Expected Rifle Accuracy Observed During 1920

  • 185 Views
  • Last Post 05 March 2023
Bryan Austin posted this 05 March 2023

As many of you may know, and get tired of hearing about.....I seem to do things backwards. I don't have a problem with what I do...it's better than sitting on the couch!

For the past several years, through my experiences, I began to settle on ten shot groups with the 44-40. I felt it better tells the story of true accuracy rather than the typical three shot groups  popular today. I also settled on certain groups being about the best of the best for this cartridge at different ranges.

Recently I came across vintage 1920's information that is somewhat the same along the groups achieved at the distances used.

I came up with my consistent best which would be 4" at 25 yards with a revolver, (scoped) 3.5" at 100 yards with a rifle, 9" at 200 yards and 29 of 37 shots inside 14" at nearly 300 yards.

 

Seems to be fairly consistent with this 1920 information. Thought some of these other cartridges may be of interest to some of you.

Attached Files

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
RicinYakima posted this 05 March 2023

 I knew that was familiar, so went to your reference. Whelen.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bryan Austin
Aaron posted this 05 March 2023

Great information in this publication. Chapter 4 (as above) was written by Lt.Col. Townsend Whelen. As any shooter of note knows, Townsend Whelen is to shooting as Chuck Yeager is to aviation. Perhaps Charles Lindbergh is more appropriate to keep the time-frame correct. smile

I especially appreciate that in the day, target groups reflect the marriage of the rifle and the shooter COMBINED to produce the group. I hear our younger shooters claim their rifle shoots 1/2 MOA and therefore will deliver 2.5" groups at 500 yards. Nonsense.

Their rifle, clamped into a rest, and fired with match ammunition may deliver 1/2 MOA but when shot by the marksman, off a rest (sandbags or such), with a shooting jacket, will deliver substantially higher MOA numbers than what the rifle alone is capable of delivering. Stating that because a rifle shoots 1 MOA at such and such, and therefore by extension, 1 MOA at any range, is preposterous. I also agree with the higher shot group philosophy and the marriage of the rifle to the shooter to determine the sheath of trajectories capable with the equipment+marksman+ammunition.

It's good to see realistic data like this in print. Unfortunately only the historically interested researcher will find it in the pages of tomes like the one listed. This data is a realistic portrayal of rifle/cartridge capabilities before we insert shooter ego into the data!

Of interest in the book is the section on rifle fouling, causes, and cleaning methods for different types of fouling. It begins on page 112 and again is an excerpt derived from Townsend Whelen.

Great book. Reminds me of the visuals and methods taught by the NRA Marksmanship programs of the 1960's.

With rifle in hand, I confidently go forth into the darkness.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bryan Austin
Bryan Austin posted this 05 March 2023

 I knew that was familiar, so went to your reference. Whelen.

applause

Attached Files

Bryan Austin posted this 05 March 2023

This is how much of my post are welcomed on other forums...proof they do not read who wrote the articles or they are just plain ignorant.


Just how many people will go out and read every scrap of information??  Especially when there is an amount (large) written by those who quote others of no known expertise??  I singular individual may well stand on his or her soap box and proclaim to the world their superior knowledge which may or may not cause future serious injury for which they accept no fault.

I am not a Ballistician.  Never have been.  I am, however, a retired gunsmith.  I lump Savvy Jack's position in the same box as those who espouse the safety of Damascus Barrel Shotguns and "light" smokeless ammunition.  Quoting antique informational sheets, coupled with long out of manufacture propellents verges on stupid.  If we are going to err, let us at least err on the side of safety for ALL rather than dashing off half cocked. 

 

This is the intelligent reply of most shooters now days. If Elmer Keith didn't write it, it didn't happen cause he wasn't there!  I never talked about Damascus barrels either (or did I), I talked about the 38-55.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bud Hyett
Eutectic posted this 05 March 2023

The amount of shooting that represents is amazing compared to the shooting done for an article in today's magazines. Notice the suggestions for adequate PRACTICE in real world situations. 

Sadly this type of advice is little noticed today.

Attached Files

  • Liked by
  • Bryan Austin
  • RicinYakima
Close