sub moa rifles....riiiiight


PDA






kir_kenix
April 22, 2007, 01:53 AM
it just seems that everybody i meet at the shooting range has a rifle (or most of the time RIFLES) that are 1" sureshot super rifles. the same can be said about gun writers. seriously, everything that every gun writer reviews seems to group .00005" at 650 yards.
i think that anybody could shoot a 1" or less group, if they shot enough groups. i mean, i have a few rifles that if i do my part can group at, around, or slightly below one inch, but not every time. not nearly every time. and most of the time it is around...as in above.
what got me thinking about this subject is that i went to my local gun range today with some of my buddies (buddies w/ super rifles that shoot .01" groups every day but saturday when I am around). each one of them bragged about what sort of groups they could produce, and none of them (myself included) performed to that pinnacle. sure it was windy, but most groups, even off rests, were at or around the 2" or above mark.
anyway, i was just wondering what everybody else's opinion was on this subject. i think that we seem to only remember the really good groups and not the AVERAGE or TYPICAL group. 2-4" groups should be plenty for most hunting, but we seem obsessed w/ moa.
i would never call anbody at my range a liar, but i think that most of us are frequently guilty of rather selective memory. does everyone else seem to fall into this line of thinking with me, or have i just been up WAY too long?

If you enjoyed reading about "sub moa rifles....riiiiight" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Avenger29
April 22, 2007, 01:58 AM
Most of the modern production rifles today are limited by the shooter.

Of course, most people bragging on their rifles in the "Hey, hey, look at me! I've got a sniper rifle and that means I am a sniper!" manner couldn't hit the broadside of a barn from the inside.

P.S. These people are usually packing a Glock 7:p

kir_kenix
April 22, 2007, 02:05 AM
oh, im not inferring that the rifle isnt CAPABLE of moa groups, just that they are not the norm. for instance i have a stevens .223 that i shot a 1/2 group w/ today. i dont think that makes it a 1/2 rifle, just because i shot that group once today (w/ s&b 55gr fmj from a bi-pod in 10-12 mph wind). i USUALLY shoot just under 2" with the same ammo. thats what i am getting at i guess (or at least i hope that i am getting at something...lol)

270Win
April 22, 2007, 02:18 AM
If the rifle is capable of doing it, then it's fair to judge it by that, even if infrequent. I agree with you, though, that people SHOULD say "It has achieved half-minute-of-angle groups on occasion" to be entirely accurate; but that doesn't sound as impressive as "it's a half minute of angle rifle", not nearly so ;)

I also agree with Avenger29 that most contemporary production rifles ARE capable of MOA or better these days, given a good shooter and good conditions. Thus the high number of shooters who have, at one time or another, achieved such lofty results...

Freelance Tax Collector
April 22, 2007, 02:27 AM
I think most of the accuracy standards are made from rests, so it is easy to see how such accuracy is attained from control situations like these. My best group that I've ever fired was a 3 shot .65 MOA fired from my PSS .300 win mag with TTI armory 190 grain AMAXs bipodded in the prone. Again, this was in a zero wind, zero stress, control situation. I'd post pics, but my other computer with all my pictures was stolen, so you can go ahead and call me a liar and a commie and a pig and get it over with.

Waywatcher
April 22, 2007, 02:32 AM
I can honestly say I can shoot my hunting rifle into MOA. Sitting on a bench. With a rest. With little to no wind. I've done it, so I know I can. Take away some of the controls and my groups widen up, and I'm the first to admit it.

I think some people just have a bragging problem, be it about their car, their boat, their house, their rifle, etc.

Beetle Bailey
April 22, 2007, 03:14 AM
Well, I have seen some silly antics at the range.

One guy I know brings out several rifles to each range trip. He takes one out and shoots it until he gets a good group. Let's say he gets 3 or 4 groups that are about 2". Then he gets one group that measures 1". He stops, cuts out and saves the 1" group to attach to the rifle, and moves on to the next rifle.

Another time, this guy was shooting his 6mm PPC and doing fantastic. He already had a couple of 0.5 MOA groups but he was on a roll. He put the first four shots of the group into a hole just ever so slightly larger than the bullet diameter. :what: He was really sweating it because he was afraid to take the last shot and ruin a very nice group. He spent almost ten minutes debating whether or not to even shoot the last shot. :uhoh: I suggested he go ahead and take the shot, but in the end he passed and kept it as a great four-shot group.

Me? My Savage does shoot sub-MOA. I shot six groups and they were all under 1 inch, so I'm gonna go ahead and call it a sub-MOA rifle. I just don't tell you about the ten other rifles I have that I haven't shot even one sub-MOA group with. ;)

SunRunner
April 22, 2007, 04:38 AM
Ive found that many factors can affect ones ability to achieve consistent tight groups at a given distance. I have a old Model 70 Winchester 22-250 with a standard barrel and a 3x9 Leupold VX scope that in the past was capable of putting 10 rounds into a group at 100 yards. Obviously this was bench resting on sand bags.

Now, what it took for me to be able to do this on any specific day was another thing. I found that first and foremost that shooting early in the morning, 7:30am ish on a nice crisp and clear 50 degree day was optimal. I would have required a good nights sleep and a light breakfast. No pancakes, eggs and sausage. Caffeine from any source seemed to impact my ability so coffee was out until I was done shooting.

I also reloaded my own ammo. I would use only Winchester brass that had been fire-formed to this specific rifles chamber and then trimmed and neck sized only. Every case was prepped methodically, cleaned and measured with a dial caliper. Always used the exact same lot CCI primer, new powder and Hornady bullets. Every powder charge and bullet was weighed on my un-dampened Redding scale. I found that using my magnetically dampened RCBS scale would affect the consistency. Every finished cartridge was then measured for overall length and possible damage such a nicks on the copper jacket.

The first round out of a cold clean barrel was always high to the right but then all subsequent rounds typically would stabilize into the above mentioned group.

On the other side of this on any given day with about any ammo, a hearty breakfast w/coffee and a light wind a 1 2 group was very achievable. However, for me to get the nice sub-M.O.A. groups the moon and stars pretty much had to be aligned as stated above but it was worth it.

On a side note after storing this rifle and without it being fired for the last 25 years I cleaned it up and took it out last Thursday. I used Remington Express 55 grain JSP. Suffice to say I could have shot better groups with 00 buck in my shotgun. I really dont now what happened to it while stored but it should be fun to get it back into shape. Shortly I maybe looking for a little advise on this one.

gdvan01
April 22, 2007, 05:50 AM
it just seems that everybody i meet at the shooting range has a rifle (or most of the time RIFLES) that are 1" sureshot super rifles. the same can be said about gun writers. seriously, everything that every gun writer reviews seems to group .00005" at 650 yards.
i think that anybody could shoot a 1" or less group, if they shot enough groups. i mean, i have a few rifles that if i do my part can group at, around, or slightly below one inch, but not every time. not nearly every time. and most of the time it is around...as in above.
what got me thinking about this subject is that i went to my local gun range today with some of my buddies (buddies w/ super rifles that shoot .01" groups every day but saturday when I am around). each one of them bragged about what sort of groups they could produce, and none of them (myself included) performed to that pinnacle. sure it was windy, but most groups, even off rests, were at or around the 2" or above mark.
anyway, i was just wondering what everybody else's opinion was on this subject. i think that we seem to only remember the really good groups and not the AVERAGE or TYPICAL group. 2-4" groups should be plenty for most hunting, but we seem obsessed w/ moa.
i would never call anbody at my range a liar, but i think that most of us are frequently guilty of rather selective memory. does everyone else seem to fall into this line of thinking with me, or have i just been up WAY too long?That made my head hurt...

redneck2
April 22, 2007, 07:37 AM
I guess there are two parts to accuracy, the shooter and the rifle (or pistol)

There are some members here that ridicule shooting off a sandbagged bench. "Only way to tell what you're capable of is real shooting", or "you don't carry a bench in the woods when you hunt"

Well, IMO, the bench gives you a guideline. If you can't shoot better than 3 MOA off a bench, it's only gonna get worse in the field. Use a bench to take out some variables.

As for "super groups", I guess there are just some days when everything is working right. Remember, a .300 hitter will make 10 million a year and still miss the ball 7 out of 10.

adobewalls
April 22, 2007, 08:02 AM
I agree most of the 1/2 MOA shooting is done by cherry picking targets, when one would be more "honest" by aggregating the group from all bullets fired that day. But it is an accomplishment, and the pursuit of accuracy and precision is a noble goal.

It is still very enlightening to run a string of 30 to 50 consecutive shots just to see what that group looks like. If still shooting 1/2 MOA, then something has been accomplished.

CDignition
April 22, 2007, 08:11 AM
Here is a target I did last week. I am testing loads for my CAP Crusader. I shot 2 5 round groups at each target... ALL are 5/8" or under in group size...the smallest is .3 or so and I decided to use that load.. very pleased. a few of the groups were real good, but I pulled a few shots..;)

http://www.cdignition.com/images/43%20GR.jpg
http://www.cdignition.com/images/43.5%20Gr.jpg
http://www.cdignition.com/images/44%20GR%201.jpg
http://www.cdignition.com/images/44.5%20GR.jpg

qajaq59
April 22, 2007, 08:36 AM
I often enjoy shooting 30-30 levers at 50 or 100 yards while standing. Would you like to guess how many MOA targets I get doing that? Yup, you got that right. Zilch, zero, nada, whatever. But I sure hit hogs pretty well in the woods.

But if it's perfect targets that you like, then go for it. We're all different.

Kalashnikov
April 22, 2007, 09:07 AM
My guns shoot good enough for me. Thats all that matters to me.

fineredmist
April 22, 2007, 09:28 AM
The correct explanation is something like this, when conditions are perfect, Murphy ( of Murphy' Law) is on vacation and I ( the shooter ) do everthing right, then the rifle will do this.
Murphy spends a lot of time at the range.

darkwing
April 22, 2007, 10:37 AM
My first rifle was a Savage 99 308 with a 4x Busnhell. That gun never had a bad day. 10 shots in a inch. Like a dumb A-- I traded it for a mini 14 which was a neat rifle but a little disapointing in accuracy to say the least. So traded it in on a Model 70 243 bull barrel which would do 5 shots in a half inch. 7400 in 30/06 out of a cold barrel would shoot 1 moa but let her warm up and she string shots off the paper. I've had several guns that walk the bullets as they warm up and a some that shot better once hot . Now days I'm happy if I shoot a 2" group.
On my first hog hunt I had practiced with several guns. The 94 30-30 with iron sights was allways dead on for the first shot. Anyway thats what I used for a 75yrd neck shot. 200 lb hog just rolled over and didn't even oink. I knew then gun writers might be full of it. Who would of believed after 30 years of reading about guns I didn't need a 338 mag shooting a half MOA group to kill a wild boar.

possum
April 22, 2007, 10:46 AM
my old 1sg used to be a sniper instructer at Benning and on the aims commity and i was asking him similar questions. he was a rellay good shot, and said that he got some really amazing groups at extended ranges, one in particualr i can't remember but he told me the group size and my miuth hit the floor it was very impressive, but he said the following groups were no where near that the had shot before. there are ok shooters that get lucky every once in a while and great shooters that lucky sometimes and do extrodinary things but on the whole it is very rare to pull off some of the feats that he described, i have no reason to think that he didn't by no means. he is a great solider and a great shot. i guess the planets get in alignment sometimes, and sometimes they don't.

of course they are gonna remember the good groups and i am sure that they let the bad groups fall by the way side.

then i had another guy in my company that said he went out with another nco in the company and they shot a dime size group at 1000yds. i knew he was full of it because he streche the truth and was a liar, but i asked the owner of the gun and he sid they were shooting at about 250 meters, not to mention the act that there was no where around the area that had the space to shoot out that far, and they were using a dpms lr .308 they are accurate guns but i know they are not capable of that and especially him he dosen't have that amount of skill even if the rifle could.

there are some stories that are believable and some that are out of this world. you have to take into consideration the sourse and the deed that is being cliamed.

_N4Z_
April 22, 2007, 11:01 AM
I liken alot of these stories to "the one that got away" kind of tales. Fish stories.

Not all of them, but alot of them.

For me I've never shot an under 1" group, with a pre-determined amount of rounds, at 100 yards. Between 1 and 1-1/2 inches, yes it has happened for me, but not as often as I would like.

Just this past Friday I put 3 out of 5 rounds into 1/2 an inch at 100 yards, but the other 2 shots bloomed it out to 2 7/8". ....My newest Finn M39 with surplus ammo. I was still pretty friggin jazzed about that. :D BUT... all the other groups from that rifle that day were anywhere from 3 to 5 inches. :o


I really think it's usually just the competitive bravado most of the time. The great fish story to elevate ones self to a position of esteem among his or her peers.

