Practical Hunting Field Accuracy: Is sub-MOA Rifle Accuracy a Benefit in Hunting?

[conor_90]

I am comfortable using quality iron sights under 50 metres--and that requires practice.

I bet you can extend that range a lot…

I didn’t read the novel at the start of the thread, but I have read art of the rifle where JC discussed this along the lines of what dogleg and long walker are saying.

Mechanical accuracy is good but field positions are final…


I find at 100 yards I am better standing offhand with iron sights, a matter of practice I guess

 

[DGY]

This is my first successful year as a self taught "hunter". I shoot 0.6moa off the bench and was the only person to pass my Mapleseed with a score of 224/250. I "know" I'm a good shot, and yet still totally missed on a deer last week.

I was so excited by seeing them on my walk-in that I mixed up my charts 4MOA as 4" and 200m as 200y and didn't hold over high enough. Disappointing for sure but I got a clean shot on another deer an hour later at an even 100y. There's so much more to this then just putting a cross hair on an animal's shoulder.

Interesting, same thing happened to a friend of mine hunting partner last year, he is a really good shot at the range and then he missed on a moose by not dialling in his scope turrets… sometimes keeping things simple like a simple scope and or a fix power scope is better! I never had a problem with charts lol I don’t use them hahaha!

 

[DGY]

There is no shortcut to field accuracy, practice and experience make the most of it! I started shooting when I was 6-7 years old lots of pellet guns and 22 and then lots of all sort of calibers! The only thing I didn’t practice much is moving target like birds and rabbits etc and i struggle to get them other than when they stand still! I’ve shot a moose at 180m from a canoe on a far from being glass lake, and I think that if I had to range him, then look up my chart and then make proper adjustment and then…. He would have most likely be gone( he was aware that we were there and a bit nervous)!!
Do I practice shooting from a canoe on a wavy lake often? No!! But it would be a great thing to do!!( I shot 3 moose that way. 2 of them going down river in riffles, so moving quite good)!
I really try to keep my shot under 200m by calling or stalking or both!

 

[Unholysavage]

One thing I've noticed at the range, particularly in the fall before hunting seasons open up, is that nobody shoots their hunting rifles standing unsupported, or off sticks. They're all shooting seated, off a concrete bench. Many with a lead sled. I shoot to 200m unsupported a fair amount and people look at me like I vote Liberal. It's hard to get proficient at something if you never practice it. A 0.5 moa rifle wont help much if you can't put 2 rounds on a 12" target at 200m unsupported.

 

[emerson]

One thing I've noticed at the range, particularly in the fall before hunting seasons open up, is that nobody shoots their hunting rifles standing unsupported, or off sticks. They're all shooting seated, off a concrete bench. Many with a lead sled. I shoot to 200m unsupported a fair amount and people look at me like I vote Liberal. It's hard to get proficient at something if you never practice it. A 0.5 moa rifle wont help much if you can't put 2 rounds on a 12" target at 200m unsupported.

I notice that many hunters bench techniques are terrible too. Very little practice, lots of $$$ spent.

 

[KePet]

The other thing to always take into account is actual hunting range. I personally limit myself to 300 Meters. Within that distance I’m confident of where my shot will hit. Now, my hunting rifle will easily shoot MOA, and it will do it out to 1000. And yes, I’ve taken it out that far, off a bench. I know my dope. But I still won’t shoot anything over 300.

After 300 with a field support, or unsupported I can’t guarantee a kill shot - a hit yes, but not necessarily a kill. Yep, I see the guys taking shots at deer across a quarter section. And then, if they hit, spending hours tracking wounded game. Not fair to the animal, and something I’m not comfortable with.

As to the original question about hunting rifle accuracy. Again, I come down on the side of wanting an accurate rifle. If it’s not under 2 MOA I wouldn’t use it. At 300, that’s a 6” error factor, before you even take the shooter into account. If possible I like to work my hunting rifle in to close to MOA. Yes, it gives me more confidence in my shots, but it also means that compounding all the possible error factors in the field that my probability of a “kill shot” remains high.

 

[SHELL SHUCKER]

I've generally been satisfied with my game rifles over the years that shot into 1.5 MOA at 80 yds. I've only taken 1 deer past 100 yds, (110 actually) with a snap shot to the heart zone whilst stalkin' along a dirt road. Most of my hunting though has been from a hide or stand and at ranges well inside of 80 yds.

For pest critter shooting out to 300 yds max, I used rifles and loads that would shoot into sub-MOA at 100 yds. Kentucky windage plays a big part in getting solid hits at long range targets for me.

