How do you define Accuracy?

[cedartop]

https://www.shootingillustrated.com/content/how-do-you-define-accuracy/


Tamara hits on something here that really bugs me. When I watch most reviews on YT for handguns they will all say how accurate a gun is right after they blast away at a rather large steel plate at a rather close distance and hit it more often than not. One step up from that are the guys that will send a target out to 7 or 10 yards and fire at a moderate clip of about .5 to 1 second per round and if they keep them on the B-8 replacement canter they think they have really done something. That kind of stuff doesn't really tell me much about the mechanical accuracy of the gun. The best I see usually is Aaron Cowan doing his 5 round zero check at 25 off of a bench before he beats the hell out of the optic, or Honest Outlaw going back to 50, 75, 100 yards with what he is shooting and hitting (or sometimes missing) steel with it. This is something I miss from the magazines where the good gun writers would do as Tamara describes and test a number of different loads from a good setup.

 

[Tombs]

It bugs me too, if a reviewer wants to test accuracy, they should at least be locking it into a ransom rest and testing with a few different known good loads.

We wouldn't shoot a rifle off the shoulder at a steel plate to judge its accuracy, why is it tolerated with handguns?

 

[two70]

I'm not really sure why you would waste time or ammo on trying to determine the mechanical accuracy of most semi autos or revolvers intended for defensive uses. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if a handgun is capable of 2" or 3" groups at 25 yards from a rest when it is most likely to be used at 10 yards or less in a dynamic situation. With the intended use and likely range, mechanical accuracy simply isn't very important.

Mechanical accuracy is more important for a target or hunting revolver or semi auto and that is where I usually see more in depth testing with different loads. Often these types or handguns are used from a rest and at longer ranges so it makes more sense to find the best load and determine the capability of the firearm.

 

[Amishman44]

I'm not really sure why you would waste time or ammo on trying to determine the mechanical accuracy of most semi autos or revolvers intended for defensive uses. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if a handgun is capable of 2" or 3" groups at 25 yards from a rest when it is most likely to be used at 10 yards or less in a dynamic situation. With the intended use and likely range, mechanical accuracy simply isn't very important.

Mechanical accuracy is more important for a target or hunting revolver or semi auto and that is where I usually see more in depth testing with different loads. Often these types or handguns are used from a rest and at longer ranges so it makes more sense to find the best load and determine the capability of the firearm.

Yes...and when people figure out that the same bullet load fired in one pistol, doesn't always perform identically to the same bullet being fired in an identical pistol (example: Glock 19 vs a Glock 19) that becomes a factor as well.

 

[Creedmoor]

I always chuckle when someone says, look at this group I shot!

Accuracy to me is, repeatability over and over.

 

[Mgderf]

This is something I miss from the magazines where the good gun writers would do as Tamara describes and test a number of different loads from a good setup.

It's not just gun magazines.
Welcome to the world of 30 second sound bites.
Humans today don't seem to have an attention span more than about 30 seconds.
All pertinent information must either be divulged in the opening statements, or promise something of interest, or the consumer moves on.
I've said for years that I miss the days when news organizations would actually tell the entire story.
Today, you get Cliff notes at best, and maybe a follow up later, if the story is sufficiently gruesome.

It's all but impossible to judge "accuracy" in any aspect, when you don't have all the relevant information.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Basically - barring physical defects in manufacturing, I posit that every firearm has an inherently good mechanical accuracy.

What makes any firearm not accurate is, by far and away, the user.

To a lesser extent, also as mentioned in the thread, is ammo. We all know how picky rimfire guns can be. In my limited experience, snubbies can be wildly inaccurate with certain ammo, too. When my 642 was new, I was trying out some factory JHP that I was able to pick up relatively inexpensively. Glad I tested it - because it wouldn't print on a paper plate at 5 yards.

So positing further - accuracy is dependent upon the goals. Is the goal to determine the absolute best inherent mechanical accuracy of a certain firearm? Is the goal to win a bullseye competition? Is the goal to win a USPSA / IDPA or even Steel Challenge match?

Gotta define accuracy within context in order for any of this to make any sense or have any real impact (heh).

