how accurate is using reduced targets?

SPUSCG · January 8, 2009, 04:56 PM

the high power range is covered with snow and cant really use it right now. wondering how accurately using a 1/2 size target at 100 yards simulates 200, ect.

Hondo11 · January 8, 2009, 05:10 PM

For a simple explanation...

You can't completely simulate the difference that way, but it's good enough for practice and certainly better than nothing. It really depends on what type of shooting you're doing...but if you were really into precision shooting, I guess you wouldn't be asking.

The best way to think about it is this:

The target may look smaller at distance, but it's not actually smaller.

And to make it translate completely, you'd have to be able to hold your particular MOA out to an infinite distance...and there are many factors which make that not likely.

Casimer · January 8, 2009, 05:28 PM

1/2 is about right. The black on the NRA SR is 13" at 200yds and 6 3/8" on the SR1, which is the SR reduced for 100yds.

Here's a spreadsheet for determining the dimensions of reduced targets - http://www.ray-vin.com/tech/targets/reducing.xls

The actual formula incorporates the bullet diameter.

onthejon55 · January 8, 2009, 05:30 PM

why not just work on your 100 yard group and then see if you have improved on the 200 later

SPUSCG · January 8, 2009, 05:53 PM

100 yards is nice with the 336, i want to see how i do at 200, and i dont feel like trudging through snow and slipping on ice to see the target

Slopemeno · January 8, 2009, 06:01 PM

I played with this idea in my action shooting league, and did a 3" x 5" card "El Presidente" stage. Man, THAT was hard at speed regardless of the short distance.

hogdogs · January 8, 2009, 06:44 PM

No the half size does not simulate double distance when using a .30-30 at all. It is 'tween 100 and 200 where bullet drop compensation is heavily needed. so "to see how I do at 200" doesn't work. All you are doing is seeing if you are capable of hitting a smaller target at 100 yards. Which in itself is a commendable aspiration we all should work on...
Brent

**Shane Tuttle** · January 8, 2009, 06:52 PM

Hogdogs has it right regarding accuracy with your gun. Distance in general will never have a substitute.

However, if you're talking about honing YOUR skills, then I think it's not only acceptable, it's a great idea.

If you ever attend Appleseed, they start out simulating targets at (500yds?) using a target at approx. (83?) yards. The target is the size of a postage stamp...yes, a postage stamp. My numbers are probably off, but you get the idea.

My take is by all means, practice safely using smaller targets as you're wanting to do...

kraigwy · January 8, 2009, 07:20 PM

100 yeard reduced targets are great. You can do your rapid fire strings and work on your offhand.

You dont get the wind but dont let anyone tell you you dont get any benifits from reduced target shooting.

When my rapid fire scores start to slide, I dig out the reduced targets and run through several strings. The 600 yard Prone Slow fire reduced to 100 yards is great too.

I want to see all who say you cant get any benifit from reduced targets, clean some 600 yard reduced targets from a prone unsupported position.

When you can do that constently, and the same for the SF Offhand, then come and tell me reduce targets offer no benifits.

Yes you dont get the value of dealing with wind and mirage you would get at 600 yards. But you arnt gonna get any wind and mirage experience sitting by the fire, when the range is snowed in, either.

hogdogs · January 8, 2009, 07:31 PM

Kraig, No one has said he won't see benefits... Just not an actual simulation of 200 yards by shooting half size at 100... I used to shoot 20 gauge hulls at 100 with my .22lr to tighten my 75 yard hunting to the point that head shooting squirrels was too easy unless they running. But to practice for 200 yard shots with a levergun by shooting a half size target does little. The BDC is many inches if not a foot or more at 200 with a .30-30 flat nose. So to practice 200 you need to learn barrel rise as well as target acquisition... But hey I used to love to try to put a .22lr thru the spent primer on the bottom of hulls at 100 with a .22 and it was not only fun but to hit my mark I really had to snooker down on my breathing and grip... I missed 75% or so but these were off hand shots with iron sights on both a marlin 60 and a S&W .22 pistol... man I miss my eagle eye vision back then as a 2o sumthin young guy!

Brent

Slopemeno · January 8, 2009, 09:34 PM

Have you ever heard of Micro-sniping? You shoot at empty 9mm cases with a match air rifle at 40 yards, which is supposed to be the same size ratio as a human torso at 1000 yards.

SPUSCG · January 8, 2009, 11:07 PM

got plenty of used 12 guage hulls

funfaler · January 12, 2009, 03:09 AM

The idea of using reduced size targets to "simulate" ranges is a long proven technique.

However, the idea is to this technique to improve shooter's mechanics, not to improve the shooter's skill in come-ups, wind estimation/compensation.

If a shooter does not have proper mechanics, they will just be frustrated at actual distance shooting. If they have the proper mechanics, they will be able to much more easily learn and apply the skills needed at actual distance.

Point being, if you can not do it at reduced sized targets at reduced ranges, you can not do it at actual distance.

Smallgame2100 · January 12, 2009, 03:11 AM

Like some others said, work on 100 yards. Get that down good and work your way up.

January 8, 2009, 04:56 PM	#1
SPUSCG Senior Member Join Date: January 25, 2008 Posts: 3,004	how accurate is using reduced targets? the high power range is covered with snow and cant really use it right now. wondering how accurately using a 1/2 size target at 100 yards simulates 200, ect. __________________ Check us out: www.imfdb.org. Fun site for people who love gun movies.

January 8, 2009, 05:53 PM	#5
SPUSCG Senior Member Join Date: January 25, 2008 Posts: 3,004	100 yards is nice with the 336, i want to see how i do at 200, and i dont feel like trudging through snow and slipping on ice to see the target __________________ Check us out: www.imfdb.org. Fun site for people who love gun movies.

