The 1 MOA Hoax: How manufacturers have confused shooters

well,,, Weatherby refunded my money after their service guy could not attain 1MOA with my rifle and their ammo
I was still a couple hundred in the red (various brands of premium ammo)

This is why I think that video is pretty good info. Like just HOW MANY types of ammo do you have to try to get their MOA claim? It's no good for a hunter going after moose for them to say "well, we use this highly frangible or non expanding target ammo to get the MOA guarantee"

It's a hunting rifle...presumably the hunter wants good accuracy with HUNTING ammo.

Personally I would never buy a rifle based on a manufacturers claim of accuracy. I have handloaded for many years and if I can't get the rifle to shoot it gets a new barrel or gets sold depending on how much I like the rifle. And if it really sucks I guess I would send it back, too! But lots of guys don't reload so they should expect decent accuracy using good factory ammo.

These days there are plenty of hunting accuracy, really a 2MOA rifle will kill every deer or moose for most hunters. I just think the video is interesting about manufacturers claims. :)
 
well,,, Weatherby refunded my money after their service guy could not attain 1MOA with my rifle and their ammo
I was still a couple hundred in the red (various brands of premium ammo)

I first bought a Sauer 100 in 6.5x55 and with good ammo it would average around 1 moa 3 shot groups. They advertise 1 moa accuracy guarantee. I later bought the same rifle but in 7mm Rem. Mag. this rifle would not shoot close to a 1 moa group with any ammo or bullet weight I tried. I sent it back for warranty, the warranty gunsmith testing it could not get any better accuracy than I could and Sauer replaced the rifle. The replacement rifle was slightly better but very inconsistent, I managed to get one group that was about .6 moa then the very next group I shot, same ammo, same conditions was almost 4 moa. This is off a bench with proper benchrest bags and almost zero wind and cooling the barrel between shots. Out of the six groups, average was very close to 2 moa. Basically a 2 moa rifle. As goofy as some think the guy in the video is, he speaks the truth.
 
Last edited:
I had to take two runs at the video, he turned me off pretty early in the first one, but having another go at it holding the red hot needles to my eyes I got through it and agree, he does finally bring it all together, and has a little help along the way. So agree...watch the whole video, it will make sense.
 
watched it all
Only he can do it , is the story

Actually, that’s not what he’s saying at all. What he is saying is that there are some, I repeat some, rifles capable of doing it. For all of the rifles he’s owned/shot, he has one that will do it consistently with ammo that he has obviously tried on multiple occasions. If you take anything away from the video, take away the fact that when he averaged ALL of the groups he’s shot out of ALL the rifles he’s tested he came up with a 1.8” average. Almost 2 MOA.

And I have to add here, that like many people posting, I don’t especially enjoy his video. BUT, just because I don’t personally like his presentation doesn’t mean that he’s wrong, or that the information isn’t valid.
 
I think that's another aspect of the "guarantee" if the rifle is sub MOA in a machine rest, when talking about hunting rifles, which is what he is talking about. Is a machine rest sub MOA guarantee worth anything if a hunter using a rifle that is considerably lighter than a target rifle cannot make a sub MOA group despite using a good rest and good technique? I'm not talking about a box of ammo a year hunter that uses a sand bag or some improvised rest and no rear bag can't shoot a MOA group, either!

That would be a big problem if most, or even many of the rifles were as described.

Have a feeling that hunter, being a very capable shot, finds a factory ammo/handload combo he likes, the majority of the time. And if it takes some searching, "rifles can be picky" is a known phenomenon.

If not, he sells it and moves on, as happens sometimes. Sometimes he even tells the buyer it wasn't particularly accurate hahaha.

A few get sent back in annd exhanged.


But all of this hinges on most rifles not being the kinnd that barely hold a 3 shot, sub moa group when fired from a machine rest, and I think that's the case.


