Practical Accuracy

[kyratshooter]

What is your limit on acceptable rifle accuracy?

We get very hung up on long range accuracy and high firepower and such but often the real practical limits of the gun/shooter combination are not condusive to threading needles with a string on a bullet.

I love to tote several rifles in the woods that I know are not MOA shooters or anywhere close to it. My problem is that I always see game at just outside the range of these less than perfect shooters and seem ot always wish I have brought the other rifle.

Even the military of various nations can not settle on this question. The U.S. says 3@100, the Soviet block says 6@100. My own personal limit is 8"@100 (keep them on the pie plate).

I just finished a project gun that is not shooting the "perfect group". It is sticking to about 4" and is at its full accuracy potential. I was really feeling like I had wasted a lot of effort untill I remembered that my 30-30 does no better and I still love to carry it. I am still inside the K-zone of a deer at 200 yards and I should not beat up myself or the rifle either one.

Do you carry what you love and adjust the range limit to suit the rifle?

[Rick]

100 yards is my limit on everything I own. I try for 6 @ 100. Everything I own is better than me by quite a bit. I have no idea what it will be now with the new shoulders. I'll find out next year I guess.

[Pretty Pants]

Well, for me anyway, the answer to the question would depend on the terrain you frequent. While I've only read about it, hunting opportunities back East are in generally brushy areas requiring shots of 100 yards or less?? Accuracy probably wouldn't be too important in those circumstances.

My adult ) life, I've lived in Oregon and Montana. Shooting opportunities can sometimes be limited only by how far you can place an accurate shot. Considering that, I've never hunted with a rifle that wasn't capable of 1" or better. If you restrict longer shots to when you have a decent rest, and use a good cartridge in an accurate rifle, humane shots can be made fairly easily. As a gunwriter once said, "only accurate guns are interesting".

I now only hunt with pistols, but I still want them as accurate as possible. I use a 44 mag Ruger Redhawk with open sights, for up to 80 yards, and also carry a scoped Remington XP100 in a chambering equivalent to a 243 for longer shots. While everything has to be right before you squeeze the trigger, they do a great job on game. Of course, I'm not that concerned with getting something, so I won't take an iffy shot.

While self defense has different needs, accuracy is still a concern to me. I have no experience with self defense, and may end up crying and quivering like a little girl if confronted, I still think accurate weapons are the best choice. I think of accuracy as a crutch.

Thanks, Pretty Pants

[natertot]

Depends on it's purpose. My .22 is for small game, rabbit and squirrel mostly. It has a scope and I am pretty confident that given the chance, I could take a mouse at fifty yards. Four inch groups out to 75yds is fine for me. I don't really trust the .22 beyond that for humane reasons. The only other rifle that I shoot is my mosin. Always hitting in a 10"x10" square at 100 with open sights is fine for me.

[kyratshooter]

Well Pretty Pants what you are saying is eaxctly what the discussion is about. Your limits under your conditions with the equipment at hand. And you have gone a whole different way in your hunting experience, limiting yourself to weapons with short range, pistols.

But, you still want unlimited/strict accuracy capabilitites from your rifles?

My own experiences over the years at numerous ranges and in the field, is that most shooters are not capable of doing what they think they are capable of doing and should pose self limitations on their attempts. But they will not do so. If they can see it they are going to shoot at it.

Here in the east we have a problem with "far sighted hunters". The ones that think they are shooting at 300 yards when they are actually shooting at 75. My sightings of deer at ranges beyond 200 yards have been few and in almost all the circumstances I can remember the shot would have been illigal or futile, as in nearly dark or on protected WMA areas where the deer seem to know they have nothing to fear.

Everyone wants the elusive MOA capability. I have found that in most cases achieving MOA requires a stable shooting bench, ideal weather conditions, an absense of distractions and perfect lighting. In most cases it also requires a good deal of tinkering with the equipment and in 50 years of shooting I have encountered few rifles that would achieve it out of the box with factory ammo. But everyone thinks their rifle will do it.

Or their rifle is more accurate than they are. What does that mean, really?

Most of my receint hunting has been done in conditions where a red dot scope or illiminated recticles were needed. I was discussing long range shooting with another forum member via PM and he invited me to shoot with him at a 1,000 m range. It was going to be a 5 hour drive to reach a place where we had that range capability! The only place in my area where I would ever approach a 1,000, or even a 500 yard shot would be down the right of way along the interstate highway.

