Outshooting the Gun?

[Xun]

I see the phrase “I’ll never outshoot this gun” pop up all the time, but I think this idea is sometimes misunderstood — or misused.

I’m not sure how everyone interprets that phrase, but to me, it sounds like people are comparing their own accuracy directly against the gun’s mechanical accuracy. A lot of people seem to treat this as a reason not to care about gun accuracy. You can see this mindset in posts like the first reply here:

But here's the thing: you and the gun are not competing. You’re not trying to “beat” your gun. You're a team. The shooter's dispersion and the gun's dispersion combine into the final result.

Even a less skilled shooter will get tighter groups with a more accurate gun. Yes, if your personal dispersion is 10x greater than the gun's, then the benefit of better gun accuracy might be negligible. As long as your groups aren’t more than 5 times larger than the gun’s, improving the gun’s accuracy still makes a meaningful difference — so saying “the gun outshoots me” feels like a misunderstanding to me.

Would love to hear what others think. How do you interpret “I’ll never outshoot this gun”?

 

[DNF]

for me, when I have the gun on a bench bipod/rear rest. All I’m doing is measuring how the guns shoots. I have negligible effect imo, for me, on how the guns shoots in that scenario.
Now when shooting offhand or even in the field with shooting sticks, this is where I compare how the guns shoots to my ability to shoot it well.

 

[WNYBill]

BR guys would argue with you. Reading the wind is an art. Negating the mirage is an art. Trigger control is an art. Regardless of your shooting equipment and position, all those things enter into your accuracy. IMHO

 

[Struckat]

I love my SP-01….I am guilty of making that statement.

My AA 500 is a good example. It does what it is supposed to every time I shoot it. I on the other hand have so much room for improvement in my technique that I will always come back and try again.

”I don’t deserve this gun,” maybe more accurate.

 

[UDABEGGER]

BR guys would argue with you. Reading the wind is an art. Negating the mirage is an art. Trigger control is an art. Regardless of your shooting equipment and position, all those things enter into your accuracy. IMHO

Heart beat . Don't forget the heart beat !

 

[Gerry52]

My guns are consistently accurate & repeatable. I, however, am at the whims of a human body & the ravages of age upon my senses. My improvement over time is undeniable but I'll never be a machine. CLOSER, yes, but never 100 percent.

 

[ChickenDumpling]

Must be the best out of more that one gun.

 

[boscoebrea]

I think it is about doing the best you can.Hopefully your gun is more accurate than you and you are always trying to bring out the best in it,and the other way around....A relationship that develops.You find out what it likes and give it that.Guys even talk to their guns.

 

[beerthief]

BR guys would argue with you. Reading the wind is an art. Negating the mirage is an art. Trigger control is an art. Regardless of your shooting equipment and position, all those things enter into your accuracy. IMHO

so you are saying the gun is more capable than you are because you introduce flaws in judgment . OR, That you introduce the gun to unfavorable conditions .

 

[cavedweller]

so you are saying the gun is more capable than you are because you introduce flaws in judgment . OR, That you introduce the gun to unfavorable conditions .

I have never really outshot any particular Airgun BUT I have gotten to a point where I’ve run into a particular guns limitations and adjustability which then affects my ergonomic interface. It’s at that point I have reached my limitations with a gun.
If we are being honest, some guns are just cheap and poorly made And they are not as much fun to own or shoot.

 

[Xun]

My point isn’t really about whether you can outshoot your gun — it’s more about the mindset around comparing the shooter’s ability to the gun’s — or not comparing them in the first place.

It’s like working two jobs — sure, you can compare which one pays more, and we definitely do. But at the end of the day, what really matters is how much you make in total. Saying one job “outearns” the other kind of misses the point — both contribute to the final outcome.

Same with shooting. We don’t say “my aiming outshoots my trigger control.” That would sound weird, right? But both are part of the same shot process, and both affect the result. It’s not a contest between them — they stack, just like you and the gun.

 

[rcarlisle]

If you've ever had a gun that simply does not shoot well, no matter how perfect you execute each shot, you've had a gun you can outshoot. As in, "I can pick up a rock and hit what the gun refuses to." Sometimes it helps to look at the phrase with the most negative scenario in mind in order to understand it.

 

[Vana2]

When I say “I’ll never outshoot this gun” I'm pointing out that the accuracy of gun will never be a limiting factor in the final results.

I can manage 1/2 MOA groups (on a good day) and most of my airguns are easily capable of that within their effective range.

On the flip side, I've shot airguns that couldn't shoot 3 MOA on their best day. Those would be the accuracy limiting factor.

I've always said that every gun is a tack-driver...within a certain distance. That distance might be measured in inches, feet or yards.

Cheers!

 

[Franklink]

I think the saying means that the gun is doing what it should (sending the projectile where you want it and/or where it should have gone relative to where the cross hairs were when the trigger broke).

It doesn't usually take more than a few shots to know if a gun is something I want to keep around or not. If projectiles aren't going where they should, and the results don't match what the wind is doing or my input to the gun, than I can shoot better than the gun (ie it's throwing flyers).

 

[FelixS]

Having a gun that outshoots me is a.pleasure because I know that it's going to get better from here, and having an objective with a potential upside is what it's all about, for me.

 

[Florida_Man]

I don’t have time to sort pellets. If I do everything right, I’m still at the mercy of those.

 

[WNYBill]

so you are saying the gun is more capable than you are because you introduce flaws in judgment . OR, That you introduce the gun to unfavorable conditions .

If you agree with "The Houston Warehouse" scenario, most good BR guns are capable of shooting 0's . They sort of proved it with 1/4 oz triggers and machining tolerances of one 10,000 and no atmospheric variables. The shooter was usually the limiting factor. Most BR guns will out shoot their operator. However there are a lot of guns (most) that can be out shot by their operator. I am saying the gun is the limiting factor usually, but not always. BR shooting is a very deep rabbit hole too! Maybe that's why so many PCP guns come from China.

 

[Florida_Man]

Its easy to see if you are imparting negative actions on your rifle, and you only need 10m and a 24x scope. I put my rifles on a lead sled and watch how different cheek pressure, grip, etc relate to the crosshair moving. Different stocks and rifle design have different results. It has also helped me identify a lightly loose screw between the action and the stock.