Sub-MOA shooters

[tcoz]

This is a rhetorical question but it would be interesting to hear some thoughts about it.

Are there really as many sub-MOA shooters out there as you would believe by reading forum posts?
I pretty closely follow about a half dozen various forums, some are narrowly focused on a specific rifle (e.g. Garand, M1A etc) and others are a little more general (e.g. THR, bolt action rifles, Sig Forum, Savage forum, etc). If I were to take as gospel all of the various posts that I read, then we have a sport/hobby filled with marksmen who are sub-MOA shooters all day, every day. Really.......?
I consider myself a slightly above average rifleman and on a good day I might be able to shoot two or three out of ten sub-MOA three shot groups and maybe one five shot sub-MOA group if it's a really good day and only with a couple of my rifles. I can easily post a picture of my best group or groups and make it look like I shoot sub-MOA all day but I don't do that.
So, what are the criteria for considering yourself a sub-MOA rifleman? How many groups out of how many shot? How many shots per group etc? What about flyers or sighters? Personally, I have to call them (to myself) in order to consider them flyers.
The other day I shot the following target with my 66 year old eyes on my new iron sighted M1A at 100 yards......


I consider it to be representative of how well I can shoot. 39 shots (bottom two were sighters and before sight adjustment) and CEP, which I consider to be the best accuracy measurement with large groups, of 1.348"....but it's a 5.9" group.
Other than posting it here (and one other place to demonstrate the camera system), I probably wouldn't post it anywhere because based on what I read, almost anybody can and should be able to shoot better and I don't want to deal with the comments.

Like I said, this was just a rhetorical question and based on some idle musings but I'd be interested to know what other people think..........and NOT about my shooting

 

[rayatphonix]

I'll go first. I shoot off a front bag or bipod. I use a scope. I use 5 shots to evaluate a group. Flyers are included. I don't know if that makes me a sub-moa shooter or not. I do know it works to help me evaluate a load or rifle.

I know I need to spend more time practicing while standing or kneeling. If I was better at those techniques I would definitely be a better shooter.

 

[Demi-human]

I am of the thinking that many only place thier best work for others to see. A sub MOA shooter I am not, yet. Yes, at times I can get a very good group, but I feel as though more than half of them must be below one MOA to count my self as such a shooter. I also feel fliers count. After all I tried, fired the round and belived it would hit the mark. If it didn't I would still be my error. Whether a bad hold, bad pull or bad handload.

I suppose if half were under and the other half were 'all over the map', I still could not claim the title.

 

[tcoz]

rayatphonix, do you consider yourself a sub-MOA shooter and why or why not? What criteria do you use? Just curious. I'm trying to determine whether I'm looking at this all wrong.
Thanks.

 

[LoonWulf]

Accurate heavy rifle, lite recoiling round, and a solid rest, and i can produce consistent groups under moa.....on a still day.

Real field shooting? Im pretty happy with being able to hit 6-8" rocks with my first or second shots out to 300, past that if there's any wind it gets dicier.
Most of my shots at longer range are taken from the truck either over the hood or off the bed rails, so i dont consider that "field" shooting.
Sitting, is what i guage my effective range with, prone offten leaves rocks and crap in my way, so it dosent get used as much as id like.

So to answer the question...now that ive rambled...

For myself and many folks its situational.
Perfect, or even good, situation for repeatability, and most of us can shoot moa at short range..say 100yds
As more distance, environmental factors, positional stability, and equipment come into play that consistency drops dramatically.
The guys who cope with the changes well, will continue to shoot something around what they did at 100. The guys who dont will suddenly find groups getting larger in exponential ways.

 

[TN Outlaw]

Ive never thought about it as in wether im a sub-moa shooter or not. I dont believe i am. I just know with a good shooting rifle, good quality scope, a pet load, off of a vice, some of my guns with me behind them shoot 3-5shot sub-moa most of the time. Some of my guns, if one of those things are changed, they wont shoot that well. Others just seem to shoot tight no matter what load.

Without my vice or a good rest i dont think i would have many sub-moa groups. I am def the weakest link in the chain. Now days i do think there are lots of guns capable of sub-moa with the right set-up. Even alot of entry level rifles.

With that said, one lucky time out of ten is not consistently shooting sub-moa, 3 shots are alot easier than 5. 5 is waaaay easier than 10 and so on. I in no way believe alot of what ive read folks claiming. Always shooting .3 moa with factory rifles from bi-pods. What? Not me.

I gotta throw this in, a new guy at work that i heard was an excellent and entertaining liar, heard i was a "gun guy" and came up to me talking about shooting and whatnot. He proceeded to look me in my eyes and tell me he shot dime sized groups at 700yds with a factory Savage 10BA Stealth in 6.5creedmoor. I just laughed and walked away. Poor boy dont know he's a world record shooter?