R.W.Dale
April 22, 2007, 11:09 AM
I have a couple rifles that will do it on an average basis, it's not really magic. When I was a new shooter I thought it was, But if you're willing to put the effort into precision shooting after awhile you'll find that sub MOA isn't all that hard to achieve

sansone
April 22, 2007, 11:15 AM
I agree with the original post. I consider myself a good shooter and especially like accurate rifles, single shot, boltie, etc.. I don't EVER recall getting sub MOA myself, or been present at a range to witness anybody doing it. now maybe myself and others around me just plain suck.:D :neener:

YodaVader
April 22, 2007, 12:05 PM
i think that anybody could shoot a 1" or less group, if they shot enough groups. i mean, i have a few rifles that if i do my part can group at, around, or slightly below one inch, but not every time. not nearly every time. and most of the time it is around...as in above.


With the right rifle , loads and equipment combined with some degree of shooting skill MOA or 1" @ 100 yards is not such a big deal? Look at the targets by CDignition , all are well under the MOA.

I see some of the group firing methods used by some of the shooters at my range , rolled up jacket on a box of ammo with the forend resting on it and the shooter's balled up fist under the stock , hard to shoot MOA that way. No taking their time , a five shot group does not have to fired in less than 45 seconds when testing accuracy.

Rifles with out of the box 6 - 7 lb triggers make it difficult along with a $39 non- PA scope with thick crosshairs that do not allow precise aiming. And using the cheapest available factory ammo or the bulk mail order stuff. And some shooters have barrels so fouled they will never shoot MOA regardless of who is behind the trigger. Think a fouled barrel won't hurt groups? I find it amazing how my groups tighten up after a good barrel cleaning.

And the type of rifle , will be harder to accomplish MOA with Marlin lever action , a Remington semi-auto or WWII surplus bolt action from Lower Mongolia. Not saying it can't be done , just less likely to occur.

The shooters I see shooting MOA/sub MOA with regularity , are usually shooting varmint/tactical style rifles with heavy free floated barrels , load their own ammo with match bullets/primers , most prep their brass. They use a front rest and rear sand bag , almost always a trigger that is tuned or aftermarket. They clean often enough not to allow their barrels to become fouled to the point where accuracy deteriorates.

They all have quality optics often with target dot reticle and always parallax adjustable , with parallax present sub MOA is difficult to achieve. And don't trust the markings on the scope , adjust to the point where there is no parallax present.

They are patient enough not to rush the shots and simply have a lot of shooting EXPERIENCE.

MachIVshooter
April 22, 2007, 01:02 PM
Consistent sub-MOA groups from a benchrest using a modern bolt rifle, good optics and handloads is really no big deal. I have 6 rifles that I know will shoot 1" or better @ 100 from the bench using the right loads with little to no wind. I usually do 5-shot groups, allowing for 1 flyer.

That said, shooting from a bench with sandbags virtually eliminates the human component. I cannot reliably produce MOA from feild positions, even using a bipod and laying prone.

Half MOA is quite another story. While I have on occasion produced such tiny groups, it is not the norm. The smallest group I've ever fired was 3 shots measuring .403" CTC, but that rifle averages ~.8". IT is a remington 700 LVSF .17 rem topped with a WEaver V-16 4-16x42mm ultra fine reticle and using 20 grain V-max's loaded to 4270 FPS. The trigger is set at 17.5 ounces with 0.040" pull (FYI, this much trimming renders the safety inop).

plexreticle
April 22, 2007, 01:07 PM
I feel most of these gun writers are cherry picking their groups.

Most of the rifles I own seem to be more ammo sensitive than most the ones I read about.

Just my observation.

bhk
April 22, 2007, 01:12 PM
Same shooter (me), lots of rifles over the years, and LOTS of years tell me some factory hunting rifles will AVERAGE sub moa (in decent conditions) but most won't. I think the shooter is the limiting factor up to a point, but most rifles themselves won't AVERAGE under 1" and 100 yards regardless of who is shooting them and what type of rests/bags they use (even using mechancial machine rests). I shoot for groups when conditions are right and use good rests (Hart) and good bags. I have only one centerfire factory rifle right now that will AVERAGE under moa and it is a SAKO .223. All my others will AVERAGE between 1 and 2 inches. I don't think an occassional good group out of a rifle means anything, it is the aggregate of lots of groups that count.

Now, benchresters and others carefully selecting custom barrels, using Jewel triggers, and carefully handloading can consistantly shoot TINY groups. Some other folks repeatedly buy and sell hunting/varmint rifles until they get a collection of sub moa rifles - fine. Others carefully select rifles and spend scores of hours working up handloads for each one, also increasing average accuracy. These guys are the exception and in no way reflect the overwheling majority of shooters using factory rifles and using factory loads (or doing minor handloading). My passion is .22 rifles, with my current favorite being built on a Sako Finnfire action, with a Lilja barrel and a Jewel trigger. Yes, it averages well under moa with the right ammo (Lapua or Ely) but in no way reflects on the average across-the-counter rimfire.

Another point to consider: I'll bet many shooter claiming moa groups don't truely understand what moa means, how to properly measure groups, and shoot enough shots to truely constitute a 'group.' I don't think groups under 5 shots each should count for measuring groups, although they may give a rough assessment of 'hunting' usability.

Buzztail
April 22, 2007, 01:24 PM
Most rifles out there will, from time to time post a sub MOA five round group.


Few will agg anywhere near it

Charles S
April 22, 2007, 01:38 PM
kir_kenix,

You have posted on a topic that always interest me. It seems everyone I hung with and everyone I talk to at the gun store owns a slew a rifles that can shoot less than MOA. That is until I see then at at the range and they are having a bad day or just changed ammo. I do know a few (three) shooters who consistently shoot less than MOA, but they are the exception not the rule.

One thing you must do is define MOA, to a great deal of people a rifle is a MOA rifle if it once shot a group or two or maybe three that happened to measure, or just look like it was less than an inch, at what might or might not be 100 yards. For me a MOA rifle is one that will consistently shoot less than MOA with three five shot groups or five three shot groups.

I can shoot MOA with three of my rifles, but I am using a good steady bench (an unsteady bench can really degrade your capabilities), a benchrest quality rest, anemometer with flags at 50 and 100 yards, good optics, and quality targets on a stable target holder. Two of these rifles are custom, one is a Tikka, and I am using handloaded or premium ammo to achieve these results.

As to consistently less than half MOA, I just don't shoot enough nor have good enough equipment to shoot those kind of groups consistently, some do just not me.

I really think it is all in the definition, if one cosiders MOA a rifle that once shot a group that happened to look like it was less than an inch then sure they have a MOA rifle; if on the other hand your definition is like mine, I think you will find there are few MOA rifles or shooters out there.

C-grunt
April 22, 2007, 02:11 PM
My Savage 10FP will average about .8 inch groups if I do my part. This is 3 shots off a bench, using bipods, bag under the butt, its favorite ammo (Winchester Ballistic Silvertip 168 grn), using a leupold Mk4 3-9, little or no wind and waiting a good minute inbetween shots. The best group I have shot was just under .5 inch. I did that once. On a good day I will pull a .6-.7 inch group. On a bad day its more like 1.25-1.5 inch groups. My best handloads so far produce 1 inch groups.

My Mosin m38 is a completely different story.

YodaVader
April 22, 2007, 02:13 PM
Consistent sub-MOA groups from a benchrest using a modern bolt rifle, good optics and handloads is really no big deal.

Pretty much has been my experience with the varmint/tactical rifles
I have owned - 4 Remingtons , 700VS , 700VLS , 700P and 700LTR and my Savage 12BVSS , just shot a few through it last evening , easily averaging under the "magical" MOA mark for the four 5 shot groups @ 100 yards.

Anyone who is ever in the central IN area is more than welcome to be my guest at the range and I'll be glad to let them shoot my rifles.

MechAg94
April 22, 2007, 02:31 PM
I know a guy whose goal is to hit the same hole at 200 yards with his 22-250. He has done it, but not always. In order to do it, he has a custom rifle and shoots very carefully prepared hand loads off a bench. He puts a lot of effort into just a few shots.

For me, I am just glad to consistently shoot less then 3 or 4 inches. Most of my rifles are semi-auto so I am not trying to win any accuracy contests. I do need more practice standing and kneeling though.

Geronimo45
April 22, 2007, 02:40 PM
You guys are pathetic. I routinely shoot sub-MOA groups at 300 yards, with a full belt from my MG-42. The secret is in not shooting in bursts - that makes you less accurate. The reciprocation allows your body to compensate for recoil. Nothing is as accurate as a fully automatic weapon.

I once tried point shooting at a thousand yards with a Barrett 82.. 2" group for ten shots. Too much caffeine that day, I guess.

Gecko45, signing out.

Picknlittle
April 22, 2007, 02:50 PM
I had a fella tell me how his 30-06 shot the same 1 inch group at 100, 200, and 300 yds a couple days ago. He didn't have his gun with him at the time. :)

In about a month to six weeks, we'll have our 400 yd range open here in Montgomery Co. TN. I'll put him to the test then. :)

Personally, I can shoot one shot one, hole groups all day long, :neener:

koja48
April 22, 2007, 04:08 PM
All of my varmint rifles are so capable, but this after many years of tweaking & culling as well as working-up loads. On some days, off a rest I am even capable. I've always been careful to describe those occasions when the stars aligned using the following statement: "The smallest group I shot today was . . . " Even though I shoot A LOT, a group, even on a good day without a "flyer" is much more the exception rather than the rule.

Afy
April 22, 2007, 05:29 PM
I know that all the rifles I do own are MOA or better. However me as shooter isnt...

Peter M. Eick
April 22, 2007, 06:10 PM
These are not MOA rifles, but they are better then that. They are consistent.

To me the measure of a rifle or a handgun is how it does over a 50 shot group. 50 shots is a lot of time for the shooter to screw up, the gun to warm up , mag changes etc, and basically it takes a lot of the guess work out of the process. It would be hard to "luck" into a 50 shot good group at 100 yards.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/eickpm/sm_targets2.jpg
Supermatch, 100 yards, 50 shots off the bench.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/eickpm/nm_target.jpg
NationalMatch, 100 yards, 50 shots off the bench.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/eickpm/94_target.jpg
Winchester 94, 100 yards, 50 shots off the bench. Note that most of the flyers on this one was the first shot out of the cooled barrel prior to reloading.

Farnham
April 22, 2007, 06:18 PM
http://www.hunt101.com/img/391379.jpg (http://www.hunt101.com/?p=391379&c=500&z=1)

Hey, I did it once! Took me a lot of reloading, a new stock, and a bipod, but my Savage 10FP .308 turned in this group one day. More often, it's an inch and a half or better off the bipod. But knowing it IS possible encourages me to try harder every trip.

S/F

Farnham

atblis
April 22, 2007, 06:23 PM
Hmmm. My Tikka is an easy sub MOA rifle. Everything else...not so much.

itgoesboom
April 22, 2007, 06:27 PM
I can honestly claim to have a rifle that can and does shoot well below 1MOA, for 3-shots, center to center. In fact, if I get a group over 1" with that rifle, with the handloads I have done for it, I am sorely disapointed. Five shot groups are another matter, I can never seem to hold 5 tighter than an inch, but I suspect that is me rather than the rifle. I get three really tight, get excited, 4th is just a little farther, and then I yank #5.

During my load development, I shot about 10-15 groups, and averaged the size. The average was roughly .5". Largest was right at an inch, the smallest was in between .3-.4".

Since then, I have shot groups over an inch, including one that went about 2". But they aren't the norm.

Everytime I have had a group go over 1", there has been a major error on my part.

Here are some examples.

-Didn't clean the rifle for a few range trips. 2 range trips resulted in <1" groups, third resulted in groups over an inch. Cleaned the rifle, and the groups went back under 1".

-Didn't clean the cases well enough of the RCBS case lube in the necks, and the bullets were sticking. I pushed them back .001-.002" to unlock them, then shot them. Groups opened up a bit.

-Flinching. Didn't take this particular rifle to the range for a bit, instead focused on my AR. Significant change in recoil between the two, and the first few targets weren't up to par.

I actuallly have 3 recipes for handloads for this rifle. One is extremely accurate at it's best, but inconsistant. .4" of inch one group, 1.4" next, so I don't shoot it anymore. Next is very accurate, and consistant day to day. With that load, I know that my POI is exactly 1" high @ 100yards with new brass when compared fired brass. Next is a hunting load, accuracy isn't quite as good, but still much better than average.

Reality is that most rifles are capable of really good accuracy, and most factory loads are capable of really good accuracy. It's the shooter that limits the potential.

trueblue1776
April 22, 2007, 06:35 PM
I'll put the first one on the paper and the next four in the trees off to the left. Thats a "one hole group" right? :D

Mesa
April 22, 2007, 08:54 PM
Excepting the cold bore shot (always high and to the left) my 10FP will consistantly shoot under 1" 5-round groups at 100 yards. But .5 or less groups are VERY few and far between. In fact, they go on the wall on the rare occassion that I actually shoot one. That being said, as I go out to 200, 300 and beyond to 650 yards the sub-moa groups dwindle. Some days I can just stack them in there and others I'll have a group that looks more like a buckshot pattern than rifle shots. I also shoot 3-round groups past 100 just because of ammo price. 3-round sub moa and 5-round sub moa groups as different as night and day.

