Do hunters overthink accuracy

[Superbrad]

I surely need to read less on the internet, but it always strikes me as confusing when I see the repeated threads about a guy asking what rifle he should buy for the next elk hunt with the usual condition that the rifle needs to be able to shoot 500 yards or even further. The guys that can accurately shoot that far have a skill set far superior to mine but most guys going hunting do not have the ability to get anywhere close to that.
It's not as if the newest magnum or rifle is a magical laser that makes distance irrelevant.

The internet is a dangerous place to gather opinions at times, I've frequently and recently read statements (like getting a half inch group at 400 yards from an out of the box rifle). Let's remember the regular hunter is a smelly old duff that is just glad to be away from the wife and work for a week.

Heronfish...... I consider myself a fairly seasoned Hunter, and I think you have it bang on.......

I don't criticize other hunting methods that are legal, but long range is not for me...... I prefer to get up close and personal if possible.....

I enjoy trying to get my rifles as accurate as possible through reloading (it's really not that hard or expensive)..... My personal limit is 300 yards......

Rifles all have characteristics and so do certain brands and models...... It's like anything else, accuracy is one of the attributes buyers are after....... That's why people ask about it......

 

[Sqr]

Most rifles will outperform the shooter so if a hunter can hit the vitals at 100 yards standing then the rifle is accurate. Very seldom and usually never will a hunter try a 200+ yard kill unless with some form of a natural support. At that distance the game will not get spooked to require a rushed shot. The biggest factor is that a hunter knows the limitation of his rifle and the only way is to shoot the rig on a regular basis. Removing said rig from the safe a week before the hunt to fire 5 rounds at the range is a recipe for failure.

 

[NL-Hunter]

I am a regular old smelly duff that absolutely love getting away from work and wife every year. Been filling two freezers every year since mid nineties, little interest before that as I did not know what to do with all the meat if successful. Ducks and rabbit back then.

I have taken moose from 20 to 250 yards with the longest being the only bang flop with a .308. Downhill shot that took out the heart.

It do not matter if a rifle is a lazer, you will most often end up in a different shooting position every time. Whether it is leaning against a tree, holding on to a stick or offhand standing or kneeling. When the adrenaline starts pumping and you are in an "awkward" shooting position that do not resemble that of a gun range, accuracy is second. Being able to control your breathing and focus on target while you only have a few seconds is.

Forget about the youtube videos of hunters that use bipods and other resting devices wile sizing up their game at 800 + yards. It rarely happens. Practice with bench at 100 all you want, practice for hunting happens at a multitude of shooting positions. Try running a KM before practice and that will help you prepare for adrenaline.


So, do hunters overthink accuracy? I once had an old .303 that would group 8 inches at 100 and filled the freezer a couple of times. Blamed it on old ammo and no scope of course. Any excuse to get a new rifle.

Oh, and get as close as possible to the game without spooking it. Stalking is fun and rewarding.

 

[cath8r]

Not much of a rifle hunter but if a fella bought a new or used quality hunting rifle and a bushnell banner scope and then that same day bought a .22 rifle and 5000 rounds znd an identical scope as they have on the big game centerfire and then proceeded to use up all of that .22lr ammo before big game season they'd be made in the shade.

 

[danny45]

My 2 cents worth. Spend a little amount of time shooting your hunting rig pre season to see if it at least hits the side of a barn. Get familiar with what tool you are using. Period

 

[madashell]

"Do hunters overthink accuracy"...

What ... compared to F-class ? Or compared to Joe 6 pack who's idea of "zero" is "good enough". ...

Some seem to care, many don't ... and everything in between.

 

[ruger22]

My 2 cents is the guy that under thinks the important stuff.

The guy with the best rifle, caliber, load, scope etc. He will tell you all about it...

has junk for outdoor clothes, wants to stay in the truck
and he is so out of shape he cannot walk 200 yards
cannot figure out his GPS
forgets major stuff every year

I am not being a snob.
But do try and be in the best shape I can.
Run a hunting gear check list.
etc

 

[hoytcanon]

Not much of a rifle hunter but if a fella bought a new or used quality hunting rifle and a bushnell banner scope and then that same day bought a .22 rifle and 5000 rounds znd an identical scope as they have on the big game centerfire and then proceeded to use up all of that .22lr ammo before big game season they'd be made in the shade.

