How much money, time, and materials is invested, wasted, or spent on a half minute HUNTING rifle? How much more is a half-minute rifle worth?

No delusions here just curious about the difference when a buddy shows you a consistent half inch shooter at the range and sais its for sale, vs the MOA+.

Course we would all agree that when shot from sitting or from offhand, the marginal value is mathematically deminimus. However the confidence and composure factors are priceless, especially when shooting prone, over a backpack rest, or from bipods.

So, just for fun, how much premium do you pay for a true tackdriver vs a MOA or worse, a MOA+ rifle?

They cost the same, and luck plays your hand, they will or they won't...Unless your shooting in matches, turkey shoots or pinheads, it will make no difference at all unless you miss your deer by a half inch!

It really depends on what you're hunting. If you're deer hunting, there's not a practical difference. On a prairie dog shoot, that half minute difference, especially at longer ranges, makes all the difference in the world.



I spend a lot of money on custom rifles, and expect them to be tack drivers. My custom 7-08AI shoots itty bitty groups, but it won't kill a deer any deader than a used 30-30 that you might pick up at a pawn shop for $150-200. Sometimes it's just a matter of "what floats your boat".



I know that over the years, the money I've spent working up handloads trying to find that perfect load for a particular rifle would probably have paid the difference for a more accurate rifle had I started there to begin with. However, I would have missed out on all that time at the range that I treasure so much.

I treasure my MOA .375. It's the most accurate rifle I own and the last I'll ever part with. However, I don't use it for prairie dogs and so that kind of accuracy is pure braggin' fodder. I also treasure my .318 and it's closer to 2.5 MOA with peep sights. Who knows what better it would shoot with a scope but that would be sacriledge. Are you in it for the paper or for the hunt and all the traditions that go along with it? Personally, I think that super accuracy has become an American obsession that fits into Thorstein Veblen's "trans-optimal craftsmanship" theory. It may be nice to have, but what's the point?

As someone else said, it depends on what you're shootin' at, and how far away. If my varmint rifles won't shoot at least .5 moa they go down the road. For big game I want a solid 1 moa at least. For me the bigger question is how well can I shoot from field positions. My goal with every rifle is to have my groups, regardless of size, centered over my point of aim. It seems that most hunters, if they practice, can hit well out to 300 yds. Even a 3 moa rifle, centered over POA at 300 yds is going to hit within 4.5" of your aiming point. I think this is sufficient for all the big game I hunt, and almost every animal I've ever shot was much closer than 300 yds. Now, when you add range, and other conditions such as wind, the close shooting rifle greatly reduces your margin of error. I have a .22-250 that routinely shoots in the mid .3's. At 500 yds I have shot groups in the 1.75-2" range. When the wind picks up a little and becomes shifty, groups open up to 5", or 1 moa. It gets tough to hit prairie dogs at 400 yds under these conditions, but if the rifle shot even .75 moa under ideal conditions, it would be pretty useless in less than calm winds. So, is a half moa rifle worth more than a one moa rifle? It depends on what you're shooting at and how far, and do you shoot enough to use the potential of a true half moa rifle. Is my $.02 worth half the time it took to read this? Now there's a question...

If you and the seller both agree that 1/2 MOA performance is worth a premium, then the rifle will sell at a higher price.



I don't buy and sell rifles myself. I buy them to shoot. I think that paying the new-rifle price for a rifle in "new" condition that has been demonstrated reliable (or accurate or visually attractive or whatever you're looking for) isn't a bad bargain at all. You've got a pretty slim of getting a good quality off-the-shelf rifle nowadays, and it's easy to find ways to pour $500 into a new (NIB) rifle trying to get it to do what you want.



H. C.

MOA is just fine if you are shooting paper or varmints. However, if you know the size of the vitals of the amimal you are trying to take, and the size of the groups you can shoot from field position, simple math will tell you the maximum range at which you can take the shot. This is what hunting is all about.
I have a couple of rifles that will shoot very sub MOA from a bench. Unfortunately, I can't shoot that well from a field position.
In most cases, it's not the gun, it's the shooter.
Just my opinion

depends whose shooting it..........
woofer

While braggin' rights are nice and, perhaps, have a value, over the years, hunting the different stuff I've hunted from small to large, I can't bring to mind a single time when a .5 rifle would have made a difference over a 1.0 rifle. Under field conditions, a fellow will probably wobble more than that and if he wobbles in the right direction at the right time...............

I'll take handling, balance, feeding, and reliability first.

Jeff

It depends on what you want it for & how much more is the rifle? For a big game rifle, I-1.5MOA is fine. If he wants twice the money for a .5MOA rifle, I wouldn't.

If you read the posts in the "optics" section, you are told (by many) that only your own personal experience counts! If that is so, then here is my personal experience based on my ownership and my immediate families ownership, of over 50 rifles over my 40 years of shooting, including my 1 full blown custom rifle with a Douglas Air Gauged Premium barrel.

There AREN'T any 1/2 minute rifles.