 

[stringnut]

I am not a sub MOA shooter. It takes quite a bit of practice to even shoot less than that even at 100 yards consistently. Also the setup has to be rock steady. Those that claim tiny groups with just a bipod and no rear bag are suspect. There might be people who can do it ,but, haven't seen one. When I shot a lot it was within my capabilities to shoot most groups under a MOA at 100 yards if conditions were good. However, this is not proof of a whole lot. Never having shot groups at more than 100 yards with a solid bench set up I have no clue if I could replicate the results at a longer distance. There are those that can and I have seen proof, but, it sure isn't me!

 

[Corn-Picker]

Personally I've always found the idea of group size a little useless; I think we should talk about standard deviation and probability. For instance, if your standard deviation at 100 yards was 0.50 inches that means about two-thirds of your shots would be within an inch, and 95% (19 cartridges out of a box of 20) would fall within two inches.

So am I sub MOA? Let me know how many shots are in the group and I can give you the probability that all will be within one MOA at the ranges I shoot.

I agree with whomever said people tend to post their best work. I once took three shots at a hundred yard target, standing offhand with no sling/weird equipment, and all fell within one inch. Chances I'll ever accomplish that again -- very very low.

 

[chicharrones]

I'm not a sub moa shooter and I do count flyers in my attempted groups.

I have a couple rifles that can put up sub moa groups (3 to 5 shots only) on occasion if all goes well and the gun is on a front bag. Of course I've put up photos of those groups on the internet as I'm glad to have evidence of when everything came together nicely that day.

 

[salt&battery]

for a while I had access to a farm where 3-700 yd shots could be taken. I brought a lot of braggarts from gun stores there and their groups that they said they could shoot at certain ranges looked like buckshot at 60 yds

 

[someguy2800]

I have no problem shooting sub moa 100-200 yard groups with many different rifles including sporter weight hunting rifles. BUT, in order for me to do this I need to be on a good stable shooting bench (I have one at home) and on bags front and back, and need to have at least about a 6 power scope. Can I shoot moa groups on a bipod and rear bag? Usually. Can I shoot moa on a pair of shooting sticks? No chance. Can I shoot moa sitting, prone with no rest, or standing? No chance. Can I shoot moa with iron sights? No chance. Can I shoot moa at 800 yards in the wind? No chance.

I have shot 25 shot 1/2 moa groups at 100-200 yards with my varmint rifle on the bench but I would struggle to hold all shots on an ice cream pail at 100 yards standing with no rest. My father in law on the other hand who used to shoot various types of practical competition shooting cannot hold as tight of groups on the bench but he can shoot much much better than me standing. So I guess I would say that I am a good bench shooter but only a average or mediocre shooter offhand. For deer hunting I will only take shots with the gun resting on something.

 

[someguy2800]

Oh and in most cases if someone says there gun shoots dime size groups, that usually means it shot a quarter size 3 shot group once.

I would suspect that many people that say they are not an moa shooter have either never owned a really accurate rifle or have never shot on a really good rest. I guess for most people it's a moot point as they don't require that level of accuracy and don't bring a shooting bench hunting.

 

[CraigC]

I don't think about it that way. If I post a target, it's to brag about the firearm/cartridge/load that produced it, not the shooter. I view others in the same light.

 

[tcoz]

CraigC, I think all of us would say the same thing but I don't get that impression from all of the posts I read, especially from a few unnamed forums.

 

[Varminterror]

Shooting Precision is the only "sport" in which it is so grossly popular to intentionally program in so many considerations to avoid the responsibility of performance.

Whenever I hear a shooter talk about their precision "considering the shooting of a factory rifle, cheap ammo, off hand, with iron sights," I immediately think about how I have NEVER heard a sprinter talk about how fast they can run, "considering the wearing of dress shoes, carrying a 40lb backpack, running in knee deep mud." It just doesn't happen.

The true test of a sprinter's speed minimizes (or eliminates) all considerable variables - sprinting spikes, rubberized track, known date for training cycle planning, etc. Equally, a true test of a rifle's precision minimizes (or eliminates) all considerable variables - including shooter excuses.

If you want to test how well you can shoot off-hand, then shoot off-hand. But it's either arrogant or ignorant to pretend the guys shooting 1/4-1/2MOA don't have to demonstrate marksmanship skills to achieve those groups any less so than shooting a >4MOA group offhand with irons.

