Making Ammo more accurate

[skip62]

I've been loading for 25+ years, well over 200,000 rounds, but that doesn't mean I know enough, or that I'm even good at it... What are the tricks you use to make ammo accurate, when you have a Power Factor goal in mind?

Edited October 7, 2008 by skip62

[Merlin Orr]

I find mine to be much more accurate if I aim before pulling the trigger. YMMV....

[Jman]

Off the top. A Redding Competition Seating die. Quality jacketed bullets like Montana Gold, Zero and Precision Delta. Matched head-stamp brass and a nice taper crimp. About all I need for 9's and 40's I shoot.

Jim

[Aristotle]

I don't know that it's as important in a pistol caliber as it is with rifles to make a bullet necessary more accurate. A big part of the equation, outside of technique is your pistol.

For the most part, I've experimented with varying recoil springs and loads to optimize my follow up/splits and dot tracking. I have found the best approach is, what ever you work on first, do it incrementally and separetly so that you can pin point cause and effect.

In speaking with Mike of Shuemann Barrels, he has also advised me to get bullets .001+ so that more of the bullet impacts the rifling of the barrel as to optimize the twist on his barrels.

Outside of that, I found that the more I pull the trigger, the luckier I get.

.03$

[skip62]

Well, you all have seemed to sense I'm having a specific problem that lead to this post...

I stopped shooting about 10 years ago, and started back up this past spring. So I know I'm rusty, but with my old Behlert 38 Super I can still pull out 10 shot, 2" groups at 25 yards off a bag. I have loaded for my Witness 38 Super and get 10 shot, 2 3/8" groups. now my problem, I bought a Trojan in 38 Super, and I can't get below 10 shot, 3" groups. It's driving me crazy, and I don't really think it's the gun, so I guess I'm hoping to find some advice for making the load more accurate. I'm using Zero 125's, tried both JSP's and JHP's, same results. N320 for powder. I'm trying to hit 125 - 130PF, It still may be me, and the trigger....

Edited October 8, 2008 by skip62

[shooterbenedetto]

Besides redding bullet seater die, I also use the LEE powder drop micrometer to make my loads accurate. I check both overall length, powder drop and crimp every 50 bullets when I do my reload. Its just something I got from sniping.

[Throwin Lead]

This works for me. I like to tinker with load development and can get somewhat carried away. I also work for an engineering/construction firm - the engineers have worn on me.

I like to develop loads in 60 round batches. I load 20 rounds at the decided charge weight, 20 rounds at -0.2 of charge weight and 20 rounds at +0.2 charge weight. I then chrono all 3 loads in 10 shot strings. When chronoing I like to set up a target for each charge weight with a paster for POA at 10 to 12 yards out. I bench shoot the chrono rounds using a rest & aiming at the paster consistently as a reference. After the chrono session is done I set up another target with a paster as a reference for each charge weight and shoot the remaining rounds slow fire freestyle. 20 rounds works well in case the chrono doesn't see a few of the shots. I like to base my chrono data on a 10 round sample per charge weight.

When I get home I analyze my chrono data in a spreadsheet I use & compare my targets and go from there. Sometimes its back to the drawing board, some times it tweaking what I discovered. Once in a while by increasing/decreasing the charge a tenth or so the effects on accuracy are amazing. Some groups tighten up, some open up. Once I settle on a load I'll make another 20 or so, chrono again and test fire for groups again. Once I'm satisified I'll either make a production run or just enter the data into my reciepe book for use later on.

I compare the data of the base charge weight first.

The questions I look to answer for all charge weights are:

Did it make the expected PF?

How consistent are the velocities?

What is the extreme spread & low velocity? If I gave up 8 rounds to chrono at a match would the low velocity make the declared PF?

How accurate is it?

How does it feel?

Disclaimer: I'm by no means a load development/reloading expert but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express during Summer Blast.

[skip62]

Throwin lead, that's almost exactly the process I use. Just can't get this Trojan Super to do what I want. I'm missing something, just don't know what...

Edited October 8, 2008 by skip62

[Throwin Lead]

Throwin lead, that's almost exactly the process I use. Just can't get this Trojan Super to do what I want. I'm missing something, just don't know what...

How consistent are your velocities through your test charge ranges?

How consistent is the OAL? If using mixed headstamps maybe sort them?