I do know that I can very consistantly shoot sub moa 3-round groups to 300 yards though, (3" or less). Past that distance I'm consistantly inconsistant.

I would LOVE to get one of those rigs that eliminate the shooter to see just how accurately (consistantly) the 10fp will shoot. Then again, maybe I don't want to know.

For the record, I shoot prone, with a bi-pod, and a rear bag.
-Mesa

atblis
April 22, 2007, 08:55 PM
There are most definitely lots and lots of liars at shooting ranges. Usually they claim something much less than 1 moa though. 1 MOA is believable, 1/2 MOA is getting into wader territory (with hunting rifles).

I think what most people do is shoot one group of a particular size, and then that gun becomes a whatever inch gun based on a single group.

We all know this though.

Bartholomew Roberts
April 22, 2007, 09:07 PM
There are probably a lot more rifles out there that are sub-MOA capable then there are shooters. However, anybody talking about group size and accuracy needs to understand the factors outlined in this post:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=279218

I shot two 5-shot sub-MOA groups today (back to back even), so I feel pretty confident the rifle can do it consistently. The shooter needs a bit more work though.

Here is an example of an earlier MOA 5-shot group, along with more typical groups (grid squares are one inch, rifle was a 16" midlength AR15 with Lilja barrel, stock trigger, TA11 ACOG, shot at 100yds from the bench using Grippod and rifle case for support).

http://www.ont.com/users/kolya/target.jpg

itgoesboom
April 22, 2007, 09:19 PM
There are most definitely lots and lots of liars at shooting ranges. Usually they claim something much less than 1 moa though. 1 MOA is believable, 1/2 MOA is getting into wader territory (with hunting rifles).

I think what most people do is shoot one group of a particular size, and then that gun becomes a whatever inch gun based on a single group.

We all know this though.

Just cuz you might not be able to do it, doesn't mean that it isn't possible.

These are all pretty much shot on different days, different temps (by as much as 45 degrees), different lighting conditions, etc.

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=56413&d=1176341545

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=56414&d=1176341571

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=56415&d=1176341605

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=56416&d=1176341636

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=56417&d=1176341653

These are just a few targets that I have scanned, I have a stack more. All of these are well under 1", and many are under .5" center to center.

ETA, these are all through my Weatherby Vanguard sporter. To be fair, I have restocked it and bedded the action, and the trigger is pretty decent.

fatelk
April 22, 2007, 09:24 PM
I used to work for a gunsmith who built high-dollar benchrest and hunting rifles. He would guarantee that under ideal conditions his rifles would shoot "in the twos or threes" (.2 or .3 MOA). Now of course that's a $2500 plus rifle with a $1000 plus scope with meticulously loaded ammo, from sandbags, no wind, expert marksman at the trigger.

I have a rifle he put together for me on the cheap from spare parts, under $1000 scope and all. I can shoot very consistently under 1moa with it, often 3/4moa, but sometimes I will have a bad day and shoot one and a quarter but that's me and not the rifle. The best group I've shot lately was 1.04" 5 shots at 200 yards (center to center).

To me I would not call a rifle "minute of angle capable" unless it would do it consistantly, not just a lucky group. Lucky groups happen and they are just that- luck.

Peter M. Eick- that's some impressive shooting with those M1A's.

taliv
April 22, 2007, 09:39 PM
i mostly agree with peter.

i don't even consider "3-shot groups" to be groups. posting pictures of them and talking about them is just wasting my time.

if you can't shoot 5 shots with no "fliers" in any wind conditions, then talk less, practice more.

if you want people to respect your skills, make it a 10 shot group.
if you want people to respect your rifle, show me a 50 shot group.

R.W.Dale
April 22, 2007, 10:06 PM
In my book hunting weight rifles get 3 shot groups and bench/varmint weight rifles get 5 shot groups. You can't expect a featherweight rifle to be able to be held to the same measure of repeatability you would a target gun. 3 shots are a more than adequate representation of what a hunting rifle can do in the field.

Saying 3 shot groups don't matter is silly anyhow, A 3 shot group can mean just as much as a 5 shot group, it just takes more of them. Which means more two .50 three shot groups or one .50 five shot group.

taliv
April 22, 2007, 10:27 PM
it's not silly, because anybody can luck into an "impressive" 3-shot group. an "impressive" 5-shot group is significantly more difficult because the "fliers" are usually the 4th or 5th shot.

i don't expect a featherweight rifle to be held to the same standard as a target gun, because i know they're not the same. but 1MOA is 1MOA and .5MOA is .5MOA.

but internet braggarts don't qualify their claims by saying "my tikka shoots .5 hunting MOA"; they just claim it's .5 MOA.

if you want to claim your featherweight rifle can shoot like a target rifle, then shoot a competition sized string.

R.W.Dale
April 22, 2007, 10:30 PM
because anybody can luck into an "impressive" 3-shot group.

So it's always luck when a person shoots four or five outstanding 3 shot groups in a row:rolleyes:

In my opinion a SINGLE five shot group is as meaningless as a SINGLE three shot group. It's the average that counts

_N4Z_
April 22, 2007, 10:38 PM
don't even consider "3-shot groups" to be groups. posting pictures of them and talking about them is just wasting my time.

Finland circa WW2 time period. Army tested rifles must produce three shot group of 1.5" or less @ 100 (or was it 150?) meters, before being allowed into service.

Those Finns kicked the snot out of the Soviets during the Winter and Continuation wars while vastly outnumbered.

Guess those 3 shot groups weren't a waste of time for those infantry guys on skies. :neener:

taliv
April 22, 2007, 10:39 PM
no, it's not always luck. but it's usually luck.

a single 5 shot group is obviously more meaningful than a single 3 shot group.

i agree, the average is more important. but nobody posts all 100 shots they made for the day, they just post the best 3-shot group, and out of 33 tries, everybody is going to luck into at least one 1-moa group. that's unlikely to happen with 5 shot groups, and it's not going to happen with 10 shot groups.

edit: that's fine, n4z and not a waste of money. it's perfectly ok for a battle rifle.

351 WINCHESTER
April 22, 2007, 10:49 PM
I knew I shouldn't have had that 7th cup of coffee. I have rifles, that will shoot sub moa, but only with perfect conditions and not every day. The human factor is usually the cause. If you have a hunting rifle that shoots 2 or 3 inch groups at 100 yds. and you deer hunt - go hunting with confidence.

theCZ
April 22, 2007, 10:57 PM
I'm kind of miffed, I didn't think MOA was that tough to get if you had a rifle capable. All of my scoped bolt actions make the MOA requirement, at least at 100 yards. I bought a .223 CZ a few months ago and my first ten load recipes gave me 1.5" 5 shot 100yd groups, and then I found the load my rifle likes and shot this group:
http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u225/bhunewill/CZ527Americangroup.jpg?t=1177296045
Am I going to say that my rifle is a 1.5MOA shooter because the first ten groups I shot while looking for a good load had terrible accuracy? No way! I'm not either going to say mine is a .27 MOA shooter (measured center to center), because that group isn't representative of the groups I've fired since then with that load. I'd have to be honest and say that it's a .75 to .85 MOA rifle, and if the wind's blowing, I keep that one at home and take my 6mm Rem. after coyotes.

And my heavy barreled varmint rifle can certainly shoot great groups, but my overall average group size is about twice the size of this one (out to 300 yards I've had many targets at around .6MOA):
http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u225/bhunewill/cz527group2.jpg?t=1177296232
I've gotten a 4.5" 500 yard group with this rifle, but it was on a very calm day and I was curious to find the drop on my 50grain Blitzkings.

You'll never find me bragging at the range about these rifles though.
I've never shot factory ammo through either of these guns, and take the time to develop pet loads for everything I shoot. I have very good front and back rests also, that makes a big difference. I've talked to guys at the range claiming to have shot an 800yd dime size group that also took a sniper course in the Marines, and plenty of other guys using a rolled up sleeping bag as a rest that were happy to get a 3" 3 shot group. If you enjoy reloading and accurate rifles, it won't take long to make you a sub-moa shooter!

dakotasin
April 22, 2007, 11:00 PM
i shoot a lot, and i have a couple of guns. i've got it covered from 25 yard big-hole-maker to 1000 yard prairie dog whacker...

most of my (newer) rifles are moa or better - but, it takes a little gunsmithing, good handloads, and good trigger discipline...

when so many posts on these boards are to the tune of 'hey, lookie here! i made it to the range today... first time in 8 months i've fired a gun' - why is it a shocker so few people can actually shoot sub-moa? when all someone has done is gone shooting, and they feel compelled to write a report about it, yeah, not much of a shooter. so, imagine the epiphany a shooter gets when he drives a dedicated bench gun and comes up at 1+" at 100 yards, but when the practiced shooter gets ahold of the same weapon, he knocks out a .2" group...

i'd venture to guess that the average remington 700, savage 110, tikka t-3, browning a-bolt, etc etc etc is indeed capable of day-in, day-out sub-moa shots at 100 yards if the shooter driving said weapon actually practiced his craft once in a blue moon...

anyway, yeah, i think most rifles are moa capable. i think the person driving the rifle is the weak link.

itgoesboom
April 22, 2007, 11:00 PM
Taliv,

Sure, target rifles can hold .5MOA for more shots, but 3-shots can still be .5MOA. It is just an angle of measurement.

The reality is that hunting rifles, with thin barrels, won't hold the same accuracy for as many rounds as a heavy barreled target rifle.

So what?

Barrels heat up and POI shifts, not to mention mirage (I was shooting in 28f weather, and after 3 shots the target got a very blurry) can shift the POI as well.

It isn't necessarily luck when someone shoots a quality 3-shot group. My rifle consistantly shoots 3-shot groups under and inch, and many under .5 inch. I promise you, that isn't luck.

That is a quality rifle, with a solid stock, with the action bedded, with very carefully handloaded ammo held to tight tolerances, set up on very stable rest, with a shooter trying his hardest to shoot to the best of his ability.

A target rifle? Not quite, although I have outshot many people at my range who bring a high dollar target rifle to the range.

It just happens to be a very accurate hunting rifle. It is what it is.

taliv
April 22, 2007, 11:30 PM
So what?

exactly. reread my post; i think we're saying mostly the same thing. at least, i already addressed those points.

anyway, yeah, i think most rifles are moa capable. i think the person driving the rifle is the weak link.

dakotasin, yep, but i'd add that it's the combination of rifle and ammo. and most shooters don't shoot enough to find that combination.

kir_kenix
April 22, 2007, 11:43 PM
wow, this got about 5 times the amount of responses as i thought.

i tend to agree that MOST modern rifles are capable of or around 1 moa with decent ammo without human error. what gets me, and why i started this post is that some people just seem to throw out the smallest group they have ever shot and attatch it as "this is a .42 moa rifle!"

it is a fact that most shooters don't handload, and that they just pick up whatever ammo is cheapest at wal-mart. now, almost certainly this load will not produce moa groups at 100 yards consistantly....but it may happen once or twice a range session with three shot groups....maybe.

i think part of the problem is that we dont have a real good definition of moa. there is no real guidlines to meet, such as single group size, average size, etc. i don't think there is anything wrong with 3 shot groups, but i think it takes a few more <1" 3 shot groups to equal 1 5 shot moa group.

i have been keeping a running log book on several of my more accurate rifles, and i was honestly suprised that my remington 700 .223 averages about 1.6" groups. i would have honestly told anyone that i could consistantly shoot 1" groups out of this rifle 3 months ago, but now i see that this is not the case. sure i have plenty of 1" or slightly below groups (and a handful of really lucky groups) in my binder, but not with the frequently that i would have previously proposed.

i think what i have been trying to get at, is that we put too much emphasis on the occasional, or semi-frequent moa patterns and forget the 3 groups we just fired. i know there are alot of really good shooters, many times better then me for sure, but i think that many are guilty of the same thinking that i once was.

and as for gun writers...i think they either really cherry pick their groups or just flat out lie. it seems that they AVERAGE <moa with EVERY type of ammo they fire. i do not have a single rifle that shoots that well with several types of ammo in 4-5 different bullet wts/profiles.

anyway, i wasnt trying to offend anybody or call anybody a liar, but from what i have seen and experienced their must only be a very small percentage of shooters that average under 1" all the time.

4fingermick
April 23, 2007, 12:02 AM
The factory meant the rifle was sub moa, they didn't include any specs on the shooter! :D

rangerruck
April 23, 2007, 12:18 AM
I refuse to keep any that wont.
here is my
cz 527 carbine
marlin 17m2
nef 17m2
marlin mod 60 , in that order; all at 100yds.
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/53557d05.jpg
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/czpics031.jpg
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/czpics016.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/007-3.jpg
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/005-3.jpg
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/002-4.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/010-2.jpg
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/009-3.jpg

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/mod60005.jpg
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a284/pmullineaux/mod60003.jpg

and this is just some of my rifles, including a cz in 762.39, supposely impossible, and a mosin 38, yeat that's right, a mosin 38.

