accuracy versus precision

[Fred M]

MGMorden.
One more go. The BR rifle in 6ppc could shoot with the same accuracy at a score target. But in HBR game the 6PPC is not allowed hence the 1/4" group instead the 1/10". Either gun is made up with the same precision, but is not shooting with the same ammo. There are Varmint for score matches where you can use the same rifle for score or group shooting.
HBR Score shooting is mostly done with a 30x47 or something with a 45.5gr water volume. So much form score and group shooting.

Can you really have one and not the other? I don't think so. A broken down scope is bad news for precision shooting. It like the chicken and the egg. If you want eggs you need a chicken. if you want chickens you need eggs.

[MGMorden]

MGMorden.
One more go. The BR rifle in 6ppc could shoot with the same accuracy at a score target. But in HBR game the 6PPC is not allowed hence the 1/4" group instead the 1/10". Either gun is made up with the same precision, but is not shooting with the same ammo. There are Varmint for score matches where you can use the same rifle for score or group shooting.
HBR Score shooting is mostly done with a 30x47 or something with a 45.5gr water volume. So much form score and group shooting.

Can you really have one and not the other? I don't think so. A broken down scope is bad news for precision shooting. It like the chicken and the egg. If you want eggs you need a chicken. if you want chickens you need eggs.

I didn't say that the scope was broken.  I said it was off.  As in not set so that point of impact and point of aim are the same.  That would very much result in precision lacking accuracy.  If you choose to correct that then you would have both, but when it comes to the terminology, if the scope is not set correctly, then the grouping will be precise but not accurate (despite how easy it might be to make it both).

As to having accuracy without precision.  Happens all the time.  It's called a lucky shot.  If a drunken slob staggering about can throw up his rifle and hit bullseye offhand at 100 yards, then that was an accurate shot.  Can he do again though? And again?  Doubtful.  Though the shot was accurate, the group as a whole lacks precision.  

As to each being "made with the same precision", with that your'e going into a different direction.  Phrased in that manner you're talking about accuracy and precision of the manufacturing process, not the shots themselves.  Completely different thing.  H&R accurately makes their rifles (the rifles come down the assembly line looking like a Handi and not a Ruger ), but they are not as precisely made as an Encore for example (if they were then you could just swap barrels without having them fitted, because they would be duplicating each rifle with more consistent tolerances).

[Longcruise]

Seems to me that any "precision" rifle has the iherent ability to be accurate.  It's just a matter of sighting the dang thing in.

Then, there's the human factor.  Are there not shooters who have the ability to shoot with greater precision than other shooters?

Aren't both terms sorta relative?  The shooter going for score at 1,000 meters must have a precise firearm and must shoot it with accuracy.  The whitetail hunter in the brush must have a rifle capable of four or five inch "precision" and must shoot it with enough accuracy to stay in an eight inch or so target.

As to the semantic portion of this discussion, I'm ok with both accurate and precision measurements of anything.  Seems the same to me. :grin:

[Lynn Alan Kietzman]

Paralysis through analysis. Adjust your scope.

[gwhilikerz]

Lone Star.

The tiny 1/10 groups come from precision rifles and ammo.

The accuracy needed to hit 25 x's in a Hunter match requires the same precision. of equipment.

So I still say you can't have one without the other.

But your point is well taken, it is a good analogy. I also buy the Websters dictionary explanation. Accuracy and precision being the same.

Isn't that a brain twister? It comes down to the application.

Accuracy and precision are the same according to Webster's?  Thank you Fred M.  I think webster has it right. Some of us just can't admit we are wrong, so we just keep arguing without any basis for our points. We just have to "be right".

[bajabill]

Im throwing in with  MGM on this one, perhaps because I am a scientist at heart and respect the scientific distinction between the terms.  In scientific terms they are not the same and the difference has been explained above.

[MGMorden]

Accuracy and precision are the same according to Webster's?  Thank you Fred M.  I think webster has it right. Some of us just can't admit we are wrong, so we just keep arguing without any basis for our points. We just have to "be right".

Without any basis?  I sourced the American Heritage (just as respected a dictionary) definition above.  Or did you have trouble reading all that?  I also hold a Bachelor's Degree in a scientific field in which I had to do NUMEROUS experiments and measurements to earn.  Within the concept of layman speak the terms may well be interchangeable (and if they weren't then it's not really a big deal), but if you try to tell any physicist in the country that they are the same thing then he'll laugh in your face.  This is something I know quite a bit about.  Of course some of us feel the need to pout . . . grow up :roll:

Sorry for that guys.  With the exception of some who feel like pushing buttons I'm simply debating the terms without any contempt or agenda here.  Doesn't matter one way or another to me which way you believe.  If you choose to speak one way or another feel free;  it's not going to effect the state of the union.  But since the whole purpose of the thread was to dicuss the possible differences between the terms then I don't really think it a bad thing when we dicuss the terms.