Except... they also have to shoot their actual hunting rifle... zero it first with an accurate load and then practice with it from field positions. Two shots at a gravel pit at a hubcap and a "good enough," is not reponsible for a hunter.

 

[Superbrad]

Except... they also have to shoot their actual hunting rifle... zero it first with an accurate load and then practice with it from field positions. Two shots at a gravel pit at a hubcap and a "good enough," is not reponsible for a hunter.

I really have to agree with this...... And I tried to avoid getting "mathematical" in this thread (although the two shot hit on a pie plate post tempted me).......

At minimum, every Hunter should know what their rig shoots from ideal bench rest conditions and practice fom there.......

 

[hawk-i]

IN actual fact, printing cloverleafs at 100yds may give you the misplaced confidence to attempt a 400 yard shot. When you can hit the aforementioned pie plate (with or without pie) at 400 yards, every time, from field positions, you can feel confident in attempting that four hundred yard shot. I have watched guys banging away at 100 yards, with the rifle settled into their lead sled. and I wonder, what's the point? I seldom shoot my hunting rifles from a rest anymore. I also seldom shoot my silohuette rifles from a rest. In fact, the only rifles I regularily shoot from a rest are those which are intended to be shot that way ( "F" class, BR, varmint rifles). If, shooting off my elbows, I can stay within the 2 moa range, I figure I'm OK.

What I meant is, if you can't group good at 100 yds you cant expect to make longer shots. 400 yard and over shots shouldn't be taken IMHO if you cant use a good steady rest. Your rifle has to be capable of making longer range shots...and again IMHO that starts with good groups at the 100 yard range.
I agree with you on the lead sleds....have never used one.

 

[Boomer]

Do hunters, as a group, overthink accuracy? I don't think so, though some individuals do. There is nothing wrong with the persuit of accuracy; the problem arises when mechanical accuracy becomes confused with practical field marksmanship. Field marksmanship is less concerned with group size, and more concerned with the distance between the actual point of impact of a cold bore shot, and the intended point of impact. The problem is complicated in real world hunting situations when the range is unknown, the target has no well defined aiming point, and the time constraints while open ended, are tight. Light can be subdued, and Canadian weather conditions during big game seasons can be dreadful. An analogy to overthinking accuracy in such circumstances, is to measure with a micrometer then cut with an axe. The folks who overthink accuracy are the ones who choose heavy barrel target or varmint rifles, probably loaded with Bergers, and topped with huge, high magnification scopes for big game hunting. I'm not referring to the long range game shooter to whom accuracy, along with the knowledge and talent to apply it, means everything, but to the fellow who still-hunts the thickets, and is better armed with a fast handling carbine, loaded with Partitions, and topped with a 2X scope. Trigger quality is arguably the most important component of the rifle as it pertains to marksmanship, but problems are sure to occur in the field when, in the name of accuracy, a trigger breaks from ounces of pressure, rather than from pounds. An accurate rifle is a joy to shoot, but aside from a sense of pride, the true benefit of accuracy is the confidence it instills in the hunter. If the hunter is an enthusiastic rifleman, he'll recognize his limitations, and be able to perform well within those limitations, regardless of how accurate his rifle is.

 

[galamb]

80% of our "hunting ammunition" is sold in the couple weeks leading up to the deer hunting season (rifle season) in Ontario.

"Most Hunters" are driven by COST - whatever is the "cheapest" for their 30-30, 30.06 and 308 (in that order of total sales) is what they buy. Most of them have never heard of MOA. They are shooting DEER not MoAh's

A deer has a vital area about 8" round (which is why a pie plate/paper plate is often noted as a good practice target for those trying to stretch things out).

PERSPECTIVE - 2 MOA is still within that 8" vital area @ 400 yards, which would be "further than the AVERAGE hunter would ever shoot in their lifetime".

If you consider 300 yards "your limit" then almost 3 MOA is "both lethal and ethical", and if you are talking Moose or Elk instead of Bambi, then 3 MOA is more than you need.

