Average vs minimum rifle accuracy

[JTK1791]

Where does an emo fit in?

Ask the Iraqis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emo_killings_in_Iraq

 

[Capn Jack]

The only time I pay any attention to group size is when I'm working out a load.
After that, where the bullet hits is up to me.

 

[sobo]

The only time I pay any attention to group size is when I'm working out a load.

 

[Kruel J]

If I can still consistently hit you in the eye after a full day of shooting a "few" rounds all day……. you won't know if my rifle is >MOA.



View attachment 1471514

Have you ever reproduced those results? That picture has to be 5 years old by now.

 

[solv3nt]

Have you ever reproduced those results? That picture has to be 5 years old by now.

It was a hole punch

 

[Spitpatch]

The other thing is 99.9% of hunting shots are done with a cold, clean bore so any data gathered after that is moot.

No one with much experience in the field and on the range would hunt with a clean bore (although some blackpowder rifles may prefer that condition for accuracy).

As to a cold bore, certainly that statement is correct for the vast majority of hunting shots, but once again an experienced shooter and hunter will have tested and shot his rifle at cold-bore condition; such is A VERY good case for bench testing (apart from accuracy/consistency pursuits).

I don't measure hunting rifle groups. I don't hunt off a bench at a known distance. I can tell it's a good load by looking at the holes in the paper but beyond that I want the group to cluster right around the cross hairs at whatever range I shoot at. Zeroing is much more valuble to me at the range than gantz-azz groups.

I measure hunting rifle groups for the simple reason that I want to eliminate (or modify) all things in my control toward a clean kill. Too much is already beyond my control toward repeated success.

 

[Croat]

I have a Rem 700 that I spent too much money upgrading and that will do holes touching at 200 yards. However, not the entire group, and not "all day".

Always tricky to assess accuracy because of wind, ammo quality, and the human element. I sure would never send a bbl (or complete firearm) back under a sub-MOA "warranty". The mfg. is going to win that argument every time. That is a rigged game IMO.

Not always a rigged game. Had a real POS. Fliers all over the friggin place. I won't name the brand, but going into it I was relying on brand's good name and in fact bought one of their higher end rifles specifically for long-range hunting. Fed up, I called and complained, so they asked me to UPS it to their testing site. They pretty obviously planned to prove me wrong. Long story short, they sent back a completely new rifle and admitted the one I had could not be fixed. Good for that brand, but on the other hand it appears their quality control has totally tanked in the modern era. And no, it was not a Remington.

 

[Spitpatch]

Sound of the splash, dontcha know.

 

[Aero Denezol]

Not always a rigged game. Had a real POS. Fliers all over the friggin place. I won't name the brand, but going into it I was relying on brand's good name and in fact bought one of their higher end rifles specifically for long-range hunting. Fed up, I called and complained, so they asked me to UPS it to their testing site. They pretty obviously planned to prove me wrong. Long story short, they sent back a completely new rifle and admitted the one I had could not be fixed. Good for that brand, but on the other hand it appears their quality control has totally tanked in the modern era. And no, it was not a Remington.

^^^This is interesting.

A large manufacturer will use Statistical Process Sampling methods for inspection, meaning there could be quality escapes.

 

[TTSX]

My 6.5 creedmoor savage will typically shoot about 1 MOA with most loads. I tend shoot a 129gn bullet because it seems to like it. On average I'll see groups from .9 to 1.1 inches, best group I shot was about .75 and it almost never shoots 1.3.

I'm very sure the rifle itself is a 1 MOA gun and the errors are mine. I don't care to get it to shoot any better.

 

[Kruel J]

It was a hole punch

I saw @No_Regerts shoot a sub-1 inch group at 300 yards with a cheap Walmart Weatherby vanguard special and Core-Lokt ammo. We both had a good laugh about it knowing full well it was a one-off.

My point? The sun shines on every dogs azz once in a while. If those results can be reproduced effectively and consistently then bragging is appropriate.