Edited October 8, 2008 by Throwin Lead

[skip62]

How consistent are your velocities through your test charge ranges?

How consistent is the OAL? If using mixed headstamps maybe sort them?

ES's less than 40 SD's less than 14 funny enough, the worse on the chrono is what groups best.

OAL is less than .002 usually less than .001, but once in awhile it get one that's drifted. All the same lot and number of firings on the brass, even tried brand new brass.

[skip62]

just thought of something. The Trojan is the only one with a fiber optic front sight, could this be messing me up?

[Throwin Lead]

just thought of something. The Trojan is the only one with a fiber optic front sight, could this be messing me up?

Yep, Top of front sight blade=POA not cover target with FO dot. Learned that lesson too!

[skip62]

Yep, Top of front sight blade=POA not cover target with FO dot. Learned that lesson too!

hmm, I was still trying to hold 6 o'clock on an NRA bullseye target with the top of the sight, I'm just not sure these old eyes are seeing the top correctly with the fiber....hmmm May have to switch the sight back to make sure. Man, what a pain, that sight is tight...

[shooterbenedetto]

Well, you all have seemed to sense I'm having a specific problem that lead to this post...

I stopped shooting about 10 years ago, and started back up this past spring. So I know I'm rusty, but with my old Behlert 38 Super I can still pull out 10 shot, 2" groups at 25 yards off a bag. I have loaded for my Witness 38 Super and get 10 shot, 2 3/8" groups. now my problem, I bought a Trojan in 38 Super, and I can't get below 10 shot, 3" groups. It's driving me crazy, and I don't really think it's the gun, so I guess I'm hoping to find some advice for making the load more accurate. I'm using Zero 125's, tried both JSP's and JHP's, same results. N320 for powder. I'm trying to hit 125 - 130PF, It still may be me, and the trigger....

SHoot it on the nag! at least you eliminate yourself!!

[skip62]

SHoot it on the nag! at least you eliminate yourself!!

LOL, "on the nag"? that's a new one to me, can you explain?

[G-ManBart]

Are your Zeros .355 or .356? I'm not sure what STI is using for stock bore diameter on .38 Super, but it could make a difference. Also, why not try a heavier bullet with a bit more bearing surface? In many standard Super barrels, the old 130gr FMJ works like a champ because of it's shape and lots of bearing surface. A lot of folks prefer 147gr for minor loads in both 9mm and Super...something to consider. R,

[superdude]

as G-ManBart said, sometimes you need to try something else to see what the gun likes. some guns (read: barrels) have preferences with respect to bullets and powders. sometimes you get surprised. for example, my Colt .356 barrel really likes Remington 147 gr FMJ Match .355 bullets and Winchester 115 JHP .335 bullets, both with a moderate charge of 231.

[revchuck]

N320 is supposedly a fine powder - I've never tried it myself - but it's not the only powder out there. Titegroup works extremely well in 9x19 at minor velocities; it might be worth a try here. Hodgdon's data shows 4.4 - 5.0 grains for .38 Super with velocities of 1020-1124 fps with 125 grain Sierra FMJs.

Many of us find that the gun runs more reliably around a 135 PF. YMMV on this, though.

[DougCarden]

Folks, this may be heresy........ aw...what the hell.......

When I am accuracy testing ammo and shooting groups, I use steel targets. I put one round on the target, then aim at the bullet mark. This gives me a finite aim point, versus shooting in the black of a target. You can use the white side of the IPSC target as well if you need to keep the group. I also use paperplates with pasters on them as center aim points when I want to evaluate groups later to see if primer changes make any difference when measuring groups, etc.

When learning to load accurate ammo for 50yd groups in 9x19, I learned on the Bullseye forum that as long as the brass is caseproed (ie. all consistently put back to factory specs) the groups didn't change when you used the right components vs. all one casehead....I do it anyway....

I also load the bullet out as long as I can get it in the magazine and still feed reliably, depends on the gun and platform. JHPs are perenially more accurate than FMJ, but some lead loads can be freakishly accurate as well. I wont even waste my time on plated anymore. You also have to find out from bullet manufacturers where the bullet's sweet spots are for accuracy. The big Sierra manual ( bible) has accuracy loads for their bullets along with the load data, and that give you a good idea of what velocity the bullets do their best work at.