While it's nice to be shooting 1/2" MOA, in reality the "average hunter" would never need anything close to that accuracy.

The "small percentage" of hunters that actually care about such things, do it because they have an interest. Probably less than 1% of hunters even need a round that will make MOA - if we are being honest...

 

[hawk-i]

CT customers might have a slightly different philosophy about preseason rifle practice than a hardcore hunter/target shooter.

 

[pisces-guy]

Good points made here...anyone practicing for hunting using a lead sled is not quite with the rest of us... Every competent hunter I've known, myself included, has practiced shooting from field positions for quick shots at closer ranges, and either practiced shooting off their hunting backpack, (especially if they're after sheep in the mountains, who needs the weight of a bipod), or a bipod, (especially if they're walking a short distance and setting up over a clear cut), for long shots. We work at shooting moa from these rests, but seriously, being able to reliably and quickly put an offhand shot into a four inch circle at 100 yards, (when you're rested and calm), is going to take care of business when a buck pops out at close range. Your 4" circle accuracy will slip to 6" circle accuracy if you're breathing a bit heavy or excited, but you'll still git 'er dun.

 

[Lefty Dick]

I think it's ok to obsess over getting a good to great shooting load, STOP!

I also feel that once that good to great shooting load is found, it's time to start obsessing about, developing yourself to as high of degree of perfection that you demand from your rifle and load.

In other words, get off the damned bench, STOP!

Yes ammunition and components cost a lot. Name one thing that doesn't.
Rimfires, reduced cast or jacketed bulk bullets, what ever it takes, just get off the damned bench!

 

[stubblejumper]

80% of our "hunting ammunition" is sold in the couple weeks leading up to the deer hunting season (rifle season) in Ontario.

"Most Hunters" are driven by COST - whatever is the "cheapest" for their 30-30, 30.06 and 308 (in that order of total sales) is what they buy. Most of them have never heard of MOA. They are shooting DEER not MoAh's

A deer has a vital area about 8" round (which is why a pie plate/paper plate is often noted as a good practice target for those trying to stretch things out).

PERSPECTIVE - 2 MOA is still within that 8" vital area @ 400 yards, which would be "further than the AVERAGE hunter would ever shoot in their lifetime".

If you consider 300 yards "your limit" then almost 3 MOA is "both lethal and ethical", and if you are talking Moose or Elk instead of Bambi, then 3 MOA is more than you need.

While it's nice to be shooting 1/2" MOA, in reality the "average hunter" would never need anything close to that accuracy.

The "small percentage" of hunters that actually care about such things, do it because they have an interest. Probably less than 1% of hunters even need a round that will make MOA - if we are being honest...

One thing that I have noticed over the years, is that the people that choose ammunition based solely on price, and that don't practice shooting in the off season, tend to shoot more rounds during a hunt, and they miss or wound with more shots. The people that shoot a lot during the off season, and that spend the time and money to find a load that shoots well in their firearm, and that properly sight in their firearms and shoot at various distances, tend to shoot less shots at animals, and they miss or wound less animals. And this is not just true with big game hunting, but with wing shooting as well. It's not necessarily the increased accuracy of the load/firearm that results in less missed or wounded animals, but rather the increased shooting practise that a person gets from seeking out an accurate load at various distances.

 

[NL-Hunter]

Use a bench and rest to sight in and find out what the rifle can do.

Use every other position known to man at various ranges to find out what you can do with the rifle.

 

[c-fbmi]

