I know this is a general question but what accuracy requirement do you expect from your scoped big game rifles?
I like for my rifles to shoot at "about 1" at 100 yards. 1 1/4" is OK . 1 1/2" is passable but I start looking for some other load etc. Over 1 1/2" is not acceptable to me.
Also, to me, a 1" group is that the bullets holes are inside a 1" circle. In general I think that a rifle that shoots a 1" group consistantly is rare.
What do you guys think?
Terry

[ 07-08-2002, 05:33: Message edited by: Terry P ]

Terry,

I'm with you. My rifles MUST shoot sub-MOA. If they don't, they're either sold off, or rebuilt.

George

Only accurate rifles are fun.

I had a strange upbringing.
The rifles I started on, all military variants, shot sub 1/2 moa at 100 yards. By the way, that was with open sites, and custom made ammo for the M1A's and Ar-15's.
I thought ALL rifles shot like that, and, I was very disappointed that a 30-06 I bought, with scope, shot 2 " at 100.
If with a scope, I can't get the gun to fire MOA or less, it's back to the gun shop, and I will also get them down there, or sell them.

Same with most pistols.
S

On my first post I said that a rifle that shoots 1" groups consistantly is rare. "Rare" is probably a poor choice of words but I used to shoot different rifles of various makes and I have a friend that still does shoot different rifles through out the year.....for instance Sako,Remington,Win....the normal out of the box rifles in say..the 222 calibers to 30 calibers. We have found that "most" (I know that "most" is a generalization too) just will not shoot under an inch or within a 1" circle.
My friend still trades guns like a mad man and I used to too and I've traded off rifles that would really shoot good for the "new rifle of the day" We've learned the hard way that if you really have a good shooting rifle it's not so easy to come by again!

[ 07-05-2002, 22:28: Message edited by: Terry P ]

While it is impressive to shoot .2" groups any rifle capable of hitting a playing card at 200 yards with each shot is more than a great game rifle.
JMHO

I don't shoot long range, as my personal limit is only 500yd, but if my rifle / ammo combination won't consistantly shoot 1/2 MOA 5 shot groups than it's getting worked on. (2 1/2 in groups at 500 yd)
For a short range gun (100 yardish only) I might accept one that holds 2 MOA (thinking handgun here)
Groups are measured by taking the center to center of the 2 farthest apart holes (or outside to outside minus 1 bullet diameter)

Maybe I am too picky, but I won't keep a hunting rifle that won't do 1/2" or better (3 shots) at 100 yards. I have a 1" minimum for over .30, but my .375 shoots in the .3s anyway. Of course, I have gotten rid of quite a few nice rifles, but I have total confidence in the ones I have. I primarily use a pair of .308s and a 7mm Rem. Mag, all of which shoot in the .3s or better with Trophy Bonded. I know I don't need that accuracy level, but it gives me a ton of confidence in the gun. Be realistic, though. If you aren't capable of shooting tiny groups to begin with, you will never find an acceptably accurate rifle. Also, a 1-1.5 minute gun really is acceptably accurate for hunting.

My present hunting rifles both shoot well under moa..the .30 probably averages .75" but I've shot more than a few under .5 (for 3 shots)...the .375 is close. These are with hunting bullets and to me that means Nosler Partitions. I have, however, taken a lot of game from deer to brown bear with rifles that wouldn't shoot any better than 1.5 moa no matter what I did. the important thing, which to me is more important than max accuracy, is the fact they were both consistent and always shot to the same point of impact.

I might also add that I consider 300 yards a long shot on a big game animal and the conditions would need to almost perfect....stationary animal, a solid shooting position, and not much of a wind for me to take a shot like that. This isn't because I'm not able to make the shot, it's just that I like to hunt for my animals before I shoot them, not afterwards (I think Elmer said that first).

The required accuracy of a hunting rifle is probably conditioned on the shooting conditions and the game being hunted. Last year I carried a Ruger 77 Compact .308 Win (16 1/2" barrel) which would not shoot a three shot group much better that 2 inches at 100 yards. But the shots taken in the area I hunt are usually much less than 100 yards. (The buck I shot last year was at about 40 yards) The little rifle, therefore, was plenty accurate for those conditions. I have since traded that rifle on a Remingtion Model 7, hoping to still have a portable and compact gun, but hopefully get a litte better accuracy so that the rare 200+ yard shot could be taken with more confidence. For most shots at big game in my neck of the woods, grandpa's model 94 is pleny accurate.

I guess what we need to strive for in a hunting rifle is a one shot group that hits where we aim it. Most rifles are inherently more accurate than we are under most field conditions.

1 MOA, center to center, or better. I think that its bunk to suggest that this sort of accuracy is rarely needed. A couple of long big game shots I've taken where such accuracy was necessary come to mind. Also, at not so extreme ranges, having this sort of accuracy allows you to consider shot placements you'd reconsider otherwise. A few more examples come to mind.

I'll live with 1 1/4 MOA if shots are evenly distributed in the group (not first shot 1 1/4" away from the rest, etc.). Anything worse gets sold.

Sam

1.5MOA and under is fine in a hunting rifle.

Ya I've got a .375H&H that shoots in the .2's and .3's also,on an exceptional day,it fires one shot groups in the .1's. I've been reluctant to unleash it on the BR world though.Which is a problem you're facing also,I'm sure.

For my type of hunting, moose and bears, I am perfectly happy with a rifle I can take three fast shots and hit a 2" diameter circle at 100 yards. In fact, if those three bullets hit a 6" plate at 200 yards, the rifle is good to kill a moose out to 400 yards.

At the range when developing handloads and with careful aim I like to get somewhere around 1" with three bullets. Sometimes the group is much smaller than that, and that's good, but that's not exactly what I want from a rifle. In fact, I don't care about super accuracy if I have to slowly and carefully aim my rifle. That's just a waste of time when hunting.

What I expect from my rifle when I am hunting is to shoot so two or three fast shots will hit over the center of the target and about 2" high at 100 yards. So far this old Ruger has not missed game from 100 yards to 300, and most have dropped with one well-placed shot.

[ 07-06-2002, 02:13: Message edited by: Ray, Alaska ]

RMK...not an H&H but a custom Lazzeroni 9.53 Hellcat. and more than a few have walked away a little lighter in the wallet and a frown on their face.

For me, it would depend upon the cartridge, the firearm and the conditions that I'll be using them under.
For my Marlin Guide Gun in 45-70 w/ iron sights and factory ammo, I'm happy w/ a 2.5" group at 100 yards. But I never use that rifle except in an area where a 100 yard shot is the rarity. Most are under 75 yards.
My 25-06 shoots reloads into a .4" hole at 100 yards with consistancy. This is the rifle I tote when I go after mulies or whitetails in Tx or even after the odd coyote in NM.
The Blaser R93 in 300 win will keep groups under .75" (with a 3-shot group measuring right at .35"!! )This one is also used for mulies and for elk.
That's a sampling of the rifles I have and their groupings. Each has it's place.
One factor I haven't seen anyone bring up is what type of group will your rifle shoot when you've just completed a hike to the top of a mountain and spot the big one out there at 200 yards? There's no place to rest the rifle either? I'd dare say that most flatlanders that go on their once a year Colorado,Wyoming,Montana or other mountain state hunt would be hard pressed to keep their shots inside of a 2'X3' box at those ranges. No matter HOW accurate the rifle shoots!

BBear:
You know the physical strength to hold a 375 steady enough for such a shot is something that really takes work, or sticks.

Same with heavy handguns. They work muscles you don't use much for anything else...

I'm surprised this isn't brought up more often.

Perhaps that's the reason for the super lightweights...???
s

Every gun I own is capable of sub-MOA accuracy. Most of the time, I am too. I am absolutely tenacious about finding "the right load"... because "field conditions" are not "bench conditions" and I want as much room for error (in the field) as possible.

Russ

I will not hunt with a rifle that can't hold MOA at the ranges that I expect my shots to be taken. If I expect my shots to be long (350 yards plus), then it had better be a mag cartridge which shoots sub MOA's.

I like my groups to be under 2 inches at one hundred yards. I dont know how my rifle could possibly shoot a .3 group. The freaking crosshair alone must cover two inches at the same distance. Do you guys use 20X scopes or what. Not that there is anything wrong with a high power scope.
I just dont worry so much about every shot touching. My rifle rest could use improvement I am sure. I like to rest the forearm on a bag and put the stock in my shoulder or stand and rest the forearm on a post. These most resemble a rest in the field.
Some of my rifles I consider accurate enough for close range and some are good for farther out.
I am good for about 500 yards or so I guess (300 yards is an easy shot at range). I just dont shoot that far. Any animal I ever see that far can be stalked.