Next, your barrel and the fit makes a world of difference. The KKM and Schumann 1/32 twist barrels are laser beams with 115/124 grain bullets on down at the right velocities. The 1/16 twist works fine for 124-147 grain bullets. This is in 9x19, and Kart, Barsto, etc.. any of the fine barrel manfacturers....

With your Trojan.....I would get some 125 Zero .356 jhps, which I have never seen NOT shoot in any gun, and try a medium speed powder, like VV320, Win 231, Solo 1000, Win supertarget, Titegroup. Load them up from 130 - 150 PF and go shoot off the bench shooting groups until you get a circular group. The best way would be to use the Ransom rest to test, but sandbags on the bench will work as long as you are not in a hurry and get into a good repeatable technique.

If all this doesnt work, have your smith look at the gun.....It may be as simple as needing a tighter bushing, recrown, etc.

You can also slug the bore and see what the diameter is, and the info on using a diameter .001 higher is spot on.

Hopefully this helps in your quest, I went through all this and found out I had a crap barrel.......some days are better than others.....LOL

Good luck,

DougC

[Darrell]

I've finally found a 9mm load that is both accurate and feels good. I used to use Tightgroup powder and 147 gr bullets. I tried the plated, jhp's, fmj etc. I read an article on how to make the most accurate 9mm in a magazine I bought. It recommended 6.0 gr of power pistol with a 124 gr hornady at an oal of 1.120. I loaded some from 5.4 to 6.2 gr. And sure enough 6.0 was the most accurate, but felt pretty hot. They chono'd at 145 pf. It didn't shoot as accurate an all my 9mm's so I experimented. My most accurate 9mm is an EAA limited. I have a G17, G34, 2 m&p's, an FN, and an XD9 Tactical. What I found was that with a load of 5.6 of power pistol, and decreasing the oal to 1.100, I got the best accuracy on all of my guns with a power factor of 140 to 143. Its a little snappy but very accurate. My EAA 25 yd group from a bench rest avg of three 5 shot groups was .769" My G17 and G34 was 1.1" and my m&p's were .99 to 1.1". I'm using montana gold 124 jhp's. When I decreased the OAL, my accuracy and consistancy greatly improved, and that is the recipe I'm sticking with this coming season. I'm not going to try and get as low to the 125 PF floor as it can cause reliabilty issues sometimes, and I prefer an accurate load thats a little more snappy than a less snappy load thats not as accurate. By the way, I use mixed headstamp brass and winchester primers.

Edited October 8, 2008 by Darrell

[want2race]

Not all production guns can shoot 2" groups at 25. As mentioned earlier, have the gun looked at.

[cautery]

OK, how detailed into this subject do you want to go? I've spent hundreds of hours on pistol ammunition accuracy research, and no one thing will maximize your accuracy... it's the sum of the parts. Shooter, gun, ammo are a system...

1) Shooter (or method for maintaining the weapon on the same POA for each round). I will not discuss this, as the variables are many. I reduce the variables (in testing), by using a Ransom Rest with custom inserts to fit the specific gun. The rest is mounted on a specially constructed platform and mounted to a rigid shooting base (like a concrete bench rest rifle station). I use a specially modified mechanical trigger pull device to make sure the trigger is pulled the same way every time. etc, etc...

2) Weapon - Bottom line, you need a weapon that locks up the exact same way every shot.

-A quality barrel, produced at or near the beginning of the first run for the rifling tooling.

-A quality barrel properly fit to the slide is not optional.

-Further, the slide to frame fit should be such that when in lockup, the trigger pull does not cause the slide/barrel bore line to change in any way.

-Now, to the chamber...

Headspacing - The round must locate in the chamber the same way EVERY time... This is much harder to do than one might think, especially with weapons that (are supposed) to headspace on the case mouth. Typically, a factory auto-loader with factory ammo tends to headspace on the extractor, which introduces a variable into the cartridge to chamber relationship. This must be eliminated.

The way I fix this on the weapon is as follows: I purchase a barrel that is short chambered and then finish reamed with MY reamer that I had made to MY specifications. This gives me control over where the headspacing step is located, the chamber diameter, lead length and the transition angle/length to the full height rifling. More on the lead later under ammunition discussion . I choose a chamber depth such that when the barrel is fitted at the hood, the value falls into a very small range.... On a .40 S&W, I chose (IIRC) 0.853". This is because the vast majority of S&W brass it at or slightly longer than this measurement. Now, by using a depth micrometer, I can measure the exact length from the face of the barrel hood to the headspacing step. This is a critical measurement.