 

[gregkl]

To answer the OP's subject line statement I define accuracy as achieving repeatable results. In cabinet making, accuracy would be achieving cuts within ±/- 1/32". In firearms, I agree that to test the accuracy of a firearm, you need something like a ransom rest or at least bags.

For a shooting accuracy definition, to me, that is more subjective. Some want MOA or better, some want minute of man.

There are people who talk about how accurate this gun is or that gun is; or the shorter barrel is less accurate. Is it? Or is it the operator?

And of course, ammunition adds all kinds of variables.

 

[bgcatty]

Accuracy? Repeatable consistent 1 MOA at 100 yards or better. At a minimum.

 

[cedartop]

Accuracy? Repeatable consistent 1 MOA at 100 yards or better. At a minimum.

That is some damn fine handgun accuracy.

Even with rifles that is not a given. I have a BCM AR-15 that only shoots around 2.5 MOA with any given ammo. When I contacted BCM about it they told me that fit within milspec standards.

 

[NHT3]

As others have noted, rifle accuracy and pistol accuracy are two entirely different equations. Pistol accuracy, for me, is multiples in the same hole at 7 yards. For the distances I will be shooting a pistol that is adequate for what I expect from my pistol (and myself) and how I sight in a RDS. I'm fortunate that I don't need a rest to accomplish that but I understand why some do..
I don't expect to be called on to use my pistol beyond 25 yards but I would be comfortable taking a 100 yard shot if the situation demanded it. Just my .02

 

[Leo]

Like tacticallyfat posted, the bullet is as important as the firearm. Your basic third world surplus ammo does not have carefully engineered and manufactured projectiles. Even if you are carefully handloading, cheap bullets will not make accurate ammo.

It is too early in the morning for me to work out the math, but that .30 cal bullet just left the barrel at 2750 fps, spinning a complete turn in 12 inches. Think of the rpm. The higher the rpm, the more critical the rotating balance.


edit after coffee: In my example it would be 165,000 rpm.

 

[WebSnyper]

Mechanical accuracy (should say mechanical precision) and its measurement should be as objective as one can reasonably make it, and at least the conditions of the test should be limited in variability between the guns tested.

I understand what people are saying about what is acceptable to them and intended usage, etc, but for the most part, accuracy precision should be able to be tested objectively with limited variables. This doesn't mean finding the absolute best load for a given gun, but it does mean generally using the same loads across similar classes of firearm, preferably with a mechanical rest (Ransom rest, etc) and under similar conditions (indoors/shooting tube, etc). And then each gun within a given class that is reviewed gets the same treatment.

That would make it about as objective as possible. Then the mostly objective results can be compared and applied by the consumer of the material.

Your usage of the data may be subjective, but for the most part, measuring accuracy precision should be mostly a scientific, repeatable set of steps with objective, numerical output.

 

[cedartop]

Basically - barring physical defects in manufacturing, I posit that every firearm has an inherently good mechanical accuracy.

What makes any firearm not accurate is, by far and away, the user.

To a lesser extent, also as mentioned in the thread, is ammo. We all know how picky rimfire guns can be. In my limited experience, snubbies can be wildly inaccurate with certain ammo, too. When my 642 was new, I was trying out some factory JHP that I was able to pick up relatively inexpensively. Glad I tested it - because it wouldn't print on a paper plate at 5 yards.

So positing further - accuracy is dependent upon the goals. Is the goal to determine the absolute best inherent mechanical accuracy of a certain firearm? Is the goal to win a bullseye competition? Is the goal to win a USPSA / IDPA or even Steel Challenge match?

Gotta define accuracy within context in order for any of this to make any sense or have any real impact (heh).

I am going to have to disagree with some of this my friend. All production handguns definitely do not have the same accuracy potential. Now, some of that is covered under your defect statement. Early 9mm M&P's as well as the Legion X series 320s come to mind. There are other examples for sure. It is pretty well known that a Gen5 Glock will outshoot earlier Gens on average. A Walther or HK is going to beat that. Does it matter for you? That is up to the individual and what they are trying to accomplish. If I am shooting self defense, IDPA/USPSA, probably not. If I am shooting Bianchi Cup, definitely. We are talking pretty substantial differences here. 25 yard slow fire bench of 5 inches for my pos XCarry or 2 inches with my Walther or Staccato. What was SLG getting with his stock P30? Less than 1.5 IIRC. Earlier Gen Glocks 3-4.