It is my belief, that every rifle, can be cleaned, trigger tuned, bbl channelled out, pressure pad added up front, action screws correctly torqued, in other words, tweaks of all possible kinds to any rifle, to make it shoot very well.
the first thing you must do is, find out, before any tweaks at all, which ammo it likes best, so you must buy all possible makes and samples. then when you find the one it groups best, even if it is a 2 or 3 inch group, then let the tweaking begin. I just got a kids youth rossi, in 17hmr, to shoot one ragged holes, at 50 yards. Thats right , a 100 dollar kids model, cheapy ol Rossi!! and you know what? the torque it liked best on it's action screw was not only nothing at all, but actually hanging a half turn loose! thats right, that means the bbl was lying untightened in its channel, but with just my little added pressure pad up front!!! now that is sick!!!

notice on the cz carbine, it even shot wolf sub moa!!! So Kule! I still hate that ammo , though.

Dr.Rob
April 23, 2007, 12:22 AM
I think most bolt action rifles made since the Winchester change-over in '64 are capable of sub-moa groups. It was part of everyone's marketing ploy to make more accurate rifles.

As for sniper wanna-be's NOBODY in the commercial industry used the term "MOA" in any frquency in the 80's and before, it's rather a recent change in terminology and technology. (IE Mil-dot scopes)

I have a rifle capable of under .5 inch groups off the bench WHEN I PRACTICE. It's amazing how those open up if I've been away from the range for a for a while.

Trigger/scope/ammo all make a difference. As do breath control, where and how you hold hot barrel vs. cold barrel etc.

As for 3 shot vs. 5 shot groups? Well I'm not doing much sustained or supressive fire with my hunting rifles, as I suspect most folks aren't. If you've got 3 shots touching, unload set it aside, let it cool off. In a few minutes do the same over again. Some guys take multiple varmint rifles to the field for the same reason, shoot one let another cool off.

Now if we were talking a rifle (AR/M1A/M1) I'd use for DCM/CMP style match or Military-style semi-auto rifle for 3 gun (AK, FAL, HK 91, etc etc)... I've met darn few people who can shoot a 5 shot under 1 inch group at 100 yards with iron sights. However, even I've shot a 3inch or under group with such a rifle. With a lot of practice I don't doubt that a mil-spec M-16 series rifle is capable of 4-5 MOA for several magazines, but no degree of skill beats physics as that barrel heats up. (And I'm talking about burning through magazines, shooting as fast and accurately as possible, not just burning up ammo.)


It takes practice, it's not rocket science for most rifles with a scope, but you have to be up to the task.

On a side note: The Mini 14 is a rifle NOTORIOUS for vertical stringing after a handful of shots. If you can claim to 'compensate' for all the variables that create this, and hold it to under 3moa for 20 rds I suggest you call up Ruger and offer to show them how it's done. It would have saved them re-engineering a rifle.

I expect NO rifle shooting Wolf CENTERFIRE ammo to be capable of stellar accuracy. Until Wolf proves me wrong, I'm holding to this. Wolf might be great for zapping a watermelon at range, but it's not 'precision' loaded.

Dr.Rob
April 23, 2007, 01:12 AM
Figures as soon as post it someone posts evidence contrary... Ranger is that Wolf Classic, Gold or Military or?

rangerruck
April 23, 2007, 03:54 AM
that is regular ol 62 grain steel cased, lacquered wolf. but like I said, I wont run it through any of my weapons again, 'cept maybe my Saiga. otherwise, it is just too hard on everything, and I don't like leaving a lacquer trail down my bbls!!!
Those shots were cooled though, 1 minute between shots.

Essex County
April 24, 2007, 02:16 PM
True 1" rifles used to be rare breed in sported weight rifles. Today it's a lot easier. Good bullets and good barrels are a couple of reasons why. When You sit down at your bench, such factors as wind, temprature and coffee intake as well as bench tequnique make such a diffrence. Yep, it still requires things to all be right, But it a lot easier..........Essex

Gewehr98
April 24, 2007, 02:50 PM
I don't know if the OP is simply jealous, inexperienced, or unaware. Sub-MOA rifles are indeed out there, and can be purchased off-the-shelf. That's a fairly recent development in the firearms world, which was previously the domain of the custom gun builders and the benchrest crowd. Whether the shooter is capable of getting the advertised accuracy out of the gun is open to debate, but the tools are most definitely up to the task. I have several sub-MOA guns, and some even have guarantees of said accuracy straight from the manufacturer. I didn't pay WalMart prices for it, but this is my Remington 40X in .308:

http://mauser98.com/40xbenchircleft2.jpg

I have very few problems shooting 1/2" groups, at 200 yards, with this rifle.

I also have a somewhat famous wildcat Krieger-barreled 6.5-06 that demonstrates accuracy equal to, or better than, the 40X above. Same goes for my vintage B.E. Cottrell custom in .236 Super. My factory 700PSS is no slouch in the accuracy department, either, easily sub-MOA with store-bought ammo. I'd be more than happy to invite the OP to my range and let him experience what a consistent sub-MOA rifle can do, my treat. :D

Afy
April 24, 2007, 03:28 PM
True off the shelf sub MoA guns are indeed available.

Stuff like the SHR 970, Sako Trg 42, Tikka T3, PSG 90, PSG 10, Tiger (Hand loads), the AI rifles, even the Anschulz series in the humble .22 lr are all in that capability amongst others. These days even some of the side by side Express Rifle manufacturer's like Beretta, Baiklal etc are guanrteeing sub MoA.

People on this board are apparently shooting sub MoA with weapons such as stock AR-15's and AK clones with Milsurp..

Personally I beleive in the hands of an above average shooter even something like the humble CZ 42 with the right ammunition can be well under 1 MOA at 100 Meters.

I cant shoot sub-MOA groups consistently... I lack talent. However I do own weapons that can do so... I dont understand the fuss.

SamTuckerMTNMAN
April 24, 2007, 03:41 PM
I just sit quiet and do my best. Often outcomes are different than the talk. And since I may have a bad day best if I shut up and just shoot. Bruce Lee once said, "Man discovers freedom the moment he loses consiousness of the self." Marksmanship is a martial art in the purest of form.

st

MrDig
April 24, 2007, 03:42 PM
Fineredmist "Murphy spends a lot of time at the range."
He must be busy as Heck cause he spends a lot of time in my boat too.

All of my rifles out preform my ability to shoot. This is just a matter of practicing more, but at this point, I have yet to outshoot one of my rifles.

innerpiece
April 24, 2007, 03:58 PM
as has been said over and over.. if yer rifle can do it once, it can again.. conditions and user error are the determining factors.

knowing exactly what yer rifle will do, is important, so is trigger pull, posture, and how yer rifle is rested, and about everything you can and cant think of, for precision shooting.

SniperII is a great book for those who dont have the means to be trained by professional marksmen.

an educated rifleman, will judge himself by his largest regular groups... those are the ones you learn from!


ip.

itgoesboom
April 24, 2007, 04:19 PM
as has been said over and over.. if yer rifle can do it once, it can again.. conditions and user error are the determining factors.

Innerpiece, I am going to both agree with you, and disagree with you at the same time.

A rifle can throw a flyer into a group, just like it can throw a flyer out of a group. So I don't trust that a rifle that normally shoots 2.5" @ 100yards, but has once thrown a 1" group at the same distance, is a 1MOA rifle.

On the flip side, if a person shoots four groups at the same range, using the same ammo, .45", .67", .53" and 3".....I will tend to believe that the rifle is indeed a <MOA rifle, and that the shooter is the one at fault for the large group.

And really, it's not too difficult to figure out if it is the rifle/ammo combo or the shooter. When you shoot the rifle, follow through, and call your shot before you look at the target to see where you hit.

If you call it perfect, and it hits a few inches away, you might have a bad rifle/ammo combination, or a scope issue, etc.

If you call the shot off, right and high, and the POI is right and high, that means it is clearly the shooter.

Davo
April 24, 2007, 05:39 PM
I consider five groups of 5 shots each to be the gold standard. If on the same outing, you can shoot 5 groups of 5 and all are Sub MOA you have a sub MOA rifle. I agree its frustrating when people claim a rifle is SUB MOA because it once shot a sub MOA group. Even more so when it gets done "All day".
My k31's are not MOA rifles, even scoped they are typically 1.25 MOA, and SUB MOA groups are rare.
My 10fp IS sub MOA, and honestly I have to be having a bad day to shoot 1MOA or more. This is with handloads off a bipod with rear bag.

cameron.personal
April 24, 2007, 05:46 PM
I think it's funny how people talk about 1 MOA at a 100 yards like it is different from 1 MOA at 200 yards...

Charles S
April 24, 2007, 05:47 PM
Gewehr98,

I think you and may others have missed the point of the thread. It is not that MOA cannot be done. Nor that there are plenty of people who posses the equipment and capability to produce MOA groups. I believe that the point is that if you listen to talk everyone can shoot MOA or better. You have very nice (custom) equipment, experience, practice, and knowledge. I for one do not doubt your claims.

OTH when a guy in my local hunting club states that his box stock Ruger 25-06 with a Simmons scope and a 8+ pound trigger shoots 1/2 MOA I am doubtfully. I at the range I find that he cannot reproduce the claimed groups. This is not uncommon.

I think that the point of the post is not that MOA cannot be achieve, but that if you listen to claims everyone achieves that or better with whatever equipment is used. I find this true where I live, but when I go to range I also find that MOA rifles, by my definition, are not that common.

115grfmj
April 24, 2007, 05:50 PM
are the guys that go to the range and their rifles never leave the rest:rolleyes: ....and they brag about their groups...and then wonder why they miss in the field. Most modern rifles are capable of significatly more than the average user, more still if time is taken to work up the proper load. However, Riflery is a learned skill that only comes through frequent practice....away from the rest! Personal I sight in my rifles from the rest to ensure they are hitting POA, then I put the rest away, and practice my field positions. Sorry for the rant....but we all get to hung up on Sub MOA groups...which under most circumstance are not dupicatable in the field.

kir_kenix
April 24, 2007, 05:53 PM
its frustrating when people claim a rifle is SUB MOA because it once shot a sub MOA group. Even more so when it gets done "All day".


okay...well this pretty much sums up what i was getting at i guess. never meant to doubt that people on this board could and have shot sub moa groups, just that it is not as common or repeatable as people make it sounds. i know since i started recording my groups i was suprised out how often my groups were twice the size i would have figured that i averaged.

taliv
April 24, 2007, 06:06 PM
I think it's funny how people talk about 1 MOA at a 100 yards like it is different from 1 MOA at 200 yards...

it is different. one is about 1 inch. the other about 2".

Caimlas
April 24, 2007, 06:18 PM
Eh, I think most rifles manufactured today are probably capable of MOA groups out of the box. The problem comes in when you introduce the shooter and the ammunition. A shooter who can consistently get sub-MOA groups with almost any rifle isn't usually going to be able to do so with all brands of ammo - from what I understand, those groups are typically achieved with handloads fashioned for a specific rifle.

Last week I shot my 16" RRA AR15 with a cheap Leapers 4x scope at 100 yards sitting and prone, 20 shots (about 10 each, checked every three or four shots). The result was (after the 5 shots to sight in) a single jagged hole about 2" in diameter. I was just using Fiocchi .223, cheapest stuff I could find, but evidently it's pretty consistent. The shooting wasn't that fantastic, other than it was consistent (I took quite a while on each shot), but the group was pretty decent.

Also, a 3-shot group isn't the same as a 5-shot group. You'll get more variance with the more shots you take. It's pretty easy to make 3-shot 1-MOA groups all day with one out of (say) three of the groups having what you deem a "flier due to me not doing my part" - when, in fact, you may have done your part, but the ammo is inconsistent.

Another "for instance": I've got a Tikka T3 .270 Winchester. I like the gun, but I can't get groups much smaller than 1.5" with 9x magnification. I've read that .270 Win ammo is pretty inconsistent from the factory because it's not a popular caliber, and is generally "just" a hunting rifle, where such grouping capability neither matters or is that greatly desired (ironically, considering the long-range flat shooting capability of the round).

~z
April 24, 2007, 07:21 PM
Eh, never mind.
~z

Dr.Rob
April 24, 2007, 08:12 PM
No matter what the group size, I don't understand showing off a group that's off centerline, (unless you had a windy day).


Ranger's targets I understand. Here's the aiming point, here's the impact. You can see him 'dialing it in.'

But CZ if you are aiming at that cross... why don't you adjust your scope to hit it? To me, sure great group but it's an inch low and 3/4 right of where I'd want it. I FULLY understand sighting in to shoot an inch high (dead on at 200 etc.).

Same thing for CDignition, if you shoot consistantly 1/2 inch right, why not move the sights?

See this thread for comparison: I cover a lot of variables like trigger weight, wind, power of the scope and the dfferences between two shooters. (Where we hold on a target etc.)

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=186289

cameron.personal
April 24, 2007, 08:43 PM
it is different. one is about 1 inch. the other about 2".

My point was that 1 MOA is the same at every distance.

Regardless whether it is as 25, 50, or 500yards it is still 1 MOA.

