OK, here I go with my opinion on RoyP's post.

I'm probably going to cause some serious incoming fire on what I'm about to say so anyone of you who are standing around me might want to dig in a little deeper or back away cause I imagine it is going to get a little hot around me in a short while.

And remember, my opinion is worth exactly what you just paid for it.

Yeah, I delight in those impressive itty bitty groups. I've actually shot some myself, have'em tacked to the wall of my reloading area and own a couple of rifles which will accomplish the same.

But, I do not feel that for the subject matter of the title of this post " The quest for small groups with a big game rifle " that MOA or sub-MOA is necessary.

Here, let me shout this at you...

IF YOU FEEL UNDER-GUNNED WITH THE GROUPS YOUR RIFLE SHOOTS,,, GET CLOSER DAMN-IT!!!

ITS CALLED HUNTING, NOT EGO-BOOSTING BRAGGING RIGHTS ON HOW FAR AWAY THE GAME ANIMAL WAS WHEN YOU HIT IT!

Where are your ethics? Game animals are not targets!

If bowhunters can sucessfully take all sorts of game all over the world with their equipment, my GOD surely you can do the same with a rifle that doesn't get MOA or SUB-MOA accuracy.

What are the boundries (read ethics here) of the shot you will take? 400, 600, 800 yards? Why not go out and buy yourself a good 50 BMG bolt gun and blast away from a mile or more? If you're lucky, the meat won't spoil by the time you get to the animal.

I say all of this in the context of BIG GAME HUNTING. Sometimes I think people have gotten hunting and shooting mixed up.

Ok, let'er rip.

Never really savvied that stance.

Don't "ethics" sorta start goin' out the window when you wakeup in the morning and your sole intent for the day is to try and kill something?!? My mindset is different with a rifle,than it is with a camera.

My intent is to kill as quickly as possible. Distance largely means dick.

Warm fuzzy feelings aren't my longsuit. My job is to know my tools and their limits,as well as that of my own abilities.

Dead is dead,whether it is slapping something in the ear from 10yds away after a long belly crwal(done it),or crunching shoulders at 600yds+(done it). My job is to deal death as swiftly as I can.

My tool selection has much bearing upon that............

Alright, I'll bite.

If that is your stance, why do you limit yourself with shoulder mounted weapons?

Limit myself how?

The distance I'll reach with a rifle?

Or why don't I put a 100lb 50-20mm PacNor Ackley Improved rail gun inside my backpack?

The first is because I am human and have limits to my abilities.

The second because I ain't that tough.............

[ 03-07-2003, 01:15: Message edited by: Big Stick ]

Nebraska......no gambling to it at all , at least no more than you would have with a rifle you would call "accurate" . A whitetail is going to have a vital area of around 12 inches .

Compare say a 1.5 MOA gun to one most would call pretty accurate , 3/4 MOA . What does that get you at 400 YARDS ? A mere 1.5 inch more "leeway" in each direction . This does not take into account the fact that random errors are going to "hurt" the 3/4 gun more than the 1.5 gun as range increases .

Getting sub MOA accuracy , fussing with loads , barrels , and bedding , is all good fun and games and I am all for it .

But my opinion , it just unrealistic to think you are going to bag more game or make materiallly longer shots because you have squeezed a few inches out of your long range dispersion .

[ 03-07-2003, 04:16: Message edited by: sdgunslinger ]

I think really acurate rifles are a neat thing. But for most hunters, obvioulsy not anyone that posts here , the time and effort it takes getting a hunting rifle that will shoot 1.25moa groups down to less than 1moa off a bench is better spent in practice shooting from field positions. Hunting groups sizes from field positions are really what matters, and to reduce these groups sizes, more can be obtained from practice than gunsmithing. I think you should of course develop accurate loads, but how many hunters can hold 2moa from field positions with an accurate gun? Most cant even come close. I think its funny how most guys shoot their rifles off the bench and call it practice. Get the thing dialed in on the bench as good as it will do, then shoot it from field positions!

Ok it's the last day of 10 day Dall Sheep hunt in AK. You have spent 10k to get here and pay your guide. The elusive 40 inch full curl is 350 yards away and you have to choose. Settle in using your daypack as a rest and take the shot or cross a wide open area and risk spooking the animal and going home.