I'm not sure "over think" would be the correct term, but I think a lot of hunters over emphasize accuracy and it's role in the outcome of a hunt. I like to have hunting rifles that shoot well (MOA) but I do not feel handicapped with one that shoots 1 1/2 or 2 MOA consistently. My 350 RM keeps about 1.5 MOA give or take a titch and I have used it a lot. Given the platform I think this is good accuracy. It is a very light and short barreled Mod 7 KS and I have never taken a shot beyond 250-300 mtrs with it, it has worked flawlessly every time. It points impeccably well and I have made some nice quick off hand shots with it to flatten black bears which had decided they wanted to inhabit a different township.
I never think bench shooting is a waste of time though as any practice demanding sight alignment, trigger control and follow through is good practice and does carry over in the field. Practicing all field positions is necessary of course, but in reality you still have to focus on sight alignment, trigger control and follow through, regardless of position. I have found when shooting game up close, offhand, that I am in a "zone", the rifle just comes to my shoulder, the crosshairs adjust to the appropriate spot on the animal and the trigger breaks.....all kinda on auto pilot, without any conscious thought on my part. Maybe this is the outcome of shooting thousands and thousands of rounds, many of those at running jack rabbits........but I still believe and practice off a bench concentrating on sight alignment, trigger control and follow through. I also shot thousands of rounds shooting rimfire and CF rifle silhouette, which really shows you how bad an offhand shot you truly are.
I also decided long ago that I would sacrifice a little accuracy to gain 200+ fps in a hunting rifle. Because a rifle gives 1/2 MOA at let's say 2800 fps and the same rifle gives consistent 1 MOA at 3100 fps, I will always take the 1 moa at 3100 fps as 1/2 moa is never going to change the outcome of my shot at game, however the extra 300 fps may very well change the outcome. It has much greater energy transfer and less time of flight allowing the elements less time to act upon it. I know this attitude flies in the face of a lot of members here, who would say that sacrificing accuracy for velocity is wrong and one should hunt with the most accurate load possible in that rifle. These are precisely the shooters to whom you refer in the OP, and I happen to disagree with them. I will seek the highest safe velocity in any rifle as long as accuracy stays within acceptable standards for my hunting, which is not necessarily the most accurate load in that rifle/bullet combination. However I have also found that the top node in most magnum cartridge/rifles also produces some of the best accuracy.
I also use different terms than many on here, as I believe the term accuracy applies solely to the capability of the rifle and load, with all other factors removed. What most refer to here as field accuracy I deem to be hunter/shooter ability and has nothing to do with the accuracy of his equipment. I believe this is an important distinction, as it removes confusion during exactly this type of discussion. I read the OP's question to mean "do hunters place too much importance on the accuracy of their equipment" and I believe that some do at the expense of developing the skill set to actually use this accuracy.
I think one must also realize that when discussing such things on a site like CGN, you are really only talking to 10% of the hunting population. The other 90% will run the gamut from 2 hits out of 5 on a 10" pie plate is good enough at 50 mtrs to hunters who, even though they don't reload, will try several different kinds of factory ammo to see what shoots best in his or her rifle and then will sight it in properly before going afield. None of these other 90% are overly concerned with accuracy as long as it meets their reasonable standards. I think we on forums like this forget all too often that we make up a small percentage of the total hunting population of our country. Given this statement I think maybe the question would have been better worded to ask "do reloaders place too much importance on the accuracy of their hunting equipment"...........JMHO

 

[rem338win]

I think far too much time (I'm guilty) is spent chasing 1/2 or 1/4 MOA in hunting guns. I've done like decent work with 1.5 MOA guns out to 450yds without issue.

I would say that weight, balance, fit and ergonomics are far more important. If you have a rifle that weighs 7 1/2lbs loaded and ready to go with a scope that falls somewhere In the 3 to 12x range and goes 1.5 MOA with a good hunting bullet I'd say most gun scribes 20 years ago would've called you blessed. Today I'd say the same, especially if it fit you like a glove and it points well enough to hammer pie plates at 75 yards on a snap shot.

I still giggle watching folks packing 10lb rifles with hubbles on top with 28" tubes into black confers. It's a 1/2 MOA gun.....for a bow range shot......

 

[wilbar]

A beat up old style synthetic stock Model 7 in .308 with the 18.5" barrel. Weighs 5.75 pounds without the scope and rings.
I believe it was made in the '50s. Got it a gun show.

Sorry, I try my best not to be "that guy" on forums BUT IF you are talking about a Remington Model 7 the first production year was 1983, the Model 700 was first produced in 1962.

However, I think that your post underscores the fact it's more important to practice with your rifle and know it well than to know which year it came out or what the barrel stamping means. If you're filling the freezer then you're winning!