Acceptable accuracy in a rifle! What’s that mean??

[mdwest]

For my more modern bolt guns, I expect sub MOA accuracy.. that’s what most manufacturers like Christensen, fierce, seekins, etc all “guarantee”.. but truth be told if I can find a good hunting load that reliably produces 1 MOA I find that perfectly acceptable..

as a follow up to the previous... its honestly pretty amazing just how accurate a "hunting" rifle can be these days.. numerous manufacturers are offering "sub MOA" guarantees.. and while there are some qualifiers/discriminators associated (typically theyre talking about 3 round groups, not 5 round.. using match grade ammo.. under very controlled conditions).. many of these manufacturers arent kidding...

as an example.. I picked up another Christensen Arms Mesa this past weekend... its in 308 (shouldnt be a surprise to anyone that knows me)..

I have a particularly accurate 308 handload that all of my other 308's really like (I get sub MOA out of the kimber, rem 600, and ruger bolt actions.. about 1.15 MOA out of my daughters Howa 1500.. and about 1.5 MOA out of the 2x AR10's we hunt pigs with.. all using this particular load).... so I took the new Christensen to the range today to get a zero on the rifle and see how well it groups.. if it did well, the intention was to take it to the woods this weekend for opening day of deer season...

Understand that many years ago I considered myself a very good rifle shooter.. I competed for a few years.. attended multiple "sniper" schools (both military and law enforcement) and put a whole lot of rounds down range back in those days (other people were paying for it.. so.. why not? )... I also worked for a few years as a major metro area SWAT sniper and ended up the sniper team leader before leaving law enforcement..

but these days, I consider myself maybe a little above average at best... I simply dont shoot nearly that much anymore.. and my eyes and body have both grown old... so.. the below pic is NOT me bragging about my abilities.. this is me saying the rifle is really nothing short of incredible in terms of accuracy and handling compared to most hunting rifles of old where maybe a 1.5-2" group was considered more than acceptable out of a bolt gun..

I pulled the shot on the left.. I knew it as soon as the shot was released.. the gun is new to me and this was the very first group after I achieved a 100 yard zero... the other 2 rounds speak for themselves..

this was done at an indoor 100 yard range in DFW (Rifle Gear off 121).. shots were taken at 100 yards..

so... back to the original question... whats acceptable accuracy?

I think "it depends"..

what rifle are you shooting? what caliber are you shooting (something known for accuracy?)? what is the shooter capable of doing (a .5 MOA gun isnt going to be all that accurate in the hands of a 5 MOA shooter).. etc..etc..

but with the right gun, ammo, shooter combination.. these days just about anything is possible.. even when using a relatively inexpensive rig (this was from a base model Christensen Mesa, with a Leupold VX3 3.5-10x40 optic).. nothing special at all honestly...

the gun is really just that good.. while I was feeding it known quality ammo.. this ammo wasn’t built for this particular rifle…

Although I don’t think I’ll be brewing anything special up for it now… I think I’ll just stick with what I’ve got…

 

[R eight]

Is accuracy often confused with precision? I reckon it often is.

 

[mark-hunter]

Probably, but if somebody shoots accurately and precisely, then it is irrelevant!

 

[Sabre]

To answer your question directly about the ads you see where people say it. When I see that in a rifle ad, I would read between the lines that the gun's accuracy is not going to be "knock your socks off" impressive and has diminished overtime and that's a nice vague way of saying it.

Also, asking a question like this on the internet is almost always a great way to get a million people talking about how they, and their guns, can shoot half MOA all day. The reality is that if you watch where real people are challenged to show up and shoot that well in real life, almost none can. Even MOA accuracy at 100 yards is much more rare than most people think.

The new common guarantee of 1 MOA accuracy out of the box is even a bit of a....fib, to be polite. Generally the gun just needs to shoot 1 MOA once on a 3 shot group to get sent out the door with that guarantee, even if it took 100 shots to make it happen. Some places don't even test it, they just send the gun out with the guarantee and bank on the vast majority of people not sending it back when they get it.

