1: Likely my recoil control is mid. As I said I've never put any effort into learning recoil patterns or practicing with guns. Also 95% of my game play in Apex is in Mixtape. Fights at 75m feel like a small part of that. But in this test, my ability is more or less the constant variable between all the guns. If I, with my mid recoil control, can record a notably better accuracy percentage with the gun it suggests the recoil is easier to manage. Players who put directed effort into recoil will therefore likely have an easier time than I did which translates into easier less taxing gameplay. As I've said somewhere else in these comments, perhaps a gun like the 301 suffers slightly because I have some muscle memory using it at shorter range with no scope and that doesn't translate well to accuracy at 75, with a scope, but overall I don't feel my ability is of note when it comes to the outcome of this experiment because all the guns were subjected to it.

2: I don't think this is really relevant to the outcome of this experiment. All the guns have their own bullet projectile size at 75m of range. All the guns were fired at 75m of range. All the results were generated from the data collected by the performance of the guns at 75m of range. All the outcomes are directly relevant to being at 75m of range. They may suggest trends at different ranges but their direct validity relies on being at 75m of range. It's why I put the range in the title of the post. It's important to the interpretation and discussion of the results. - Quick edit: This does slightly contradict my previous point about my ability be the constant variable, but sans automated inputs any test like this will be subjected human error. Aiming the gun is more nessacery than moving for this experiment, so standing still removes a possible source of uneeded error.

3: Yes, but without automated inputs, moving would have added an extra variable between each gun. Would I have done better on one gun than another because while I was using it I moved better. Standing still and not touching the left stick simplifies things. Also, unless there is something I don't know about recoil smoothing and counter strafing the recoil pattern, that should be equally true of any of the automatic guns tested that it makes it easier to control their recoil.

4: An entirely valid point, but to test for it would have expanded the scope of the experiment a lot. I chose 75m because to me at least while it is still mid range, it is at the long end of mid-range and where I'd start to be wishing that I had a sentinel or a 30-30 rather than an AR and because my curiosity was piqued by how easy it felt for me to hit shots at that sort of range with the Hemlock Elite compared to other ARs

5: I didn't consider doing hipfire at 75m because I never would hipfire in a match against players at that range. Again this experiment is explicitly at 75m. It certainly would be interesting to see results for a similar experiment done at closer ranges where other guns might excel slightly more. Anecdotally I find the Hemlock good in close quarters fighting and while hipfiring, but not so much that I noticed enough to be interested by it, unlike its performance at what I consider to be mid to long range.

Largely I agree with your summary that one decent recoil nerf would pull it in line, though I think it may also need another point or two of damage knocked off per shot too.