CDignition
April 24, 2007, 08:45 PM
Same thing for CDignition, if you shoot consistantly 1/2 inch right, why not move the sights?


I shoot 8" Plates at 1K yards, so trust me, I line em up when it matters...

When I shoot a target like this for groups, I want the bullets to hit out of the area my crosshairs are. This way you don't "gravitate" towards the dot and get a bad group...I also can shoot several "Groups" at a single target without changing it out...Just drop POI 2.5" and go again....


Shooting groups isn't about hitting the exact area...its about groups,lol...

YodaVader
April 24, 2007, 08:57 PM
I consider five groups of 5 shots each to be the gold standard If on the same outing, you can shoot 5 groups of 5 and all are Sub MOA you have a sub MOA rifle

That is the exact description of what constitutes an aggregate in sanctioned benchrest. So , if at the range a shooter takes his rifle and can shoot groups in the manner as decribed above and averages an inch or less that too me would be a good indication of a MOA rifle. Hard to shoot 5 fluke groups in a row.

I agree its frustrating when people claim a rifle is SUB MOA because it once shot a sub MOA group. Even more so when it gets done "All day".


As my Savage gunsmith told me about that "all day long" line , "They must have very short days where they come from!"

My 10fp IS sub MOA, and honestly I have to be having a bad day to shoot 1MOA or more. This is with handloads off a bipod with rear bag.


Oh come on , you can't be serious!? Just kidding! But consider this - Say you fire 10 groups of 5 shots each @ 100 yards with ample time for cooling or cleaning if needed between groups. For each group that is not MOA or better you pay $10 bucks to one of the skeptics. For each group that is MOA or better they have to pay you $10. Would you take this bet with some of the doubters here? If your Savage is like mine you would more than likely be a $100 richer after the smoke has cleared.

taliv
April 24, 2007, 10:07 PM
if somebody's been shooting 3 shot groups, i'd take the skeptic side of that bet of 10 5-shot groups most of the time, although i'd qualify that by saying i'd have to be present (and i'm not driving across the country over a $100 bet) and have a neutral 3rd party measure it.

for people who claim .5 MOA, i'd take that bet almost every time.


edit: i just went through the whittington list and noticed none of the people on this list claiming to shoot sub-MOA are going. i was going to propose some bets.

bluedsteel
April 24, 2007, 10:21 PM
Ironic that this topic appeared today. My brother and I spent six consecutive hours on the bench at the range this past weekend shooting for group size with our .223's. His rifle is a Weatherby TRR with a Leupold 4.5-14X50 with the varmint hunter reticle. My rifle is a Rem 700 Varmint with a $20 Chinese scope, with chopsticks for reticles.

After about two hours of zeroing, rezeroing, and fiddling around, we competed for the best 3 shot group at 100 yards. Amazingly, I won, with a group of 9/16" against his 3/4". (He's an NRA master class shooter). However, squinting through that cheap scope gave me a migraine and severe eye strain, so I am going to find the money for a Leupold scope(6.5-20X40...gotta outdo him...). Looks like the girlfriend's diamond ring will have to be on hold again.

In any event, towards the end of the day, we each fired a five shot group. Both our groups stunk...just under 2".

We were shooting a variety of ammo. Both of us shot our best groups with Georgia Arms 52 gr. Match BTHP. The promotional Remington green box, Winchester, and PMC ammo shot relatively poorly (of course, that is what I mostly have...thought it was a "bargain".). Obviously, ammo matters...a lot.

My brother is going to relieve his barrel channel some more; I am going to get a Leupold scope (and eventually an H-S Precision stock).

So, good groups are possible, but elusive...there are a lot of variables... and you can make yourself crazy in the pursuit of consistent sub-MOA groups. I am looking at this as a learning experience about rifles and riflery...I am 50, but you're never too old to learn, right?

As far as folks claiming they always shoot into the same bullet hole at 500 yards...well...lying is somewhat endemic to the fishing and hunting crowd.

Anyway, my goal is CONSISTENT sub-MOA groups. Not there yet....but we're having fun in this quest...so far.


bluedsteel

TimboKhan
April 24, 2007, 10:43 PM
I have been keeping up with this thread and finally decided to throw in my 2/100 of a cent. Ready? Here it is: I couldn't care less about MOA. I have absolutely no problem with folks trying to get the last drop of accuracy out of their gun, and I can even derive some enjoyment from looking at someones tiny groups. It's hard to do and a worthy goal. For me, I just want to hit what I aim at. My buddy Rockstar.esq and I have a long running argument about Mini-14's, and his complaint is always that they are inaccurate. Well, that may be, but I can hit what I aim at darn near every time, and thats all I care about. So what if it is 3 moa at 100 yards? It's not a precision rifle and was never meant to be. So what if I can only shoot 2 inch groups at 300 yards? That will kill any elk that walks on earth, and thats all I care about. Accuracy is good, and fine accuracy is great, but all I care about is so-called pie-plate accuracy. If I can get shots off into that pie plate repeatedly and easily, thats all I care about. Tiny groups are swell, but I can shoot into a pie plate from any position you can name, with iron sights, at pretty decent distances all day. For me, thats good shooting. Except for prone. I am too fat and have no neck to shoot from prone, lol...

Dr.Rob
April 24, 2007, 11:17 PM
I don't think anyone was trying to start a pissing match.

The reason I dial my rifle in at the range is so that I know exactly where it's hitting when I draw down on game.

MOA and 'good enough for deer' are not exactly light years apart. To me, the smaller I get that group down it gives me more confidence to shoot at longer range. Nothing shrinks those groups like removing variables (ie shoot the same ammo all the time) and practice.

Some say shooting on the bench does nothing... I'd say it's sure better than not shooting at all. Shooting from the bench is mostly about seeing how accurate your rifle is, and partially about your form.

Shooting out in the woods is mostly about form, but it sure helps to have an accurate rifle.

~z
April 24, 2007, 11:29 PM
Uhhh, a 2 inch groups at 300 yards IS sub MOA
~z

aubie515
April 24, 2007, 11:39 PM
I agree with Doc Rob in that bench shooting will tell you what your rifle is capable of shooting. If you remove the variables out of the equation, you can focus on your rifle. Once you learn what type of groups you will produce with factory or your reloads, then it' time to practice shooting in other positions.

I also believe that one should use 5 shot groups instead of the 3 shot groups. To me, shooting 3 rounds does nothing for me and I'm not afraid if I have an off day and have a flier. It happens to the best of us and some days...you just "don't have it" to shoot a good group.

Too many wannabe's on the internet with their "claims" and there is no way to verify their information. I've seen people post pictures of "groups" that they measured incorrectly. You get both ends of the spectrum on the internet. There are some very skilled shooters to the not so talented shooters.

I disagree with the OP because I have owned a few sub MOA rifles. If there are sub MOA rifles that are older than 20 years old. What makes you think that today's modern rifles aren't as good or better than 20 year old technology?

I'm done with this thread...so you kids that want to continue the arguement...play nice.

Zak Smith
April 24, 2007, 11:44 PM
Bench? We don't need a bench!

http://demigodllc.com/~zak/DigiCam/BSR-2007.03/smaller/D101_3144_img.jpg (http://demigodllc.com/~zak/DigiCam/BSR-2007.03/?small=D101_3144_img.jpg)
............... Larger version of above photo. (http://demigodllc.com/~zak/DigiCam/BSR-2007.03/?small=D101_3144_img.jpg)

bluto
April 25, 2007, 12:29 AM
Enjoyable thread.

Since I'm not a hunter, just a recreational target shooter (pistols mostly) MOA and sub MOA claims were a consideration when I was deciding to purchase a rifle. I did my homework and had a Harris M86 .308 built to my specifications. It came with a sub-MOA guarantee and seems to have lived up to its claims. Extremely easy rifle to shoot.

My daughter was shooting sub MOA 3 shot groups at 100 yards with it her first time using a rifle.

BTW, I've shot next to quite a few dedicated shooters who seem to produce consistently impressive groups with much less expensive equipment than mine.
I believe that off the shelf sub MOA rifles are definitely available.

Jon Coppenbarger
April 25, 2007, 07:26 AM
I keep trying to get sub moa groups but keep getting 2.5" to 3" groups at 200 yards. But shooting 20 shot groups I always seem to get a few flyers in that so it kills me making it. I do not know if I ever will as my eyes are getting worse with open sighted ar15's.

trueblue1776
April 25, 2007, 08:52 AM
Kir-
Your point is not lost on me, 90% of the shooters I know don't even have a decent Rem 700 (or comparable rifle). So the guys I shoot with are boasting about their SKS with a fiberforce stock and air rifle scope. Or there is the Wal-Mart Rem 710 crowd with the biggest scopes you could imagine, as long as they can get them for less than 80 bucks. To me the two shooters represent the average weekend warrior, they probably both know more about MS Excel than shooting technique. I could care less about accuracy claims as we all hunt in the bush down here, so 12 MOA is a deer killing machine in these woods.
A 3 MOA rifle is something special to me, I'll give two inches and save a grand.
:D
If you didn't get it, compared to everybody here I am a BAD rifleman, no need to point it out, I kill pigs, deer, quail, dove, and squirrel with my horrible accuracy.

Geno
April 25, 2007, 01:31 PM
Here is an interesting website:

http://www.accuracysystemsinc.com/about_the_barrels.php

They manufacture some pretty cool firearms and barrels.

Bazooka Joe71
April 25, 2007, 01:52 PM
Bench? We don't need a bench!

Zak, I really wish you wouldn't have posted that picture...Now I'm extremely jealous that I have nothing even close to that where I live. I have 1 crappy range and 1 decent one and thats it.:banghead:

Thats just looks like so much fun.:fire:






:D

Afy
April 25, 2007, 04:22 PM
I want a Sako TRG 42 ... and am now seriously thinking about trading in my .222 Remmington Magnum and .300 Winchester plus adding a pile of money to get one...

Sub MOA....Sub MOA.... SUB MOA I want Sub MOA.

Trueblue: BTW my Excel Skills suck but I am pretty good at BizTalk... :neener:

JonB
April 25, 2007, 04:32 PM
EVERYONE has a sub-MoA rifle - just ask them. Seriously, haven't you read all the posts on THR, ar15com or other forums? People wouldn't LIE on the internet would they? What would be the point of that?

bowfin
April 25, 2007, 04:39 PM
Out of 15-20 rifles, I think I have one that I could tell you would be sub MOA on any given day, and that is a custom built 7mm Rem Mag with a Shilen barrel and a Texas Magnum action.

About a third of them might be capable (The Remington 700s and the like), but since most are milsurp and deer rifles, I never pursued tweaking the rifles and loads to anything under 2 MOA for the deer rifles. Several of the deer rifles have shot less than 1" groups at times, but to me, sub MOA means that they would do that 90% of the time, and they haven't.

I would be disappointed in this day and age if I bought a fairly nice varmint rifle and it didn't shoot under 1" with at least one load. I think that is a lot more attainable than it was years ago.

bowfin
April 25, 2007, 04:51 PM
No matter what the group size, I don't understand showing off a group that's off centerline, (unless you had a windy day).

Most benchrest shooters and those testing for absolute accuracy don't want the bullseye to change from one shot to another by having holes in it, thereby changing its size and/or shape. They purposely keep the group from impacting on their aiming point by having it shoot a couple of inches off the bullseye.

Four shots from a .30 caliber rifle on a 1" bullseye can pretty much wipe it out, and then what do you use for an aiming point for that all important fifth shot to round out your group?

MinnMooney
April 25, 2007, 07:15 PM
I have to agree with the thread starter that everyone seems to brag too much w/o putting qualifiers on their claims.
I have sub-MOA targets for every one of my guns - both light barreled hunters and bull-barreled varminters.............BUT - The difference is that the hunting rifles can only do it 1 in 10 while my Savage LRPV (.22-250) can do it 90% of the time (sub-.5 MOA 25% of the time).
Let's set some parameters :
1.) the BEST ammo for THAT rifle
2.) reasonably calm day
3.) 5-shot groups (not those lucky 3-shot'rs like some gun writers like to brag about).
4.) I do MY part - which sometimes is just not the case and I KNOW while I'm shooting!

If I ever find a new rifle that won't shoot 1.5 MOA consistantly - I get rid of it. Even my T/C Omega blk powder shoots 3 MOA but that's open sights so it's probably just me.