I first bought a Sauer 100 in 6.5x55 and with good ammo it would average around 1 moa 3 shot groups. They advertise 1 moa accuracy guarantee. I later bought the same rifle but in 7mm Rem. Mag. this rifle would not shoot close to a 1 moa group with any ammo or bullet weight I tried. I sent it back for warranty, the warranty gunsmith testing it could not get any better accuracy than I could and Sauer replaced the rifle. The replacement rifle was slightly better but very inconsistent, I managed to get one group that was about .6 moa then the very next group I shot, same ammo, same conditions was almost 4 moa. This is off a bench with proper benchrest bags and almost zero wind and cooling the barrel between shots. Out of the six groups, average was very close to 2 moa. Basically a 2 moa rifle. As goofy as some think the guy in the video is, he speaks the truth.


Sounds like two trash rifles in a row. Sorry man.

If my bolt gun randomly spat nearly 4 inch groups at 100 yards I'd be pretty pissed.

One like that really skews a testing average though.

Actually, that’s not what he’s saying at all. What he is saying is that there are some, I repeat some, rifles capable of doing it. For all of the rifles he’s owned/shot, he has one that will do it consistently with ammo that he has obviously tried on multiple occasions. If you take anything away from the video, take away the fact that when he averaged ALL of the groups he’s shot out of ALL the rifles he’s tested he came up with a 1.8” average. Almost 2 MOA.

Going with the above, what happens if you remove the two worst stinkers? The average is 1.8" but we're not seeing any other stats. Some error bars would be nice haha.

But either way, its that shooter, and usually 3 particular kinds of ammo.

No one guarantees "Hey, THAT guy can shoot SUB moa groups with any ammo he wants!". People shouldn't need to be told that....but then people believe all sorts of weirdness about their rifles. And their shooting ability lol.
 
Last edited:
That would be a big problem if most, or even many of the rifles were as described.

Have a feeling that hunter, being a very capable shot, finds a factory ammo/handload combo he likes, the majority of the time. And if it takes some searching, "rifles can be picky" is a known phenomenon.

If not, he sells it and moves on, as happens sometimes. Sometimes he even tells the buyer it wasn't particularly accurate hahaha.

A few get sent back in annd exhanged.


But all of this hinges on most rifles not being the kinnd that barely hold a 3 shot, sub moa group when fired from a machine rest, and I think that's the case.





Sounds like two trash rifles in a row. Sorry man.

If my bolt gun randomly spat nearly 4 inch groups at 100 yards I'd be pretty pissed.

One like that really skews a testing average though.



Going with the above, what happens if you remove the two worst stinkers? The average is 1.8" but we're not seeing any other stats. Some error bars would be nice haha.

But either way, its that shooter, and usually 3 particular kinds of ammo.

No one guarantees "Hey, THAT guy can shoot SUB moa groups with any ammo he wants!". People shouldn't need to be told that....but then people believe all sorts of weirdness about their rifles. And their shooting ability lol.

I didn't like his 1.8" either. A true factory ammo shooter or reloader setting up his rifles would have tried a half dozen loads (factory guy, even more from reloader) to see what each rifle preferred and run from those choices. Then the overall average of what was in the safe would be smaller than 1.8". If you just keep a few match type ammos on hand just for continuous testing of new rifles in and out the door to write and make videos about then that was not representative imo. That 1.8" won't apply to most of us...the number is less but at least it illustrates a point, all he needed to do there was caveat that number would be smaller in most real shooters/hunters gun selection of their main hunting rifles they keep and use (modern, not assuming the antique stuff included as the discussion was about the moa guarantee which means modern anyway).
 
People should jsut watch the video if they are interested in the topic of manufacturers accuracy guarantees. It's only 13 min long and the guy doesn't talk too fast so easy to run it at 1.25 or 1.5 speed to shorten it up.

I found it interesting the criteria and conditions that they put on their accuracy claims and also interesting was the cost involved with sending in what you feel is a poor performing rifle.

The guy for sure is a bit nerdy and i don't watch all his videos but sometimes I stumble on one with a topic I haven't really seen covered before. (like this one)

+1.
 
