I'm Affraid We'll Have to Use Science!

[Tower75]

Hello, all.

You know, I believe I've hit that point in my shooting hobby; for years now I've only ever been a plinker. I've only ever gone down range to plink and see if I can hit the target somewhere.

Well, no more I say.

I feel I'm at that point where I'd actually like to use a bit of science in my shooting. To explain I'd love to be one of these chaps that says, 'ah, my round travels at blah, the target is bloop, so I know the drop of my round will be thus over xyz distance, so my sights should be so...'

All of my fullbore rifles are .303 and iron sighted. Only one has target aperture sights, the rest are ladder, battle sights.

I wish to end my days of plinking and start my days of accurate target shooting with the knowledge of .303 ballistics and shot fall and all that jazz.

Could any of you fine ladies and gentlemen suggest a good webbysite or booky that would be good for a novice of the ballistic arts? I would be entirely grateful.

Your servant,
T. 75, esq.

[TattooedGun]

Ah yes, you'll be wanting that book of black magic...

[MrD]

Hi

No idea where this came from, was given to me by a club member.

Donald

[Blu]

TBH with you Tower I've never really bothered much about how fast any bullet travels. I've shot things that have been way in the distance and some that have been 10 yards away, bullet has always done it's job either by making a hole in paper or putting meat on the table.

Not saying don't bother nor am I criticizing those who do it, just saying it never held any fascination for me. Thing is though if you are serious about getting away from plinking then you are going to have to come over to the dark side. May the force be with you then.

[Alpha1]

I know nothing about elevation tables I do know that to day at the range I could knock down every figure eleven target with my .303 No4 out to probably 300 yards and my mas36 with iron sights out to 200 yards So why complicate things.

[George G]

Ah yes, you'll be wanting that book of black magic...

Just what is The Volume of Funny Handshakes doing on a shooting forum?

[Alpha1]

You mean Masons not that I recognise that book of course.

[Robert303]

You either go modern or classic. Two classic books are AGs Book of the Rifle by AG Banks and The Elements of Rifle Shooting by J A Barlow. It's also worth looking at the http://www.rifleman.org.uk/PH_Service_sights.htm
website and learning as much as you can about using and setting Parker Hale Target sights. If possible get copies of early Parker Hale Score Diagrams and books. After that you really need to get hold of a good target Rifle shooter to teach you as much as he can about wind reading etc. It's something I missed as a youngster and regret missing now. As to the ballistics. You have a choice. Sort out a load, taken with recommendations from a good tartget shooter, and make sure that your reloading technique is CONSISTENT and work to it. Unlike the old pistol days there are not many rifle shooters using one load at one range and another at a different range, although I may be wrong on this point. OR you can spend the rest of your time chasing all sorts of weird and wonderful theories / powder bullet combinations with no real results. Over the years I've cut and pasted all sorts of articles and notes from forums and websites. However it's no substitute to talking to people who have been there and done it. We've all taken the P out of the Target Rifle Brigade and their funny jackets and hats but it does no harm to talk to them and a lot of them know a LOT. An hour spent talking to an old wind coach is better than houtrs reading.

[1066]

This is the book I cut my teeth on. It's a bit dated now, very much in the Enfield based target rifle era (1960's) but has a great deal of relevant information. Ballistics, sights, wind, etc.
It's often available on Amazon in good used condition for about £10-15.00.

[Gaz]

For general theory of small arms fire, read this from page 19 onwards: http://www.weapons.org.uk/smallarmstrai ... 7-A1,2.pdf

Some of the minor detail is inaccurate (oily cartridges affects pressure rather than vibrations) but otherwise it's sound.