seating depth. To say that gun will shoot another 4" group with the tuned load that got .4" is not likely, and if it did, I would be looking for loose screws, mounts, or possibly a scope issue. Now if he said that .4" load would occasionally shoot .8" or even 1" then I can accept that. Granted, we should do additional group tests more often to verify that the load you have come up with is consistent with the group size and not take one result as fact. In my experience, once I have found a load that shoots good, I have not seen it deviate far from what I have previously worked up.

[@CJ-ty8sv]

You are using an extreme unrealistic spread though which is NOT what he was saying. He was saying exactly what you said in this line: *_"Now if he said that .4" load would occasionally shoot .8" or even 1" then I can accept that."_* The key thing is to know what the extremes are within the reasonable statistical probability and to not waste time trying to diagnose a problem that really isn't a problem because its with in that reasonable statistical probability. Basically its where standard deviations come into play. Say a rifle shoots an average 5shot group of 0.5moa and after shooting say a 10 5 shot groups to come up with that average you find that is has a 0.2moa standard deviation. Its when it gets into 3 standard deviations or consistently the high end of 2 standard deviations that you should start to worry about there possibly being a problem. Looking at only the larger side of the average, it breaks down to there being a about a 34% chance of there being a group somewhere between 0.5 and 0.7moa, or a better way of looking at it is that there is about a 16% chance that you will have a group that will be bigger than 0.7nao. There is still a possibility that you will get a group that is as much as 0.9moa BUT the percentage chance of there being a 0.9moa to 1.1moa group is only about 2% so that is very unlikely and then there is only about a 0.1% chance of there being a group that would be bigger than 1.1moa. So basically, if the average was 0.5moa and the gun suddenly shots a groups or two that are say 0.7 to 0.8moa, but doesn't do that all the time, then you likely do NOT have a problem as you are still in a dispersion area that has pretty high probability so don't waste your time going and making changes. On the other hand, if you start to get where you are seeing a lot of 0.8's or worse, then yes, something has likely changed / you have a problem. That is what he is really saying because there are a lot of people who will all of a sudden see a couple groups open up and then start looking for problems where there likely isn't one. Now keep in mind, my example is based on only 10 5shot groups which is really pretty statistically insignificant on the grand scale. Since you mentioned Erik Cortina, you also have to remember, his statistical date sets are MUCH larger and thus MUCH more accurate with to where his average groups size might accurately be say 0.4moa with a SD of say 0.08moa, so more than 2 deviations fir him would be the groups going above 0.56moa (i.e., much different than 2 deviations for my example).

[@rodgerthackeray7978]

@CJ Thank you for the respectful comment. I do believe that is what he was trying to say as well. There was a time when he was saying adjusting seating depth didn't matter and that the gun would still shoot the larger grouping eventually. I just think he forgot to mention some key details, which made the claim seem incorrect. He has way more experience than I will probably ever have. I know what he was trying to say is correct when I take his words as intended and not what was actually said.

[@Snailz5]

All of the discussions of dispersion and how to really know how well a firearm system performs are quite basic applications of stats. The problem is that it is very hard to truly standardize everything except a single variable and moreover most people don’t want to spend the time and money it takes to get to a statistically significant result. As a hand loader who doesn’t compete, I know that when I 3 3-shot groups of a load between 1/2 and 3/4 MOA that my true accuracy may end up being 1-1.5 MOA, but I’m not spending another 20-30 rounds to get a sufficient sample size when those cartridges could be saved for the animals they were intended for.

[@johnseptien3138]

The number of shots they are referring to for the statistical data to confirm a group average is more like 150. Not twenty or thirty as you reference. Watch the Hornady pod cast " Are Your Groups Too Small" part 1 and 2 with Miles Neville and Jayden Quinlan. It's similar to Gavin's conversation with Litz but on steroids.

[@n.u.t.y.]

As an engineer, I love the nerdy statistics discussions! I've not yet read any of Bryan's books, so this may already exist, but I would like to see a standardized new metric for firearm/barrel precision to replace the "best 3-shot/5-shot/10-shot group". Maybe call it the "Litz value". 😎

[@westsidecamper]

what about circular error probably and mean radius?

