Handgun Accuracy

I could say more about this article, but it speaks for itself.
To me, it's very useful information, while live practicing, and it explains why the "groups" are likely not the same on each target.

http://accuracy.martinchick.com/handgun_rifle.html

(I put this in the Fundamentals forum, as it has a big effect on the things we're trying to learn.)

I think the article applies to novice non-BE shooters. If you have a good pistol you can call your shots "spot on", no pure chance as he is indicating in the article. Crap guns shoot pure chance shots, good BE pistols do not!
So I really didn't care for the article. If I was a journalist and didn't have a clue about accuracy it could help.
My 2 cents....
Jon

The author attempts a discussion on accuracy, but then discusses precision, without presenting, or perhaps knowing, the difference.

There are far better discussions available describing the basics of shot groups and statistics.

I will pass on this one.

Jon Eulette wrote:I think the article applies to novice non-BE shooters. If you have a good pistol you can call your shots "spot on", no pure chance as he is indicating in the article. Crap guns shoot pure chance shots, good BE pistols do not!
So I really didn't care for the article. If I was a journalist and didn't have a clue about accuracy it could help.
My 2 cents....
Jon

+1  The article has no actionable value for the BE shooter and in fact "excuses" something you (should) have control of - shot placement.  Your gun's barrel can maybe shoot a 1-1.5" group, your assembled gun maybe 1.5-2", add you to the mix and it's ??

The question becomes what are you doing to move the groups around?
- Dave

sharkdoctor wrote:The author attempts a discussion on accuracy, but then discusses precision, without presenting, or perhaps knowing, the difference.

There are far better discussions available describing the basics of shot groups and statistics.

I will pass on this one.

I'm guessing he did that to make it easier for the average person to read and understand.
Please post the location of a better discussion - I had no luck in finding one.  I tried, several times.
I found other similar discussions, but the best one I ever read, long ago, vanished.

Does this apply to Bullseye shooters?  Maybe not to someone like Jon, but it would certainly apply to most of the people I see shooting Bullseye targets at my range, myself included.

It seems to me that when someone gets talented, these "circles" just get smaller.
If someone had complete control of their shot placement, all their holes would be in the X-ring.

(If I shoot a nice target and stop, I've got something nice to hang on the wall, but if I continue shooting, maybe 30, 40, 50 rounds, the group always opens up until it reaches my ability.)

dronning wrote:

Jon Eulette wrote:I think the article applies to novice non-BE shooters. If you have a good pistol you can call your shots "spot on", no pure chance as he is indicating in the article. Crap guns shoot pure chance shots, good BE pistols do not!
So I really didn't care for the article. If I was a journalist and didn't have a clue about accuracy it could help.
My 2 cents....
Jon

+1  The article has no actionable value for the BE shooter and in fact "excuses" something you (should) have control of - shot placement.  Your gun's barrel can maybe shoot a 1-1.5" group, your assembled gun maybe 1.5-2", add you to the mix and it's ??

The question becomes what are you doing to move the groups around?
- Dave

Seems to me the rather valid point of the article is that as a shooter you move the CIRCLE about. Where the bullets go within that CIRCLE are random chance.
The various groups within the circle show that shooting a single 3, 5, 10 shot group and making accuracy claims is questionable. 
If your assembled gun has a circle of 1.5", the worst group possible would be 1.5". Certainly doesn't leave room for excuses other than shooter performance.
So to address Jon's point: even with a 3" gun, if your in tune with your shot process and know where you let of the shot you can call "spot on". Realistically a circle somewhat larger than the performance of the firearm and the better you are at understanding and observing your shot process the closer you can call to the performance of the firearm.

Slartybartfast wrote:Seems to me the rather valid point of the article is that as a shooter you move the CIRCLE about. Where the bullets go within that CIRCLE are random chance.......

If the author of the article was a Bullseye shooter, I'm pretty sure that's what he would have added to his article.

If you call your shot high right, for example, what you've really done is to call your "circle" (not the individual shot), and as 'slartybarfast' just wrote, the bullet could have gone anywhere within that circle which was centered over the predicted location.

.......which would nicely explain how an average shooter, not a master, might accurately call his shot high and right, but if this average shooter had a circle of say, three inches, the bullet hole would be somewhere within a three inch circle centered on the called location.  For those of us who are frustrated with calling their shots, such as myself, this is helpful information to know.  And if Jon had a circle of one inch, for example, and he called his shot high and right, it would be somewhere within a one inch circle centered about the spot Jon was calling.

For an average Bullseye shooter, trying to get better, this is nice to know, to avoid frustration from rarely seeing bullet holes exactly in the predicted "spot".


.....and for me, if I shoot a group clustered around the bullseye, with one hole right through the middle of the X, that shot is no better or worse than the other 9 shots.  If I were to get as good as Jon, on a good day, all my shots would be more or less on the X, because Jon is so talented he has a tiny circle.  Even as good as he is though, it is unlikely that there will be one single round hole with the diameter equal to the diameter of the bullet, on the X, that all ten rounds passed through.

this book was written for rifle shooters, , however I think a good portion translates well over to any shooting sport, 

 try Jim Owens book, 

if helped me a lot when I was starting out in Service Rifle

Sight Alignment, Trigger Control & The Big Lie" 

lyman1903 wrote:this book was written for rifle shooters, , however I think a good portion translates well over to any shooting sport.......

Thanks - sounds like a lot of interesting reading, mixed in with all the rifle skills that may not apply.
I just ordered it from Amazon - will be here Sunday, only $16.
Thanks for posting!

I just wasted five minutes that could have been spent dry firing.

Pretend there is a 3-1/4" pipe that starts at the muzzle of your pistol and extends to the 10 ring, 50 yards away. Any shot out of that pipe is your fault.

lyman1903 wrote:this book was written for rifle shooters, , however I think a good portion translates well over to any shooting sport, 

 try Jim Owens book, 
if helped me a lot when I was starting out in Service Rifle
Sight Alignment, Trigger Control & The Big Lie" 

I never did get around to thanking you for posting this.  Yep, a lot of the book is for rifle shooters, but he has an interesting way of making his points, many of which do apply to handguns.  I skipped over much of the rifle info at first, but then went back and read most of that too.