Don't use this ammo at 54.69 yards
- Thread starter Ben_hutcherson
- Start date
OP
Ben_hutcherson
Member
Right. Beyond "Yonder" is "A piece".
And, beyond a "a piece" is "a fur piece"
jmmitc06
Member
I don't know where the engineering comment came from, plenty of other professions use sig figs. I'm a bioinformatician and I use sig figs all the time. Us scientists are not engineers!!!
(for those not in the community, there is a bit of a rivalry between science and engineering)I don't think about sig figs as much as my analytical chem pals, but they are very important when wanting to be precise. Literally anytime you measure something (so think reloading ammo, measuring stuff in a house, airplane or car, a pharmacist measuring your chemo or whatever) you deal with sig figs because intrinsically there are tolerances on all measuring devices. It's hard to trust companies and people who make precision products, such as ammo, when sig figs seem to not matter to them.
Once on the USS America, an Aircraft Carrier I was on, I sent a bootcamper down to another Weapons Dept shop for 50 yards of "Chow Line". 
He came back with a 100 pound, five gallon bucket of bolts. (...the lid was on) Oh the look on his sweating face when it donned on him was priceless!
He came back with a 100 pound, five gallon bucket of bolts. (...the lid was on) Oh the look on his sweating face when it donned on him was priceless! 
Mcwsky09
Member
I don't think the original comment about significant figures was meant to be condescending but rather based on the fact that very few if any people who have not had a reason to become familiar with the concept either through education or profession would have run across the term and it's meaning in everyday life.
Also part of what was being pointed out is that the label stating 54.86 seems odd because it is oddly specific. So even with no understanding of the concept of significant digits most people would wonder why that is so specific.
A good example of how this can be misused was a study that reported 33.33% of the experimental subjects were cured by the treatment, 33.33% were not cured and the third mouse ran away. While 33.33% is certainly an accurate way to express 1/3rd but by expressing it that way it suggests a result with far more statistical significance than one out of only three. And since that case is really only 50/50 when you exclude the runaway, the results are effectively meaningless. Compared to say a study with 1000 individuals with a 33.33% success rate.
As relates to firearms if I were to say that I reloaded my 9mm with 4.0000 grains of powder would require a scale capable of measuring to an accuracy of +/- 0.00001 grains.
The flip side is the margin of error, which can be expressed as that +/- so in the case of my reloads if my scale is significant only to 0.0 it means that my measured 4.0 could be anywhere from 4.04 to 3.95 assuming that I am using it correctly and it is calibrated properly. But if I wrote 4 grains instead of 4.0 on the box the. Instead of 3.95 to 4.04 you would not know if it could actually be anywhere from 3.5 to 4.4 which is very different.
Also part of what was being pointed out is that the label stating 54.86 seems odd because it is oddly specific. So even with no understanding of the concept of significant digits most people would wonder why that is so specific.
A good example of how this can be misused was a study that reported 33.33% of the experimental subjects were cured by the treatment, 33.33% were not cured and the third mouse ran away. While 33.33% is certainly an accurate way to express 1/3rd but by expressing it that way it suggests a result with far more statistical significance than one out of only three. And since that case is really only 50/50 when you exclude the runaway, the results are effectively meaningless. Compared to say a study with 1000 individuals with a 33.33% success rate.
As relates to firearms if I were to say that I reloaded my 9mm with 4.0000 grains of powder would require a scale capable of measuring to an accuracy of +/- 0.00001 grains.
The flip side is the margin of error, which can be expressed as that +/- so in the case of my reloads if my scale is significant only to 0.0 it means that my measured 4.0 could be anywhere from 4.04 to 3.95 assuming that I am using it correctly and it is calibrated properly. But if I wrote 4 grains instead of 4.0 on the box the. Instead of 3.95 to 4.04 you would not know if it could actually be anywhere from 3.5 to 4.4 which is very different.
I care.
And I am firm in my conviction that my caring makes the world a better place and me a better person.
Last edited:
jmmitc06
Member
Precisely!
I'm always surprised that I don't run into this very much when talking of reloading with people. I've had people tell me that adding another .1 grain or removing .1 grain was a big improvement in a give load or something of the like. The first thought in my mind is what scale do you have? you are probably already loading some with an extra .1 here and there and don't know it.
jlrhiner
US Veteran
The problem with precise measurements is that any one person can do them. It gets squirrely when two people have to do them.
Hum... would not likely use that ammunition beyond 25 yds., as that is the longest distance available at the indoor range where I go shooting. However, at that distance the Aguila .22 LR that I have fired has produced superlative results! If the .22 LR shortage ever is resolved, I will be buying a lot more of the Aguila. It is excellent ammunition.
SgtLumpy
Member
I thought I was shooting my pistol up close today at 15 yards. There were a dozen AR shooters with targets closer than that.
Sgt Lumpy
shouldazagged
Absent Comrade
NOW you tell me not to shoot the stuff at 54.69 yards! After all that hideous destruction and carnage!
OH, the humanity!
OH, the humanity!
goldenlight
Member
I wonder why they didn't just put '50 yards' on the package? Meters are about 10% longer than yards, but at that distance, it's pretty insignificant.
My 2 cents...
My 2 cents...
BearBio
Member
No where and no way was I indicating that people were "beneath me" or "beneath my level". DO NOT PUT WORDS INTO MY MOUTH! To not know what significant figures are is analogous to me not knowing the spark gap for a 1932 Ford V-8, It is not relevant to me. Significant figures are not relevant to the majority of people.
By the way, the spark plug gap on a 1932 Ford V-8 is .025".
Aticus
Member
I don't know where the engineering comment came from, plenty of other professions use sig figs. I'm a bioinformatician and I use sig figs all the time. Us scientists are not engineers!!!
I don't think about sig figs as much as my analytical chem pals, but they are very important when wanting to be precise. Literally anytime you measure something (so think reloading ammo, measuring stuff in a house, airplane or car, a pharmacist measuring your chemo or whatever) you deal with sig figs because intrinsically there are tolerances on all measuring devices. It's hard to trust companies and people who make precision products, such as ammo, when sig figs seem to not matter to them.
So you're a scientist not an engineer. I'm neither. I was, in my working life, a communications technician. What I was driving at in my post was the sound of someone obsessed with numbers. I'm not. The difference between 54.68 yards and 54.69 yards in the firearms field seems to be insignificant and not worthy of comment, especially if such comment casts doubt on the intelligence of others unknown to the writer. That's why the post.
Just for my benefit: what is a bioinformatician?
BearBio
Member
"The difference between 54.68 yards and 54.69 yards in the firearms field seems to be insignificant and not worthy of comment, especially if such comment casts doubt on the intelligence of others unknown to the writer"
Hey, that's 1/3 of an inch (0.36, actually, by computation, not field data, nor ground trothed.)
ps: No one except you is mentioning intelligence. There is a difference between informed and intelligent. Between "stupid" and "uneducated".
Hey, that's 1/3 of an inch (0.36, actually, by computation, not field data, nor ground trothed.)
ps: No one except you is mentioning intelligence. There is a difference between informed and intelligent. Between "stupid" and "uneducated".
Last edited:
