With a properly sighted in gun and someone who knows where it shoots at 300 yds AND has shot it at 300 yds enough to be comfortable with the shot...a 3 MOA gun will do it for deer in most cases...because it is only 4.5" away from POA...and will cover the kill zone...at least in theory.

Knowing where you will put the first round out of a cold, usually dirty barrel is what is important to me....not how well the gun shoots on the range. By the same token, I won't hunt with a gun that isn't going to do what I want it to do in the field. I have 3 rifles "between barrels" now becasue I don't trust them to shoot where I want every time.

I have a fish scale called the "Deliar"...the lazer range finders have recently turned a lot of my 300 yds shots into 225 yds shots. A muzzle loader shot last weekend I paced at 175 yds with my Savage ML 10 turned out to be 137 yds with the range finder....it's hard for me to count that high with my boots on and a gun in my hands that I'm reloading on the way.

Accuracy is important within reason, but knowing your gun and where it shoots is more important to me. Remember the old saying...beware of the man with only one gun....

Good thread.

For my deer rifle, I finally got it to shoot 1 MOA after a lot work on the stock, trigger, reloading bench, and time on the range.

Before I found a combination my .308 "liked" it shot 1.5", and still got my deer. Why did I spend all that time and a little money to shave of that .5"? Because I wanted to see if I could do it. I have done most of the work on the rifle myself, and it has been quite a learning expierence!

Now I am starting to fool with my varmit rifles. Each is at least 3/4" (for me) and the 12FV has shot an honest to God .5 group (by a guy who shoots bench rest). So now I have a new goal.

Why do I do this? Because it is fun and a challange. I will put more bullets through paper then I will shoot at game, but the added confidenced that the rifle is capable of good accuracy helps.

quote:

Probably because I shot up to 70 rounds a day of centerfire practice 4 days a week for a number of years.

I think you, Alberta Canuck, are the exception rather than the rule. Not many folks have the opportunity for this much practice time. And it seems your rant is judging everyone to your standards. Why? Are your rifleshooting team mates letting you down?

Although the title of this thread is "How important are 1" groups," it seems to me that you are more exasperated with the poor general marksmanship of your circle of shooters than anything else.

Why do you give a damn how well or poorly the next fella shoots? Unless he is a fellow police officer covering your back?

If everyone else shoots crap, you win all the trophys, and kill all the game. What's the downside to that?

This world is not utopia. Not everyone is Carlos N. Hathcock II.

Someone on Accurtereloading has the signature line, "Life's too short to hunt with an ugly gun."

I'd change it to "Life's too short to hunt with an inaccurate rifle."

1" or better groups are good for knowing your rifle.. and, frankly, most guns outshoot the shooter...

i DO practice "in the field" holds, with the bubbas... off hand, kneeling, sitting, (well, not prone for the boomers) with sticks, off a tree, etc...

it is AMAZING what a box of shells for practice, standing on your pegs, will do for your ability to hit a pie plate or paper plate at 100 yards.. amazing..

imnsho, CONSISTENCY is far more important than group size, assuming the gun is capable of 2-3" or less.

If the shooter adds 6" of wobble, in a off handhold at 100 (which is actually a good shot.. try it) 1" or 3" means 7" or 9" group.... that's a tad big...

but if that same shooter puts a shoulder on a tree, that suddenly becomes 2" of wobble.. or a 3 to 5" group... at 100...

sit on a cheek and pop up a knee... well, under range conditions, a fella can train to shoot nearly as well as off the bench.

I aint ever seen a gun take game.. only a hunter, and therefore the GUN is fair less important than the guy on the trigger.

This goes back to a 223 in the ear of a pig is FAR more effective than a 700 NE in the dirt, 2" high and 2" right...

and the GUN doesn't put the bullet on target, the guy on the trigger does.

just my 2cents...

the hunter is the important part.. the rifle is a tool.

If anyone wants to have a ball, take your favorite hunting rig and go to a friendly range... shoot 3 from the bench... 3 from standing, 3 from kneeling (or modified kneeling) and see how you shoot in the field.

then shoot a box of rounds from kneeling and see what shots 24-26 look like the next time you go out.


jeffe

AC, great topic. I do expect better than 1" out of my guns for several reasons. If they won't do that, then they are gone. I spend alot of time and money to have the very best and expect them to preform.
Do hunting rifles need to do better than an 1", not for most folks but alot depends on the style of hunting done and of course offhand, hell I'd be lucky to shoot a 4"group
I have always tried to find a good steady rest when making a shot in the field as I am just not as steady as I was in younger years.
My varmit rigs all shoot 1/2" or smaller off the bench as that is the style used when hunting these critters.
Each to their own but I want to know that a miss is due to the shooter and not the weapon of choice.

I believe that Alberta Canuck’s premise is a very sound one. “Most†shooters will benefit far more from increasing their shooting skills than they will from increasing the accuracy “potential†of their rifle...and very few game animals are shot from a bench rest.

In hunting it is where the rifle and the shooter are capable of placing their FIRST shot from a cold barrel, shooting from a field position...not how many shots they can put into a group of a certain size off a sand bagged rest at a known distance paper target with a clear and distinct aiming point.

quote:

Originally posted by browningguy:



If someone wants to shoot a 2 1/2" gun, standing in a stiff breeze, without using a rest, then let them have at it.

But why try to convince anyone else thats the best way?

Seems you have gotten a little off course, Browningguy.

NOBODY, especially me, said that is the best way. And no one I know of has tried to convince anyone it is the best way.

The basic message was and still is, a question...namely:

Why are people nutso over getting one inch groups, when most of them can't shoot anywhere near that well themselves from any practical position? And more to the point, if they don't get 1-inch groups from an out of the box factory rifle, pretty much any of which will shoot as well or better than they can shoot, why do they immediately condemn the rifle as a POS, when it is really their shooting skills which contribute the most to their poor performances?

A one-inch gun is not much benefit to a rifle shooter who is not a 1" rifleman.

Dave - (onefunzer2)-

I appreciate your comment. I am sorry if my "rant" came off as my saying everyone should shoot by my standards. That was not my intent.

I am exasperated, but it is not by the guy who can't shoot well. Most of them know that all too well and try to do better, if and when they have the time to learn and practice.

To me, that is admirable. They have a tough row to hoe, but they are in there doing their best.

The ones that exasperate me, and which caused me to start this thread, are the folks who condemn one or more makes of mass-produced factory rifles because they don't shoot 1" groups right out of the box.

A good example, is the Savage. 15 years ago when I moved to this particular locale, lots of folks around here were vocal in their ranking of the Savage as a POS. It was a wide-spread, baseless, local prejudice, passed on by a lot of shooters who were anything but real riflemen.

It irked me, so I arranged with Savage to provide an up & coming young local shooter with a Savage bolt gun at a substantial discount, and talked HIM into using it that year in competition. He won a National Championship with it. (He added a scope, but otherwise shot it exactly as it came from the box.) Some POS!!

When a "newbie" comes here and asks a question about some particular rifle, or relates an experience he had, I don't think we on the forum do him any service if we immediately start referring to certain makes of rifles as a POS. Some individual rifles may be, but generally, most makes are not.

It certainly is useful if we tell him what the rifle's weak points and strengths both are, and suggest ways he can improve it's performance in his appolication. It is even reasonable, I think, to suggest that for his use another brand or model might do his intended work better than the one he was talking about.

Likewise, educating shooters about what kind of accuracy is really useful, what they can realistically expect from a factory gun, and ways they can improve a rifle's performace are all good things.

But, blanket labelling of any make of rifle as a POS is not our best effort.

I say again, I think suggesting to him that he needs to junk everything that won't shoot 1" or better, is not doing the newbie a favor.

Amen to Alberta Canuck!!!!!

I could not agree more, and I too get a bit exasperated when people on here voice such vehement hatred toward a particular brand or model of facory rifle based, most of the time, on old wives tales that have been repeated so many times that they take on a life of their own and get better (or worse) with each telling.

I’m sure someone has done this, but I would love to see a test done with out-of-the-box factory rifles from each of the major manufacturers fired and cycled by a machine that would remove the human element from the equation.

See what the average sized groups were and how many malfunctions/breakages each rifle exhibited over 500 rounds or so.

Internet group size to range size translator:


The average guy at the range never can get a 5" group centered on the bullseye, but then goes home, gets on the internet, and tells some guy [who only gets 1" groups] how to fix the problem.


>5" at the range = < 1" on the internet.


Those who spend enough time on the internet, will tell you that all their guns are sub moa. When at the range, you can point out that none of the guns are 5 moa. The typical response is, "something is wrong, these groups don't count."


I have seen ONE guy with a benchrest set up, get quite a few one inch groups at the range, perhaps half his groups. He is there every day, and has spent ALLOT of money on the set up.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
it is AMAZING what a box of shells for practice, standing on your pegs, will do for your ability to hit a pie plate or paper plate at 100 yards.. amazing..

That's my stile of shooting. roger

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
Internet group size to range size translator:


The average guy at the range never can get a 5" group centered on the bullseye, but then goes home, gets on the internet, and tells some guy [who only gets 1" groups] how to fix the problem.


>5" at the range = < 1" on the internet.


Those who spend enough time on the internet, will tell you that all their guns are sub moa. When at the range, you can point out that none of the guns are 5 moa. The typical response is, "something is wrong, these groups don't count."


I have seen ONE guy with a benchrest set up, get quite a few one inch groups at the range, perhaps half his groups. He is there every day, and has spent ALLOT of money on the set up.

Could this translator also apply to most gunwriters?


Merry Christmas.

Cheers, Dave.

My "bottom-line" accuracy standards are #1) the rifle must hold it's zero, and #2) must be accurate enough for me to hit an 6"-8" target as far as I care to shoot (max about 300 yards) from a solid field position.


Anything else is pure "gravy".

We all like accurate rifles and the use of a very accurate rifle increases confidence, if nothing else. The reality though, is a 2" hunting rifle would be just fine providing the group center is consistent. Just give it some thought.
A rifle which will shoot 2" groups will put all of it's shots to within one inch of the expected point of impact at 100 yds. At three hundred yards, the actual point of impact should be within 3" of the expected POI. This will certainly do the job.
The important thing then is that the shooter is able to make sure he can keep the point of aim on target. Anyone who can consistently hit a 6" circle at 300 yards can confidently take game at that range. There is little question that a more accurate rifle can make this an easier proposition but the most accurate rifle in the hands of a poor shooter will make it an impossibility. Regards, Bill.

quote:

Originally posted by tnekkcc:
Internet group size to range size translator:


The average guy at the range never can get a 5" group centered on the bullseye, but then goes home, gets on the internet, and tells some guy [who only gets 1" groups] how to fix the problem.


>5" at the range = < 1" on the internet.


Those who spend enough time on the internet, will tell you that all their guns are sub moa. When at the range, you can point out that none of the guns are 5 moa. The typical response is, "something is wrong, these groups don't count."


I have seen ONE guy with a benchrest set up, get quite a few one inch groups at the range, perhaps half his groups. He is there every day, and has spent ALLOT of money on the set up.

Thats why any time I talk about load development or how my rifle shoots at the range, I take pictures and post em. Now, there is no proof as to whether somebody actually shot em @ 100 or 10yd, but at least you are showing SOME form of proof.

Bill, good call on the confidence factor, and everything else. I know that if I was/am a "decent" marksman, it would take away from the fun and experience if you knew you had a good bead on your target, solid rest, and missed after pulling the trigger. Wheter it is because your rifle has a problem, or you shot up the barbed wire fence 4 feet in front of you. Either way, it sucks.

I have a Remington 510 22 rimfire that will usually shoot ~ 1" ~ 5 shot groups at 50 yards with Win Power Point ammo.

Once it shot a 5 shot .2" group at 50 yards.

The group is on an 8.5" x 11" piece of paper with 4 other groups ~ 1" ~


Should I cut out the one good group and carry it in my wallet?