I didn't like his 1.8" either. A true factory ammo shooter or reloader setting up his rifles would have tried a half dozen loads (factory guy, even more from reloader) to see what each rifle preferred and run from those choices. Then the overall average of what was in the safe would be smaller than 1.8". If you just keep a few match type ammos on hand just for continuous testing of new rifles in and out the door to write and make videos about then that was not representative imo. That 1.8" won't apply to most of us...the number is less but at least it illustrates a point, all he needed to do there was caveat that number would be smaller in most real shooters/hunters gun selection of their main hunting rifles they keep and use (modern, not assuming the antique stuff included as the discussion was about the moa guarantee which means modern anyway).

you re way better than most of the shooters ... and if you look the video even hornadi is mentionning ... hunting rifles again ... 5 shot groups ... faxtory ammo ...
 
Last edited:
I didn't like his 1.8" either. A true factory ammo shooter or reloader setting up his rifles would have tried a half dozen loads (factory guy, even more from reloader) to see what each rifle preferred and run from those choices. Then the overall average of what was in the safe would be smaller than 1.8". If you just keep a few match type ammos on hand just for continuous testing of new rifles in and out the door to write and make videos about then that was not representative imo. That 1.8" won't apply to most of us...the number is less but at least it illustrates a point, all he needed to do there was caveat that number would be smaller in most real shooters/hunters gun selection of their main hunting rifles they keep and use (modern, not assuming the antique stuff included as the discussion was about the moa guarantee which means modern anyway).

Absolutely. That sounds a lot more representative.
 
you pretented to be a superior shooter than most ... prove it ...

you spruster and blakelely should show the world how good you are to us poor peons ...

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Where did I say that? Can you quote me on it? Cause I think you're severely misunderstanding me here. I said no such thing.

Honestly I'm pretty confused how anyone could take that from anything I've said. A quotation of where I say I am better than anyone, let alone most people, would be appreciated.
 
I have no idea what you're talking about.

Where did I say that? Can you quote me on it? Cause I think you're severely misunderstanding me here. I said no such thing.

Honestly I'm pretty confused how anyone could take that from anything I've said. A quotation of where I say I am better than anyone, let alone most people, would be appreciated.

re read your posts here on the thread ...
 
re read your posts here on the thread ...

You're the one who thinks I said it.

Spoiler alert: I didn't. Ever. In any way at all.

Whatever I said that bothered you, I'm sorry, but what you're sayinng right now is simply not true. If it was, you could just hightlight it. I'll explain what I mean.
 
Last edited:
you re way better than most of the shooters ... and if you look the video even hornadi is mentionning ... hunting rifles again ... 5 shot groups ... faxtory ammo ...

fair point, I keep forgetting the 5 shots and factory...and average shooters/hunters who go off the shelf gear, I only do that in comparisons from the initial set up to choose the ammo and already chosen rifles based on user reports of 5 shot accuracy sub-moa not manufacturer marketing stuff, it's been achievable likely all of 15 years and more to find factory rigs that could do sub moa 5 shots with factory ammo but had to choose carefully both the rifles and the ammo, I don't think I actually checked 5 rounds with my ruger grendel, when the first two out of it on paper at 200 and two clean breaks and you only see one hole through spotter you worry dud, wrong ammo etc. until you walk up and see them almost touching, good start, so I shoot 3 into 3/4 average all the time with it and don't actually know it's 5 shot potential but I wouldn't bet against it being over 1 moa, that's why I would have loved to take that challenge, most guys and rifles you're right, likely don't take things that far and maybe would be higher than buddies 1.8"? less guys like me who prefer to find as close to custom/reloading as I can with off the shelf...like to think his $50 bucks would have been in some danger of becoming mine, next time I'm out I'll run simulate prone on bipod to see, won't be till fall and may just hunt so will see, will try to post back here if I do, sounds like a perfectly fun challenge, I don't sleep well at night if I don't have at least one rig in the safe ready to go at all times that is comfortably moa or less in my hands majority of time for 3 and zero'd, checked cold multiple times etc...I build any new rigs first to achieve that before I let the last one go down the road
 
Back
Top Bottom