Erud
April 26, 2007, 07:40 PM
I realize that this topic has just about run it's course, but I just wanted to add my $.02, and possibly brag just a little. 1MOA is definitely attainable, as is 1/2MOA - just a little harder. I have had several rifles that would shoot sub-MOA regularly. I don't tend to keep rifles for very long if they do not shoot well. My current favorite rifle is a GAP Crusader in .308 - same as CDiprecision, just with a different stock. This rifle has been fired exactly 483 times, and I have targets to show for 458 of those rounds - remainder were at improvised targets(rocks, chunks of concrete, etc). I typically shoot 5-shot groups, but there are a few larger groups(10-15 rounds) mixed in as well. All groups were fired from a wooden bench with a Harris bipod and a rear sandbag from distances from 100 - 400 yards. Of all of these groups, there are only 4 that are larger than MOA, and those not by much. To be fair, one of the over MOA groups was a 10-shot 300yd group that measured a hair over MOA(3.084" C-to-C), one was a 400 yd group shot by my Dad(not familiar with my rifle) that measured 5.678" and the last 2 were just slightly over MOA with no excuses. I have not averaged all of the groups shot with this, but I'd guess it's right around 1/2 MOA for the life of the gun so far. This rifle cost me a lot and I worked hard to pay for it. I also practice often with this gun - I would be disappointed if it did not shoot like this. In 3 more weeks I will have access to a 1000-yd range - then the real fun begins. There are many people and guns out there that can shoot sub-MOA, and you can too, with the right equipment and practice.

Erud

Nhsport
April 26, 2007, 08:16 PM
Group size can be a subject of considerable entertainment. Guys streaching the truth is one thing but it just kills me when they actully believe the BS themselves.
Back several months I was at the indoor range at my club on a cold day and another member was setting up a scope on an air rifle.
After some shots and some running of the target back and forth this guy comes around the side of the booth and shows me a target with one hole dead center in the bull. "look at that group!" says the proud owner of the air rifle. "how many shots?" I ask----The guy looks kind of confused and says "Well just the one." -----OK


To me three shot groups are as likely to be the result of luck as they are due to good shooting,ammo,and firearm. If you show me a bunch of 3 shot groups shot in a row or a couple of 10 shot groups without any flyers I will start to pay attention.

I belong to a club with 275 members,about 100 of them shooters. I do like most of these men and women but there isn't but about 5 of them that I pay any attention at all to when they start talking group size because most of them just don't grasp the concept. When someone starts to run their mouth I just say " I would like to see that on the range"

~z
April 26, 2007, 09:05 PM
Sorry, I cant take it any more. Yes, people lie. Yes, folks think it will make them seem a better person if they tell this lie. Yes, they are trying to impress YOU.

But honestly...if they spend time with their gear, learn it, care for it, and appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of their selves and equipment, and practice for the purpose of refining the craft and not just to make noise.

Sub MOA is not difficult to achieve with modern equipment. First you must learn the craft; you will never out shoot your gear, but once you gain the proficiency to know where the flyer came from...

~z

NC-Mike
April 26, 2007, 09:40 PM
I like to put up a 8" splatter target at 100 yards and shoot a Mosin or Mauser with iron sights at it. If I stay on that 8" target, I'm more than happy. :cool:

U.S.SFC_RET
April 26, 2007, 10:00 PM
Sat at a bar only to listen to a stretcher of a story if I ever heard one. Cartridge was 308. Bolt gun. Custom gun, harris bipod. guy swore that he only put 450.00 into the rig. Could shoot the same hole from the bench at the 100 and dime sized groups at 500. Retired Leo telling this and I am thinking :rolleyes: . I ask him about adjusting for parallax. His reply.. Parallax?:rolleyes:

Art Eatman
April 26, 2007, 11:19 PM
Well, I'll be at Whittington, and I figure to bring some rifles. Two of them have been averaging under one MOA for five-shot groups since 1971. That's ignoring some load testing that didn't work out as hoped. But my "standard loads" are always sub-MOA or I'm back to testing.

One rifle that I'm bringing is generally half-MOA for three shots. I don't think I've ever run a five-shot string through it. Killed lots of prairie dogs with it, out to 300 yards, a year ago.

I once had a Bushmaster Match Target that shot five in a row of three-shot half-MOA groups, if that's any help.

But I'll be there with a fair amount of ammo. And sandbags. And hear guards.

Basically, I'm a hunter. I don't care all that much about groups, compared to the importance I attach to the first shot from a cold barrel always going to the same place as the last shot from that cold barrel. By and large, then, I've found that for my purpose, a three-shot group tells me as much as I need to know for a successful hunt. One reason I think my reasoning has merit is that the great majority of all my deer and coyotes have been one-shot kills, and any sort of miss has been a very rare event. (Shrug)

:), Art

zedheadmc
April 26, 2007, 11:41 PM
Well there was that time I shot that deer at 700 yards with a borrowed 270 with open sights from a standing position but I don't think it was able to do sub moa:neener:

MachIVshooter
April 27, 2007, 12:39 AM
I think it's funny how people talk about 1 MOA at a 100 yards like it is different from 1 MOA at 200 yards...

It is different. A rifle/load combo that is MOA at 100 yards may not be at 200 or 300. This is especially true with cartridges that start out with lower velocities and drive bullets with low B.C. that cause velocity to drop even faster.

I have worked up 2 loads for my Remington 700 BDL .25-06 that do shoot consitently under 1" at 100 yards. These same loads seldom produce groups under 4" at the maximum distance of our 387 yard range; usually closer to 6".

As I mentioned earlier, I have 6 rifles that I can print cositent sub-MOA 100 yard groups with. Only one of them will maintain that level of accuracy out past 400 yards. That one happens to be my AR-50.

On a side note, I'm quite sure my 700BDL .375 RUM can shoot ~MOA, but I have yet to be able to calm my nerves enough when shooting that 7-1/2 pound howitzer. Relax your muscles behind that critter, and pain follows.

theCZ
April 27, 2007, 12:57 AM
But CZ if you are aiming at that cross... why don't you adjust your scope to hit it? To me, sure great group but it's an inch low and 3/4 right of where I'd want it. I FULLY understand sighting in to shoot an inch high (dead on at 200 etc.).

I guess I should have stated that I was in the process of testing loads and that was the first group I shot with that combo of powder and bullet seating depth. After I find a load that I'm satisfied with, then I zero the scope. I now have that rifle shooting to point of aim at 100 yards. That's just the way I test loads, I don't care if I'm hitting the bullseye until I find the best load, then zero the scope to it and keep it that way.

Art Eatman
April 27, 2007, 12:50 PM
MachIV, I've often wondered about that. I finally set up a 500-yard range here at the house. Tried some loads with my '06. Sierra 165- and 180-grain. After messing around to get the scope set, I shot two four-shot groups with the 165s. Each was four inches. About the same MOA as at 100 yards. I then shot a ten-round string with the 180s. I called two fliers as I touched off, and had eight hits in a six-inch group, or 1.2 MOA. I didn't really hurry any of the shooting, but I didn't sit around between shots to let the rifle cool.

FWIW,

Art

ojibweindian
August 14, 2007, 09:23 PM
I've got a Weatherby Vanguard in 7mm Remington Magnum that spits out 150gr Winchester Power Points like watermelon seeds. Best group with that ammo is 1.5" at 100 yards; the worst being close to 2.25".

But, when I shoot the load developed I for it, groups drop down to under 0.5" at 100 yards. All off a bench, of course. I would love to take it to a place nearby that has a 600 yard range, just to see what happens with that load at longer distances, but I never seem to have the time.

Anyway, I'm of the opinion that many factory rifles made today are capable of sub-MOA, if the person behind the trigger puts in the time at the range and the reloading bench.

docgary
August 15, 2007, 12:31 AM
kir_kenix
Senior Member



Join Date: 09-18-06
Location: Shelby, nebraska
Posts: 165
sub moa rifles....riiiiight

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

it just seems that everybody i meet at the shooting range has a rifle (or most of the time RIFLES) that are 1" sureshot super rifles. the same can be said about gun writers. seriously, everything that every gun writer reviews seems to group .00005" at 650 yards.
i think that anybody could shoot a 1" or less group, if they shot enough groups. i mean, i have a few rifles that if i do my part can group at, around, or slightly below one inch, but not every time. not nearly every time. and most of the time it is around...as in above.
what got me thinking about this subject is that i went to my local gun range today with some of my buddies (buddies w/ super rifles that shoot .01" groups every day but saturday when I am around). each one of them bragged about what sort of groups they could produce, and none of them (myself included) performed to that pinnacle. sure it was windy, but most groups, even off rests, were at or around the 2" or above mark.
anyway, i was just wondering what everybody else's opinion was on this subject. i think that we seem to only remember the really good groups and not the AVERAGE or TYPICAL group. 2-4" groups should be plenty for most hunting, but we seem obsessed w/ moa.
i would never call anbody at my range a liar, but i think that most of us are frequently guilty of rather selective memory. does everyone else seem to fall into this line of thinking with me, or have i just been up WAY too long?


ROTFLMAO!!

gimposaurus
August 15, 2007, 12:37 AM
Both my centerfire rifles wil consistently shoot sub MOA groups at 100m, off sandbags on a bench or a harris bipod. Most modern production rifles probably will too.

rugerdude
August 15, 2007, 12:58 AM
I have a scoped Lee enfield that has produced a .75" 3-shot group with pakistani surplus ammo. However, the average is about 2-3" (100 yards) and I haven't even put 200 rounds through it yet.

That .75" grouping really made me glad to own that rifle because I knew that it would shoot better than I ever will be able to without a rest. It's just nice to KNOW that you are the only thing that needs improvement.

Now, just recently I shot a nice (to me) 10-shot grouping with my Browning buckmark on an NRA 25 yard pistol target and put 8 in the 10-ring and 2 in the 9-ring. I am most pleased with that target because I shot it, not the rifle that was rested front and rear on bags that I happened to be behind and pull its trigger.

I don't care if I ever make a .00004" grouping at 600 yards off of a bench because it will never be as satasfying as "real" shooting.

Buckskinner
August 15, 2007, 01:12 AM
NONE of my '06's, .270, 300wsm, 300wm, 338wm, .45-70, .30-30's, 6.5wsm, .223's, .308's, (20 rifles!) have EVER shot MOA. Got close with handloads a couple times.

I'm a good shot too! I've shot other accurate rifles, but none of mine after countless hours bedding, handloading, trigger work, practice, sore shoulders, burnt powder, premium bullets, have paid off in the holy "sub moa rifle".

And other guys who have gone through the same process swear about their gear, but can rarely shoot consistent "sub moa".

I did meet one guy, who had an awesome rifle, and was a fantastic shot. We essentially had exactly the same conversation as this thread, and he told me he practiced nightly with dry fire practice in all three positions.

So its one thing to have a machine that has the potential to provide consistent accuracy to a specific standard, and another thing to be a practiced marksman that can consistently wring that rifle's potential out with every shot string.

Anyway, this has been worth whatcha paid for it...

LiquidTension
August 15, 2007, 01:15 AM
I have no idea if I own any MOA or sub-MOA rifles. I can't think of a time that I've shot that well. I'm told that my K31 should be very accurate, but I've never done better than 3" at 100 yards.

Hey, at least I'm honest :o Maybe I should invest in a rest of some sort instead of putting a rifle case on top of an ammo can.

ojibweindian
August 17, 2007, 10:19 AM
Buckskinner

Are you getting close to MOA in the standing, kneeling, and sitting positions? If so, that's pretty good.

The Deer Hunter
August 17, 2007, 10:45 AM
My .22wmr can shoot about 1" on a good day with a warm barrel at 50 or so yards, but starts loosing inches around 100 yards. Its more like 2". But I shoots minute of woodchuck for me so I', fine with it. Plus the triggers real bad :(

My M44 shoots minute of deer so I'm fine with that too.

I definately agree with the OP that everybody braggs about their super sub moa "sniper" rifle. The thing is-I don't see this in real life. Noone brags about the little smiley faces they can punch out or anything like that.

ojibweindian
August 17, 2007, 11:19 AM
My rifle is definitely sub-MOA. Me? Nope :D

I think I'm a pretty good shot, though; hitting the inside gold square on a pack of Liggetts at a distance of 100 paces (not yards) is not a problem (done with a Marlin Model 60, a 3-9x40 Bushnell Legend, and bulk Federal .22lr from Wal-Mart).

I do practice, too. A lot. About an hour's worth 3-4 nights a week, consisting of dry-firing and holding the cross-hairs steady on a few dots on the far wall of the living room (in all three shooting positions).

Works. Really does.

the lone gunman
August 17, 2007, 12:50 PM
If you are a hunter, This is my opinon. whatever it is that you are hunting will not give you a chance to shoot a 3 or 5 shot group. IF your rifle will put that first shot in the vitals of whatever game you are hunting Thats all you need. Think about it, a 2 moa rifle is 8" at 400 yds, good enough for any big game animal. I love to headshoot squirrels in the fall, when I sight in my 22 marlin 880 , I set up several targets the size of a squrriels head at 50yds and shoot one shot at each. if they hit the kill zone,, Im happy.

Buckskinner
August 17, 2007, 01:22 PM
Ojibwe,
Ha ha! I wish! My best is about 2 moa with a buddies matched out M1A and his handloads. That's prone, iron, slung, slow, 4" group at 200 yards...

Well, actually my best would be having fun in rimfire silhouette. Knocking over little iron rams at 100 meters, offhand with a 24 power scope is a kick in the pants! Once with my little 10/22 I knocked over 6 pigs in a row, rapid fire, before my buddy stopped me: "Hey, man! You don't have to shoot all 15 in 2 1/2 minutes, just 5!!" We laughed pretty hard, then said "Wow! 6 in a row ain't bad!"