That's when all of the practice and gunsmithing on your favorite rifle pay for themselves. If you had been shooting 20-30 rounds per week and knew exactly what you and the rifle were capable of wouldn't you want the most accurate rifle possible.

When i buy a new rifle the first thing i do is a good range testing. If the rifle shows promise, then it's off to the gunsmith to have a trigger job, action squared and trued, glass bedding and yes one of those noisy muzzle brakes. Most of the time these basic modifications will meet my needs for a rifle that will shoot into less than an inch at 100 yards. That's all the confidence i need when i hunt.

However there is nothing like building a true custom toy up from scratch and then shooting those groups that touch all of the bullet holes. Of course that rifle is never taken hunting either...

All of my keeper rifles will shoot 1" or less consistantly, not every time but consistanly...they all shoot various loads to the same POI,,,,No problem, but it took me 50 years to put that set of clubs together!!!

That said, I would rather have a free floated rifle that shot 2" groups in clover leafs than a 1/2" gun with forend pressure or tight bed...I would rather a rifle shot 2" "clover leafs" than 1" across or up and down...

I prefer and have free floated guns that shoot 1" and 1/2" groups with most any bullet and load and in clover leaf groups....

Do I need this, absolutly not and it's not important, I just kept the exceptionally good'ens over the years and now I have about 7 or 8 of them, that will do that. Had two more but I sold them about an hour ago...

If we leave confidence out of the equation your chances of hitting something from an improvised field rest will be greater with a rifle that "sprays" it shots than a bench rest rifle.

Having said that, one of the things I hate about a lack of accuracy is that it indicates the rifle/scope/load has a problem.

Mike

Whew!!!! Now it's 49 posts. This is incredible. Thank you all, again.

If what I read and hear about very accurate rifles (1/2 to 3/4 MOA...true, repeatable, consistent 1/2 to 3/4 MOA) is true, it takes a lot of effort, time, patience, and excellent conditions to achieve and KEEP that level of accuracy. I do not doubt for a second that there are some people here who have rifles that shoot true, repeatable, consistent sub-MOA groups. These rifles are the exception and those people are exceptional shooters. But, this accuracy is true, repeatable, and consistent because they test their rifles in exceptionally good conditions and they baby their rifles, scopes, and ammunition in several inches of foam going to and from the range.

That isn't the real world. I would think that when they shoot these rifles in less than ideal conditions, say there is a variable breeze, or maybe the sun is beating down on them and the barrel is hot even without the first shot ever being fired, or perhaps it's winter and it is a bit below freezing (maybe a lot below freezing) and the barrel is icy cold, or they are less persnickety about the sand bag placement one day, then they are likely to get larger groups than what the rifle is capable of under ideal conditions. I'd bet money on it. But I say again, under the best conditions, when the rifle, scope, and ammo are finely tuned and EVERYTHING is right, there are those here who achieve sub-MOA accuracy...truly, repeatably, consistently.

I guess what I'm saying is when I shoot my big game rifles for accuracy testing, I shoot in all conditions and then determine the accuracy by looking at the big picture. I don't wait for ideal conditions. I think people are fooling themselves if they only do accuracy testing under ideal conditions and then proclaim their rifle will shoot sub-MOA. I'm not saying go out in 30 MPH winds, or a monsoon rainstorm, or a driving blizzard. I AM saying shoot your big game rifle in "regular" weather conditions, a bit of a variable breeze, or when it's a bit hotter or colder than you and your rifle likes it, and then look at those groups, too. That is your true accuracy as far as I see it. The groups will be larger. If we are honest, we should include these groups in the overall assessment of our big game rifle's accuracy. roy p.

I like to know my rifle will hit where I'm aiming. Some will, and some won't.

I have a couple that will shoot three shot 100 yard groups you can cover with a quarter, if I'm doing my job.

Most rifles can be made reasonably accurate given a trigger job, proper barrel relief and decent optics.

In my opinion, most rifles shoot better than the guy holding them can, self included.