Remember, this section is for medium bores, not small bore varmint rifles.

OK, I know there are some out there, especially target variety .308's. You can probably get a few lucky full-blown customs that are 1/2 minute. But boy, I haven't seen them!

Now if you widen the definition to say a 1/2 minute rifle is a rifle that ONE TIME had a 1/2 minute group (or even 2 or 3), then that is a different matter.

In my opinion, a 1/2 minute rifle is one that averages 1/2 minute accuracy for at least one load that is suitable for what the rifle is used for. If it is a deer rifle, it has to be a deer weight bullet at a velocity suitable to that caliber. If you fire 500 groups, all 500 have to AVERAGE 1/2 minute.

And they have to be 5 shot groups. 3 shot groups just don't cut it. 3 shot groups won't even tell you precisely where your rifle is sighted in. If you don't believe me, consider that when you fire 3 shots, mark the group, and then fire 2 more. Nearly always, except with extremely accurate rifles, the next 2 will be off to one side or top/bottom of the original 3. I can't explain this phenomenon, but it works that way about 80% of the time for me. They just never hit on one side and then the other.

Now, I know, I'm going to be ripped up bad for making this post. I probably am overstating my case a little. But I'm tired of reading all these exagerated accuracy claims.

And no, there is nothing wrong with my shooting. I've owned 2 "almost" 3/4 minute rifles. They are impressive and satisfying - there is nothing like owning one of these. Nothing builds confidence like KNOWING that the bullet is going to hit where you aim - not just CLOSE to where you aim. And 5 shots within 3/4" in a medium bore means the group is TINY!

By the way, my air-gauged custom rifle is NOT one of the accurate ones. It is "almost" a 1 1/4 minute rifle in 7mm08.

Ok, come on guys, make mince-meat out of me!

I agree with you, Jeff, on this one. I'll take reliability, balance, feeding, and a stable point-of-impact over theoretical accuracy any day of the week. For any sort of big game hunting, MOA accuracy is plenty good enough, especially if your rifle is ultra-reliable and never changes zero.

AD

One MOA hunting grade medium bore rifles are to be truly treasured. Half MOA are as MikeG50 says are almost non existent. The problem with owning either of them is that you simply have no excuse for missing.....and you will sooner or later. But the confidence that type accuracy gives makes you try even harder not to miss.

I think it all depends on what that extra 1/2" of accuracy ends up costing you. Most of my shooting is done at the bench so 1/2" is a lot to me. If you can gain it with better handloads, trigger adjustments or improvement to your bench techniques that's fine. However it could also involve glassing the action, floating the barrel, a complete new trigger unit or even purchasing a heavier barrel or new scope. Now we're talking money! How much do you want it? That's the question. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

Cal, you make a really solid point.

At what price accuracy?

I've seen guys jump through endless hoops -- and many of them an exercise in foolishness -- just to gain (in their minds, anyway) a 1/2 MOA.

Guys get all convince that some "improved" version of a factory cartridge is going to somehow be more accurate than a standard factory round, or else they need an extra-tight neck, a long (or "deep", if you prefer) throat, or a poorly-balanced sniper-type rifle with a bulky stock and a monstrously-heavy barrel for general hunting, or some ungainly, overpowered, over-complicated "tactical" scope. They'll also resort to atrocious tin foil-type target bullets for big game hunting, even though the maufacturers themselves warn against the practice. And it's all done, with naive -- but good -- intentions in the name of accuracy.......

I think many hunters have read too many stories about "beanfield rifles", shooting Coues deer at 600 yards, and about the concept of "benchrest accuracy" so that what has evolved is a rather misprioritized set of icons that have led a lot of people down the wrong path. The trend also shows, I think, a genuine lack of hunting experience, where guys become more interested in a tight cluster of holes on a piece of paper, than what's truly practical to take into the field, and I guess they have varmint hunting confused with big game hunting.

I have found that if the rifle is properly constructed and scoped and the ammunition properly prepared or selected (in the case of factory ammo) that there is absolutely no need to resort to weird wildcat cartridges, tin-foil bullets, or non-standard chamber dimensions in order to achieve superb accuracy -- as in sub or even half-MOA five-shot groups off the bench at any reasonable hunting range.

In fact, I know several guys who shoot guilt-edge, hunting configuration rifles in common calibers with common fixed 4X, 2-7X, or 3-9X scopes that I would place ten-to-one odds on to hit any target at any reasonable distance under hunting conditions, and I'd but these guys up against the vast majority of paper-punchers who are convince that they need varmint rifles and complicated tactical scopes in order to get the job done.

These guys have several aces up their sleeve that gives 'em this edge: Amoung other thngs, they are deeply experienced riflemen and hunters blessed with a great deal of common-sense, plus they are absolutely as cool as ice, don't get excited, and have tremendous powers of concentration.

This is the stuff that true "accuracy" is founded upon: It's not some much the rifle or the gimmickery, it's about the guy who's pressing the trigger...........

