Does accuracy matter?

Accuracy does matter.
It instills confidence (mental), as well as actual capability of the round.
We must know where the round will land in the "heat" of the moment (important). This means a group of 3moa means a bullet will land at half that distance on the target (bugger-all).
So, if you walked up hill for three hrs. and have to take a shot, in good confidence, does a guns accuray (1 moa) mean that much?

Dwayner
 
Accuracy is relative.
A very few have already put this to bed.
An accurate rifle is subjective. Comfort with the target, familiarity and repeatability is more important. Shooting from sandbags at paper or in the pit on an old stove is meaning less. It is fun, but not relative in this context.

Target shots do not interact. It is the difference between a boxer punching the hell out of a bag but getting KO'd in the first round.
A hunter must engage at a moments notice, in less than perfect conditions. Mathematics are great for the class room but don't add up to the sum of puck all when you are pursuing. A 1/2 moa rifle in the hands of someone not comfortable can and may result in moon shots.

A bent barreled lever 30-30 that could not print at 50 in my hands, in the hands of a life long owner can take down a 1200 lb moose on the run at over 250 yards first shot. Been there done that.

Accuracy, like perfection, are illusions when it counts. All that matters is the job being acceptable
 
As JOC said..

"Most of the guys that cannot shoot well at the range,at a target, at known distances, but claim they are 'poison' on game shooting...never shoot at game past 100 yards."

"When they make hits beyond that is because animal "kill zones" are pretty big.;)"
 
Great Posts!

I wish there were more folks like you guys out in the woods here.

For myself, I taught my kids how to shoot, exactly as you folks recommend. We start with paper to see how the GUN shoots. Then it is away with the sandbags and onto real world shooting positions. To get to be a good shot, just like music...practice...practice...practice.

Just my two cents, for what it's worth.;)
 
Gatehouse said:
As JOC said..

"Most of the guys that cannot shoot well at the range,at a target, at known distances, but claim they are 'poison' on game shooting...never shoot at game past 100 yards."

"
Click to expand...

JOC did have a way with words, didn't he?:)There's a guy that never lead anyone astray. Neither will Gatehouse or Boomer.

Brian Litz (SP), there's another guy with a way with words. Things like explaining how putting a lesser group in the center of the target boosts a score somewhat more than putting all your misses in the same spot. That's not to say that you can't have both, but I don't think that it's hard to fathom that a loose group of 4s, 5s, and Vs scores higher than tight group of 3s. Sometimes it seems like people have confused shooting tight groups with hitting things.

In other news, we're currently sitting in Anchorage with a couple of Ursus Arctos hides and skulls taken with a couple of tweaked .338 Win Mags. Both show the boring ability to group 1 MOA out to 500 yards. Shots were 107 and 66 yards (mine). Now, granted I don't know if that proves that accuracy doesn't matter, or that grizzlies are pushovers, or if we just got lucky. Pretty sure it doesn't prove anything.


About the only thing that I know for sure is that the ground in Alaska in front of a glacier on Halloween night is just a tad hard for sleeping on.That and non leaking waders are a good thing.;)
 
In tests done by Col. Jeff Cooper, a one m.o.a. rifle and a three m.o.a. rifle were both shot from field positions, by the same shooter. Groups were nearly identical. I know hunters that shoot hundreds of rounds a year in practice, and can put three shots through the same hole at 100 yards. These guys, in my experience, are the ones most likely to miss or wound game. They obsess about "accuracy", and spend their lives practicing for 600yd. shots on deer, etc. Then they miss deer at 25 yards, because they can't take the bench along when they hunt!

M.o.a. accuracy may be required for shooting pests at great distances, but it's not necessary for hunting real game. My rule of thumb is, the practical range of your hunting rifle is the longest range at which you can hit a clay pigeon. I never shoot rifles from the bench, except for the initial sight-in. You'd be surprised at how far you can hit a clay pigeon with a 3.5m.o.a. rifle!
 
Dogleg said:
Col. Cooper was one smart hombre. The kind of man that didn't lose track of reality after training thousands of shooters.
Click to expand...

I was just reading something on this subject, written by the Col. some years ago. It said " Owning a one hole rifle is much like owning a 200mph car. A largely theoretical delight." As he said, nobody could shoot one hole groups in actual field positions. Col. Cooper was indeed a very smart man, who told it like it was.
 
It's about trying to take out the variables..and using controls through practice to ebable the shooter the proper techniques to make the shot count.
This is not say a shooter can not miss, or wound an animal..it is still hunting...there are no guarantees..at the range they are somewhat more controlled.
Whats the first question you ask the seller when buying a gun?? How does it shoot.
 
It's about trying to take out the variables.
Click to expand...