- Chamber diameter, headspacing step, breech face - I chose a slightly smaller diameter than the SAAMI specs. I did not complete my testing on chamber diameter due to the requirement for a separate custom made reamer being required for each diameter. I "backed" into my diameter measurement by starting with rounds loaded in the brass and bullet brand I planned to use. I made it smaller to reduce potential "rocking" in the chamber, but large enough to make sure the round would chamber reliably. However, chamber diameter is much less critical than what follows, and the "rocking" is rendered minimal assuming the following is realized:

The headspacing step MUST be true and perfectly perpendicular to the centerline of the bore. Additionally, the center of the circle described by the headspacing step MUST fall on the centerline of the bore. I could explain why, but this is already going to be long enough as it. Further, the outside diameter of the headspacing step where it meets the chamber wall must be computed to match to the diameter of the loaded round at the end of the case to 0.000" (-0.000"/+0.005). In reality, since brass thickness changes, you cut it a bit bigger than this, and choose brass to match.

The breech face should be true and as close to perpendicular to the bore line (parallel to the headspacing step) as humanly possible (this is ONE of the important factors in barrel fitment).

The closer you come to accomplishing the above perfectly, the better the resultls.

Ammunition - Now that you have eliminated as many of the variables as possible to launching a projectile on the same path every time through the weapon, you need to construct a bullet that fits the gun.

Case - Ideally, you want every case to be identical in every respect. This is not possible of course, but you do need to control as many of the variables as possible. The critical variables include: case length, case wall thickness (especially at the mouth), diameter at the base, and to a lesser extent case volume. Rim thickness can also be important but I will not cover that here, as it is minimized if other things are accomplished.

Ideally, I would get Starline to make a special run of brass for me. It would all come from the same brass stock, consecutive off the machines, and have NO HEADSTAMP. I would have it sent to me un-trimmed, or preferably cut to 0.010" over my computed required length. In my testing, I used once-fired Winchester brass, all from boxes with the same lot number.

I cleaned the brass, then de-capped and sized the brass using a Redding sizer die. I cleaned the brass again. If I was doing the test again, I would then lap the base of each case to 1200 grit using a fixture to insure the base was perpendicular to the case centerline. I used a micrometer to sort the brass for length (discarded those less than 0.855"), base diameter, and case wall thickness. I then used a modified Redding trimmer, to trim all of the cases to 0.853" in length (-0.000/+0.0005") and chamfer the edges just enough to insure that the outside edge would feed reliably to the headspace step, and that the inside edge would not scar the bullet on loading. It is important to maintain the maximum amount of face on the case mouth AND that the case mouth face be exactly perpendicular to the case centerline.

All of this effort combined with what follows insures a round that resides in the chamber with less than 0.001" shared clearance between the headspacing step and the breech face. Combined with a tuned extractor that has minimal or no rim contact/pressure on the round when in battery, does two things. It reduces breech slap (the cartridge backing out of the chamber against the breech face), and cartridge tile in the chamber due to headspacing on the extractor which tilts the projectile off the bore centerline.

Bullet - I used MG 180gr. CMJ bullets. You can start with any reputable bullet, but you MUST start with the bullet and plan backwards to the reamer design. Bullet profiles are different and weigh heavily on the reamer's lead specs, et al. I weighted the bullets one by one to get a working sample twice the number required for testing that were 180gr exactly (-0.0gr/+0.1gr). if I was doing the testing again, I would hold this tolerance even tighter using a scale that resolves to 0.01gr.

From my working sample, I used a mic to sort for bullet diameter and bullet length. If I was doing this again, I would also get/devise a way to sort for bullet concentricity. I held bullet diameter to within chosen diameter -0.000"/+0.0005" I held length to within 0.0005". I had to sort a LOT of bullets to get a sample large enough for testing.

Primers - WSP all from the same lot number

Powder - TG all from same/new keg.

Loading - If I did this again for absolute accuracy, I would probably use a top line single stage press and Redding dies, but for this test, I used my highly tuned Dillon 550 with a toolhead clamp (you can do the same thing with UniqueTek's toolhead kit). I used all Redding Competition series dies with after-market o-ringed lock nuts and set screws..... Suffice to say, I have tricked my 550 and dies out to insure that it loads as consistently as possible on a progressive press...

