Average vs minimum rifle accuracy

[Spitpatch]

All valid points, however not an answer to the question asked by the OP.

Actually (taking the time to count them) there were 3 questions, rather than a singular one as referenced.
1. I measure accuracy according to group size and repeatability.
2. I evaluate according to average group size (one triumph does not equal victory).
3. Yes

I appreciate the observation and the opportunity to adhere to a requirement not enforced elsewhere in this thread (most notably quite close to home for those who might choose to point out my oversight).

 

[Koda]

In a much simpler version, i thi k of benchwork as more getting to know the rifle. I think of fieldwork (woods...) as getting to know my capabilities. In order....
I do know you cant flip those in order. Avaerage group size is learned and dialed in at the bench.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Well...I always shoot excellent one shot groups...
Hell , I shoot so good....I often hit what I ain't even aiming at....
Andy

 

[Bobbygun]

Well...I always shoot excellent one shot groups...

Welcome to the club.

Although, not to toot my own horn, most of my one-shot groups offhand at 25 yards can me covered with a nickel.

 

[Spitpatch]

Well...I always shoot excellent one shot groups...
Hell , I shoot so good....I often hit what I ain't even aiming at....
Andy

Amateur. Forgot the first tenet of bragadocious marksmanship:

NEVER "call your shot". Doing so robs you of one of the most valuable reputation-preserving tools available:

"I meant to do that."

 

[MTpockets]

Warning.....Oh no... MTpockets story follows...

One year, a long while ago, I agreed to take a co-worker out for his first deer hunt. He assured me that he had his rifle and gear squared away. I believed him... mainly because he was detail oriented and trained by the USMC.

Timed everything correctly, parked before first light, and in the chill of the Fall air I pointed him to a skid-trail that would take him across the clear-cut. I walked up the reject capped main road and entered at the tree-line above. I moved slowly while looking for fresh sign, and keeping an eye on the green hunter below.

I bumped a bedded buck and it moved down and away from me. It would cross the skid-trail if it maintained its course. I watched for the Marine...there he was topping a rise on the trail as the buck stepped into the path within a swale below him. He raised his rifle and stopped the deer instantly. I assumed it was a well placed shot...at what looked like a distance slightly over 100 yards.

I worked my way off the tree-line and found him with a very nice fat 4X3...it had a very clear entrance and exit wound to its skull. I congratulated him on his first deer and described the event from my vantage point.

Then I asked him why he went for a head-shot, when the deer was walking slowly and broadside to his position.

"Was aiming at its heart..."

I am sure that I had a puzzled frown when I asked to see his rifle. I looked it over and found that his Winchester Model 100 had a loose front stock screw that allowed the barreled action to raise approximately a quarter of an inch from the front of the stock.

I gave him The Talk... explaining that when describing the event, he needs to leave out the part about aiming at the heart....and fully accept his new workplace monicker... HeadHunter.

 

[CLT65]

I have a similar story about a friend's teenage son. He was hunting with a family-heirloom Savage 23 in .22 Hornet, and dropped a nice buck offhand at a fair distance with a single shot to the head. He strutted around like a peacock for a while, telling everyone "That's just how I do it. I'm that good!"

Some time later my friend brought the rifle over for me to look at. They had tried shooting it and it was all over the place. I quickly found a broken scope mount, and he recalled that it had been dropped the previous year (before his son's legendary shot) but they hadn't realized it was damaged.

Who was it that said "I'd rather be lucky than good"?

 

[dangerranger60]

Ha, Ive tried that and got bored waiting.
One thing I considered was that if I took a shot at game, and on the rare occasion another shot is needed... my bore wouldnt be cold anymore.
I found that even with my pencil thin barrel I could get 2 sometimes 3 shots in a group before the heat walked the next shot usually up a tiny bit.

I bring a few guns to shoot. Fire a shot for the record, place a towel over the gun and shoot something else for a while. DR

 

[osprey]

A few years ago I was with a rookie bow hunter, trying to spot and act as a mentor. Right at legal light we were walking along a 2 track on our way to a vantage point where I had spotted many deer in the past. A fat mule deer doe crosses in front of us and steps off the two track into the sage to our left and out of sight. I told the greenhorn to tippy toe over and see if she hitched up. He goes down and disappears in the tall sage. About 5 minutes later I hear what sounds like an unleashed arrow and I see the doe high tailing up and over a small hill with what looked like blood in the throat area. The greenhorn appeared climbing the hill hot on her track. I whistled and got his attention motioning tor him to come back to me. I could tell by his body language he was not wild about it but he returned to me. When he returned he says "did you see me drill her right in the vitals"? I replied I had not seen the shot but that I thought I saw blood near her throat as she crested the hill. He still maintained it was a lung hit and thought we should go peak over the hill. I told him it would be wise to let her be and come back in an hour or so after we looked over the ground from my vantage point. After all I had a tag and was packing a bow as well. We spotted some does a ways off from my spot but not any bucks. After an hour and a half we walked back to follow up on his doe. I said if we are lucky she is mortally wounded and died before she got on private, which was only about a quarter mile from where we last saw her. We looked around where she was standing when he shot and found the arrow a short distance away with a bit of meat, hair and very little blood on it. I looked at him an frowned. I told him to knock an arrow and be ready to shoot again. We crested the hill and saw no blood but the track where she was digging was quite obvious. I hung back scanning with binocs and naked eye while he stayed on track. I could see the fence marking private not far ahead and had a sinking feeling. I moved to different vantage points carefully glassing when I spotted her about 15' from the fence and she appeared dead thankfully. I whistled and caught up to William Tell. I tell him I see her and she looks stone dead. "I knew I drilled her" he says. We get to the doe and she is dead with a nicked windpipe. I just shook my head and said "sometimes it is better to be lucky than good".