 

[iron cat]

One thing I've noticed at the range, particularly in the fall before hunting seasons open up, is that nobody shoots their hunting rifles standing unsupported, or off sticks. They're all shooting seated, off a concrete bench. Many with a lead sled. I shoot to 200m unsupported a fair amount and people look at me like I vote Liberal. It's hard to get proficient at something if you never practice it. A 0.5 moa rifle wont help much if you can't put 2 rounds on a 12" target at 200m unsupported.

Far too many shooters out there do not in fact get off the bench and actually shoot their rifles from kneeling or standing, or off the sticks they use to hunt with !
Drives me nuts in fact to have a guy shoot off the bench at 100 yards then proclaim he is good for a 500 yard shot on a deer!
Cat

 

[South Pender]

The other thing to always take into account is actual hunting range. I personally limit myself to 300 Meters. Within that distance I’m confident of where my shot will hit. Now, my hunting rifle will easily shoot MOA, and it will do it out to 1000. And yes, I’ve taken it out that far, off a bench. I know my dope. But I still won’t shoot anything over 300.

After 300 with a field support, or unsupported I can’t guarantee a kill shot - a hit yes, but not necessarily a kill. Yep, I see the guys taking shots at deer across a quarter section. And then, if they hit, spending hours tracking wounded game. Not fair to the animal, and something I’m not comfortable with.

As to the original question about hunting rifle accuracy. Again, I come down on the side of wanting an accurate rifle. If it’s not under 2 MOA I wouldn’t use it. At 300, that’s a 6” error factor, before you even take the shooter into account. If possible I like to work my hunting rifle in to close to MOA. Yes, it gives me more confidence in my shots, but it also means that compounding all the possible error factors in the field that my probability of a “kill shot” remains high.

You raise good points, KePet. Particularly about keeping your game shots to 300 yards and under. However, if I had a rifle with great sentimental value (e.g., my dad's rifle) and with which I felt very comfortable shooting--but it was a 2 MOA rifle--I don't think I'd hesitate to use it in the game fields if I was restricting my shots at game to 300 yards or less. The practical field accuracy disadvantage might not be as great as one might imagine. For our hypothetical 3" field shooter, here's the difference between a 1 MOA rifle and a 2 MOA rifle:

100 yards:
1 MOA rifle: 3.16" practical field accuracy;
2 MOA rifle: 3.60" practical field accuracy;
so less than 1/2 inch difference in practical field accuracy.

300 yards:
1 MOA rifle: 9.48" practical field accuracy;
2 MOA rifle: 10.8" practical field accuracy;
so a little over 1 1/4" difference in practical field accuracy.

Are these differences enough to account for a miss with the 2 MOA rifle, but provide a hit with the 1 MOA rifle?

 

[Ben_in_Canada]

Lots of good advice already. I took up PRS to practice different shooting positions, distance and found it has helped immensely.
I try as often as possible to use my range finder and ballistic calculator (phone app) to get the most accurate shot.
Practice Friday morning.

Real world Friday afternoon (200yds)

 

[tokguy]

I'm lucky in that I don't have to worry about 'going to the range'.
I reload and do firearms related stuff in 'Pa's Bunkhouse' which is about 40 paces from my 'Range'
Which has nice tidy 100 - 130 yd options. Can't shoot uphill, but I can shoot on a downward cant or level quite handily.
Usually all offhand at inclined plates...some days are good; clang, clang, clang...some days not so much.
If I need to check absolute zero...I'll go prone or seated...don't even have a bench. My cheater is a Shooting Jacket from the early '50's 'Kerr's of Beverly Hill's'...makes the Hard kickers much softer. Take the flinch out of the picture...I shoot better.
I don't need uber accuracy... just need to send lots of lead downrange til the hits begin to repeat with frequency.
IMO of course

 

[Leeper]

I have some very accurate match rifles and some very accurate hunting rifles. In general, for the hunting rifles, I don't much care, within reason, how they shoot off the bench and seldom even shoot them that way. If I do shoot off the bench, I hold the rifle and shoot off my elbows.
At my 300 meter range, I usually just shoot at a piece of printer paper and, shooting off my elbows, I can stay on that paper with any of my hunting rifles. That is good enough for me. It doesn't really matter what size group the rifle will shoot off bags. There was a time that I cared and tried to get my hunting rifles to shoot like match rifles, but no more.

 

[KePet]

You raise good points, KePet. Particularly about keeping your game shots to 300 yards and under. However, if I had a rifle with great sentimental value (e.g., my dad's rifle) and with which I felt very comfortable shooting--but it was a 2 MOA rifle--I don't think I'd hesitate to use it in the game fields if I was restricting my shots at game to 300 yards or less. The practical field accuracy disadvantage might not be as great as one might imagine. For our hypothetical 3" field shooter, here's the difference between a 1 MOA rifle and a 2 MOA rifle:

100 yards:
1 MOA rifle: 3.16" practical field accuracy;
2 MOA rifle: 3.60" practical field accuracy;
so less than 1/2 inch difference in practical field accuracy.

