Let's talk about 300AAC accuracy...

[rsilvers]

On my average mean radius, the +- value I give is based on 2 times the standard deviation. It is what you can expect 95% of the time (19 out of 20 shots should be within that range - even for thousands of shots).

[ALCOAR]

I commend your extensive efforts to report the accuracy results honestly and it's the real man's way of doing business

More importantly than so many Mfg'rs out there giving dishonest or deceptive accuracy reports on their product, is the overall lack of interest of knowledge in a said product's accuracy. Most people I guess just want them to go bang at the end of the day and will never explore the potential performance and accuracy of a said rifle. At any rate, some of us notice when people do things the right and honest way and appreciate it very much.

[rob_s]

Or most people realize that chasing .10ths and .010ths of inches is meaningless for anything beyond the exercise of chasing those numbers.

[d90king]

Yes, and also - the data I gave may be the first time in the history of guns that a gun company both gave the actual accuracy data and also there being enough shots to make it statistically significant. I could have picked out three shot groups from that which were 1/4 MOA - as common industry practice - but I know how irrelevant that is and I can't play that game. Lots of companies have made their guns appealing by giving three shot accuracy guarantees and it is meaningless. Reporting accuracy is normally a joke - and about as trustworthy as looking at the 'mile range' of a walkie talkie or the 'dynamic contrast ratio' of an LCD TV. But those sell a lot of LCD TVs to people also.

The industry needs a standard precision test. I would like it to be radial standard deviation, but true - it is somewhat abstract to understand and requires a computer to get the results. So I would settle for average mean radius, as I reported. It should be generated from AT LEAST 30 shots (my data is from a few hundred shots on 7 uppers) but I would be much happier if the industry test was 100 shots - and actually, it should require five guns. So 500 shots. This could do for the gun industry what SAE certified net horsepower did for the car industry - cut out the BS. And then people should not trust anything not tested to this new industry standard. But in reality, people don't even seem to demand SAE certified HP numbers, and likewise, people are all too ready to believe fanciful accuracy numbers, so I see little hope for people to demand real testing.

Basically, I don't want to know the best group a gun can shoot is. I want to know typical results. I know what you are thinking - a car's 1/4 mile time is the best that it has done, not the average. Well, true... but at least that is a significant test. I would be perfectly happy to have the 'best' results from a 500 round 5-gun (100 per gun) precision test based on average mean radius!

If you don't mind what is your background? Do you work for a manufacturer or ammo company? It would help give perspective to the information that you are putting out as empirical data.

It would also help put this statement in context for us all

"the data I gave may be the first time in the history of guns that a gun company both gave the actual accuracy data and also there being enough shots to make it statistically significant".

Thanks in advance.

[rsilvers]

I work for AAC, the company who sells that rifle.

[d90king]

I work for AAC, the company who sells that rifle.

Great, thanks for the fast response. It might be a good idea for you to have that in your sig line so that there isn't any appearance of shilling for a company which is very frowned upon on this site.

Thanks again for the great input on the accuracy standards of the round. Any reason you chose a 16" for testing? Can you discuss who's barrel and the setup of the rifle that you conducted your testing with?

Is this round going to be geared toward 16" rifles or is its main market going to be for the suppressed SBR market?

Thanks in advance.

[ALCOAR]

Or most people realize that chasing .10ths and .010ths of inches is meaningless for anything beyond the exercise of chasing those numbers.

Very true...as always your "why use a filet mignon, when a sloppy joe gets the job done" sentiment is well received.

[charmcitycop]

.......

[ALCOAR]

This always come up whether we are talking GA triggers, UBR buttstocks, anything accuracy related....etc. I don't buy widgets or waste my money on my pondering shit, I enjoy seeing things done as perfectly as possible and enjoy learning and seeing the science behind that process. Kia's and 911's both have four wheels and get you from point A to point B, some just like the speed and performance associated with one vs. the other. To each their own

[rsilvers]

Any reason you chose a 16" for testing? Can you discuss who's barrel and the setup of the rifle that you conducted your testing with?

It was seven different AAC 9 inch barrel uppers for the mean-radius data. The 16" barrel was 16 inch because that is the SAAMI standard length for 300 AAC BLACKOUT.

Almost all rifle cartridges use a 24 inch SAAMI barrel, but we did not want to do that for 300 AAC BLACKOUT as we knew most people would have shorter barrels.