How much accuracy do you NEED?

[Jason_W]

They didn't. The first whitetail was successfully taken in 1986 when Nightforce scopes came out.

Tongue in cheek comments aside, I have no quarrel with accuracy hounds. I personally find the whole thing highly expensive boredom that gets a little overwhelming. First you have to spend thousands of dollars on a rifle, then at least as much as an optic, then there are bipods and probably other additional tack ons I don't even know about etc.

Couple the cost with the overall trend of most America shooters to want to be ultra snipers and (to me) the thought of throwing some buckshot into my bird gun and heading into the nearest cedar swamp becomes refreshingly simple and almost an act of rebellion.

 

[someguy2800]

Well, we've got another person who doesn't understand how inaccuracies from hold vs. wind vs. gun combine to produce accuracy on target...

It's not really hard math or anything, but I suppose the Monte Carlo sims have the advantage that they show people what it looks like.

I know the math is wrong but the point is that an inaccurate gun compounds the inaccuracy of the shooter and its pretty hard for a shooter to correct the issues with his shooting with a gun that won't hold a reasonable group. I'm no mathematician but its not hard to understand that if my hold is two inches right from center at 100 yards and I have a gun that groups 4 inches at that distance my shot can hit anywhere from dead center to 4 inches right or anywhere in between in a 4" circle depending on how the stars align. I've hunted enough to know I don't like to throw random chance in the equation. That 4 moa gun will still be suitible for where I hunt and my shooting ability but it may not be for someone in Wyoming.

To go back to the original question of "how much accuracy do you need?", I would have no problem going out tomorrow and killing a deer with a smooth bore bird barrel shotgun and rifled slugs, but I will not be taking a shot past 50 yards. The area I hunt provided oportunities for 30-50 yard shots so I guess that is the accuracy that I "need" to effectively hunt. 6" at 50 yards.

 

[horsey300]

They didn't. The first whitetail was successfully taken in 1986 when Nightforce scopes came out.

That's why the bison population was so decimated, only thing anyone could hit! Deer were obviously snared.

 

[horsey300]

Tongue in cheek comments aside, I have no quarrel with accuracy hounds. I personally find the whole thing highly expensive boredom that gets a little overwhelming. First you have to spend thousands of dollars on a rifle, then at least as much as an optic, then there are bipods and probably other additional tack ons I don't even know about etc.

Couple the cost with the overall trend of most America shooters to want to be ultra snipers and (to me) the thought of throwing some buckshot into my bird gun and heading into the nearest cedar swamp becomes refreshingly simple and almost an act of rebellion.

Well my current long range rig cost around $500 to put together, it is not awesome nor cool nor will anything like it ever appear in Hollywood, it can't make a 1" group at 500 yds, but with my handloads I'm minute of coyote vitals at 800 yds and as so many neighbors have educated them so well, the accuracy is "needed" to keep the brazen ones out of the newborn calf crop every year. I do envy you somewhat, I don't love the idea of living so close to such a humid climate, but to hunt a swamp is on a list of to dos I hope to fulfill some day.

 

[Clark]

If we count everyone who sights in a rifle every year, I think there are millions of men pursuing accuracy and precision with a rifle every year in America.
We can imagine there are millions of accuracy needs and wants.
There are 851 views on this thread, and probably as many accuracy needs here.
I will be shooting a mule buck over sagebrush 900 miles from home.
I am with special needs for accuracy.
I have a range finder, bipod, rear bag, and elevation turret on the scope.
When I tape a target to a cardboard box at 600 yards to practice, the key is to drive to the target and back.
Here is a picture of me getting my baby brother sighted in to 400 yards. He could not hang around for 600 yards, he would be late for lunch.
He has different accuracy needs.

 

[Jason_W]

Well my current long range rig cost around $500 to put together, it is not awesome nor cool nor will anything like it ever appear in Hollywood, it can't make a 1" group at 500 yds, but with my handloads I'm minute of coyote vitals at 800 yds and as so many neighbors have educated them so well, the accuracy is "needed" to keep the brazen ones out of the newborn calf crop every year. I do envy you somewhat, I don't love the idea of living so close to such a humid climate, but to hunt a swamp is on a list of to dos I hope to fulfill some day.