300 yards:
1 MOA rifle: 9.48" practical field accuracy;
2 MOA rifle: 10.8" practical field accuracy;
so a little over 1 1/4" difference in practical field accuracy.

Are these differences enough to account for a miss with the 2 MOA rifle, but provide a hit with the 1 MOA rifle?

Not sure how you’re getting your calculations, you may need to slow it down for me and put the dots closer together. LOL. I guess what I’d be looking at is how big is the vital zone on the animal. Whenever you get bigger than the vital zone, either because of distance, or equipment, or compounded error factors, then you SHOULD NOT be taking the shot.

But having said that, I’m not seeing any real disagreement with your premise. My statement was that if I couldn’t get it under 2MOA I wouldn’t use it, personally. OR! If using it because of sentimental reasons, and not under 2MOA, then I would restrict myself to 100 or 200 yard shots. Really, with hand loading, and a little effort, there are very few modern rifles that you can’t get to 2 MOA. Heck, I can even get 2 MOA (or awful dang close) with my 30-30 off the bench at 100, but I sure as heck wouldn’t try a 300 yard shot with it.

Maybe it’s the men that taught me to hunt. They stressed being ethical and safe above all else. It’s not about being able to brag about how long of shot you made, it’s about being able to kill a living, sentient being without making it suffer any more than absolutely necessary. I’ve watched my uncle pass up a shot on more than one occasion, on a 6 X 6 whitetail, either because he wasn’t sure of the background, or because it was beyond what he felt he was confident in shooting.

 

[Why not?]

My personal benchmark for hunting rifles is a magazine full into five inches at 300 meters on our silhouette range, from the bench, regardless of what the rifle is. That’s 328 yards, around 1.5 moa, and more than accurate enough for any hunting I will do in the field from prone or most often from sitting.

I have on a very few occasions taken game considerably further away, but no longer attempt to do so.

Ted

 

[KePet]

Okay, I went back and reread the original post. I get where you are coming from on your calculations.

So maybe to answer the original question, and reiterate my feelings from my previous post. A sub-MOA rifle will simply increase your possible ETHICAL hunting distance. Once your practical accuracy, either because of equipment or distance, exceeds the vital zone of the animal you are hunting you should not be taking the shot. Once you are larger than the kill zone you are depending on luck, and shooting to (hopefully) hit, rather than kill.

I know one guy that uses an SKS for deer hunting. Arguably a 3-4 MOA rifle. BUT, he hunts the bush and stalks his game. I think the longest shot he’s ever taken with that rifle was about 70 yards. Using your calculations, and my criteria, to me that is ethical.

 

[WhelanLad]

Excellent post!!!

 

[pathfinder76]

My personal benchmark for hunting rifles is a magazine full into five inches at 300 meters on our silhouette range, from the bench, regardless of what the rifle is. That’s 328 yards, around 1.5 moa, and more than accurate enough for any hunting I will do in the field from prone or most often from sitting.

I have on a very few occasions taken game considerably further away, but no longer attempt to do so.

Ted

That is a pretty good benchmark

 

[mikeyb]

I use the bench for load development and groups for consistency and confidence. An MOA shooter off the bench gives a lot of confidence in the field. I *love* seeing sub-MOA groups from a hunting rifle, but I understand that something that consistently shoots 1.5 MOA in variable situations is better than 0.5 MOA off a concrete bench. But that's only the first part of preparation - next is to shoot prone off my backpack or bipod, standing offhand leaned up against a post with a sling wrapped around my arm, and kneeling off my magical favorite Allen shooting stick/dead animal poker/trekking pole/bino stabilizer/camera monopod.

Accuracy builds confidence, but you've got to practice being accurate in actual field situations.

 

[tokguy]

Bench shooting is sorta playing with yourself I suppose... fun to do, no-one wants to hear about it though.
I suppose it has a lot to do with your personality. Some extremely chill guys could probably transfer their ability on the Bench to the field...not all though. If you are easily rattled...you will likely not be able to easily transfer those skills to a 'Real World situation'.
But have fun doing it by all means.

 

[PSE]

I find in many cases hunters don't know what MOA rifle they really have. It is because they are not necessarily shooters but hunters. Firing 3 shots into 1 MOA on one single occasion does not mean that it is a MOA rifle.

A large enough sample size fired on several occasions and averaged out gives a much better idea of rifle capability. Most hunters do not wish to go through the ammo expenditure to determine that however.