As to ammo, for sure can be a big difference. I remember when I was still teaching at Sand Burr and had the opportunity to do some 100 yard pistol shooting and pass it around. Out of my stock Gen3 Glock with RMR at 100 with WWB anyone was lucky to hit the USPSA target, some rounds impacting the target next to it. With Tula aiming at the neck you could almost get a group center of body. That is just the difference in cheap ammo.

Later taking a class from Denny using snubnoses and his reloads, some of us were hitting at 100. That however is not something I would bet my life on.

Your overall point of the goal being the decider, I agree with. I still say I miss consistent repeatable methods of testing a new model for accuracy and nothing will get me to turn the channel faster on some YT dude who just blasts away and tells me how accurate the gun is.

 

[bgcatty]

That is some damn fine handgun accuracy.

Even with rifles that is not a given. I have a BCM AR-15 that only shoots around 2.5 MOA with any given ammo. When I contacted BCM about it they told me that fit within milspec standards.

I was thinking of mid-range cost rifles like in the $750-$1000 price range only. I didn’t even consider handguns. Not arguing here; just clarifying.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Later taking a class from Denny using snubnoses and his reloads, some of us were hitting at 100. That however is not something I would bet my life on.

Your overall point of the goal being the decider, I agree with. I still say I miss consistent repeatable methods of testing a new model for accuracy and nothing will get me to turn the channel faster on some YT dude who just blasts away and tells me how accurate the gun is.

A) Which Denny - so I can look 'em up?

B ) I subscribe to both Shooting Times and G&A (and maybe Handguns, too. I literally don't remember). Anyhow - those folks do have testing standards for things. I think rimfires are off a rest at 10-15 yards and centerfires are off a rest at 25 yards.

Not mechanically locking rests, though - the guns are still held with human hands and actuated by those same human hands.

 

[cedartop]

A) Which Denny - so I can look 'em up?

B ) I subscribe to both Shooting Times and G&A (and maybe Handguns, too. I literally don't remember). Anyhow - those folks do have testing standards for things. I think rimfires are off a rest at 10-15 yards and centerfires are off a rest at 25 yards.

Not mechanically locking rests, though - the guns are still held with human hands and actuated by those same human hands.

Denny Reichard. He has since passed. He owned Sand Burr Gun Ranch and was pretty much a S&W revolver legend.

PASSAGES: DENNY REICHARD |

I don't subscribe or buy paper magazines any more due to the cost, but yes, I used to get them all.

 

[Leo]

International Handgun Metallic Silhouette Association. Big bore is 50, 100, 150, and 200 yards with a handgun held in a hand. The pistols are capable.

The Dan Wesson .44VH was the big dog in that sport. Then Freedom Arms made that big .454 Casull single action that really started dominating.

200 yards with an iron sighted handgun gets my respect as well as 800, 900, 1000 with an iron sighted M1a.

 

[Trapper Jim]

International Handgun Metallic Silhouette Association. Big bore is 50, 100, 150, and 200 yards with a handgun held in a hand. The pistols are capable.

The Dan Wesson .44VH was the big dog in that sport. Then Freedom Arms made that big .454 Casull single action that really started dominating.

200 yards with an iron sighted handgun gets my respect as well as 800, 900, 1000 with an iron sighted M1a.

Yes. Those of us who grew up shooting NRA Bullseye and IHMSA mastered handgun accuracy. Unfortunately, many of todays shooters bypass follow through on trigger management and just go for the easy quick close shot. A compromise that seems good enough for the self defense crowd.

 

[cedartop]

Yes. Those of us who grew up shooting NRA Bullseye and IHMSA mastered handgun accuracy. Unfortunately, many of todays shooters bypass follow through on trigger management and just go for the easy quick close shot. A compromise that seems good enough for the self defense crowd.

And how does that translate to practical shooting for you? For example, can you dot to an IDPA match and average 1 point down per stage while shooting at a pace of roughly 1 second per shot, that is around 18 seconds for an 18 round stage, 10 seconds for a 10 shot stage, etc.?