Sizing - cases were pre-sized, but I ran them through the sizer again to insure consistency.

Powder/belling - Powder system was modified with a UniqueTek micrometer kit on the powder bar and a host of other tweaks. I used a ten charge average to set the charges, and was able to get individual charge variation to less than 0.05gr. If I did this again, I would probably load on a single stage press and trickle each charge and weigh it on a scale that resolved to 0.01gr. I basically did not bell the cases at all.... The ream/chamfer step in case prep made it such that the powder die essentially only sealed with the case mouth. I suspect there was some belling, but it was less than 0.001".

Bullet Seating - CRITICAL

I used a specially modified Redding Competition Seating Die. While this die is THE best seating die for consistent seating depth in my opinion, the seater insert works by contacting the bullet on the profile. Since bullet profile differs slightly from bullet to bullet, this can result in a slightly different seating depth from round to round. Having all of the cases the exact same length reduces this to the minimum, but can be improved with a little effort.

A note on the difference between Cartridge Overall Length and (Effective) Bullet Seating Depth... The die sets the bullet to approximately the same position every time... Thus, you can achieve the same COL. However, case length will change EFFECTIVE bullet seating depth. If all of the bullets are the same length, then the volume in the case will be consistent, BUT the length of case the bullet occupies will change according to the range in case lengths. Keeping case length the same insures that you have the same amount of brass length holding the bullet consistent. If case wall thickness, case length, bullet diameter, bullet length, and crimp are the same, then you will get as close to equal bullet retention in the case as possible. We'll discuss crimp in a moment.

Now... back to the seating insert. Using the stock insert, bullet profile differences will change bullet seating depth depending on the manufacturing QC of the bullet. Ballistically, this is an almost negligible effect, but I believe bullet seating depth is important to pressure measurements (bullet retention), but wayyyy more important is the position of the bullet to the rifling.

I made my Redding seating die insert such that the insert contacts the bullet as a whole rather than just a ring around the profile. First I tried using a proto that contacted just the tip, which does make COL VERY consistent, it does not control the seating depth with respect to profile differences. You can't get perfect consistency without perfect profile consistency, but you can minimize the overall effect by averaging the differences with a full profile contact patch.... not to mention that a full profile contact controls bullet centerline to case centerline variances. Essentially, I cast a negative of a representative bullet. Then I cast a positive from the negative using a material that would stand up to the heat level I needed for the next step. Then, I cast a positive using a hard casting metal. I took this positive, and had it machined to fit the die as an insert with attention toward making the insert centerline parallel and centered along the die centerline.

This insert netted me COL/BSD consistency to within 0.001". It would be even more consistent using a quality single stage press.

Now... WHY all the fuss about bullet seating depth and COL consistency? The answer is BULLET JUMP...

BULLET JUMP is the distance the bullet travels from its rest position in the cartridge until it contacts the lands in the barrel. Everything I've covered up to this point culminates with this... While all the barrel lockup, slide to frame, chamber dimensioning, and bullet construction details serve to locate the projectile in the same place in space in relation to the bore prior to launch (and this is a good thing), the last step is to make sure the projectile contacts the lands the same way and in the same position every time.... ideally, such that the centerline of the projectile and the centerline of the bore are coincident (same line). Combined with a consistent launching force, there is no other way to insure that a projectile travels the same path every time.

The final step in getting this to happen is to minimize the possibility that the bullet will cant off the bore centerline while it begins to exit the case to the lands.

IF the bullet profile is concentric, and the bullet centerline is coincident with the bore centerline, and the lead centerline is cut coincident with the bore centerline, and the bullet travels straight to the lands, the bullet will contact all the lands at the same instant insuring that it travels true down the bore. THIS will reduce abnormalities in the bullets external ballistics. (Think perfect spiral footbal pass).

If you reduce the bullet jump distance to near zero, you reduce the potential for the bullet to get off the bore centerline. All the values I chose in my bullet and chamber design were chosen to minimize bullet jump to a potential BJ of less than 0.001".