The cedar swamps were more of a back home thing. My parents' property in Northern Vermont is largely cedar swamp.

Where I live now, the closest analogue would be a stand of manazanita or whatever that ghastly species of squat, scratchy oak that grows everywhere around here is (I don't care for California if you can't tell by my location notes).

The point is that for me, hunting the thick stuff is more interesting and accuracy matters less in such environments than woodsmanship.

A while back when I was still kidding myself that I might be able to make at least a supplementary living as an gun/hunting/fishing/outdoor writer (you can't, don't bother trying) I was corresponding with the guys Ddupleks slugs over in Latvia. They were explaining that the style of big game hunting over there typically involved close range shots at running game. That intrigued me as it sounds way more exciting than sitting in a blind overlooking an alfalfa field for 12 hours in hopes that I get to try and snipe a deer that looks like a fuzzy spot on the horizon. To each their own and all, but I spend at least 40 hours a week sitting and enduring tedium, so the thought of doing that during my off hours isn't appealing, even if it might result in venison.

 

[.308 Norma]

I wonder how people ever managed to successfully hunt big game prior to the advent of the "precision" rifle and optics through which you can count the stars on the American flag on the moon.

Well, here's one of the big game hunting methods they used:
https://allaboutbison.com/buffalo-jumps/
And here's some of their big game hunting tools:
https://www.bing.com/images/search?...ng+tools&qpvt=ancient+hunting+tools&FORM=IGRE

Personally, for big game hunting I'll stick with my beloved .308 Norma Magnum and its 3X9 Weaver scope.

I didn't vote in the poll because my accuracy "minimums and maximums" change depending on what rifle I'm using, and what I'm using it for - I'm not always hunting when I'm using a rifle.

 

[olkowsr]

I need the most I can get... ideally a lazer!

Mainly because I'm super OCD about certain things.

 

[Jason_W]

"Well, here's one of the big game hunting methods they used:
https://allaboutbison.com/buffalo-jumps/"

And if you try that now, Fish and Game, wildlife biologists, and local and national news outlets will get all uppity. No appreciation for efficiency, I tell ya.

 

[CoalTrain49]

You probably should rephrase the question to how much precision do you need? Apparently some here are getting lost when they equate a rifle's precision with the shooters skill to shoot the rifle accurately in the field or on a bench.

There are two distinct things to measure here, the rifle's ability and the shooters ability. The gun is only capable of precision, The shooter has to zero the rifle and shoot it accurately. A rifle can be stabilized to measure its precision without the human factor being involved. If there is a human element obviously the rifles true precision can't be evaluated because the results will be different every time the rifle is tested. No body shoots the same groups everyday and no two shooters have the same skill level. Maybe 2 in 5 shooters actually have the skill to test a rifle's precision. I've shot some 1 moa groups but I can't consistently produce those with the same rifle.

Obviously we can't test a rifle the same way a mfg. can so all we can hope for is some amount of precision based on our skill as shooters. Our test won't be the rifles absolute precision though. The OP's question mostly relates to the rifle, the scope and the shooters skill which defines the accuracy of that combination.

 

[.308 Norma]

No body shoots the same groups everyday

I know I don't.

I've shot some 1 moa groups but I can't consistently produce those with the same rifle.

For me, it depends on the rifle I'm shooting. What I mean is, I have an old Ruger 77, 30-06 that I know will produce 1 moa, 3 shot groups if I'm having a good day. If I'm having a bad day, it's frustrating.
On the other hand, I have a "tricked out" Ruger 10-22 (heavy barrel, stabilizer, target trigger assembly, huge scope) that on a "good" day at 40 yards, I can put all 10 shots in one hole no bigger than a dime. I've never yet had a day "bad" enough that I couldn't keep a 3 shot group from my little 10-22 under 1 moa. Now that would be frustrating!

 

[LoonWulf]

You probably should rephrase the question to how much precision do you need?

