Hunting Rifle Accuracy, what's "good enough" ?

[NWBlacktail]

My elk rifle is a Ruger M77 in 300 win mag. It does pretty well with 200 grn partitions (just around 1MOA). But I sacrifice trajectory with that load. I worked a long time to find that load, most everything else gave me about 1.5 MOA.

But all of that is splitting hairs on elk size game. :roll: I'm just OCD about it, :mrgreen:

 

[JD338]

I strive for .5 MOA in my rifles but will settle for MAO.

JD338

 

[lefty315]

Minute of dead definitely works but accuracy builds confidence. I've been pretty fortunate in a lot of my reloading ventures to stumble onto a pretty decent load in the beginning without much tinkering......until recently. I couldn't get an acceptable load for the 280 and the 150 LRAB's, so I gave up and went to a 140 AB. I was getting 200 yard groups, off a bench, that we're hovering between 2 1/2 to 3 inches. Realistically that's not bad but if I wanted to stretch it out to say 350'yards in field conditions I may not be so confident.

I started going deeper in the case and now have an honest 100 yard 5/8ths of an inch load. I haven't gone to 200 or 300 yet but I'm pretty sure it'll be good.

I always thought that a shooter should be able to hold 2-3 inch groups in various field conditions for the intended ranges you will be shooting. If that's all I can do from the bench then my confidence suffers. If I can hold that in the field from a 1.5 inch shooter then I'm heading out to hunt. I'd just like to take all the mechanical variables out if the equation so there's only human error to contend with.

 

[EOD Diver]

Good deal Guy. Looking forward to your future report. As pretty as that bedding job is, I can't imagine it not shooting better than before with a little work.
One thing I have noticed with my stock (beside rifle basixs trigger) 700 match rifle, that if I wonder if anyone else has experienced, is that although it shoots well at 100yds, but really comes alive at 600 and beyond. A lot of the old timers I shot with explained that what shoots the lights out at short range isn't always the best load when you extend the range. Anyone else encounter this?
Joe

 

[Ridgerunner665]

That's very true Joe...it's easy to get decent looking groups at 100 yards...and they often do not tell the whole story.

Close range groups will "hide" things like large velocity swings and improper stabilization (not enough twist)..."time of flight" becomes a factor...

I won't hunt with a load I haven't tested to at least 300 yards for this reason...and 5-600 yards is better.

 

[Guybo]

Very good post! I'll admit that im no where near as bad as I use to be when it comes to accuracy, maybe im just becoming an old fart, getting older and more laid back .

 

[IdahoCTD]

Since I build my own I shoot for 1/4" to 3/8". Sometimes I settle for sub 1/2" but not very often. I'd rather it be me that misses and not the rifle.

 

[Guy Miner]

Interesting. I've never been able to blame the rifle or the ammo for a miss. It's always been my fault.

Guy

 

[LD375]

I strive for .5 MOA in my rifles but will settle for MAO.

JD338

Ditto Jim, I have the same goal!

Lou

 

[SJB358]

I have gone to doing all of my load work at 200 yards. Seems like it works out a little better for me. Easier to see the changes that are made on the paper and discern what is going on.

I would actually do load work at 300 yards if I could. I don't mind seeing larger groups but I do like seeing the consistency of the load as you stretch it out.

 

[RiverRider]

All my rifles will turn in MOA performance at least half the time and I suspect that the other half of the time the problem is the guy on the trigger. A couple of them do much better. I do get frustrated at times when I'm not shooting all that well and it drives me nuts...but then I have to remember that a 2-inch rifle will hit within one inch at 100 yards if it's sighted in properly.

So take a 2-MOA rifle. It will hit within two inches of point-of-aim at 200 yards. Is that really all that bad? Yeah, I know, I have the same illness everyone else here has. If I can have better, I'll sure go after it. Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

 

[truck driver]

Interesting. I've never been able to blame the rifle or the ammo for a miss. It's always been my fault.

Guy

You got that right Guy. No matter how good the equipment there is always human error. I make the ammo to be the best the rifle can shoot and If I miss it sure wasn't the rifles fault. It's the nut behind the trigger. :mrgreen:

 

[big rifle man]

I'm very happy with 1 MOA in all my rifles. I do have days when everything goes right and I can get three shots in 1/2 or 3/4 of an inch. For hunting purposes I don't stretch my range much past three hundred yards so 1MOA is definitely plenty good.

 

[ScreaminEagle]

I love "one-holers", but I have a couple rifles that are 1.5 MOA at best. I hunt with these rifle because they have a ton of sentimental value.

 

[Oldtrader3]

I prefer a rifle that can shoot better than 2 inches at 200 yards as a big game rifle. I do not have a lot of rifles now but all of them are <MOA performers day after day.

 

[IdahoCTD]

Interesting. I've never been able to blame the rifle or the ammo for a miss. It's always been my fault.

Guy

That is all relative to how far your shooting and the accuracy of the rifle. For 95+% of people, if the gun shoots 1 1/2 MOA then they have no excuses to miss out to 4-500yds. 1 1/2 MOA at 800 is roughly 12" ( I doubt most could even hold that even) and could easily mean a miss on a antelope or small deer size animal at that distance, depending on the hold.

 

[.300winmag]

I'm with IdahoCDT and Fotis. In my profession, tolerancing is key. I expect an average of 1/2 MOA out of my bolt rifles (Out to at least 600 yards) and even my Anschutz (at 50 meters). I'm OCD about group sizes and extrapolate my groups based on time of flight, not distance. I'm very aware of ES's, SD's and consistency; I over analyze a lot I imagine, my hunting buddies and father always laugh when I bring up my 'digital range reports' with notes. One buddy told me "Holes in the paper or it didn't happen"... I guess that comes with being an engineer.

I have been amazed however by my competition AR, though. It is a stag lower with a White Oak upper and Krieger barrel 1-7", with a Geiselie trigger and a weight system. That rifle amazes me, with 75gr A-Max's (my bullet of choice for 600 yards) and 80gr SMK's, I've shot a few 200's at 600 yards. However, I have only shot one 200 at 100 yards in reduced course matches with 52gr SMK's. Tried the 52's at 600 once when I left my 600 yard ammo at home It went terrible, elevation and wind where all over...I still gather flack from that. . .But, my 600 yard ammo does extremely well at distance, but I cannot beat the 52's or 77's at 100 with my LR ammo.

I do agree with Guy in regards to the post. With rifles, bullets, powders and components today; we probably do put too much emphasis in accuracy in hunting rifles. But, it is nice to know that your equipment is capable and more consistent than you are.

Great post, Guy!! :grin:

 

[Guy Miner]

Interesting. I've never been able to blame the rifle or the ammo for a miss. It's always been my fault.

Guy

That is all relative to how far your shooting and the accuracy of the rifle. For 95+% of people, if the gun shoots 1 1/2 MOA then they have no excuses to miss out to 4-500yds. 1 1/2 MOA at 800 is roughly 12" ( I doubt most could even hold that even) and could easily mean a miss on a antelope or small deer size animal at that distance, depending on the hold.

It's interesting, the shortest distance you mention is 400 yards.

That's farther than the vast majority of hunters will ever shoot at game, or in practice.

Yes, I agree that if you're shooting game at 400, 500, 600 or even 800 or beyond, then match rifle accuracy is needed.

Most though, are well served with a nice handling, reliable, one MOA rifle. I've shot a lot more game at under 100 yards than at over 400 yards, and I'm a precision/distance kind of guy. You fellows are way out there on the far end of the bell curve, with those 600 & 800 yard shots. Yes, for that, you do need 1/2 MOA rifles. Absolutely!

Regards, Guy

 

[truck driver]

Most of my rifles will shoot 1/2 groups and I have one that will put 5 in 3/8ths or less depending on conditions. When I want to surgically remove a varmint I pick up the 257 Roberts. Haven't had any trouble making the first shot count with any of my rifles.

 

[IdahoCTD]

Interesting. I've never been able to blame the rifle or the ammo for a miss. It's always been my fault.

Guy

That is all relative to how far your shooting and the accuracy of the rifle. For 95+% of people, if the gun shoots 1 1/2 MOA then they have no excuses to miss out to 4-500yds. 1 1/2 MOA at 800 is roughly 12" ( I doubt most could even hold that even) and could easily mean a miss on a antelope or small deer size animal at that distance, depending on the hold.

It's interesting, the shortest distance you mention is 400 yards.



That's farther than the vast majority of hunters will ever shoot at game, or in practice. S

Yes, I agree that if you're shooting game at 400, 500, 600 or even 800 or beyond, then match rifle accuracy is needed.

Most though, are well served with a nice handling, reliable, one MOA rifle. I've shot a lot more game at under 100 yards than at over 400 yards, and I'm a precision/distance kind of guy. You fellows are way out there on the far end of the bell curve, with those 600 & 800 yard shots. Yes, for that, you do need 1/2 MOA rifles. Absolutely!

Regards, Guy

A large portion of the game I shoot is short distance as well but when I need to I shoot things at long range I'm prepared. In the last 2 years I have shot 2 elk under 150yds, one elk under 250yds, a antelope at 513yds, and a deer at 1006yds. If you add the year before that I shot a elk at just over 400yds.