January 8, 2009, 06:52 PM	#8
Shane Tuttle Staff Join Date: November 28, 2005 Location: Montana Posts: 9,443	Hogdogs has it right regarding accuracy with your gun. Distance in general will never have a substitute. However, if you're talking about honing YOUR skills, then I think it's not only acceptable, it's a great idea. If you ever attend Appleseed, they start out simulating targets at (500yds?) using a target at approx. (83?) yards. The target is the size of a postage stamp...yes, a postage stamp. My numbers are probably off, but you get the idea. My take is by all means, practice safely using smaller targets as you're wanting to do... __________________ If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language. Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting

January 8, 2009, 07:20 PM	#9
kraigwy Senior Member Join Date: June 16, 2008 Location: Wyoming Posts: 11,061	100 yeard reduced targets are great. You can do your rapid fire strings and work on your offhand. You dont get the wind but dont let anyone tell you you dont get any benifits from reduced target shooting. When my rapid fire scores start to slide, I dig out the reduced targets and run through several strings. The 600 yard Prone Slow fire reduced to 100 yards is great too. I want to see all who say you cant get any benifit from reduced targets, clean some 600 yard reduced targets from a prone unsupported position. When you can do that constently, and the same for the SF Offhand, then come and tell me reduce targets offer no benifits. Yes you dont get the value of dealing with wind and mirage you would get at 600 yards. But you arnt gonna get any wind and mirage experience sitting by the fire, when the range is snowed in, either. __________________ Kraig Stuart CPT USAR Ret USAMU Sniper School Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071

January 8, 2009, 11:07 PM	#12
SPUSCG Senior Member Join Date: January 25, 2008 Posts: 3,004	got plenty of used 12 guage hulls __________________ Check us out: www.imfdb.org. Fun site for people who love gun movies.

January 8, 2009, 05:10 PM	#2
Hondo11 Senior Member Join Date: September 6, 2008 Posts: 120	For a simple explanation... You can't completely simulate the difference that way, but it's good enough for practice and certainly better than nothing. It really depends on what type of shooting you're doing...but if you were really into precision shooting, I guess you wouldn't be asking. The best way to think about it is this: The target may look smaller at distance, but it's not actually smaller. And to make it translate completely, you'd have to be able to hold your particular MOA out to an infinite distance...and there are many factors which make that not likely.

January 8, 2009, 05:28 PM	#3
Casimer Senior Member Join Date: April 23, 2007 Location: Pennsylvania, USA Posts: 1,918	1/2 is about right. The black on the NRA SR is 13" at 200yds and 6 3/8" on the SR1, which is the SR reduced for 100yds. Here's a spreadsheet for determining the dimensions of reduced targets - http://www.ray-vin.com/tech/targets/reducing.xls The actual formula incorporates the bullet diameter.

January 8, 2009, 05:30 PM	#4
onthejon55 Junior member Join Date: October 23, 2008 Location: Evansville, IN Posts: 411	why not just work on your 100 yard group and then see if you have improved on the 200 later

January 8, 2009, 06:01 PM	#6
Slopemeno Senior Member Join Date: January 19, 2007 Posts: 2,663	I played with this idea in my action shooting league, and did a 3" x 5" card "El Presidente" stage. Man, THAT was hard at speed regardless of the short distance.

January 8, 2009, 06:44 PM	#7
hogdogs Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 31, 2007 Location: Western Florida panhandle Posts: 11,069	No the half size does not simulate double distance when using a .30-30 at all. It is 'tween 100 and 200 where bullet drop compensation is heavily needed. so "to see how I do at 200" doesn't work. All you are doing is seeing if you are capable of hitting a smaller target at 100 yards. Which in itself is a commendable aspiration we all should work on... Brent

January 8, 2009, 07:31 PM	#10
hogdogs Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 31, 2007 Location: Western Florida panhandle Posts: 11,069	Kraig, No one has said he won't see benefits... Just not an actual simulation of 200 yards by shooting half size at 100... I used to shoot 20 gauge hulls at 100 with my .22lr to tighten my 75 yard hunting to the point that head shooting squirrels was too easy unless they running. But to practice for 200 yard shots with a levergun by shooting a half size target does little. The BDC is many inches if not a foot or more at 200 with a .30-30 flat nose. So to practice 200 you need to learn barrel rise as well as target acquisition... But hey I used to love to try to put a .22lr thru the spent primer on the bottom of hulls at 100 with a .22 and it was not only fun but to hit my mark I really had to snooker down on my breathing and grip... I missed 75% or so but these were off hand shots with iron sights on both a marlin 60 and a S&W .22 pistol... man I miss my eagle eye vision back then as a 2o sumthin young guy! Brent

January 8, 2009, 09:34 PM	#11
Slopemeno Senior Member Join Date: January 19, 2007 Posts: 2,663	Have you ever heard of Micro-sniping? You shoot at empty 9mm cases with a match air rifle at 40 yards, which is supposed to be the same size ratio as a human torso at 1000 yards.

January 12, 2009, 03:09 AM	#13
funfaler Member Join Date: December 3, 2006 Posts: 80	The idea of using reduced size targets to "simulate" ranges is a long proven technique. However, the idea is to this technique to improve shooter's mechanics, not to improve the shooter's skill in come-ups, wind estimation/compensation. If a shooter does not have proper mechanics, they will just be frustrated at actual distance shooting. If they have the proper mechanics, they will be able to much more easily learn and apply the skills needed at actual distance. Point being, if you can not do it at reduced sized targets at reduced ranges, you can not do it at actual distance.

January 12, 2009, 03:11 AM	#14
Smallgame2100 Junior member Join Date: January 8, 2009 Location: New York Posts: 164	Like some others said, work on 100 yards. Get that down good and work your way up.