 

[osprey]

Lately, I have been playing with the cva 45-70 single shot I had converted to a muzzle loader. With a stout charge of bh209 and 30Ogr arrowhead xld bullet it will regularly shoot sub 1" 3 shot groups at 100yds. This is with a fixed 2.5x scope. I finally got the proper height front sight installed on it and have been practicing with irons lately in prep for a hunt next month. Even with my old eyes I can still keep most groups around 2moa for 3 shots at 100. My best group has been 1-1/4" and my worst 2.5" with the irons. The price of these bullets is enough that I am going to trust that this will be good enough and try and keep my shots under 200yds for the hunt. Gotta love them big ol' 45 call holes.

 

[Stomper]

Have you ever reproduced those results? That picture has to be 5 years old by now.

LOL…. I knew that'd trigger you! Actually, I haven't shot it for a couple years now….


BUT THATS NOT THE POINT!!

 

[Kruel J]

LOL…. I knew that'd trigger you! Actually, I haven't shot it for a couple years now….


BUT THATS NOT THE POINT!!

LOL! It really did! Please please please stop posting the same old pictures. Go shooting and take some new ones!

 

[CLT65]

I used to play the moa game back in the 90's. All the gun rags said that was the magic number for hunting rifles.

I still enjoy sitting at a bench with sand bags occasionally, making tiny little groups of holes in paper, but I realized somewhere along the way that serious benchrest isn't really my thing. I came to the conclusion that I'm not a hunter either, around the same time, and haven't hunted since.

Nowadays I mostly just shoot for fun, and tiny little groups are no more practical than a great score at golf, so I don't get real serious about it.

I have a nice old Remington 700 in .270, that was my first centerfire rifle. My dad bought it for me (used) in the late 1980's. It's a 1.5 moa rifle. No matter what I tried, that's what it is, and I tried glass bedding, recrowning, many different loads and ladder tests, etc..

I used to get really frustrated that it wasn't accurate enough, but I realize now that the difference between 1.0 and 1.5 moa just isn't enough difference to make a difference, for the average hunting rifle.

 

[Stomper]

LOL! It really did! Please please please stop posting the same old pictures. Go shooting and take some new ones!

LOL! It really did! Please please please stop posting the same old pictures. Go shooting and take some new ones!

Uuuggghh….. between the career, grandkids, being born, more adult, children of mine getting married, enduro riding, 4-wheeling, and getting the finish-carpentry completed on my house… I haven't done that, or even ridden my Harley in a couple of years!

I did go to a 22LR wood shoot using my G44 at Clark Rifles a month or two ago with @Joe13!

 

[Kruel J]

Uuuggghh….. between the career, grandkids, being born, more adult, children of mine getting married, enduro riding, 4-wheeling, and getting the finish-carpentry completed on my house… I haven't done that, or even ridden my Harley in a couple of years!

I did go to a 22LR wood shoot using my G44 at Clark Rifles a month or two ago with @Joe13!

I haven't seen either of your ugly mugs in several years. Come to think of it, I haven't seen ANYONE from that group in at least 3 years.


Maybe I should take that personally.......... Nah.

 

[Flopsweat]

I always try to make my next shot better than my last shot...that is good enough for me.


True...especially on our club's trail walk.
20 or so steel gongs of various sizes and various distances...25 -100 yards.
Any hit will do...

However...also on the same trail walk is a paper target that will get scored by points...so a tight group is nice.
Not to forget to mention the splitting the playing card edgewise shot...or tie breaker shot of hitting , or coming closest to the bull , which is the size of a nickle.

Any of the above shows accuracy...some of the shots however require a different kind of accuracy.
All shooting on this trail walk is off hand as well.
Andy

You probably know this already, but the tight group was accuracy. Splitting the playing card was more about precision. Accuracy is how close the shots are to each other. Precision is how close they are to point of aim.

And not aimed at you &E but please people, never say "One inch MOA".

 

[Stomper]

LOL! It really did! Please please please stop posting the same old pictures. Go shooting and take some new ones!

Fine, (true story) last weekend I got this in my fortune cookie…. and everyone thinks they're just made up BS!

 

[Capn Jack]

Stacking bullets !