TERRY P,
I'll acknowledge that 1.5 MOA accuracy has greatly reduced many animals. I will not say anyone who hunts with such a rifle is wrong. However, such a rifle is not for me. Many years ago I bought what was then a new model of rifle. The Ruger M-77 in a 7mm RM. I spent a lot of time, work and money on that rifle and could never get it to shoot MOA. I finally sold it to a man I worked with. He was very happy with it and bragged about it all the time. Yet, I was never happy with it because I didn't have confidence in it. I was never positive that when I pulled the trigger I was going to place the bullet exactly where I wanted it. I knew I wouldn't miss an elk or deer with it, even at 400 yards. What did scare the living daylights out of me, was the possibilty I might wound an animal. At age twenty I'd been through a 1952 tour in Korea and had developed some very fixed opinions. If I couldn't do it right, I wouldn't do it. Period. That's why I don't hunt with a bow anymore.

The type rifle and what I intend to use it for has a bearing on what is acceptable. A 1894 model Marlin in .45-70 for use within 100 yards is acceptable with 1 1/2 MOA. A Winchester in .30-30 shooting a Speer 110 grain Varminter bullet on coyotes coming to a call is also acceptable at 1 1/2 MOA. However a modern bolt action rifle that cannot be made to shoot 1/2 MOA is just NOT acceptable. The rifle will require tuning. Loads will require testing. Cases must be prepped. All that is understood from the start. For me, it's also a good part of the fun. Working with loads until groups, if I do my part, are one ragged hole at 100 yards test not only my body but are very remanding mentally. Besides, I'm retired and it keepd me out of the bars abd away from the wild women. There's one more thing it keeps me away from, but I cannot remember what it is. OH WELL. Good luck all.

I like all the accuracy I can get. But the truth is that even 2.5 MOA will work for the vast majority of big game shooting. You are only talking a slightly more disperse shot between a 1 MOA, and a 2 MOA group.
I've noticed the military only requires 1 MOA for their sniper rifles.
John Plaster, in his book, The Ultimate Sniper, stated that 88% of our snipers can't use anything under .75 MOA. And these are excellent, long range shots, not big game hunters who rarely shoot at their standard ranges.
I, like some others here, am far more interested in a consistant rifle that will always put the first one where it should be from a field position. E

I am only interesting in a gun that will put the FIRST shot where I want it.

Sure nice clover leaf groups are great, but I want to be able to hit a 3" spot at any range with a cold "dirty" barrel.

I'm like most people: I want all of the fundamental accuracy I can get, no matter if I need it or not.

If I can keep five shots, consistently, inside a 1" circle at 100 yards with a given rifle and the loads show consistent, safe test readings, I'm satisfied. If I can cut that number in half without creating potentially problematic ammunition for the sake of another 1/10", so much the better.

Once the 1", five-shot group or less has been established, I need to know that the rifle prints in the same place under all weather conditions. A consistent point-of-impact is more important than fussing and fuming over a fews fractions of an inch in group size for big game hunting.

AD

[ 07-06-2002, 18:15: Message edited by: allen day ]

It must group so that I can shoot a small roe in the heart lung area at 150 - 180 meters. If it can do that. Then it's allwright to me.

Johan

Try this experiment the next time you are at the range. You likely know what your shooting capabilty of the rifle is, say it is 1/2", or 1" or 1/5". Now shoot at 100 yards in a standing position, then sitting and then say using a post as a support. All of those are likely positions you will encounter in the field.

I would be very surprised that any of you could group that 1/2" rifle standing at anything less than 2 1/2 inches. Now take a look at what difference the rifle accuaracy makes in that group. The total accuracy is made up of the rifle accuracy and the shooters accuracy. It is not the sum but it is the square root of the sum of the squares. Your rifle may be + or - and the shooters accuracy can actually improve the accuracy of the rifle if his error is in the opposite direction.

So if you are shooting a 2 1/2" group standing then your error with a 1/2" rifle is 2.45", with a 1" rifle your group would be 2.65" and with a 1 1/2" rifle it would be 2.87". So the 1 1/2" rifle will result in an accuarcy difference of .42" with the 1 1/2" rifle at 100 yards.

Assume you can group the shots into 2" at 100 yards with the 1/2" rifle. The shooters error is now reduced to 1.94" and the group with a 1" rifle is 2.18" and with the 1 1/2" rifle it is 2.45 so there is a difference now of .45 inches with the 1 1/2" rifle over the 1/2".

My point is that the field shooting conditon error will be in you and not in the rifle and the difference between the tack drivers and the one to two MOA rifles gets reduced drastically. The difference is more on the bench but you don't get to carry one of those with you. I certainly would rather have a 1/2" rifle and I do own a few but the 1 1/2" rifles will serve me well in the field.

