Originally Posted by mykeal
I'm always amused by the interest in chronograph test results; people act like they really mean something, to three significant figures, when in fact they're looking at numbers from uncalibrated instrumentation measuring data from a test with uncontrolled, changing variables.
Are you implying that the data such as that from the Lyman BP Handbook is taken from uncalibrated instrumentation in an uncontrolled environment?...or that some data from some people is taken as such? I don't know if eveyone/anyone hangs their hat on 3 significant figures. Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they post the 3 significant figures because that is what they have in front of them and it doesn't make sense to round up or round down.
mykeal, your point and former points on this topic are well taken. Don't get me wrong. However, I think there are any number of reasons that people would be interested in chrony data. I don't want to presume I know whether or not their reasons are valid or not. This is probably a short list but here are a few reason they might be interested: (1) just a passing interest to get an idea of how fast they can propel a chunk of lead, (2) want to check if there is something way off in their load or firearm, (3) want to make sure they are within SASS (or whoever) rules, (4) want to see what difference there may be in one powder versus another. I take it that this forum encompasses more than just a bunch of loons posting pics and talking about smoke-n-boom. Seems reasonable that chrony is a valid topic. I would assume there is a reason why so many loading manuals post such information; but that is an assumption.
I enjoy reading posts about chrony results. I may take them/some with a grain of salt and look at them as just one data point of many. And I admit I get a chuckle whenever a hear about a miscue where someone accidentally shoots their chrony.
It could be just as amusing when someone claims that an 1858 gets three inch groupings at 25 yards with 35 grains of FFFg. I can't determine if they were scientific in posting their results either. Was it really 25 yards? Was it really a 3 inch grouping? Did they measure with a ruler and was their yard stick or ruler calibrated? Was their load really 35 grains exactly and everytime? How did they calibrate their load? Was the 1858 fine tuned by a professional gun fighter? Did they really use FFFg or was it FFF? Was it Goex or Swiss? Was the wind blowing?
Again, your point is well taken. However, if we (as a group) discount posted data/results because we don't have proof that everything was calibrated to a certain standard then we'd wipe out a significant number of posts. That just might take too much fun out of this forum.
Us boys can have a lil' fun can't we?
I'm just sayin'.....