Why not 2 MOA? 2 inches @100 yards, 8"@400 yards and still in a deers' kill zone. At 400 yards very few 4x scopes have enough resolution to tell buck from doe. (in most cases what is estimated at 400 yards is actually more like 200-250) And as stated, here in the east few shots will be encounterd outside 100, well within the capabilities of a peep sighted off the shelf 30-30 rifle.

There is another thread where we are extrolling the good fortune of a member that has acquired a Ruger Scout Rifle. I am sure that rifle will be capable of excellent accuracy. But what accuracy level should be expected of it? The rifle is based on the concept of Jeff Cooper and his "General Purpose Rifle". The term "Scout Rifle" has been coined and tacked to it, but it was conceived as a general purpose long term survival rifle. A specifically unrefined tool with no expectations of speciaized application. While the length, weight and caliber requirements were very restrected, the sighting equipment was left as an open choice; peep sight, LER scope or standard scope of low power, whatever the user prefered.

Cooper stated that its accuracy requirement was to be as practical as the rest of the concept; 2MOA capabilities. Mr Cooper was an avid hunter and used an oversized model of the scout he named "Thumper" as a game getter while on safari on the African plains, where range is also unlimited in many cases. He was a western guy from the "Big Sky Country", but felt 2MOA was acceptable.

My rifles might be capable of MOA, but taking a shot using a pack and jacket as a rest, at estimated range, with fading sun and my heart beating like a freight train? It might be best if I got a little bit closer. I ain't that good. My 1 MOA rifle just became a 10 MOA rifle.

And Natertot, over the years I have come to expect better accuracy from my .22 rifles than from my centerfires. My targets are usually smaller and harder to track and see. They are also usually the food of despiration. I do not want to miss if I need something in the pot for supper.

I want no more than one inch groups at 50 yards from my hunting grade .22 rifles. But that is also inside the 2MOA restriction.

[Pretty Pants]

Hey kyratshooter, I totally agree with your last post. And arguing against anything Jeff Cooper said on guns and shooting would be foolish.

Since being a kid, I've always been intrigued with accuracy. Starting out with a 22 on jackrabbits and ground squirrels, moving up to a 222 with longer potential, then the 7mm mag when Remington first came out with it. Was always trying to compete with my childhood buddies.

Whether using pistols or rifles, we were always trying to beat each other. You know how it goes.

And you're 100% corect on the practical/real world accuracy bit. While my guns shoot pretty well from the bench, they do seem to go to hell in the boonies. But I'm aware of that, and what I am capable of given the circumstances. I would think that should be a given whether talking pistols or rifles, plinking or hunting, or self defense. Like Clint said, "A man has got to know his limitations". While I do have tons of limitations, I still want to do the best I can.

But I still love accuracy, it allows me to shoot a bit better than I could with a sloppy shooting gun.

Thanks, Pretty Pants

[Rick]

Or their rifle is more accurate than they are. What does that mean, really?

For me it means the rifle has capabilities that are better than me. When you factor in all the human stuff I'm not the best shot in cavalry. That same rifle in someone else's hands is bound to be more accurate. Ergo, (I actually just wanted to use that word) my weapon is better than me.

I don't have a bazillion rounds that I've shot at 3000 yards on a ridge line at dusk in driving snow and still dropped a prized elk. I have fun at the range, I bring home a few squirrels or rabbits now and then and just like things that go boom. If ATF allowed I'd probably have an anti-tank gun or mountain howitzer and we'd be talking MOA at 2 miles. If I can hit the target six times consistently at the 100 yard range I'm pretty happy with the results. If I can do that in the trunk of a body target I'm even happier. I'm a simple guy.

[hunter63]

Some how or other I came across a Ruger m77 in 7 mag thru an add in the paper....for a good price, in about 1980....came with a scope, while not expensive, has held "0" for all these years.

Benched it, until I was getting 1" at 100 yds consistently....Different loads moved the group on target, but still maintained the "cover with a half dollar" group.
I know that the rifle can do it, the rest is up to me....even from a bench, good scope, there are the little thing like breathing, steadiness, lack of flinching and generally good shooting skills.

I practiced the 2 shot placement from all sorts of free hand positions.....and because I hadn't shot scopes before....idea was hit the paper plate, work the bolt and hit it again.

To this day, if I'm doing some serious hunting, this rifle "Elviria" is my first choice.

For a hunting rifle, consistant MOpaper plate will kill most animals......if the tool is tuned, it's up to the shooter.

For target rifles,or pistols that's a whole 'nuther animal.

[Daniel Nighteyes]

Or their rifle is more accurate than they are. What does that mean, really?

For me it means the rifle has capabilities that are better than me.

Agreed, Rick. When I say it -- and I do say it, or something like it -- I am acknowledging that my personal factors (e.g. knowledge, skill, focus, concentration, motor control) contribute much more to any accuracy/consistency issues than does any characteristic of the rifle. For example, and as we all know, when shooting at longer ranges (even from a very stable rest), your own heartbeat can significantly increase the CEP.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Circul...32949876742748

[hunter63]

So how many times have you been at the range,..... seen and heard guys female doggin' about what a POS the rifle, or scope, or ammo or wind, or sun in their eyes etc, etc causes them to shoot all over the place......then their buddy shoot a decent group with the same rifle.

There is more operator error than mechanical error in most cases.

I don't worry about the range much, I use it to try my toys out, work on scopes, sights and ammo loads, anf fun.........But hunting is completely different, over the shoulder, running full tilt thru the alders, down hill....becomes a "see, raise rifle up, acquire target, safety off,...squeese....watch it fall over.....All one moment, you don't feel it, hear it....just do it.

[lucznik]

It all depends on the gun and it's intended purpose(s).

Where I live a 250-300 yard shot on big game is to be routinely expected. For me, my primary, bolt-action hunting rifles need to be capable of essentially 1.5 MOA. This figure is arbitrary to be sure, but it's what I expect. A gun that won't routinely hold 1 1/2 inch groups at a hundred yards just isn't worth keeping. Lever action, blackpowder, etc. rifles get a pass on this expectation.

I have only one rifle that is a legitimate sub-MOA rifle. It is a Winchester m70 (post-64) in .264 Win Mag. It is also my biggest, heaviest, and most cumbersome rifle to pack around and yet, I still carry it a lot because I know that missing with that gun is a truly rare phenomenon. If I had to limit myself to only one rifle, this would be it.

My hunting handguns are expected to maintain groups of no more than 2 1/2" at 25 yds with the chosen hunting ammo. Both my m686+ (.357 Mag) and my 22A (.22 LR) exceed this mark and it looks like my new SR22 is going to be able to do that also.

For self defense handguns the ubiquitous 4"@25 yds is unimpressive but, (marginally) acceptable.

[Daniel Nighteyes]

So how many times have you been at the range,..... seen and heard guys female doggin' about what a POS the rifle, or scope, or ammo or wind, or sun in their eyes etc, etc causes them to shoot all over the place......then their buddy shoot a decent group with the same rifle.

There is more operator error than mechanical error in most cases.

Egg-zackly!

But hunting is completely different, over the shoulder, running full tilt thru the alders, down hill....becomes a "see, raise rifle up, acquire target, safety off,...squeese....watch it fall over.....All one moment, you don't feel it, hear it....just do it.

Haven't hunted for several decades now. But when I did there was a momentary sensation, much like a very mild electric shock, when I intuitively knew I was on-target. And it was always right.

[kyratshooter]

In opposition to the "rifle is more accurate than I am" view, what about the times you have done your part and the shot goes wide? Way wide.

You analyze the situation and think through the shot and absolutely KNOW you should have hit the mark, and the gear let you down.

I will never forget the first time that happened to me. I suddenly realized that I could shoot better than the gun I was holding. No matter what I did there was the distinct possibility that I could miss because of the gun/ammo combination.

That might not matter if one has a selection of firearms to choose from, but for a poor boy that just traded everything he had for a bag of magic beans it is really a sinking feeling.

[hunter63]

It all depends on the gun and it's intended purpose(s).

Where I live a 250-300 yard shot on big game is to be routinely expected. For me, my primary, bolt-action hunting rifles need to be capable of essentially 1.5 MOA. This figure is arbitrary to be sure, but it's what I expect. A gun that won't routinely hold 1 1/2 inch groups at a hundred yards just isn't worth keeping. Lever action, blackpowder, etc. rifles get a pass on this expectation.

