Ok this is a wide open questions and one that has been discussed before.

I know Ross Seyfried says a good shooter can shoot offhand a 1" of group size for every 10 yards, or a 5" group at 50 yards offhand is very realistic and some can cut that group in half. But a 1" group at 10 yards is pretty easy, a 10" group at 100 yards is really tough! So this is not that simple of course.

I personally find bench test loads will prove what a gun is capable of not the shooter. That having been said getting a good group off sand bags with a revolver with iron sights is whole art in itself. I vertically string them off benches because I have a hard time time getting totally consistent grips and down pressure on the gun.

I personally use the old Elmer Keith reclining position with my back leaning against something like a tire or post and my hands locked between my knees. I generally get much tighter groups this way than off sand bags.

So ok we are shooting iron sighted revolvers, do we test 5 shot groups? 10 shot groups? 3 shot groups? best 3 of a 5 shot group? or average a whole bunch of groups of a given load? We know we are human and that we are likely not shooting the gun 100% of what they are capable of, especially with big recoiling guns.

I just want everyone's opinion, I personally could care less my group size if I am hitting my target, the rub is a 8" gong at 20 yards is pretty dang simple and just about any load will do. But that same 8" gong at 100 yards takes a good gun, a good load, and a good shooter on a good day to hit it 5 out of 5 shots!

So when seriously testing loads what are we realistically looking for? What do you guys think?

With my .357 blackhawk/iron sights, shooting off of sand bags with my hunting load/140 sierra jhp, I can hit a five gallon bucket all day long but shooting that same target offhand?!I wouldn't know because I don't try a shot that far without a rest/shooting sticks,side of a tree....

Great post!
JMHO, but I would put a scope on a revolver. Then I would say give a full cylinder of rounds down range at 100 yards and see what it looks like. After working up a load and I would take the scope off and see what you can do with irons.
I have done a LOOOOOT of off hand shooting. Manly black powder competition with both rifle and pistols, but the principles still carry over. What I found that helped was to spend 5 minuets a day with snap caps practicing off hand shooting and trying to keep everything as smooth as possible. I actually put oak blocks in my flint locks to simulate the same process. Again, it is JMHO…

Let me just state I'm no expert. It took me a while to be consistant on small targets at longer ranges. What worked for me was consistancy in the actual sight picture. What I mean is how you see the sights themselves, not on your intended target. Point the revoler at a white wall in your house. Now really look at the sights, the blade even with the top of the notch and the front blade centered perfectly in the notch so you can just see a thin strip of light on both sides. Now hold that picture and squeeze the trigger slowly. If you can keep this percision allingment the gun will be very consistant. What helped me was the use of a patridge front sight. The colored insets were blurry and sometimes contrasted with the intended target and all percision sight allingnment was lost. I know sixshot has touched on this subject as he likes to thin the front sight a little to get a better allingment in the rear notch.

I practiced alot with my Ruger MKII 22 and in time that allignment was a natural reflex. It improved my scores in a summer laegue we had for a few years. We use the NRA targets at 25 yards. If I held good sight allingment and even if the black center of the target was not totally in focus but I was centered the group was centered and very small. Have a bad day and loose a little concentration and it really opend the group up. Still somewhat centered but 3 time bigger than what it should have been. Elmer keith writes about long range accuracy and the bars in the front sight for elevation correction, I'm sure he was just as meticuluos with left~right allignment.

I think this at least for me turns into a two part test,what the gun is capable of and what I am capable of.Since all my revolvers are six shots I use three sixshot groups.

Now for the next part IMO there is game accuracy and target accuracy.I know some serious white-tail men who successfully take large deer ,but sight in there long guns at 100 and if they keep it in a small,say 5-6",paper plate they are happy.

For me with handguns it depends on the vitals of the animal I am chasing,for instance wt deers vitals 12".I divide that number in half and whatever distance I can go 6 for 6 in is my range and accuracy together.A 6" paper plate looks huge at 25yards and small at 100.I shoot at a 12" target most of the time close and far because this is the size of the vital area then measure the groups.

And just food for thought I know a few horrible target shooters that are great game shooters and some great target shooters that can't hit game.Just the opinions and ramblings from a swampbilly.

I make no claim to be able to shoot open sights accurately. My eyes are too old. However, in working up loads for a revolver, I shoot with a scope from a bench at 100 yds. I usually am not happy if it will not do 2" or less at that distance (five shot group).

In no way does this suggest that I can shoot 2" groups offhand or from a field position. But removing most of my inadequacies from the mix, the revolver & load should do 2" or hopefuly better to please me.

I know that I going to add plenty of spread to my "real" shots, so I want the mechanical part to be as close to perfect as I can get it. IMHO, if a revolver and load is only capable of a 4" group and I add to that dispersion, the actual spread when hunting will be enough to shake my confidence. Thus, I try to remove the one variable that I can control (the accuracy of the load in that revolver).

Because I realize my limitation with regard to offhand shots, I do not take them at game animals. If I cannot get into a position that makes me comfortable taking the shot, I pass it. I have passed a lot of them since I began hunting with handguns.

Many of you are younger, stronger and more steady than I, and many of you are much better shots than I am. Thus, my description of what works for me is not intended to apply to you. However, for me that is the big appeal to hunting with handguns, particularly revolvers. You must get closer, you must get into a situation that works for you, it is a bigger challenge.

Another thing that I have found quite useful to me in my practice with revolvers (regardless of the shooting position) is that I have a wide variety of metal targets (sizes & shapes) set at various distances. If I can easily hit the 8x10" plate at 65 yds, I move to the 5x7" plate. If that one is too easy, I move out further and/or smaller. My targets range from 12x12" to as small as 2x3" and include not only squares, rectangles, and circles but also various animal shapes and diamonds at distances from 50 yds to 200+ yds. The diamonds are the most difficult for me.

If I have confidence in hitting a 2 1/2" diamond at 95 yds from a rest (field or otherwise), a shot at a deer's neck at that distance is not difficult if the revolver is steady and the crosshairs are not moving. If the hunting situation does not allow for a "steady" rest, I wait for a bigger target or pass the shot.

My point is pratice on various sized targets at different distances from a postion that you will use in the field will provide to you the information that you need on the capabilities of you and your revolver.

In years past I had access to a place with a huge population of jackrabbits. There is no better practice than hunting them (or other varmits). One can discern the same info as described above & develop confidence in one's ability at given distances.

I also like to take out as much human error as possible when checking accuracy. I use bench, bags and scopes to test the weapon and load. Once I'm confident in the weapon and load I'll practice different field shooting positions, swap to iron (if desired), but only after I'm confident with weapon and load. I want misses to be my fault, not my equipment. When shooting revolvers, I'm not necessarily looking for MOA, but prefer it. When shooting single shoots, I'm looking for MOA, but prefer less. There's always gonna be human error, if YOU are the one pulling the trigger. If the weapon and ammo is not the best it can be, it just multiplies misses when the human error is added. That's my thoughts on it.....

Great analysis; this mirrors my last post in "My .475 Built By Rod."

I totally agree with this for revolvers.

Well stated, wtroper, good for all of us to practice in this way. I was at the range today shooting my .475 L and was quickly reminded again about how difficult it is to shoot the big revolvers accurately at further than 50 yards (or even 20 yards, lol) .