Most of the rifles that Ive sent away I did it largly because it was simply time for a change or they simply were tired. Ive had one 243 that had some serious accuracy problems. It was the most frusterating gun I ever had and I finally gave up. Otherwise I have settled on 2" groups from a big game gun, naturally I would like it much better but who wouldnt. I am guilty of always wanting more from my guns but still there comes a time, usually in the fall, when what has been done has to be enough and the best I can do from there on is to do my part. In other words, good shooting in the field IMHO is maybe 25-30% gun and 70-75% end user because there is a much larger margin for error on the shooters part.

Someone on 24hourcampfire had a post on "stupid hunter sayings" -- my nominee might be "it shoots better than I do."

Rifle accuracy and shooting skill are independent but cumulative variables.

Suppose you have one shooter and two rifles, the same in every way (stock, trigger, etc.) except that one of them shoots 1 MOA and the other shoots 3 MOA. If you shoot a statistically significant # of shots, the less accurate rifle will shoot a bigger group from any position.

This means that at some distance, at some size of target, the less accurate rifle will start to miss more often. The distance and the size of the target, combined with the shooter's skill, will determine if this is relevant.

People also say "there are no benchrests in the mountains." There also aren't any benchrests on the firing line at a service rifle match.
If accuracy weren't relevant, top competitive shooters wouldn't worry about whether their rifles and ammunition are accurate. In fact, they worry about it a lot; one book on reloading for high power competition is called "Making the Target Smaller."

John

What about the guys that consistently shoot sub MOA groups from the bench but can't hold paper when standing?
The same guys don't do much better prone, sitting or kneeling. The Bench is for load development only. After you have the load you want you need to be practicing from normal hunting situation shooting positions.
I have a couple gee-whiz rifles that will shoot 1-1.25MOA groups consistently, but if I'm not practicing, I'm lucky to hold the paper from standing, and keep it in the black prone and I still manage to tag out most years.

Please note, I am not saying accurace is unimportant! If I'm going on an expensive hunt, I'm taking my most accurate rifle and I'll be practicing with it ever weekend for 4-6 months right up till the hunt. On the other hand, if I'm hunting locally, I'll often take a "lesser" rifle just for the challenge. A few years ago I had already tagged two deer during archery season and didn't really need another, so for rifle season, I used a surplus swedish mauser. Never got a shot, but you get the idea.

[ 03-07-2003, 17:03: Message edited by: Pa.Frank ]

As with most other things in life, there is always the point of "diminishing returns".

As others have stated, the limiting factor on any shot in the field with a reasonably accurate (1.5 moa) rifle is the shooter, not the rifle. A 1/2 moa rifle can help a bit, but if it's a 10 moa shooter, it won't matter what the rifle can do.

Most of us have a limited amount of time we can spend loading and shooting. How many hours should be devoted to shrinking that 1.25" bench group another 1/4", instead of practicing with that rifle and load from field positions?

That's something everyone has to decide for themselves. At my range, most of the guys who are regularly firing their hunting rifles NEVER shoot in any postion other than off bags. They develop a load, get little groups, sight the scope in, and that's it. After that, they STILL only shoot off bags, I guess to congratulate themselves on a job well done. Whenever one of these fellows shows me a little tiny group (smaller than what most of my rifles can do), I oftentimes put up a friendly wager of a coke out of the machine at the range to the guy who shoots the smallest group offhand at 100 yards. All of a sudden, that smile freezes, and most of them decline. Some don't, and sometimes they get a free coke. More often than not though, I do. Not because I'm a stupendous rifleman, but because I practice offhand. And prone. And sitting. And off a front rest.

Small groups mean nothing if you can't utilize them. At the same time, the steadiest hand and deadest eye mean nothing if the rifle sprays the bullets all over Hell's half acre. Finding the happy medium is pretty much an individual choice.