 

[OneArgus]

Gees only 1 MOA? I can do 10 all day long

 

[Spitpatch]

On a (rifle) antelope hunt years ago, I'd brought a close friend and we both chose to bring archery tackle along. My Dad (although an archery hunter in his younger days) ridiculed us, claiming (with some truth), "There's no way in hell you're getting close enough to shoot one with a bow and arrow".

Evening after a day's hunt and our two rigs converged on the approach to camp (Myself and friend in his rig, my Dad and party in the other). Suddenly a large herd of goats came full speed over the knoll, lined out between the two vehicles and they poured on the coal, tongues hanging out, big buck in the rear. Broadside at 60mph and 75 yards.

My buddy locked up the brakes on the Bronco, bailed out the driver side with a fat-barreled Ruger .22-250, swung and fired, and the buck went azz over tea kettle in a ball of dust and debris.

Back to the rig and we all converged on the kill. Dad remarked, "Helluva shot!, Where'd ya hit 'm?" My buddy approached the buck, saw no wound, then lifted his head. "Right through both eyeballs!", Dad shouted.

Without missing a beat, my buddy replied matter-of-factly, "Yeah, if I'd been carrying my bow, I might've had to go for a chest shot."

 

[Olderguy]

I think many people, including myself, expect too small of groups from most rifles. I have or have had a lot of rifles but have had only four that were consistent MOA. Three of the four were customized or had trigger and stock work done. Most hunting rifles are fine with 2-3 inch groups at 100 yards. An elk hunting buddy used a German made Weatherby that would do no better than 4-6 inch groups at 100 yards, but he killed more bull elk than anyone in our party.

 

[ferret427]

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".

Precision is how tight the spread is, which is a function of your rifle's mechanical capability and your ammunition's consistency. Accuracy is putting your rifle/ammunition's precision where you want it to go.

 

[Koda]

heres an image Ive used to describe accuracy vs precision...

 

[bionic knees]

I kinda favor minute of heart.

 

[Member 38805]

Realistically a hunting rifle for me has to shoot 3" groups at whatever distance I feel the game is likely to be taken at. If the areas I hunt are open lands in Eastern Oregon, and most shots will be in the 300 yd. distance, then that's going to be a 1 moa (3") group for my uses. If it's closer it's still got to be a 3" group at whatever distance I choose to take ethical shots.
I picked this size long ago simply based on any possible miscalculations, or wind drift, etc. and feel it allows some slight errors in the field and still end up with shots placed within a larger size kill zone on game. It's worked for me for decades, as I've never shot game and had it run off injured.

 

[Flopsweat]

Realistically a hunting rifle for me has to shoot 3" groups at whatever distance I feel the game is likely to be taken at. If the areas I hunt are open lands in Eastern Oregon, and most shots will be in the 300 yd. distance, then that's going to be a 1 moa (3") group for my uses. If it's closer it's still got to be a 3" group at whatever distance I choose to take ethical shots.
I picked this size long ago simply based on any possible miscalculations, or wind drift, etc. and feel it allows some slight errors in the field and still end up with shots placed within a larger size kill zone on game. It's worked for me for decades, as I've never shot game and had it run off injured.

That makes the most sense out of anything I've heard in this thread.

 

[Spitpatch]

Precision is how tight the spread is, which is a function of your rifle's mechanical capability and your ammunition's consistency. Accuracy is putting your rifle/ammunition's precision where you want it to go.

To be "precise", this is may well correct. However, it should not be expected anytime in the near future that a rifle that shoots precisely is described as a "precise rifle".
They will continue to be referred to as "accurate rifles".

Webster also makes little or no distinction between the two terms (and probably wasn't a shooter).

Such is the common result of "prescriptive" language (what "precisely" SHOULD be said in order to be "correct" by someone's measure), and "descriptive" language (what is and will continue to be observed as actual usage in conversation).

I bring this to light because it resembles the magazine/clip "controversy" that is really no controversy at all (and never fails brings out the terminology Nazis with counterproductive attempts to "correct" someone in order to demonstrate their firearms knowledge).

 

[belshawelk]

rifles are funny. Some like clean bores, some like dirty, most all like cold/cool barrels. I have rifles that shoot from .27 to 2" MOA. The all kill if I do my job. Some make things more dead but that is ballistics. Not sure what you ever hunt that you cant kill with in 2" of where you are suppose to hit, don't tell me head and spine ( for all you 6.5 creedmoor long range snipers)

 

[CLT65]

I bring this to light because it resembles the magazine/clip "controversy" that is really no controversy at all (and never fails brings out the terminology Nazis with counterproductive attempts to "correct" someone in order to demonstrate their firearms knowledge).

Whoa, whoa, whoa, I have it on very good authority that this issue is all-important!



Just kidding, by the way. I very well know the difference, but it just doesn't matter to me. My WWII veteran grandfather called his 1911 pistol magazines "clips". If it was good for him, who am I to judge?