I have only one rifle that is a legitimate sub-MOA rifle. It is a Winchester m70 (post-64) in .264 Win Mag. It is also my biggest, heaviest, and most cumbersome rifle to pack around and yet, I still carry it a lot because I know that missing with that gun is a truly rare phenomenon. If I had to limit myself to only one rifle, this would be it.

My hunting handguns are expected to maintain groups of no more than 2 1/2" at 25 yds with the chosen hunting ammo. Both my m686+ (.357 Mag) and my 22A (.22 LR) exceed this mark and it looks like my new SR22 is going to be able to do that also.

For self defense handguns the ubiquitous 4"@25 yds is unimpressive but, (marginally) acceptable.

I have to agree with location of the hunt.
Elvira has taken antelope at a paced off 235 paces, rested on my jacket....and a couple of mulies at 250 and 210 paces (or there abouts) all were DRT shots...as well as an Elk at about 30 ft, was gonna get run over.
Long distances out west seem shorted than in the Midwest?...dunno why that is?

Many people I have talked to over the years have found that magic rifle, and tend to use it as the "go to".

I guess I just equate Practical Accuracy with a one shot one kill....unless i betting money on a shot at the range.

[lucznik]

...hunting is... over the shoulder, running full tilt thru the alders, down hill....becomes a "see, raise rifle up, acquire target, safety off,...squeese....watch it fall over.....All one moment, you don't feel it, hear it....just do it.

Someday I would like to try this kind of hunting. I've always been in positions where the shooting is very controlled, very deliberate, and rather long. I've never had to "hurry up and shoot," ever... well, except for small game and/or bird hunting but, that's kind of different.

[hunter63]

LOL, and I guess I was surprised at the bi-pods, shooting sticks, range finders and such the guys were using, when in the western states.

Wisconsin, Missouri, Louisiana all have pretty thick cover, short ranges, snap shots at a balls out target...shot placement my butte, ya gotta see it first.
So that kinda what I grew up with....
Out west was a treat........Two guys argueing about how many clicks and windage.

[kyratshooter]

Someday I would like to try this kind of hunting. I've always been in positions where the shooting is very controlled, very deliberate, and rather long. I've never had to "hurry up and shoot," ever... well, except for small game and/or bird hunting but, that's kind of different.

You'd starve around here!

It is not like the hunting shows on the outdoor channel by a long shot!

If you get a sitting shot it will be through ruff brush and you will be picking a spot to shoot through to hit the game. You probably will not see the whole animal at one time and will have to time your shot to hit the vitals as they pass by the "spot". If it is close the game will be moving. Hunting deer around here is sort of like shooting quail with a rifle.

[Simple Survivor]

Out in Utah, my neck of the woods...er...desert, the range is as far as you can see. I moved here from Virginia where 200 yards was like "whoa!" But out in Utah we routinely shoot out to 300-600 yards, no problem. Even my AK is capable of hitting a deer sized target at 300. (can't guarantee where on the target though.) And my PSL with a x4 can accurately hit out to 600. Past that and it becomes iffy for me. I do like to push the limits of what a rifle can do.

[Rick]

You analyze the situation and think through the shot and absolutely KNOW you should have hit the mark, and the gear let you down.

That's always going to happen. The wrong weapon/ammo can occur to anyone and almost any weapon. When I say the rifle is better my assumption is you are past that dilemma. When I miss the mark at the range my first thought is what did I do wrong. Not the wind or the ammo or the dog that barked 40 acres away.

[hunter63]

LOL, I can say that the last time I was trying out the gun show Handi Rifle in .44 mag, with open sights, was shooting it at 25 yards to see where on the paper I was hitting....It was bad ammo.

Was getting them in a 2 " group at that range, with my home ready rolls off hand....so switched to a box of reloads that a guy gave me a long time ago.......Herters brass, home rolled cast bullets wad cutters.
I couldn't believe that I couldn't hit the whole target twice in a row....now I know why he gave them away....Oh yeah the leaded up the barrel pretty good as well.

Still got 3/4 of a box, and even the brass seems over size, tried reloading 5 rounds a while back, and even with a full length sizer die, the bullet was loose......factory crimp die helped, but I won't use any more of these.

Have to say this was the first time in a real long time that I ran into crappy ammo....like real crappy ammo.