 

[Nhoro]

My hunting rifle, a CZ 550 in 30-06 is realistically a 2 moa rifle. That is with a variety of factory ammo, properly zeroed over the years. I will work up a good handload one of these days. As One Day said, vitals are pretty big on african game and so I reckon 2-3 moa will work. Varminting would need better

 

[steve white]

I only ever see descriptions of "acceptable accuracy" applied to older guns, with the implication being that they will do under 2 Moa., and the buyer hoping for 1.5 Moa. I don't think there is a company today that would offer that guarantee in a bolt gun--they would probably not make any sales to speak of.

 

[Puddle]

Here's how I go about all this...

Figure out the vital zone of what I'm after and at typical distances.

Figure out what the rifle & ammo combination consistently produces in group sizes during field practice (sticks, off-hand, etc.)

Then, whatever the verdict, I then double the expected group size to account for all the field variables I'm likely to encounter (adrenaline dump, out of breath, lousy shooting position, uncooperative animal, etc.)

I find this approach keeps me, for the most part, out of trouble dealing with poor shots, long tracking sessions, lost animals, etc.

YMMV.

 

[MS 9x56]

My hunting rifle, a CZ 550 in 30-06 is realistically a 2 moa rifle. That is with a variety of factory ammo, properly zeroed over the years. I will work up a good handload one of these days. As One Day said, vitals are pretty big on african game and so I reckon 2-3 moa will work. Varminting would need better

Not the experience with my 550 FS in 9.3x62. It shoots sub MOA with most loads from 232 grain to 286 grain. I absolutly love the set trigger on it.

 

[DG870]

Is a hunting rifle that is a 1 moa rifle from the bench still a 1 moa rifle in the field? I know it gives you a warm fuzzy feeling to see tiny groups on paper from the bench but how does that translate to shooting from field positions. If you have a 0.25 moa rifle from a bench rest with a rear bag that you shoot 2 moa from field positions than you have a 2 moa hunting rifle. I know I can’t shoot as well as my rifles do when shooting off sticks or a bipod or a backpack. For the average shooter, a 1.5 to 2 moa rifle will probably shoot better than the shooter can hold the rifle in most field positions. This rifle and shooter combination will be able to take game at a reasonable distance. (I know, what is the definition of reasonable distance - another topic that has been beat to death)

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

Is accuracy often confused with precision? I reckon it often is.

View attachment 643263

I would say the difference between low accuracy/high precision and high accuracy/high precision in your picture is just a few clicks on scope

 

[mdwest]

Is a hunting rifle that is a 1 moa rifle from the bench still a 1 moa rifle in the field?

It absolutely is.

any deviation from the rifles capability is on the shooter...

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

I’m still looking at wood stock BSA & Parker Hale rifles in .243 & 6.5x55
And keep getting the answer “ acceptable accuracy “ WTH does that mean?
I know some are 50/60/70 years old, what is average or best for these rifle
I like wood vintage but vague description's about them are driving me nuts

Acceptable accuracy for me is what I say it is, the same goes for you. What you find is acceptable and what I do may be a bit different, but it depends of course on our intended use for the rifle. So neither of us wrong.

Hearing or reading someone saying "acceptable accuracy" that is trying to sell me something is just noise to be ignored. Show me the targets and I'll decide for myself if it's acceptable to me.

 

[mdwest]

I would say the difference between low accuracy/high precision and high accuracy/high precision in your picture is just a few clicks on scope

the argument being made is similar to the one used in "quality" discussions..

many people confuse quality with grade...

something can be a total piece of crap.. and still demonstrate quality.. since quality is defined by how consistently something performs or meets expectations when compared to what was intended (if you buy a $1 Chinese extension cord that says it will last for 2 years.. and it actually lasts you 3 years.. quality of that extension cord was very high).. even though a $25 german extension cord might last you 8 years, but was advertised to have a 10 year lifespan.. the quality of the german cord would be "low")...