[ 07-07-2002, 04:52: Message edited by: Customstox ]

I am going to take a different tact here. MOA 3 shot 100 yard groups off a bench are not nearly as important as most make them to be, though dialing loads in in this manner is great. PRACTICE THE WAY YOU HUNT. There is absolutely no substitute for duplicating field conditions as closely as possible when considering acceptable big game rifle accuracy. I am easily frustrated when I can't get my off the shelf rifles close to MOA accuracy. From a practical standpoint though, nothing matters but keeping the first shot in a vital sized target at realistic ranges from realistic shooting positions. For the sake of humility, shoot standing off-hand from time to time.

Where I hunt game the shots are never long. Of course when I started out I read Whelan and then O'Connor so I carried a quite accurate 30/06 sporterized P-17. Then by chance I bought a M-99F in .358 Win and by coincidence I also learned to really hunt at the same time. The average accuracy of that rifle must be about 1.5 MOA. I never missed a shot with that rifle where accuracy could have been a factor.

So while my primary shooting was and is target by chance I learned that liking the rifle, practice and aiming well are all that's needed. While more accuracy is a want I go to the 99F when I am running out of time to get something.

At the range I have taken to shooting all of my game rifles from a hand held postition to help manage recoil. What I mean is that I hold the forend with my hand and rest my wrist on the sandbag. This results in a lot less felt recoil but not quite as steady a hold. But the slight pulse that results from that hold is good practice and very similar to a field position.

As mentioned a rifle that stays sighted in is very important. More important than groups.

I am not so fussy with game rifles as many who post here. If I like a rifle I will keep it for decades and hunt with it. Anything that shoots one MOA is plenty good enough for my game hunting.

I would like to know, when you(I mean anybody) says a gun shoots in the 2's or 3's is that a group you fired a week ago? Or do you do that nearly (average) every time you shoot the rifle.
I have a Hart barreled/Rem. 223, all trued and squared. I can hit a dime every time at 100yds. That gun is an honest .3 shooter-5shots.
My big game rifles don't even come close to that.
They honestly shoot groups (3 shots) from 1in. to 1 1/2ins. These arn't junk rifles. Am I missing out on really accurate biggame rifles? What can I do to get my pre64 M70 338 with a Douglas barrel to shoot less then 1 1/4ins? Pete

Pete in Idaho: Your rifle is doing fine if you are getting 1-1/4" at 100 yards. I little load tuning or another type of ammo will probably give you under one inch at 100 yards. Sometimes free-floating the barrel will help, while other times exerting pressure on the barrel with the stock's forend will do it too. But again, 1-1/4" is excellent accuracy.

But guess what? When I am at the range shooting my rifle and look at some of the targets from other hunters, I can see that rarely anybody gets three shots within one inch. But these hunters still go out there and get their moose, and have been doing so for years.

If you rifle consistently places three shots within 1-1/2" at 100 yards, you have an excellent big game rifle. In fact, I see lots of big game hunters at the range who use paper plates to test their rifles just before they go moose and bear hunting. I even see guides practicing off hand and using paper plates at different ranges.

I was talking to a guide a couple of weeks ago, and he was telling me about one of his clients who was bragging about the super accuracy of his gun, so he let him shoot a bear 200 yards out. The hunter hardly hit the black bear one time, and missed the second shot. He had to track and kill this bear the following morning. Guides will tell you horror stories about their clients who can hit a fly 200 yards away at the range, but who when hunting can't hit a barn door.

On field conditions everything changes. Sometimes you have lots of time to shoot and use a tree branch or shooting sticks too support your rifle, but sometimes you have to bring the rifle to your shoulder as fast as possible to shoot off hand. To get a ragged hole from your rifle at the range does not mean that you will be able to hit a moose or bear's vitals under stress. What I usually see hunters doing when they see a moose, is to shoot like they are in a war zone. All that practice and accuracy at the range goes out the window.

So find what makes your rifle consistent. If the rifle shoots better from a clean barrel, practice that way at the range. Some rifles need a fouling shot or two, but not all. Once you find out how the rifle shoots better, then prepare the rifle (clean the barrel, or shoot it a couple of times) before you go hunting, then go out and kill something.

Confidence on your rifle regardless of if you get under 1" at 100 or not is more important for hunting. Also knowing the anatomy and habits of the game you hunt.

[ 07-07-2002, 22:19: Message edited by: Ray, Alaska ]

Thanks for the come-back Ray. I hope you understood my post was made with tongue in cheek.
Sure my 338 has made clover-leaf groups but that was a flute not an average. My 7mag and 270 have fired 1/2in groups but not averaged them. Most guy when talking about the groups their rifles shoot pull one out of their wallet that they shot last summer! What do their rifles really average? Even 3 shot groups. If your honest and take 5 3shot groups I bet a rifle that averages an inch is alittle harder to come by then talking about it.
I pay good money to get .17 or .224 varmint rifles to average under 1/2in-Hart, Shilen barrels, trued actions, etc. and then someone comes in with a biggame rifle(stock-factory, maybe a triggerjob and bedding) and shoots in the 2s and 3s. Come now, lets be honest.