Possibly, i am enjoying reading everyones opinions tho....on the question as well as, on how they want their guns to shoot and uses.

 

[MCMXI]

I understand your sentiment but your understanding of error propagation isn't quite right
Its sqrt(2^2 + 0.5^2) = 2.06 MOA

Error propagation relates to handling the errors which are reported as standard deviation for a given variable. Are you saying that the standard deviation of a "1/2 moa rifle" is 1/2 moa and the standard deviation for a "2 moa shooter" is 2 moa?

 

[EIB0879]

My hunting rifles will hold 3 shot groups under an inch at 100 yds consistently. I have a cheap .270 that I use as a loaner that sometimes will shoot over an inch but not much over. I have an old Rem 742 in 30.06 which is a minute of milk jug rifle so it sits in the safe even though I killed a lot of deer with it.

Most of my shots at deer are under 50 yards anyway and usually my beat up 30-30 gets the nod now. It will hod a pretty tight group with the Leverevolution 160 gr round.

 

[1stmarine]

It really depends on the firearm and range but for the typical firearm where is relevant to talk about this type of difference that
is the rifle I want to have as much accuracy possible as it is reasonable for the given platform and round.
In many modern calibers is 1moa or much better. If one is going to miss, it is a good thing to know it is something you can control and correct so
by minimizing that variable we get better chances to connect consistently.
And we will miss eventually no doubt... but just saying...

 

[Llama Bob]

Error propagation relates to handling the errors which are reported as standard deviation for a given variable. Are you saying that the standard deviation of a "1/2 moa rifle" is 1/2 moa and the standard deviation for a "2 moa shooter" is 2 moa?

His math is correct regardless of what the probability the group size is quoted at.

 

[rabid wombat]

I want it more accurate than me (or my wife or daughter). I want to be the weak link. The flip side, I want to know that any shot I decide to take is a hit (BIG key on decision!). A quick aside, the most proud of my wife deer hunting was the shot she chose NOT to take.

 

[armoredman]

I am a horrible shot, by internet standards, but this works for me. Shot this about 5 hours ago.

 

[Hardtarget]

I'm in the 1 moa group. NOT that I can hold 1moa...or that I have anything that I can expect that out of....however, I do want to hit what I aim at. So, that's where I want to be,so I keep my hunting inside my operating envelope. I practice as far out as I can trying to improve. That's all I can do. For the record, I wish I could get to moa at a thousand. That would be cool!

Mark

 

[Bobson]

Regarding accuracy, it totally depends. The type of rifle (bolt gun vs AR vs AK, etc), what's the rifle designed for and what do I want to use it for, cost of the rifle (to a lesser extent), etc. As far as accuracy being the most important factor for a rifle... no. Rarely, in fact.

For any rifle, the most important thing is reliability. I don't care if a bolt gun can shoot wings off a fly at 100 yards if it fails to strip a round off the mag every third shot because it has a faulty feed lip design or some other crap that I have to correct. Until that reliability fail is corrected, the gun's accuracy isn't a factor at all. Likewise, an AR or other "combat" rifle is worthless to me if it doesn't function reliably 100% of the time. Accuracy is much further down the list for those guns, in my eyes.

I voted 2MOA, for what it's worth. Beyond 2MOA, I can force a smile, depending on the platform (AK, M1A) but internally, I'd still be frustrated. For any bolt gun, I can probably accept 2MOA from a factory option, provided I can make adjustments like bedding, new stock, etc, and get the rifle to shoot 1MOA or better.

 

[RPZ]

You don't need moa for self defence and hunting - except maybe small game, small varmints aind certain competition disciplines.

 

[I6turbo]

I shoot Sporter and Varmint rifles so I'm not really a serious accuracy hound compared to serious accuracy hounds. I mostly shoot targets, and it's not fun for me if I can't get under MOA, at least out to a moderate range for whatever caliber (cartridge) I'm shooting at the time. Lately I've been feeling less than satisfied with anything that's not under half-MOA. And even more recently I picked up a gun that appears to be easily capable of .3 MOA or so with factory match ammo, and I now find myself kinda uninterested in my guns that are merely MOA or a bit less. And thinking about starting back reloading for a few guns... Seems like some type of slippery slope I'm on...