[@scottsmith683]

Do you think Ramshot Enforcer Smokeless Pistol Reloading Powder is good for reloading in a 45 ACP

[@blackhawk7r221]

If a human is holding it, even with a sled, your MOA test is trash.

[@WoodrowWoods2007]

Tiborasaurusrex covered this in his Sniper101 vid series a while back

[@zecordist8085]

I'm laughing when I read people saying that Litz is a genius 😂

[@br4713]

​@@zecordist8085only beginners say that 😂

[@Bourbon-Canted-Ky-Windage]

Anyone remember the old EFuton commercial?, Well, when Litz talks, everyone listens.....

[@scottdexter9508]

I would like to see designed experiments that will lead to load development solutions.

[@dogbone1358]

Hey, if I can hit an 18x24 steel plate with an M1 Garand and an M14 at 300 and 500 yds with regularity using commercial and surplus ammo, I’m a happy camper.

[@flyfishing101]

A good rifle and scope can certainly decrease the small probability incidence by the same shooter and increase the confidence of the data(eg. shooting precision) validity.

[@MrCclimeGo]

This TOTALLY makes sense, at least to me. I'm of the mind that; if you want to know what your equipment is capable of, put it in a vise that's nailed to the earth, in a vacuum and test the different variables of load, bullet, barrel, action, chassis, seating depths, jump, etc.etc.etc. If you find the perfect combination; then put it in the hands of a person and see if it's repeatability holds true within all the environmental conditions on the planet. 🙄 Good shooters are good, mostly because they have great equipment. Great shooters are great, mostly because they have good adaptation skills. 🤙

[@outdoorswithcam]

Love the comment about Vegas and statistics...

[@charltonlwalker]

Many shooters don’t realize how effective a 1 MOA rifle at 100 yards is at hitting deer vital sized steel targets out to 1000 yards.

[@the1andonlySherlock]

I wish Bryan had brought up that group size does not actually follow a normal distribution, and instead follows a Rayleigh distribution. A normal distribution implies a non-zero probability that you will have a group size of less than 0", which is not even possible.

[@July4-1776]

this discussion has the possibility of costing component manufacturers millions of dollars 🤣

[@charltonlwalker]

308 has the barrel life to really go down the rabbit hole.

[@qapsukalek]

Should check out fims pull bullpup on your channel

[@rotasaustralis]

Unfortunately, it's going to be a long, hard fight to change the average mindset on this subject. So much is influenced by pier pressure as well as past claims which, make the situation very difficult & embarrassing for a great many folk who have run their colours up the mast & now have to dig-in to maintain their integrity. The pressure shooters are under to report that 1/2 MOA rifle & shooter ability is considerable, as is the pressure that rifle manufacturers perceive in having to guarantee a 1/2 MOA rifle to the customers in order to compete in the market place. There's no question that the 1/4 or 1/2 MOA myth has become an insidious beast that will plague the shooting fraternity for many years to come. It's good to see the likes of Litz & Quinlan start to chip away at the myth, hopefully toward a long overdue sanity.

[@wilfdarr]

Words have meaning: words matter

[@unclebob540i3]

Fantastic discussion. I have fallen into the same trap as well. Realistically, how many of us are willing to burn through a barrel just to figure out what load that barrel liked?

[@joshuagibson2520]

Lots of truth spoken here and I respect that. 95% of what you see on videos these days are people cherry pickin. Hard. He's dead on about shooting 5 or 10 groups and then analyzing. I would also say to shoot (10) shot groups as well. 3 is a no, 5 tells a little, but ten tells nearly all. If you're using a barrel burner, then do you because I support freedom above all. It's not my thing though.

[@hopefloats7573]

Isn't this one of the great things about shooting? You can always do better next time.

[@briansteele1378]

Most rifles are more accurate than the shooter behind them.

[@johnseptien3138]

Which means the system as a whole has met it's highest level of accuracy, not to be confused with consistency.

[@davidsalsedo]

This whole city is a testament to the fact of humans not being very good with statistics!! LMAO!! Love Bryan Thank you Gavin

[@TomD1999]

Or you could become a benchrest competitor. You will find out exactly what your rifle and you will do in real world competition conditions where EVERY shot counts. I had one rifle barrel combo that never shot an noteworthy group like down around 0.1'' or less at 100 but it consistently pumped out .20" to .25'' groups in the real world with the wind blowing. I never won any big matches with it but was usually in the top 10%.