Practice does help, especially in getting in positions, finding your Natural Point of Aim, watching how your breathing affects your sight picture, and trigger control. Then all you need to worry about is wind and flinching!

havanatrader
August 17, 2007, 01:31 PM
Seems that people proclaim their rifles as sub-MOA if they shoot one group, one time, that goes under an inch. All other groups with that rifle might be in the two inch range.
IMO, that is a 2 MOA rifle, the one tiny group is just deviation from its norm, just as the 4 inch groups are (the groups we never mention).

Ghost Tracker
August 17, 2007, 01:44 PM
Okay, I've read this ENTIRE Thread & call B.S. on some, maybe on others, and no doubt on the rest. I really don't want to flame anyone by explaining which fall into which of my categories.

Of several choices from which to select, I only have two (2) sub MOA rifles. Both are expensive. Both are scoped with high-power, high-quality glass. Both are trial & error matched to their ammo.

The first is a Volquartsen Superlite .22 LR shooting Wolf Match Extra ammo. It takes 1/2" groups at 50 yards to be MOA. Off a sand-bagged benchrest, this rifle (under ideal wind conditions) is easily capable of repeatedly shooting sub 1/2" (5 shot) groups at 50 yards.

The second is a Varmint AR-15 fitted with an (air-gauged) Stainless, Match-Chambered, Bull Barrel, free-float tube, Jewell Trigger, Harris bipod, etc., etc. and 3/4" (5 shot) groups at 100 yards (again, under ideal wind conditions) are common from a benchrest using carefully massaged handloads.

A great shot can't repeatedly shoot sub MOA from a junk rifle. A great rifle can't repeatedly shoot sub MOA with a rookie on the trigger. But an excellent rifleman with his own capable, well-tuned rifle & ammo (on the right day) can EXPECT sub MOA results. It's not a necessity for hunting, but it certainly can be done.

Car Knocker
August 17, 2007, 01:55 PM
The 2007 firing of the "Five at 200 (size does matter)" match brought
out many shooters who found a little time available when they were
not squadded to shoot silhouette or target rifle matches during the 5
days we run this match.
The top three in each of our four classes are as follows.
(measurements are center to center for two widest shots at 200 yards).
=================================================
Over .40 cal., iron sights
Kelly Roos CA................... 1.455"
Mark Zimmer TX.................. 1.496"
LeRoy Tanner TX.................. 1.511"
=================================================
.40 and under cal., iron sights
Craig Kirchoff NE............... 1.968"
Dave Logosz ND.................. 2.075"
Jay Butts TX.................... 2.609"
================================================
Over .40 cal w/scope sight
Earl Clark NM................... 2.383" (*)
Robert Walline IL............... 3.236"
Dalton Sparks AZ................ 3.556"
(*)Earl is age 87. Does not shoot the silhouette or
target rifle matches anymore because he cannot handle the
long walks but he still has winning skill with his Sharps rifle.
He lives in Raton NM and is a Whittngton club member there.
=================================================
.40 cal. and under, w/scope sight
Jim Kidwell GA.................. 1.474"
Dick Hansen CA.................. 2.073" (**)
Mike Rich CT.................... 2.075" (**)
(**) This was the closest score in this match history.
Both targets were remeasured by myself and two other shooters
before finalizing the results.


These are the results of a side match at the BPCR Nationals at Raton, 2007. Five shots at 200 yards. I believe the guy with the smallest group, Kelly Roos, shoots a Shiloh Sharps in .45-90 or .45-100 with iron sights.

The Annoyed Man
August 17, 2007, 02:18 PM
I own 2 rifles in .308, and my son has one. My son's is a Savage 10FP HS Precision which will make its first trip to the range this week coming up.

Mine are a Remington 700 VSF Left-Hand, and an old Ruger M77 MkII All Weather (the one with the stainless action and barrel, and the really crappy stock).

My 700 is pretty new, and it has only had 100 rounds through it. It took a lot of fiddling around with scope zeroing and learning a new set of ergonimics to get the rifle to shoot sub MOA at 100 yards. The best group so far has been about 1/2". However, for every sub MOA group I've shot with it, I've shot 4 more that weren't.

My old Ruger has shot sub MOA groups (about 3/4") at 100 yards before too, and it has done it a lot more consistently than the Remington. But even that rifle usually shoots at about 1.5-2.0 MOA. I figure that the consistency is a product of familiarity. I've probably shot 3 thousand rounds through that rifle over the years. Other than a superb action and a heavy but predictable trigger letoff, it is a piece of crap with an old piece of crap Bushnell 3-9x38mm scope on it, but it shoots real well - for ME.

Getting used to the 700, with its 3.5 lb trigger, longer length of pull, higher scope height (a Leupold 4.5-14x50mm VX-III), the longer barrel and stock (a 26" barrel vs. the 22" barrel on the Ruger), and the overall increased weight, has been more difficult than I thought it would be, and that has for sure impacted my ability to shoot it well. But come to think of it, I didn't used to shoot that old Ruger very well either, which just goes to show the truth of the old dictum that the only way to get good with a particular rifle is to send a lot of rounds downrange.

I expect that time will make me better on the Remington, and I realize that my son is in for an eyeopener the first time he goes and shoots his new Savage. Like me, he shoots pretty well on that old Ruger, but his new rifle is not going to be as easy as he thought it was.

If I can draw a parallel to fine guitars, my experience has been that the first time I went out and bought a really nice guitar, my playing skills seemed to suffer. Cheap guitars lack the clarity of sound of a good guitar, and just like a high end stereo system allows you to hear more of the music than a cheap one does, a really good guitar demands that you step up to the plate and get everything right, because every little biff and mistake is going to be much easier to hear. The guitar will do exactly what you tell it to do. On the other hand, play it well, and it will reward you with beautiful music.

I think that good rifles are like that. They will generally shoot right where you point them. If you're not pointing them well, then your group sizes are going to reflect that.

Buckskinner
August 17, 2007, 04:02 PM
Car knocker,
Are these shot from the bench? That's good shooting from anywhere, especially behind a big cloud of smoke.

I guess I'm one of those guys who figures benchrest shooting is cheating a bit. Okay for statistics, but not necessarily a highly skilled exercise, compared to offhand, prone and sitting.

Car Knocker
August 17, 2007, 04:44 PM
As I recall, it's benched.

Jimmy Newman
August 17, 2007, 04:48 PM
Cooper rifles guarantees their rifles to 1/2" at 100 yards off a bench rest with a competent shooter and good hand loads.

I average about 2" groups at 200 yards off the bench with my Rem. 700 7mm-08 using Hornady light mag 139gr SST ammo when there's <5mph wind and the bore has been cleaned. I did spend several summers learning to shoot very small groups with a .22 (at least 10000 rounds) in all four positions.

SlamFire1
August 17, 2007, 05:11 PM
When I first got my M1a Super Match, back in the early 90's, I did load development and had nothing less than 2 inches at 100 yards off the bench. With good ammo.

Ten years later, same gun, same ammunition combination, prone off the ground, I was putting most of 20 shots near an inch.

What had changed? I got better.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/ReducedM1a197-9X168Sierra41.5AA2495.jpg

YodaVader
August 17, 2007, 05:43 PM
I guess I'm one of those guys who figures benchrest shooting is cheating a bit. Okay for statistics, but not necessarily a highly skilled exercise, compared to offhand, prone and sitting.

I can agree as well , but after reading the posts here the ability for most to shoot less than an inch at 100 yards (even bench rested) is an extreme rarity.

Seems like most are also talking sporter type hunting rifles , with stock triggers , and using non-match factory ammo. Which I can also agree with - that would not be the type of rifle I would used to try to shoot less than 1" at 100yds.

Now using a heavy varmint or tactical rifle with a decent stock , with a good trigger , securely mounted quality optics , a proper rest , a solid bench and match bullet reloads I don't find it to be such a great feat , under most range condtions. My most accurate rifle is a Rem 700LTR with a Jewell trigger , Leupold Vari-XIII 6.5X-20X target dot , and I use Sierra and Berger match bullets.

To me shooting in the 90s in 50 yard slowfire bullseye (pistol) is far more difficult than shooting less than a one inch group with a bench rested varmint rifle with match ammo reloads. But with enough practice and using the right equipment some do it routinely.

doc2rn
August 17, 2007, 05:56 PM
+1 fineredmist: Murphy was a grunt

jpwilly
August 18, 2007, 12:37 AM
There are a number of variables involved; the shooter, the weather, the gun, and the ammo. If one of these is out of whack the groups can open up and I think most of us are willing to forget the bad groups and blame one of the above. When things go right - you gotta tell everyone!!

Whitman31
August 18, 2007, 01:01 AM
Good groups are how we judge our guns. There are dozens of factors that can cause groups to grow, even the best guns have bad days.
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x281/whitman31/204_Ruger_100yds.jpg
5 shot group, 100yds, 204 Ruger, Hornady 32Gr V-max...Good enough for the girl I date...

Buckskinner
August 18, 2007, 01:08 AM
good target. That's a heartbeat away from a fly's eyeball...

Whitman31
August 18, 2007, 01:19 AM
Here's another
http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x281/whitman31/100_1318.jpg
6 shot group, 100yds, Remington 700 BDL in 22-250 with 1500+ down the barrel, 50gr NBT. This gun always shoots a "flyer" the first round down a clean barrel, after that it tightens up...I adjust by shooting 6 instead of 5.

One more thing, this gun barely shoots 2 MOA with the best factory ammo I can find...

the new guy
August 18, 2007, 06:28 AM
WOW! This has been the best entertainment I've had in a looooooong time! It might even be good for a few more pages... one can only hope!

So here's what I think: Those that "do", rarely "talk". Those that "talk", rarely "do". The world would probably be a better place if the talkers shut up and "did"... or just went away. Of course, it is fun to listen to the I can shoot better than you folks out there sometimes. It's even more fun to, with a few well placed words, smash their oh so fragile self esteem and leave them wallowing in their own self reproach while I rap off a few more rounds.:evil: What can I say? Sometimes I'm a sadist.

Yes I have a few sub moa rifles... yes they're consistant... no biggie really. As far as my new rifle goes, every time I set out to find its limits it laughs at me and says: not this time. I'm very happy with it so far, everything else is merely someone else's conjecture.

Hey rangerruck, what in the wide world of shootin' stuff is a pressure pad?
And what ever posessed you to torque action screws? I don't believe I ever wouldv'e come up with that one... whatever works. Also... nice groups.

Mannlicher
August 18, 2007, 08:43 AM
Kir Kenex i would never call anbody at my range a liar, but i think that most of us are frequently guilty of rather selective memory. does everyone else seem to fall into this line of thinking with me, or have i just been up WAY too long?

well, there are 'internet 3 shot groups', and 'real life 3 shot groups'.

I have some rifles that shoot with a high degree of accuracy. I am sure most here do. HOWEVER, some of the claims posted on the internet, are in the relm of science fiction.

GunTech
August 18, 2007, 10:22 AM
I also measure shot groups by 5 round groups in 5 strings.

I my experience, people who shoot sub MOA groups will usually qualify it with conditions - 'with this particular ammo' for example.

I recenltly had a person tel me his SA SOCOM would shoot sub MOA with Portugese surplus or any other crap he put into it. It will, if you do like he does and shoot 3 round groups, and toss out 'flyers'.

Are modern production rifle capable of sub MOA - which is precision, BTW, not accuracy as some people seem to think. Certainly. But you must pick the right ammo, and in the case of many hunting weight barrels, you must allow the rifle to cool down between strings.

Can most production rifles shoot sub MOA groups of 5 rounds, 5 times in a row? Rarely. Can they do same with factory ammo? Almost never.

I shoot a 40X custome that will reliably do 1/2 MOA, and under the right conditions will do 1/4 MOA. That's after carefull working up a load using weighed bullets and brass, attention to seating depth and carefully measured powder. That's way more effort than most people bother with, but it gets groups like this:

http://guntech.com/misc/tsx.jpg

If I use over the counter Federal Gold Medal Match, it shoots about MOA - but consistently.

My M1A match shoots right about 1 MOA with handloads. I'd like to see one that will do the same with milsurp, though I've heard of many.

There may be a lot of sub MOA rifles, but I sure don't see them at the range.

Creature
August 18, 2007, 11:00 AM
I have an old sporterized 1903A3 that is sub-MOA.

sammy
August 18, 2007, 11:02 AM
I have shot a sub MOA group once. I was shooting my Springfield Scout, open sights with SA surplus. I fired a 3 shot group at 100 yards and looked through the scope and did cartwheels!! I am sure it was a total fluke, normally at 100 yards it is more like 4 MOA if I am doing my part.

ojibweindian
August 18, 2007, 11:46 AM
I my experience, people who shoot sub MOA groups will usually qualify it with conditions - 'with this particular ammo' for example.
t

What's wrong with that as a condition? If ammo wasn't a factor in a rifle's ability to shoot sub-MOA, then bench-resters, F-Class shooters, and military snipers wouldn't care if they were using cheap surplus. A rifle, like anything else, can only be as good as the stuff its fed.