CAUTION: Bullet jump reduction can be extremely dangerous. The bullet must NOT be in contact with the lands prior to ignition!!! My reamer was cut to match the bullet I used. IF you change bullets, the profile will be different, and you WILL have a different seating depth (COL) to get the same bullet jump. You have to set the seating depth by loading a round, and then PHYSICALLY chamber checking it (OVER AND OVER) until you KNOW the case is headspacing on the case mouth and that the bullet is NOT in contact with the lands. I found the COL that gave me just contact, and then reduced it to give me a jump of 0.005" in my tests. AND I chamber checked EVERY loaded round prior to testing in the ACTUAL BARREL.

Crimp - Crimp is NOT to increase bullet retention in rounds that headspace on the case mouth. Crimp is to remove belling, period. Since I had virtually no belling, I had very little crimp. Since I controlled the bullet and case wall thickness to match my chamber diameter at the headspacing step, I only had the crimp station there to basically INSURE that the diameter at the case mouth was as close to the headspacing step outer diameter as possible without binding. This also helps to reduce the possibility of cartridge tip due to gravity or an improperly tuned extractor.

END OF MECHANICAL STUFF - There you have it. This is what I did to make my weapon/ammo as mechanically consistent as possible (in summary.... many details omitted). All that's left really is finding a powder and charge weight that produce the ideal velocity for your bullet/barrel combo. I used TG, and it worked pretty good for me, but I am sure there could have been improvement in this arena. I am not exactly a student of the black art of powder choice, charge weight, and velocity... Maybe someday...

However, I will make a comment here. Pistol ballisticians feel free to comment here, but if I had to do this over again, I would probably choose a heavier bullet. Pistol bullets are not designed to travel fast.... My intuition tells me that a heavier bullet, pushed slower (farther from the sonic barrier and trans-sonic region) will be more stable in flight. And given the longer bullet centerline in the heavier bullet, I suspect it would also be a bit more stable. This also gives you a wider range of velocities to play with.

Anyway.... I am exhausted from writing this. I haven't thought on this subject for years now, and I need a break. Feel free to ask questions...

Here is an article I wrote on some of my testing. It doesn't contain everything I discussed here, and doesn't cover all of the testing I conducted. I conducted testing with improvements on the equipment described in the article, and I have added points and some assumptions here in this discussion that I may or may not have actually tested. But the article is a good read:

Bullet Jump Article

NOTE: Don't use the "Article Index" to go from page to page. The article was located on a different website when posted originally. Use the "And Then?" links at the bottom of each page to move through the article.

Hope this provides you with some ideas.... Please don't attempt ANY of the things described in this post unless you have the requisite skills and knowledge. You could easily damage/kill yourself or your equipment!!

[want2race]

Uh...wow.

Copy...and...... Pasted for future reference.

[G-ManBart]

That's some pretty awesome stuff Cautery!

Now, the big question I have is how much better this ammo performed than ammo loaded with sort of the typical process most folks use. In other words, how much gain did it net? In pistols I just don't know that it's worth it and it's almost definitely not worth it for USPSA shooting.

[skip62]

With your Trojan.....I would get some 125 Zero .356 jhps, which I have never seen NOT shoot in any gun, and try a medium speed powder, like VV320, Win 231, Solo 1000, Win supertarget, Titegroup. Load them up from 130 - 150 PF and go shoot off the bench shooting groups until you get a circular group. The best way would be to use the Ransom rest to test, but sandbags on the bench will work as long as you are not in a hurry and get into a good repeatable technique.

done most of this, no ransom rest. I always get circular groups, I can usually measure at least 2 directions(4 different holes of course) and the group size is equal either way.

If all this doesnt work, have your smith look at the gun.....It may be as simple as needing a tighter bushing, recrown, etc.

You can also slug the bore and see what the diameter is, and the info on using a diameter .001 higher is spot on.

Hopefully this helps in your quest, I went through all this and found out I had a crap barrel.......some days are better than others.....LOL

Good luck,

DougC

Guns only got 1000 rounds through it, maybe I'm expecting too much from it. May call STI and ask them if I'm being unreasonable.

G-ManBart, I've tried both .355 and .356 Zero's, JSP's and JHP's, can't tell any difference.

Cautery, WOW, great stuff, but I'm going to work that hard for the local Steel shooting I do. I've just read a lot about the Trojans being accurate, and expected around 2" groups, maybe that's my mistake. The gun functions wonderfully though.

Thanks guys.