[@br4713]

Maybe this guy isn't telling all that just to sell his products, maybe he really believes what he says about group shooting 😂 ! He's still denying all the harmonics stuff (load development, seating depth, barrel tuners for factory ammo...). I'm sure that soon someone will kick his butt by making real scientific experiments thanks to new sensors.

[@RobsReloading]

if I shoot 1 5 shot group at 0.250" and determine this is "The Load", what is the worst it is going to reasonably shoot 0.750", 1.0"?The problem is most of us are not serious competitive shooters. We just want a quick low component path to small groups. Seems like anything supported by statistics is going to involve too large of sample size for most reloaders. Most wont have multiple barrels made at the same time and wont have the time or want to spend the money on components. From my experience good components and a good rifle almost never disappoints regardless of load. This comment does not apply to anyone who shoots for a living or has intentions of winning national level competitions.

[@Ouwkackemann]

Did he really say that if I use some of the same barrels, I will continue to better my results?

[@montanaelkwhisperer1744]

you also aren't shooting in a vaccuum. there are endless variables that affect bullet flight. wind, barrel temperature, barrel fouling, human error and differences in bullet weights and velocities. the reality is...super accurate shooting is fun, but if you can hit a Coke can at 200 yards....you'll hit anything you shoot at!

[@zecordist8085]

I can shoot golf balls at 200m all the time... Because I follow best world competitors's advices instead of Mr Litz's

[@josesuro3981]

This whole conversation avoids the biggest part of the system and the one that can be incredibly humbling. The first step in this endeavor is to TRUE THE SHOOTER! I've been shooting for close to 60 years! I know shooting! Good shooters are few and far between. You can blame the rifle the ammo, reloading whatever, but if you don't know how capable you are behind a firearm you are just spinning your wheels. I recommend to people starting out to buy a quality .22 rimfire rifle and don't leave the 25-yard line until you get repeatable results. Only then move to the 50-yard line. Oh, and everyone falls back on Benchrest stories. True story: I'm a good shooter. But the first time I got behind a very high-quality, bug hole shooting, 6BR benchrest rifle that a great shooter was kind enough to share with me I SUCKED! And that is how important it is to know that the human is the biggest part of the precision equation. I had not a clue as to what was involved in shooting that discipline!

[@jamesbond7455]

I shoot 308win 168 MK getting good accuracy but wanted hunting load so I tried 168 ELD great BC but did not shoot worth a crap. I did some research turns out 12-1 twist does not stabilize the ELD 168 I like the 12-1 because works well with my 110 HP I have a 5R with 1-10 but have not tried to work up a load for it. I did read bullet makers for accuracy stay away from the long bullets with low drag for accuracy reasons. There are a lot of 700 308 varmint barrels 1-12 out there. I have a few 308 and my favorite is 700 police in H&S stock hold zero, I have shot it two years latter and puts it in the one inch square at 100 yards, I call it old dependable, Now I did clean my lee factory crimp and may had over do the crimp and deformed the ELD 168 my range now is only open 4 day a week and I like sunny day light winds and not to have to walk in mud. and not fond of cold or heat, what I am saying it is hard to find a perfect day. LOL LOL LOL I have a good reason I am old.

[@jaydunbar7538]

Bullet makers stay away from king low drag bullets for accuracy? That’s backwards, those seeking extreme accuracy are the forefront of long high BC bullets.

[@sickboy8831]

if your not shooting indoors you have many variables to your shots

[@georgedreisch2662]

Thinkin’ Brian qualifies as a legit scientist…

[@zecordist8085]

F-open and Benchrest competitors already figured out what kind of "scientist" he is

[@dalehorkey4476]

Very helpful and informative on how the processes and theories most of us hand loaders have learned know and use may be mostly statistically irrelevant. Not very helpful determining an alternative methods. O.k. I get what you are saying, now show me a better process.

[@bretnmannn]

different barrels can and do shoot different from barrel to barrel!

[@wickedtrutharms57]

Got talk to the best bench rest rifle shooters in the world. They will you inform better.