AD

Allen, there is a fine line at least for me between hunting and varmit rifles also benchrest rifles. I happen to own all three types. I have learn one thing from all this and thats how to reload and what to expect from a rifle. I also think most knowledgeable shooter can tell within a few short round if a rifle is a shooter or not. Well good luck to all!

Depends on the application. Mostly I think they are worth half as much, so you should send them all to me, C.O.D. Will be happy to trade 1-1MOA rifle for 2-1/2MOA rifles, will pick up shipping.

In Summary:

If it don't function it's junk.
Tiny animals need rifles that shoot tinier groups.
Bigger Critters need bigger bullets and it's OK if they shoot a little bigger groups.
What a rifle is worth to you is more important that what it's worth to someone else.........DJ

GREAT thread...how many 0.5 MOA rifles will actually hold a 1.5 MOA zero in the field with different temperatures and different shooting positions? Not many. It is the first shot that counts...

I had a local smith start a 338WM for me yesterday. I would be surprized if it does'nt end up a sub moa gun. Cost will end up around 3000.00. It won't be the end of the world if it is'nt, but I love a accurate rifle. They are MUCH funner to shoot. It will not be nec with this rifle. Under perfect conditions I might take a 300yd shot.
I'll go through quite a bit of powder and bullits to find the right combo, and sometimes dump a couple hundred bucks on a factory rig to get the 1" (hopefully)
I draw my line at 1 1/4". If I can't get that with my scoped rifles. I usually get rid of them. With a hunting rifle... that is probably foolish to some. Maybe I should make it 1 1/2.
Its all fun! I can't wait to start on the next one.
I'm going to hang my target in a hour. Then spend the afternoon shooting some trap and 5 stand.

sidewinder

jamiester ----- I have an old post 64 Model 70 in .300 Win mag that I gave $169.95 for in 1974 and then that to me was lots of money. It has never seen a gunsmith and has a 3 X 9 Redfield widefield scope mounted with of all things see thru mounts, but will still shoot one hole groups (three shots touching each other) at 100 yards for me, my son and grandson, when we do our part. On the other extreme I have a .358 STA in Model 70 on the post 64 design that came from Winchesters Custom Shop (that I found at a bargain but still expensive by todays prices) and has had everyting known to the best gunsmith done to it. It is mounted with a 4.5 X 14 Leupold Vari X lll long range scope with side adjustments. It will also shoot the one hole groups, as will all my rifles, or I will not keep them in the safe. A 1 MOA is very sufficient for anyone, but for me it has to be a one holer or I will not play with it any longer. I have also found with tweaking, reloading, and lots of shooting (hundreds of rounds) most any rifle will shoot with .5 accuracy. Most hunters will not put the amount of time and shooting in to see what the rifle will do at it's best. ----- To answer your post, most rifles shoot better than the shooter, but yes to me the .5 rifle is worth much more than the 1 inch rifle, after I have spent the time and trouble to bring out the best in it and found it to be lacking. With the money spent on the rifle not necessarily being the major determination of value to the owner. This is not everyone's way, but it is mine, for what it is worth. Good shooting.

This thread makes me think of a custom built .257 Roberts I used to have. Mauser 98 action, Timney trigger, 4 x 12 scope, Douglas Supreme barrel and after trying every bullet and load combination I could think of, re-doing the bedding etc...the gun would never shoot less than 2" at 100 yd.

By conventional wisdom, this rifle should have given somewhat poor results hunting as well.

Not so.

Of all the various rifles I've owned and hunted with, this .257 was the MOST DEADLY of anything I ever had. I EASILY made the longest and wildest shots of my life with this seemingly "inaccurate rifle."

Personally I wouldn't give an extra nickle for a .5 MOA rifle over a 1.0 MOA.

Accuracy is a lot like good looks. It's only skin deep. And in rifles, what shoots good today, may not shoot so hot tomorrow. Accuracy comes and goes with firearms for LOTS of reasons.

My experiences with rifles has just about led me to believe guns have personalities, i.e. the .257 just didn't like to shoot targets. But boy did it like to hunt.

Certainly not all of us are great target shooters. It may just be something about our physical or mental construction. But we are different people out hunting.

I've seen this phenomenon over and over in lots of people. And the reverse is true as well. Some great target shooters are piss poor hunters.

Bottom line. Chasing the hallowed 1 hole accuracy is an exercise in silliness, in a way.

I've even taken it to the extreme with some guns and just quickly sighted them in and NEVER shot them seriously at targets. Didn't care what they were capable of. I'm a hunter and if things die when I pull the trigger and if they are hit where I was aiming....I'm happy!

That's a good point Pecos about people shooting targets differently. For instance, my 7mag is only so-so offhand at paper, but I've killed probably 20 deer offhand and hit exactly where my last sight picture was. Now off the bench it's a .75 rifle. I guess your not chasing a dot on paper with the scope when shooting live game and that makes the mind and body work together better. If I, like everyone else had a choice, then the .5 rifle would be the choice every time. Is it worth the money and fuss to go from 1" to .5"? No.