Fun at the range.
Accurate: My CZ 452

Just put a scope on it. I go looking through the trash cans, and find the black to day glo target centers. Most people use the center, and throw away the little circles on the outside, either 1/2 inch, or 1" in diameter.

I take those little circles, make a smiley face out of em, like this,

and shoot at em. On a good day, I'm on the 1/2" all the time, and touching, or one hole, is pretty much the norm.
GREAT little rifle, and, it's very accurate.

At the same time, my 375 is kicking my butt...

gs

I Got it Pete. Thanks.

I just could not help myself when reading so many posts that should relate more to long range squirrel-size game and long range target shooting than to BIG GAME hunting.

See...most of us spend a great deal of time developing "ballistics program handloads" in front of the computer, and countless hours on "paper game" at the range. All that is good (I do it myself), but field conditions when hunting are very different. All of the sudden the big game we hunt don't have a paper target over the lungs and heart., and very often they don't stand still so we can carefully aim and shoot them through the " bright spot on the paper target." Yes, the rifle can shoot straight, but at times we can't.

Give a bad-shooting rifle to a firearm proficient hunter, let him practice just a little, and you bet he will drop big game with it. Also, there is a good chance that the "bad-shooting" rifle will shoot well enough for him. Have you ever seen a person shooting extremely well a rifle he or she likes, but one that you shoot bad and dislike? He or she can turn into a "surgeon" with the darn thing in their hands!

[ 07-08-2002, 03:25: Message edited by: Ray, Alaska ]

I would like to know how you are getting so many .5 MOA rifles, I'd like to know who is smithing these weapons. I commission sevral rifles a year and have them put togeather with the finest components obtainable and after all that, I still dont always get a MOA rifle. I need the hook up!
lb404

For big game my minimum acceptable group is I must be able to stay EASILY on a paper plate at 250 yds "from a prone position". Preferably inside the edges. I believe that for me this would equate to only about 1 1/2" to 2" at 100 from the bench. Ive owned only one rifle in my life that didnt meet this criteria and I kept it longer than I should have. I only have one gun at the moment that isnt more accurate than I am therefore my accurizing work is mostly done on ME. Thats the beauty of hunting, the fun part is what makes you better at it.

Actually all of my guns are more accurate than I am, I just have one that needs to be sighted in.

[ 07-08-2002, 04:48: Message edited by: Wstrnhuntr ]

Geez ib404,I'm suprised you haven't figured out that all rifles become 1/2MOA,when typed on the net. A certain transformation takes place,that doesn't even show itself in front of witnesses at the range. All those leftover targets you find at the range. You know the ones that look like the pattern of 00 buckshot at 25yards. These targets are left in an effort to keep these rifles from being stolen by jealous bastards. Hell some guys will even go as far as to purposely shoot like shit in front of people in an effort to disguise the .5 groups that their rifle really can shoot.

I think there is a slight misunderstanding here. RMK is not allowing for age.

It is well known that if you get your rifle settled into the bags on the least rickety bench at the 100yd range, fire a few fouling shots (you'd think one would be sufficient, but it's much easier to gauge wind from five fouling shots than from one), and then fire five rounds into 2.5 inches, then if the best three are 1.5 inches apart, you have a 1.5 inch three-shot group. But this is just one group. You must do this repeatedly, year after year. If, after doing this for fifteen years, you once happen to fire five rounds that have the closest three .5 inches apart, then you have a half-MOA rifle.

Obviously, older folks have a much better chance of having a half-MOA rifle than young folks, but that's just how it is.

Sorry, RMK; you'll just have to wait your turn.

I've read evrything so far and think I should jump in with the consistency crowd. Obviously certain rifles are expected to be more or less accurate depending on use, but for a bolt gun for medium to big game (antelope to moose) regardless of caliber if it will print 1.5 moa regardless of weather, cold or hot barrel, fouled or clean, day in and day out it's a keeper.

Next step is to get off the bench and shoot as I would when I hunt. If I can start from 300 yds away and walk toward the target taking 2 shots from an unsupported field position every time my buddy says "deer" and keep 10 shots in 8" I'm pretty happy (in our little game the last 2 are shot offhand).

Try that sometime, it's fun.

Bob