Flatter trajectory takes out variables. Less wind drift takes out variables too.Would you rather take on a 400 yard windy day deer with a 1 1/2 MOA .300 Weatherby or a .25 MOA .38/55? Forget about the killing power in this rather silly comparison, just think of which one would make placeing hits easier.
 
Dogleg said:
Flatter trajectory takes out variables. Less wind drift takes out variables too.Would you rather take on a 400 yard windy day deer with a 1 1/2 MOA .300 Weatherby or a .25 MOA .38/55? Forget about the killing power in this rather silly comparison, just think of which one would make placeing hits easier.
Click to expand...

Neither.. I am the one that makes the decisions on what I shoot and it wouldn't be either.:D But if I have to play along it would be the 300..but I need more info....to make a precise shot.
at 400 yards your looking at a rifle that will have a kill zone of approx 6" with a 1.5 moa rifle.. with a rifle sighted in with a 100 zero..180 gr..at 3200 fps..would drop...22"..so dial the scope 5.4 MOA up... assuming you play the wind right..it would be more than adequate for a deer.
 
Everyone seems to get wound up and equate a rifle's group size with its accuracy. In a hunting scenario this makes little sense as it is the first shot that most often tells the tail. If the first shot always hits point of aim, where the following 4 might go is of little consequence. Give me a rifle that prints the first 2 rounds within an inch of the aiming point, and I don't care if it shoots a 6 MOA 20 shot group.
 
Boomer said:
Everyone seems to get wound up and equate a rifle's group size with its accuracy. In a hunting scenario this makes little sense as it is the first shot that most often tells the tail. If the first shot always hits point of aim, where the following 4 might go is of little consequence. Give me a rifle that prints the first 2 rounds within an inch of the aiming point, and I don't care if it shoots a 6 MOA 20 shot group.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting point, if a rifle is on POI for the first 1 or 2 shots, your going to be fine. Personally, if my rifle can't put 5 shots under 2 MOA I'm not happy.
 
Given that 95% of all hunting happens under 200 yards, isn't it a little neurotic to obsess over a minute of angle? For target, of course. Gophers and grouse heads, sure. But hunting big game?

Most shooters have trouble keeping inside 6" off hand at 50 yards. If you can shoot into 2" at 100 yards from sitting and kneeling positions, you're probably doing great. Sitting and kneeling work very well for hunting, and an offhand shot should be a last resort.

IMO most of the joy of shooting comes from being proficient with a rifle in field conditions. A half inch off the bench means little in a world where you're shooting with 8 minute ability.
 
noneck180 said:
Neither.. I am the one that makes the decisions on what I shoot and it wouldn't be either.:D But if I have to play along it would be the 300..but I need more info....to make a precise shot.
at 400 yards your looking at a rifle that will have a kill zone of approx 6" with a 1.5 moa rifle.. with a rifle sighted in with a 100 zero..180 gr..at 3200 fps..would drop...22"..so dial the scope 5.4 MOA up... assuming you play the wind right..it would be more than adequate for a deer.
Click to expand...

Thanks for playing along. Since we agree that 1.5 MOA is more than adequate for deer at 400, would that make it at least adequate at 500? Good enough for 600? Taking another tack, would a 1 MOA rifle which would theoretically place the most errant shot a whopping 1 inch closer 400 yards significantly raise the odds of smacking Mr. Jumper? I've rebarrelled 1 1/2 MOA hunting rifles, though it doesn't make a lot of sense.
I'm a bit surprised that you want to turn turrets at a measley 400.
 
Practising field postiton shooting, adrenlin, heart-rate, buck-fever, are all factor's determining the MOA of one's rifle. Having a tight grouping rifle to start with IMO helps one hit a target closer to the intended spot. And yes it's darn hard to drag a shooting bench out into the bush.
 
noneck180 said:
It's human nature to be the best at what you do..1" is good.. .100" is better.
Click to expand...

It's also human nature to lose sight of the forest for the trees.;) Take two rifles, which both happen to be mine. Both are M700s with squared actions, heavy match barrels, aftermarket triggers, 20 MOA rails, identical Mark 4s and the normal voodoo incantations. One's a .223 1-8 that likes 80 grain SMKs and Bergers, and the other's a .300 1-11 which likes 190 SMKs.That's a far from optimum bullet for the .300.

If anything the .223 is more accurate by any measure on a dead calm day. Tighter grouping, easier to shoot, less heat build and it's Jewel trigger is better than the rifle basix on the .300. It'll hang right in there to 800 at least, and is so laughingly easy to shoot that you can't help laughing a little with every trigger pull.

Let the wind start blowing, and the .300 will wipe the floor it, stomp it real bad, then wipe the floor with it again. Which is then the most accurate rifle, the tighter grouping or the easier to actually hit with by dint of different cartridge?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom