Thoughts On Testing: Why Not 200 Yards?

A few readers have questioned why Rifle Shooter magazine doesn't use 200 yards as our standard distance for accuracy tests. It's a legitimate question. Here's my short answer: Because it doesn't accomplish our goal, which is to give the widest range of readers some kind of measuring stick they can use to decide whether a particular rifle might be of interest to them.

In my opinion (and since I'm the editor, this is the one instance where my opinion actually matters), 100 yards is a sensible testing distance. It's far enough to gauge a rifle's accuracy potential or lack thereof, it's a distance available to the largest number of shooters (nearly every outdoor facility has a 100-yard range, but not all have the capability to shoot farther), and it's a distance that measures the gun and not the shooter.

It is true that accuracy at 200 can be markedly different than at 100 for the same load. I know I've worked with rifles that shot tiny little groups with a given load at 100, but when compared side by side at 200 with a load that didn't shoot as well, the better load at 100 didn't always win. What does that tell me? Not much about the accuracy of the rifle overall but a lot about how well it shoots a particular load.

Further, at 200 yards you're testing the shooter just as much as you are the rifle. Errors in natural point of aim, sight alignment, breath control and trigger squeeze are greatly magnified at 200 yards.

Further, depending on the caliber, one's wind-reading skills become pretty crucial. Sure, if I'm shooting a .300 Win. Mag. at 200 yards, I don't worry too much about small changes in velocity and even direction if the winds are light. But with a .223 Rem., for example, missing small changes is going to make groups bigger. At 100 yards, conditions aren't an issue for the vast majority of centerfire cartridges.

I do shoot at 200 yards, a lot. Every gun and load I take on a hunt get a serious workout at 200 because I always want to be able to shoot that distance — and often beyond — and I want to know what load is most accurate at that yardage. And I encourage everyone to shoot their chosen loads at longer ranges for a true picture not only of accuracy but of zero. I don't zero "X" inches high at 100 and then assume I'll be on 200. I zero at 200 and then see where it's hitting at 100 — and at 300, if necessary.

But what I do in preparation for a hunt or shoot is not the same as giving a potential buyer a picture of what level of accuracy he or she can expect from a newly introduced rifle. And that's a big part of Rifle Shooter's mission.

Recommended for You

Shooting Tips

The Rundown on Runout

Joseph von Benedikt - May 13, 2019

A simple test shows how runout can affect the accuracy of your rounds.


Winchester Twins: The .264 and .338 Magnum

Craig Boddington - May 24, 2019

Winchester's .264 and .338 magnums were both born 60 years ago but took very different paths.


Review: Savage Arms MSR 15 LR

David Fortier - May 17, 2019

The new MSR 15 Long Range in .224 Valkyrie reaches out with authority.

See More Recommendations

Trending Stories


Cartridge Clash: .22 Nosler vs .224 Valkyrie

Brad Fitzpatrick - May 02, 2019

Brad Fitzpatrick pits two centerfire .22s against each other: the .22 Nosler and .224...


Anschutz Establishes U.S. Branch, Separates from Steyr

RifleShooter Online Staff - June 10, 2014

On June 2, 2014, Anschutz announced the start of a subsidiary branch in the United States.


Review: Wilson Combat Ultralight Hunter

Brad Fitzpatrick - March 18, 2019

Wilson Combat's new Ultralight Hunter in .300 Ham'r puts the sport back in modern sporting...

See More Stories

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.


Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services


GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.