 

[MCMXI]

His math is correct regardless of what the probability the group size is quoted at.

If the definition of a 2 moa shooter is someone who can hold the centerline of the bore within a 2 moa circle as the bullet exits the barrel, and they have a rifle capable of keeping all shots within a 1/2 moa circle centered about the centerline of the bore as the bullet exits the muzzle, the worst group should be 2.5 moa.

 

[JohnKSa]

You probably should rephrase the question to how much precision do you need?

Thank goodness someone finally provided this clarification. This discussion had run to over 3 pages and yet, clearly no one had a clue what any one else was talking about because people were sometimes using the term "accuracy" instead of precision...

Error propagation relates to handling the errors which are reported as standard deviation for a given variable. Are you saying that the standard deviation of a "1/2 moa rifle" is 1/2 moa and the standard deviation for a "2 moa shooter" is 2 moa?

It takes more than 3, or even 5 or 10 shots to characterize the distribution and thereby provide the standard deviation of the distribution. The short answer is that no one is claiming that when someone calls a rifle an X MOA rifle that they are stating that the standard deviation/variance of the probability distribution function of the rifle's points of impact is equal to X MOA.

The math is a very good approximation of what will happen when two different systems with two different accuracy measurements of the general type under discussion are combined.

If the definition of a 2 moa shooter is someone who can hold the centerline of the bore within a 2 moa circle as the bullet exits the barrel, and they have a rifle capable of keeping all shots within a 1/2 moa circle centered about the centerline of the bore as the bullet exits the muzzle, the worst group should be 2.5 moa.

While that is correct, it is important to understand that getting that worst case group size in any group with a reasonable number of shots is very unlikely.

It would require that all of the following things happen within the number of shots fired for the group.

On one of the shots in the group, all of the following must be true:
1. The accuracy error of the rifle must be at or near maximum.
2. The accuracy error of the shooter must be at or near maximum.
3. The accuracy error DIRECTION of BOTH the rifle and the shooter must line up very closely for this shot.

That puts this shot on the extreme edge of the possible group size.

On another one of the shots in the group, all of the following must be true.
1. The accuracy error of the rifle must be at or near maximum.
2. The accuracy error of the shooter must be at or near maximum.
3. The accuracy error DIRECTION of BOTH the rifle and the shooter must line up very closely.
4. The accuracy error DIRECTION of both the rifle and shooter must be very nearly opposite of the accuracy error DIRECTION of the previously described shot.

That puts this shot on the extreme edge of the possible group size very nearly opposite the other shot described.

If ANY of the above 7 requirements are not met, the maximum group size will not occur. It takes all of them occurring within the number of shots in a group or the group size will be less than the maximum group size possible.

Stated another way what we need to occur is the following:

Each shot's error is composed of a Shooter error which has both magnitude (size of the error) and a direction (direction from the point of aim--up/down, up at a 45degree angle, etc.) and a Rifle error which also has both a magnitude and a direction.

Sm (shooter error magnitude) Sm1 would be the shooter error magnitude for shot 1.
Sd (shooter error direction)
Rm (rifle error magnitude)
Rd (rifle error direction)
Smax is the maximum error magnitude that the shooter can cause.
Rmax is the maximum error magnitude that the rifle can cause.

So what we need is for all of the following to be true for two of the shots in the group.

Sm1 = Smax
Sm2 = Smax
Rm1 = Rmax
Rm2 = Rmax
Sd1 = Rd1
Sd1 = Sd2+180degrees
Rd1 = Rd2+180degrees

If you think it's easy to get that many numbers to line up just right, you just might lose a lot of money on lottery tickets...

 

[jmorris]

I want to be the weak link.

The good news is that's almost always the case. Be it how you broke the shot or the rifle, optic, ammunition, rest, day, target, etc, you picked out for yourself.

I have never missed a shot I didn't take.