I have hunted primarily in Texas, out of box blinds with a rifle rest or tripod chairs, for 30 some years. I shoot mostly 270's & 300 Wmg's with 3x9 scopes and have owned maybe a 100 deer rifles over the years and killed game in everything from 223's to 375H&H. My longest game shot has been 444 yards off the hood of a Bronco and paced off, on a pronghorn with a 257Rbts, 2x7 Leo, shooting 2600 fps factory ST's, a one shot kill that I called.
It is a confidence thing and has to do with what you believe you can do with the rifle in your hand at that given moment in that given circumstance. I passed on a 400+ yard downhill offhand shot at a double drop tine 24"+ 12point buck in south Texas as I was holding a new 7mg & no sling that had just been sighted in the day before, and it was at about 30 minutes before dark and we were 10 miles from camp in the Rio Grande river bottoms on a scouting trip for the next days hunt... and I've thought about not taking that shot for the last 15 years and it still bothers me, but I was not willing at that exact moment to take a chance and wound and lose such a magnificent animal. Everybody in camp hoorawed me but I still think I made the right decision... maybe. I've never seen another whitetail that big anywhere again.
I will not carry again any rifle that will not shoot well enough that I have any doubts about pulling trigger... on the way back to the jeep we spooked a jackrabbit and I centered it with a perfect crossing shot at about 75 yards and never broke a bone but skinned & gutted it completely... and shut up my guide's snickering about not being able to shoot! Confidence is name of the game! and 400 yards is a long way off unless that's what you are used to doing. According to a long ago friend who got paid by the USMC, he wouldn't take a shot at his "target" at anything under 800M as he couldn't run very fast and it was always like kicking over an anthill...but that was what he got paid to do.
Ron

There's one more consideration, and that's terminal performance. Generally (but not always!) tough bullets providing better terminal performance under poor conditions don't shoot groups as small as more lightly constructed "conventional" bullets. And you can't always "slip a Ballistic Tip between the ribs". Sometimes you NEED penetration. So, IMHO, don't get lulled into using an inappropriate bullet just because it shoots under 1 moa. Pick the right bullet for the job. If the more suitable bullet shoots 1 1/2", don't worry about it, you're still better off.

No arguements here on bullet performance other than....a good quality bullet in a bad place is worse than a mediocre quality bullet in a good place.

I'm thinkin' that you only need a level of accuracy adequate to put the bullet in the vital zone, that being a combination of the rifle's capability and the shooter's. My Mod 94 surpasses my needs in dense creek bottoms, my Roberts is inadequate for 1000 yd prairie dogs, assuming I want to do that. The circumstance defines the requirements, the synergy between rifle and shooter define the envelope, experience is the go-no go switch.

I agree with others that while it's rewarding to have an accurate rifle off the bench, if you don't practice with it in field positions, you probably won't be able to utilize that accuracy. I find that most rifles need scope adjustment for field shooting as the POI changes over bench settings especially if a sling is used. I get it set off the bench then start shooting at a 6 inch bulleyes at about 200 yards from prone and sitting as these are the 2 positions most often afforded me in the field. Make adjustments to the scope if needed,it usually hits lower, then practice,practice,practice. I don't look for groups, only that every shot lands in that circle. If it didn't,why? I like to set this target out and then fire 1 shot a day at it just prior to going hunting. Does that 1 shot hit in the circle day to day? It should. Practice and get familiar and when it's time shoot you'll be up to the task.

Brian

Guy's, here's a great story that pretty much confirmed, at least in my mind, that working extremely long and hard to get groups to that magic 1 MOA may be not worth the trouble, but instead working extremely long and hard at the range to improve one's shooting skills is a better investment.

My wife and I each have a .223 rifle that we use for practice and plinking. Mine's a heavy, fluted, 26 inch barrel, with an aluminum block bedded, rigid stock. Her's is a skinny 20 inch barreled super lightweight, with a skinny rubber stock that I bedded. We shoot cheapie factory ammo in both.

My super rifle with certain cheapie factory ammo will shoot an honest 1 MOA doing the 5 5-shot groups aggregate thing that people say is the real way to judge a rifle's true accuracy. (I SWEAR to God it really truly, repeatedly consistently does 1 MOA!) On the other hand my wife's skinny, whippy barreled rifle will do, with certain cheapie factory ammo, an honest to God 1 3/4 MOA doing the 5 5-shot group aggregate thing. Doing 5 3-shot groups, the group aggregate shrinks to 1 1/2 inches.

We like to go to the range, regardless if the weather is good or not, and shoot 4 inch diameter balloons at 200 yards, and 6 inch diameter balloons at 300 yards. Watching them pop after a shot is fun, and tells you instantly that you hit a nice small kill zone. Guess what! My wife, darn her, pops as many balloons as I do. This gave me a much different perspective on super accuracy in a hunting situation. All of a sudden, THE MUCH BETTER ACCURACY OF MY SUPER RIFLE MATTERED NOT ONE WHIT when it came to results on our balloon shoots. With my ego bruised, I'll show her my smaller groups on paper targets compared to her groups on her paper targets. But then she'll say, "Okay they're a bit smaller. So what, Bub? I can still shoot as good as you when it matters, can't I?" I hate it when she calls me Bub. What gall! She knows good and well my name is Roy. Those two words, Yes dear, catch in my craw, but dammit, she's right. When it comes to hitting the kill zone, her rifle is every bit as good as mine.

When we shoot 6 inch balloons at 400 yards with our .223's (I can't find decent 8 inch balloons, and the 6 inch one's pop when I try to get them bigger) a lot of our misses are due to misjudging the wind.

What can I do to make my wife show me some respect? roy p.

Your posts on here are talking about groups that are fired on a bench rest. You need to find out what you can do in shooting postions, if it is sitting, or standing with a rest. The 1/2" group will not translate into a 1" tighter group as compared to a 1 1/2" group. It just doesnt work that way. Find out how accurately you can shoot it in the field, you are not going to have a bench with you. Tne compare the two. You error is not the difference between them. They are not additive. The total is the square root of the sum of the squares. The 1" difference between a 1/2" and a 1 1/2" turns out to be a lot less then you thought. It still depends on you and how you shoot. you will not shoot a 1/2" gun into 2" at 400 yards sitting. You are deluding yourself. Forget the bench and practice hunting situations.

Finally, Chic.

One is a world-class marksman if 1/2 MOA gain on the bench equates to even an extra 25 yds. in the field on big game.

Before you sell your 1.5MOA dog take it to 300 yds against your tackdriver from sitting position.

I'm sure some people even hunt with a bullet that is not their first choice because it shoots 1/2MOA better. Now that borders on needing therapy.

A lot here has been said about the benefits of confidence. I've never passed on an animal because my rifle was missing 1/2 MOA. But I've passed on many because I was missing MOA.

The bench turns confidence of those unwilling to practice from field positions into over-confidence, and over-confidence has lost animals by the boxcars and will continue to do so.

But how do you convince someone who has just shot a 3/4" group at 100yds that he might not be able to hit the chest of a deer at 200yds in the field?

Lots of hunters, so very few shooters.

[ 03-10-2003, 17:50: Message edited by: steve y ]

Just yesterday I was doing some practice with one of my rifles. Off the bench, this rifle will do right about 1.2 MOA (Sako 75 300 WM). I was shooting sitting, with a military sling, both slow and rapid fire.

Shooting slowly, I was able to keep all shots either inside the X ring, or just outside. Shooting quickly, I could keep most of them (10/13) in the 10 ring. The wind was about 12 to 15 mph at 1 o'clock. The target was a standard NRA SR-1, in which the X ring is 1.35" in diameter and the 10 ring is 3.35" in diameter.

So, from a sitting position under the wind conditions I had yesterday, I can hold 1.5 MOA at best and about 3.5 MOA at worst. That means that, at 300 yards, my bullet will strike within 5 inches of POA in the worst case scenario. 3.5 MOA = 10" dia circle = all shots hit within 5" of POA (center of circle). In reality, I am sure that I could hit within 2.5" of POA at 300 yards, because I probably won't be rushing shot after shot after shot as one does in HP rapid fire.

That's my level of confidence in that rifle, and that's why I don't sweat that it isn't a sub-moa shooter from the bench.

You guys are teaching this young punk something. I need to practice more.

I'm gonna try what Ksduckhunter was doing and practice at that. Sounds like a very reasonable level of performance to ask for. I have a pretty consistent rifle right now in that it always shoots the same type of groups and always has the same POI whether its hot or cold, clean or dirty. It's me that needs some work.