Range Report - 120SMK over 8208XBR & 120Gold Dot AA2520 - 18" Liberty Barrel

[Klem]

I know a lot of people who can't call their shots. They usually have no idea that it's them and not the rifle. Normally, I'd say spend the money on a great barrel but if you can't shoot all that well (or don't use great ammo) it doesn't really matter.

This doesn't make sense to me...So, if you can't shoot (well) then you may as well shoot even worse?

[another caliber]

It's a math thing. At best, barrel accuracy vs cost is logarithmic. The more you spend the less significant the improvement. Going from $300 to $500 on an AR barrel is almost trivial. You're also assuming that that new guy is going to install the barrel such that the the benefits can be noticed. I've seen way too many guys install top tier barrels and not get any benefit from it. I shot NRA High Power for decades and most people wasted their money on equipment when it was training and practice that they needed. You can't buy a small group but you can sell a small group.

[Klem]

Again you have lost me on your logic; You agree going from $300 - $500 is almost trivial so why are you arguing he shouldn't bother? If by this logic it doesn't matter either way why not let him have the pride and potential of a best barrel? Why not encourage and permit the potential for improvement?

I agree the Law of Diminishing Returns is a logarithmic relationship however this is irrelevant to both our arguments.

Yes, I am assuming the "new guy" can put together a rifle competently, why wouldn't you. It's adult LEGO, not rocket science. Plus mechanical competence and shooting ability are mutually exclusive skillsets. In other words, just because you might be bad in one doesn't automatically mean you will be bad in the other.

Your experience of guys with top quality guns not getting any benefit from them - Did you see their results with lesser quality barrels to be able to make that claim?

Your last sentence is specious.

[JDub]

Well here's my thoughts...

Klem, I hear what you're saying and you're not wrong. If a Porsche is only 20% more than a Toyota, then why not go for it? However, and here's where I kinda agree with another caliber, if you never drive above 70mph, what's the point?

I know I'll never be able to hold anywhere near 1MOA off-hand. I'm sure my sight-picture oscillations measure in feet and not inches and mid-tier tubes are certainly capable of sub MOA accuracy. So seeking out a barrel with 0.5MOA potential really isn't worth the $200 in my use case (also, I'm a dyed-in-the-wool cheapskate). Remember what Detective Callahan had to say ..."A man's got to know his limitations".

The reason the $200 matters, at the moment, is I've just got back into reloading and we all know how much money is saved by pursuing that endeavor...paid $55 per box of CCI 450s (after tax shipping hazmat) and was happy to get them.

I'm a sweet spot type of consumer so I guess, ultimately, that's why I'm drawn to the mid-tier barrels.

If this was a PRS build I'd definitely be reaching up into the cut-rifled offerings.

[Klem]

It's your dollars but let me say this, if you can shoot 2MOA offhand with a best barrel, with a lesser quality barrel you will shoot a larger group, maybe 3MOA.

A gun's ability to group is fixed; as the gun is wobbling around while you're trying to hold it still the cone of the gun's ability to group is moving with it. A gun's ability to group is compounded by your ability to hold it still - they are related, not separate.

As long as you are aware of this then all good.

[JDub]

It's your dollars but let me say this, if you can shoot 2MOA offhand with a best barrel, with a lesser quality barrel you will shoot a larger group, maybe 3MOA.

A gun's ability to group is fixed; as the gun is wobbling around while you're trying to hold it still the cone of the gun's ability to group is moving with it. A gun's ability to group is compounded by your ability to hold it still - they are related, not separate.

As long as you are aware of this then all good.

Hmm...you've got me thinking. Metallic silhouette targets are 4-5MOA in size. Let's say there is a .5MOA difference in potential accuracy. I'm estimating my oscillations to be 2-3X target size so 8-15MOA. So, 0.5MOA is 6.25%-3.33% of an improvement over this area.

Do these estimates seem reasonable? Is my analysis of the conditions and subsequent calculations sensible? The numbers make me feel good about my choices but this analysis is certainly lacking in rigor.

I do see your point. If I were able to hold a tighter pattern that 3-6% would grow and become more and more significant with an increase in skill.

Like I tell my golf buddies, "It's a good thing that I don't do this for a living!"

Here's another dumb analogy. Tonight my wife ordered fried chicken from this place and the meal for 4 was $70. Was that fried chicken delicious? Hell yeah! Was it $70 delicious? I'm not so sure it was.

Maybe the real reason I need to go low is that my wife is ok with ordering $70 fried-chicken meals.

[Klem]

JDub,

Whatever the difference in accuracy potential is between barrels, you are going to see this difference in your results. This is regardless of how well you can shoot and regardless of the shooting position. It may be 0.5 MOA, or more, or less. You won't know without trying them both in the same gun. We hedge our bets when buying 'best' barrels, expecting (hoping) it will live up to its reputation and price tag.

Truth is I don't know how much better it will be. 0.5 - 1MOA sounds plausible though.

[LR1955]

Hmm...you've got me thinking. Metallic silhouette targets are 4-5MOA in size. Let's say there is a .5MOA difference in potential accuracy. I'm estimating my oscillations to be 2-3X target size so 8-15MOA. So, 0.5MOA is 6.25%-3.33% of an improvement over this area.

Do these estimates seem reasonable? Is my analysis of the conditions and subsequent calculations sensible? The numbers make me feel good about my choices but this analysis is certainly lacking in rigor.

I do see your point. If I were able to hold a tighter pattern that 3-6% would grow and become more and more significant with an increase in skill.

Like I tell my golf buddies, "It's a good thing that I don't do this for a living!"

Here's another dumb analogy. Tonight my wife ordered fried chicken from this place and the meal for 4 was $70. Was that fried chicken delicious? Hell yeah! Was it $70 delicious? I'm not so sure it was.

Maybe the real reason I need to go low is that my wife is ok with ordering $70 fried-chicken meals.

JD:

A cheap barrel will not perform well enough for your metallic silhouette shooting.

Shooting standing is not a matter of holding a rifle perfectly steady because you never will hold one perfectly steady. It is a matter of a consistent lead in to the target with a trigger break at a consistent point in the movement of the barrel. Some guys will lead in and the barrel will stop close enough to the middle for a shot. Others will break the shot at a point on the target even with the barrel moving. These techniques are far more consistent than trying to hold a rifle steady and then take the shot. I didn't say they sweep like a shotgunner so don't even go there. They have a movement pattern and speed where they know the sights will be at a point on the target and the movement is slow enough, or even stops (normally for well under a second) that they can stay on top of the trigger pull. However, there is still some movement so having a barrel and load that holds as tightly as possible is a distinct advantage. Particularly when shooting standing.

I have seen many guys shoot lousy ammo standing because they thought it didn't matter. They never score well and wonder why.

One thing about using good gear is that you know a shooting problem isn't the good gear but rather something you are or aren't doing.

LR55