[@AP2020_Outdoors]

@gavintoobe the biggest unknown is that a lot of shooters/reloaders beginner to advanced fail to realize is that their brass is NOT 100% consistent in terms of water case capacity let alone preparation. Folks will shoot a great group, and then turn around and shoot an average to mediocre group and scratch their heads! When the real culprit is more than likely is that their brass variations are contributing to their inconsistencies, not other factors that they FALSELY chase! The (5) 5 shot groups aggregate was borne from the benchrest shooters from the 1950's. Once again, this false assumption is that all brass is EQUAL = which is rarely the case. 35 years ago, I used to sort my brass by weight, case runout, etc. I was lucky to get 20% within my "spec'd." With that being said. a lot of reloaders WASTE time, components, and barrels chasing the wrong variables = which in a sense is good for the gun industry!! LOL. My groundhog/varmint rifles I hope will shoot 1/2MOA all day long. That means if I take a shot on an Ohio groundhog at 500 yards, I can reasonably expect to hit that 2.5" kill zone 7 out of 10 times if the wind is not blowing hard or my wind skills are good that day! My deer rifles should shoot 1MOA, which translates to a 3" - 5" group at 300 yards = which is well within the kill zone of our 300# Ohio bucks! Anything better is just icing on the cake, or in terms of components = more money spent!

[@Just_Samson]

Bryan is a 🧠. #HandLoad

[@WoodrowWoods2007]

MORE DATA IS BETTER DATA!

[@zecordist8085]

He should use his "scientific" reloading and shooting techniques to beat everyone in Benchrest and F-open competitions lol

[@NADHUNTER]

best my friend 👍👍

[@matsnystrom9228]

Put your money on stress lived high quality barrels

[@Rico11b]

"Flash hole deburring"??? Really!!!! Flash hole deburring probably wasn't the best example to discuss in this scenario. Flash hole deburring is something that you ONLY HAVE TO DO once for the LIFE of that piece of brass. It take 5-10 seconds TOPS to deburr a Flash hole. You can do 100 pieces of brass in UNDER 20 minutes and then you NEVER HAVE TO deburr those cases ever again. If you're not running crazy hots loads and you're not overstressing your brass you could possibly gets a dozen or MORE reloads from it.

[@chrisshumake83]

👍👍

[@br4713]

For sure he knows how to sell his "science" (books, dvds, applications...). He should show his superior "science" by winning competitions in real conditions (benchrest, F-Open). While he burns more and more barrels before learning anything new, some shooters tune their loads with 100 rounds and win many competitions because they learnt what matters by experience instead of reading books about statistics 😁

[@jwschroeder804]

Thanks for bringing science and precision back to the table. Marketing always wants to be in front of research. To your point, what is the probability of a person with limited resources winning against an unlimited house..... Disparingly poor. Keep it up. People don't want to be confused with facts.

[@WvMnts]

Thought accuracy and precision was samething💁🏼‍♂️

[@Ultimatereloader]

Accuracy = correct value (not necessarily consistent), precision = repeatability

[@WvMnts]

@@Ultimatereloader thank you. After watching this I went and watched several other talking about it. And fully understand now and clearly saw there is a difference between them. Thanks for the content opening my eyes

[@747driver3]

So, by the time I get enough data to resolve all the variables in hand loading and rifle building………it’s time to re-barrel the rifle or re-build it. IF your only goal is data collection and throwing thousands of dollars down range or, data collection is your hobby……shoot away. But if you actually want to USE your rifle on targets, in a competition or on a hunt then build a good rifle…put good optics on it….hand load with quality components and get on with it. Obsessing over 1000 variables……some of which change on every shot……is an academic function and is not relevant for real world operation of a rifle. Rifles will always have variations in accuracy and precision……..THAT is the only constant and the takeaway here.

[@StuninRub]

18:02 what is wrong with this guy?

[@justinpate3466]

The shooter will always play a bigger part than the rifle. The best rifle in the world wont shoot in the hands of a terrible shooter.

[@blairbreland1443]

Yawn zzzzzzzz frrrp

[@Ultimatereloader]

You’re on the wrong channel :)

[@mickroberts5166]

I am an FTR shooter and if my 308 gets 12 shots in the 0.5MOA, repeatedly, that is what I call half an MOA rifle. Don't care what anyone else says