Ammo test with with O rings used as

[ppkny]

Hawk-1 Unfortunately the gun shots better than the shooter.
ppkny

[Bob259]

Hawk-1 Unfortunately the gun shots better than the shooter.
ppkny

They all do Pete...

[ret]

More testing today.
If I had known it would be windy, would have stayed home. But then again, I rarely have a bad day shooting. A constant breeze from rear left , high 30's, clear sky. All fired in sequence shown.

As noted:

Upper target.
10 shots @ 50 yds. No O Rings.
Lower target
10 shots, 50 yds. w/ 2 O rings.



More images: http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/sh ... 193&page=2

ret

[Steve Tapp]

Hey ret, Were those o-rings purchased from Harbor freight tools? How about some dimensions and what gun barrel made that group, Steve

[ret]

Rifle was like this one prior to the alterations. Russian URAL.
They are O rings that may be purchased anywhere.....I think I bought these at Lowe's or an auto part store.

Before:



After:



Barreled action only used in these tests, no stock.
The board the barreled action is attached to is shown on post #25, thread X {10} of the link>>>>> http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/sh ... p?t=349679

Links to the entire series are within each edition. In this instance, thread X {10}, the links to all other threads are in post #3.

Descriptions are in the threads.

ret

[ppkny]

Back when I could afford top notch ammo I spent some time trying to get my Anschutz 64 to shoot ½” groups at 100 meters. It was possible but way to hard to control all the factors. I used a SUPER Tuner which has an infinite micrometer adjustment to move the resonance point horizontally.
If you have ever tuned a guitar or balanced a tire you know that the point of resonance is a finite point where everything just comes together in a perfect harmony. Having said that, trying to put ‘O’ rings on a barrel in a repetitive precise position to accomplish this harmony seems crude at best.
Testing at 25 or 50 yds ? Where and what shooting sport would you use this data for. The required resonance at those distances would not be the same across the full distance say up to 100 meters anyway. Unless you’re looking for a magic solution save yourself some time and money and buy a gun that can shoot better.

[ret]

Back when I could afford top notch ammo I spent some time trying to get my Anschutz 64 to shoot ½” groups at 100 meters. It was possible but way to hard to control all the factors. I used a SUPER Tuner which has an infinite micrometer adjustment to move the resonance point horizontally.
If you have ever tuned a guitar or balanced a tire you know that the point of resonance is a finite point where everything just comes together in a perfect harmony. Having said that, trying to put ‘O’ rings on a barrel in a repetitive precise position to accomplish this harmony seems crude at best.
Testing at 25 or 50 yds ? Where and what shooting sport would you use this data for. The required resonance at those distances would not be the same across the full distance say up to 100 meters anyway. Unless you’re looking for a magic solution save yourself some time and money and buy a gun that can shoot better.

It is interesting to see people feign no interest in a topic by their negative comments, but they continually return to the conversation.
Why torture yourself...don't look at this thread if bothers you. Everyone does not have the same interests or requirements. Give yourself and everyone else a break and post your own tests. I promise I will be amazed and comment accordingly.

ret

[ppkny]

Enough said, Good bye
ppkny

[jjp]

Not to be smartass. But most of the good silhouette shooters on here can do that accuaracy at 50 yards offhand. A good rimfire rifle can easily get alot less than quarter inch off the bench.

I'm all for improving accuracy. But at 50 yards I'm looking for groups barely over the bullet diameter. At 100 meters I'm wanting anything under 1.25" inches max being 1.5"

[ret]

This a functional ammo test, not a scientific test. I am not trying to prove or disprove anything. I am looking for observable results only w/o micrometer.
I could list the assumptions associated with this post, but that is beyond the scope of my efforts. In other words practicality vs. precision. Precision people have their own criteria and will be disappointed. Take this entire thread for what it is worth.

Testing of different ammo will continue as time allows.

Onward,

ret

[Byron]

Ret:

Although I'm skeptial about the O-rings I'll be one of the first to try it out.

Byron

[jjp]

I just believe other variables would help improve your accuracy before such a small thing as o-rings. And shooting the rifle attached to your shooting board. That's alot of effort your making to take you out of the variable and you are still getting big groups.

"practicality vs. precision" It's connected to a bench. How is that practical.

I'm all for trying to get the most out of anything I do. So if it makes your rifle shoot cheaper ammo better then have at it.

[ret]

Ret:

Although I'm skeptial about the O-rings I'll be one of the first to try it out.

Byron

I am rather skeptical also, but I'll try it anyway. Why not???

I just believe other variables would help improve your accuracy before such a small thing as o-rings. And shooting the rifle attached to your shooting board. That's alot of effort your making to take you out of the variable and you are still getting big groups.

"practicality vs. precision" It's connected to a bench. How is that practical.

I'm all for trying to get the most out of anything I do. So if it makes your rifle shoot cheaper ammo better then have at it.

Many "other variables".....I'll work on this one, somebody else take the others.
Is "small" the issue, or "does it work" the issue?
I also have used a "Ransom Rest" for handguns loads. Is that not good? Or does it help eliminate a large factor? ( the shooter )
"Big groups" true.... but the wind and cheap ammo are what I am putting up with at the moment. I think I'll save the expensive ammo for the end.
"Practical" well.......yes it is for this situation for eliminating movement.

I was the head gunsmith of an east coast repair station (High Point, NC) in the mid 1970's. If your gun was ever in a warranty repair situation from that time period, most likely I handled or repaired it personally. I saw and worked on every American made gun brand at that time, including Savage/Anchutz. Stopped the gunsmith business when I decided I liked the hobby more than the business.

They are just tools to me.
Will post again when I have more pics.

ret

[metalhead]

Yo Ret.... I too was one of the head gunsmiths at a small company that tried to break into the custom rifle silhouette market in the late 1990'sw....trying to do the same stuff as you, quietly crafting some one of a kind boutique rifles for this sport. Unfortunately, the company I had could never make this business model work out the way we wanted. So my days are history.

While I was never really very sucsessful with my gun stuff, to me, it looks like you are on the right track with you choice of the Russian / Checnian actions. Reasonbly priced, decent quality, sexy bolt handle, just about everything a guy would need for a master class Std. / Hntr. class silhouette rig.

Obviouly, The choice of the McMillan heavyweight Std. stock, along with the very cool paint job is just over the top for your Std. Class rifle. I mean really, it's as if I watching the food channel and Iron Chef Imas just slammed dunked me with a perfectly cooked bracheta wrapped pork loin, lightly brushed in an olive and butter suace. Your gun just looks that good.

I'm tellin' ya what, Ret, maybee I been a watchin' a few too many Discovery Channel swamp people shows but I can't imagine a match held anywhere east of the Big Muddy and points south and east that wont have all of guys just a drizzlin' dixie at any match when you show with that trophy ...if you know what I mean.....Way to go...Git er Done

[Trent]

Ret,

Just posting to let you know that I am interested in what you are doing. Your comparable results are intriguing. I for one understand that this test is about results and not about finite accuracy. At this point it seems that you have proven visually measurable results. The photos above show what looks like more than 100% decrease in group size. The actual "size" of the group isn't necessarily of great concern for this test. Maybe this is premature but it seems as though you have proven that you can tune your rifle with o-rings.

Keep testing!

- Trent