vs grade.. which categorizes a products features..


precision rifle nerds get caught up in the use of terms that non precision rifle nerds dont really care about..

we all know when a common, run of the mill shooter, whether a hunter or just sportsman, or whatever asks about "accuracy" what they are asking about is how tight of a group the rifle will shoot...

but the precision rifle guys separate precision and accuracy... with accuracy really referring to how consistent a result is to a known value (can you consistently put the holes in the 9 ring or better.. whether the group is 1" or 1.5" or 2", etc.. which really relates more to the shooters abilities than the rifles.. vs "precision" which they use to refer to the rifles ability to make tiny little groups (tied more to the rifles abilities than the shooters)..

the truth is he precision rifles version of these definitions is inconsistent with other definitions.. if you look at how most engineers view precision vs accuracy.. you get different results (albeit still very similar definitions/descriptions)...

 

[PHOENIX PHIL]

the argument being made is similar to the one used in "quality" discussions..

many people confuse quality with grade...

something can be a total piece of crap.. and still demonstrate quality.. since quality is defined by how consistently something performs or meets expectations when compared to what was intended (if you buy a $1 Chinese extension cord that says it will last for 2 years.. and it actually lasts you 3 years.. quality of that extension cord was very high).. even though a $25 german extension cord might last you 8 years, but was advertised to have a 10 year lifespan.. the quality of the german cord would be "low")...

vs grade.. which categorizes a products features..


precision rifle nerds get caught up in the use of terms that non precision rifle nerds dont really care about..

we all know when a common, run of the mill shooter, whether a hunter or just sportsman, or whatever asks about "accuracy" what they are asking about is how tight of a group the rifle will shoot...

but the precision rifle guys separate precision and accuracy... with accuracy really referring to how consistent a result is to a known value (can you consistently put the holes in the 9 ring or better.. whether the group is 1" or 1.5" or 2", etc.. which really relates more to the shooters abilities than the rifles.. vs "precision" which they use to refer to the rifles ability to make tiny little groups (tied more to the rifles abilities than the shooters)..

the truth is he precision rifles version of these definitions is inconsistent with other definitions.. if you look at how most engineers view precision vs accuracy.. you get different results (albeit still very similar definitions/descriptions)...

I can normally calibrate accuracy, I normally cannot calibrate precision.

 

[MS 9x56]

From the bench tells you what the rifle is capable of off hand or off sticks tells you what the shooter is capable of.

 

[F. Vaccaro]

Looking back, at hunter sight in day at our club, I helped zero a number of REM 760s in .30-06, .308, & .270, that would Shoot under 2”. I’ll bet no one missed a deer because of lack of accuracy.

 

[WyoBull]

Absolutely, mdwest! What gives me confidence in the field when it’s time to lower the boom is knowing that my rifle shoots bug holes.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I’m still looking at wood stock BSA & Parker Hale rifles in .243 & 6.5x55
And keep getting the answer “ acceptable accuracy “ WTH does that mean?
I know some are 50/60/70 years old, what is average or best for these rifle
I like wood vintage but vague description's about them are driving me nuts

@poco
To me acceptable accuracy varies depending on my hunting .
If'n I'm hunting litre critters then less than an inch at 100 yards is fine
For medium game and inch and a half at 100 is fine for me .
Fortunately all my rifles are less than an inch at 100 yards but some people try for the elusive little groups that can be hard to come by.
Most game is shot at 200 yards or less so a So a rifle that groups and HONEST inch and a half hundred yards groups is perfectly fine for me .
Bob

 

[R eight]

I would say the difference between low accuracy/high precision and high accuracy/high precision in your picture is just a few clicks on scope

Quite often it is. But, sometimes it’s the shooters technique.

 

[rookhawk]

In my experience, I haven’t seen many vintage rifles that were low accuracy. Handloads or different factory ammo often turn a 4” group dullard into a 1” group rifle. I’m happy shooting any rifle that can produce 1.5” groups at a 100 yards considering almost all my hunting is inside of 250 yards.