Too many times in my experience have I proven, repeatedly and consistently, shooter skill does indeed matter even when shooting from a rest. I have had many opportunities as a rifle instructor and as a gun builder to take new shooters onto the range - and giving them the rifle on the rest, it's VERY common to be able to coach them to shoot 1-1.5MOA on their first session. In shooting the same rifle myself, I can typically coax 0.6-0.75MOA out of the rifle. My wife RSO's for me in many of my courses, and typically with any rifle I can produce 0.6-0.75MOA, she can coax 0.4-0.5moa. Despite a very rifle friendly (shooter forgiving) shooting platform, given 10 different rifles, barring any extreme stock fitment, I'd expect the same 1, 2, 3 ranking between a new shooter, myself, and my wife, 10 for 10, regardless of the precision inherent to the rifle. Stand us up for off-hand shooting, the wheels will come off for the new shooter, and I'll eek myself ahead of my wife - simply because the shooter's contribution of off-hand skill becomes overwhelmingly important, and I'm more practiced than my wife. However, I wouldn't brag about my ability to run faster than Usain Bolt, but only when he's carrying a 40lb weight vest, and I don't brag about being able to cripple my wife - the better absolute marksman - simply by finding a position where I have better technique than she.

 

[Bfh_auto]

On a bench with shooting bags and hand loads, I can shoot better than 1 moa to 300 yds. In a seated position it goes up closer to 2.5 moa. If I'm standing it better be within 75 yards.

 

[Danoobie]

The majority of my guns should shoot MOA and don't. I have one which shoots .5MOA.
IMO, if I could make the other rifles shoot MOA, I would be a "MOA shooter". As such,
I can only state that I have one rifle which compensates for my mistakes enough to shoot sub MOA.

 

[z7]

With my custom 308, off a bipod with a rear bag, prone or at a bench I am sub Moa all day, 1/2 Moa in a good day

With my 16" ar 15 off hand, 3 or 4 Moa most of the time, I consider it an accomplishment to hit a 8" steel plate at 250yds offhand

I have shot sub Moa groups out of my ar15s but I don't use them in a that capacity, scopes from a good rest

The internet is full of people who love to exaggerate

 

[Tentwing]

Out of my many rigs I only have a few of rifle set ups that are capable of sub MOA results. In order for that to happen I need ammo that that particular rifle likes,a steady table,a good front rest and rear sand bad and a perfect calm weather day. Take any of those consistent conditions from me and you can forget about MOA much less sub MOA. All this be said I am referring to the abilities of the rig ......not the shooter.

Truth be told if I am shooting standing with NO support I am very happy if my groups are minute of softball at 100 yards. Also truth be told ..... You will never see me post a picture of those groups

 

[Axis II]

for me this year has been very laxed in shooting. the first 2yrs of my handloading and shooting a lot i was shooting 4-5 days a week. mostly 223 heavy barrel with handloads of a front and rear bag and could consistently send 5 shots i could cover with a dime and at worst a nickel and i could do this 4 out of the 5 days. I don't have the pics handy but ive posted a few of the pics on here. some people actually do have a very good knack for shooting. it takes a lot of practice, patience and money all of which i lost last summer. now if i can get 5 to at least touch each other im fine with that.

 

[chicharrones]

The other day I shot the following target with my 66 year old eyes on my new iron sighted M1A at 100 yards......

I consider it to be representative of how well I can shoot.

That's pretty dang good for iron sights and old eyes. At 52, I can't see iron sights worth a damn anymore.

The target below is shot with my only AR and I had to cheat using a red dot I had at the time. The forend was rested on a rubber block trying to hit that 4" white circle.

Now, that AR wears a scope which helps my eyes even more.

 

[CraigC]

Seems to me that the line is getting blurred here between bench rest groups and groups shot from less stable positions.

 

[Art Eatman]

Any time I talk about group size, the shooting is from a bench rest, and my standard test of a rifle is a five-shot string.

I mess around with trigger pull, forearm bedding and handloads to work up the tightest consistent groups. If I can't get sub-MOA, I sell the rifle. Sometimes I've had brand new rifles do sub-MOA. Other rifles took extensive "messing".

 

[chicharrones]

Seems to me that the line is getting blurred here between bench rest groups and groups shot from less stable positions.

That's a fair point. Personally, I don't have a full bench rest set up, so I just shoot off of front support when sighting in or back when I'd do online "postal matches".

Below is a different gun using the same type of rubber block up front with my weak hand under the butt stock, like I usually shoot when shooting from a bench. The 5 shot group to the left was posted on the internet years ago as it was for a online "match", therefore that group was my entry. So yes, that group was cherry picked.

 

[Andrew Leigh]

Three shot groups off a sturdy table with front and back rests. All "flyers" count.

My 6.5x55mm consistently shoots 0.60MOA. This with 120gr. Sierra Pro Hunters, 130gr. Accubonds and 140gr. SGK bullets.
My 30-06 is generally 0.9MOA with 180gr. Accubonds and 180gr. SGK's
My .375 is generally 1.5MOA with 300gr. Accubonds ....... except for the group you see in my profile pic, 0.25MOA. Have not got close ever since so not reflective of performance but real prod of that with a medium calibre.

I am not a very good shot and if I practiced more I am sure I could get better. I am hunter and not a target shooter.

I think what also counts is that all my rifles were bought new, all have decent optics, either Zeiss or Leupold, are correctly bedded and I pedantically load my own ammo.