Can most production rifles shoot sub MOA groups of 5 rounds, 5 times in a row? Rarely. Can they do same with factory ammo? Almost never.


Mine can, and does. Of course, it's with handloads, and I don't send 25 rounds down range in 3 minutes. I really don't know of anyone that does, either. Most any barrel's gonna get too hot with 5 strings of 5 rounds in under 10 minutes to reliably perform at such levels. But, if i send 25 rounds downrange in 30+ minutes, mine can, and does, shoot sub-MOA.

There may be a lot of sub MOA rifles, but I sure don't see them at the range.

That's probably the fault of the shooter, not the rifle.

My sub-MOA groups are off a bench at 100 yards. To be honest, I've not shot at any more than that (soon to be rectified). I've every reason to believe, though, that with development of the right load, my rifle can do sub-MOA to several hundred yards (if I'm capable).

Whitman31
August 18, 2007, 05:22 PM
I've every reason to believe, though, that with development of the right load, my rifle can do sub-MOA to several hundred yards (if I'm capable).
Good luck with that.

SlamFire1
August 18, 2007, 06:00 PM
My M1A match shoots right about 1 MOA with handloads. I'd like to see one that will do the same with milsurp, though I've heard of many.

I use milsurplus to bust rocks. Or get on paper when setting the zero on a new rifle. Then, to get an accurate zero, I use match ammunition in my match Garands and Match M1a's.

Even in the day of "White Box" match ammunition, that 174 FMJBT would not consistantly shoot under a MOA. It took the 168 SMK to get the occasional under one MOA group in a Match M1a. I know the rifle is capable, but iron sights and service stocks limit the shooter. And it kicks.

Milsurplus ammunition is limited by awful bullets. My Austrailian will group around 3 MOA in a match rifle. Funny enough, it will actually shoot closer to 2 MOA in an Argentine barreled FN.

Even in match rifles you have to shoot match bullets in match barrels, with a well bedded action to get close to consistent MOA groups. And then, some loads just shoot better.

aspade
August 18, 2007, 08:56 PM
Milsurp varies greatly. I have gotten consistent MOA performance at 200 yards out of some lots of RG84 and FNM in my 10FP.

cmb3366
August 18, 2007, 09:38 PM
I have to say I disagree with the statement that most rifles are more capable than their operators, and easily capable of sub MOA accuracy. I've owned and shot alot of rifles capable of only 1.5-2.5" with the best of scopes and handloads. That said there most certainly are sub MOA factory rifles, they just take some looking, shooting, and selling to get.

3 shots at 100yds with a Remingiton VLS .308, 168grain Matchkings and Varget.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/cmb3366/vlstarget004.jpg

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/cmb3366/vlstarget003.jpg






And here's an example of a rifle that was just a POS no matter what it was fed. These groups were shot at 100yds with a new Savage 11-FNS .308win I bought back when the accu-trigger came out.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/cmb3366/675ad2e0.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/cmb3366/fe9cf836.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/cmb3366/IMG_0007.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/cmb3366/IMG_0005.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a194/cmb3366/IMG_0003.jpg

GunTech
August 18, 2007, 10:23 PM
Milsurp is not just limited to bad bullets. Military contracts accept powders that have much more variation in burn rate that civilian powders. Military contract powders that are converted to civilian used must be blended to make commercial powder specs. WC848 has a much wider allowable burn rate than BL-C(2) and W748, two powders it of frequently compared to.

Miltary primers are about as bad. They are made to be less sensitive and have a big flash for reliable ignition. Anyone who's used CCI #34 can confirm that they suck for accuracy work.

Part of the accuracy problems cited for the M14 was due to ammunition variablility. The same rifles that would fail the 5.5 inch at 100 yard specification would shoot 2-3 MOA wth commercial ammunition. If the ammunition is not capable of MOA (and most military is not anywhere close) it doesn't matter what you fire it from - you won't do MOA - unless the stars just happen to be in the right alignment and you get lucky.

Commercial ammo is only a bit better. Recall that manufacturers are loading millions of rounds, and dies wear out, powder feed, etc. As long as everything is within spec, commercial ammo is pretty good.

Match ammo is a notch up, but it's very hard to compete with precision hand loaded ammunition, where bullets, powder and cases are all weight, seating depth is set for a particular rifle, necks are turned, etc.
So when someone say he can shoot sub MOA with his deer rifle and ammo from Wal-Mart, I say 'show me'. I find it particularly galling when gunwriters (many of who are basically marketing for gun companies) talk about factory sub MOA deer rifles - usually counting a single 3 shot group, and often discounting 'flyers' or 'called shots'.

Jerry Morris
August 18, 2007, 10:39 PM
Some of you guys need to find a more impressive rifle range.

Let's get me out of the way. On a "hot day", I can do sub-MOA, most of the day. Every day? No! My rifles, a model 94 in 30-30 is good for about 3 MOA, it's my meat gun. My AR is a decent MOA rifle. My formerly 700 PSS is sub MOA, when I am. It still looks like a PSS, but it has a Shilen stainless hand lapped match barrel and has been blue printed. I have had my days and am satisfied with them. Say what you will.

Now, to the meat. I shoot at George Kelbly's Range. There are a lot of fine marksmen there. Numerous times I have started out on what I thought was a quick trip to the range, only to come home 8 hours later. I was looking though my spotting scope at other peoples targets as they shot.

Three vs. five shot groups? YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TELL!!!! Ten, or more shots? You would have to watch them be fired from behind the shooter, they are THAT tight.

Never say it ain't gonna be done. And some of those writers ain't lying about their guns, or their skill. If you ever run into one of those hack writers with the name of Roland, hang onto your wallet. He can clean you out in a couple of bets.

Jerry

riddleofsteel
August 18, 2007, 11:39 PM
http://yerfrockethellhound.com/tightgroup.jpg

Remington Sendero 25-06
Leupold 3.5x10 Vari X III

3/8" ten shot group at 100 yards

This was the day I learned to set the torque on my bedding screws with a torque wrench.

Later that day I shot a 5 shot 1.5" group at 395 yards with the same rifle.


I NEVER sell a rifle that shots like this!!

I have sold a bunch that I could not MAKE shoot for love nor money.

Big game hunting rifles have to shoot 1.5 MOA off of sand bags to live at my house.

Varmit rifles have to shoot 1 MOA or less.

Having said that most of my rifles will shoot from .5 MOA to .75 MOA with my hand loads. It has been a 30 year process of elimination and gun smithing to accomplish that goal.

cameron.personal
August 19, 2007, 12:38 AM
I think it is pretty obvious to everyone that you poked those holes with a pencil... :rolleyes:

riddleofsteel
August 19, 2007, 09:10 AM
OK............... if that makes you feel better to believe that.

:neener:

cameron.personal
August 19, 2007, 10:27 AM
I was like this :evil: when I was writing that.

Really is great shooting!

Cameron

SlamFire1
August 19, 2007, 10:46 AM
Anyone who's used CCI #34 can confirm that they suck for accuracy work.

I would disagree with that. I have been using them in my M1a, Garand, since they came out. And they provide excellent accuracy.

Attached is a 200 Yard Sitting Rapid fire group I shot with my M1a, 168 grain bullets, Surplus 4895, and CCI#34 primers. It was scored as a 100-8X. I do not often shoot 8X cleans with a M1a, and I seldom ever get the target as it is usually pasted over when I get to the pits. But I was able to get a photograph this time. These primers shoot just fine all the way across the course.

And so do the CCI#41 primers. I just came back from Perry where on two out of the three long range legs I shot 197's with a Space Gun. One was an 197-8X. The wind had a larger negative influence on my groups than anything else.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/SlamFire/Targets/200-8XReduced200RFMIA64XXX168Nosler.jpg

ojibweindian
August 19, 2007, 11:13 AM
Whitman31
Good luck with that.

Thanks!

Balddragn
September 10, 2007, 01:00 PM
I guess I can throw in my two cents.

I have a Rem. 700vsf in 308 that I've been putting together and tuning up for benchrest. I'd like to be able to compete with some of the long range shooters, 600 to 1000 yards. Part of the process will be doing my own hand load but I have just finished my first batch yesterday and haven't had time to test them out yet. If I can get the pictures to load I have three examples of (barely) sub MOA 5 shot groups (I don't throw out fliers) if measured center to center. This session was the sight in for the Horus scope I had just mounted, I was shooting Federal match gold 168gr. hpbt.

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/7402/target3smov2.jpg

http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/2378/target2smkk3.jpg

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/8173/target1smce9.jpg

I shot 40 rounds that day, the first two groups to get sighted in, the other three groups were about 1.25 inches and these three just under, so the average was just over MOA.

I'm looking forward to what I can do with my own handloads.

elmerfudd
September 10, 2007, 01:50 PM
I've got 4 rifles out of about 16 that are true minute of angle rifles, (within their range limitations), and I tend to agree with the original poster. I think there are 10 people out there claiming that they or their rifles are MOA shooters for every one that actually is. Getting a minute of angle rifle really isn't that difficult. You can go out and buy a Remington LTR and then shoot Federal Gold Match off a bench and reasonably expect to get MOA groupings. In fact if I didn't get MOA with that combination I would be upset. It seems however that at the gun shop and online people are constantly claiming to get MOA groups with combinations that are highly unlikely to produce that kind of accuracy. I've heard people claim to shoot MOA groups with their muzzleloaders, AK's, AR's shooting Wolf ammo, etc... To me MOA accuracy means that you can rely on that rifle to consistently shoot MOA groups. If you fire 10 groups and the best is 1" at 100 yards and the worst is 3", then you have a 3 MOA rifle. Of course it's fair to put conditions on things, like a cold barrel or a particular load, so long as you can repeat that performance over and over.

Legionnaire
September 10, 2007, 02:29 PM
Hey, I like MOA rifles, but they don't all have to be that way. There are applications where minute-of-coke-can is quite adequate. The way I view it, I want to know the accuracy potential of any rifle in the safe, just so I know how to stay within its limitations.

I have one true, sub-MOA rifle. That's a professionally accurized Rem 700 VSSF that will routinely go 0.75" with Federal Gold Medal Match ammo. It will occasionally go to 0.5" but its average is closer to 0.75".

Then I have a couple of rifles that will regularly go sub-MOA, but group averages from these rifles are from 1 to 1.5 inches. Are they sub-MOA? Not in my book ... even though they will sometimes shoot .75" groups.

And then I have my deer rifles. For that purpose, I'm happy with 2 MOA. My .30-30 won't even do that consistently (yet) but all that tells me is that I should wait for a closer shot.

What I'm looking for at the moment is the ammo that will shoot 1 MOA (.5" at 50 yards) consistently out of a couple of my rimfires!

yesit'sloaded
September 10, 2007, 02:30 PM
I can shoot 1/4 MOA all day long with any rifle I own. The trick is to shoot 1 shot groups:neener:

GunTech
September 10, 2007, 02:38 PM
You also have to factor in the ammo. A great rifle can be brought down by bad ammo. I've had people claim their Military style rifle shoots sub MOA with cheap imported surplus. Riiiiight.

Most people who i see shoot consistent MOA or smaller groups will be able to rattle off exactly what ammo does that. Most are handloaded.

While many factory rifles will shoot and ocasionsal MOA, particularly if you shoot three shot groups and toss out flyers or 'called' shots (gun writers).

Having a rifle that will shoot sub MOA, rain or shine, ever single time, with 5 or ten shot grouops is another matter. I have exactly one rifle that will do that. On occasion, it shoot far better than MOA. But it always shoots at least MOA.

http://guntech.com/40x/40x.jpg

Charles S
September 10, 2007, 02:48 PM
Of course it's fair to put conditions on things, like a cold barrel or a particular load, so long as you can repeat that performance over and over.

That is an excellent summation. That has been my assertion all along; a true MOA rifle can do repeat that performance on demand. One single group of two or three shots does not a MOA rifle make. For me I like 5 three shot groups in hunting rifles, 3 five shot groups in varmint rifles, and multiple 10 shot groups in target rifles. That is what I am talking about when I say a MOA rifle.

Hey, I like MOA rifles, but they don't all have to be that way. There are applications where minute-of-coke-can is quite adequate. The way I view it, I want to know the accuracy potential of any rifle in the safe, just so I know how to stay within its limitations.

Agreed, first shot performance from a cold, fowled barrel, is the single most important factor in a hunting rifle to me. Not MOA performance.

Most people who i see shoot consistent MOA or smaller groups will be able to rattle off exactly what ammo does that. Most are handloaded.

That has been my experience also.

BTW GunTech really nice rifle. I know it is off topic, but tell us more about it.

Browning
September 10, 2007, 02:49 PM
One quick question, in formal target shooting how do you go about actually measuring a group?

Do you just measure from the very side of the farthest bullet hole over to the one on the other side and then do the same thing from the top or what? I've just always used round objects as a reference for my groups (minute of pie plate, minute of saucer, coffee cup, silver dollar, quarter and every once in a while a nickel etc).

yesit'sloaded
September 10, 2007, 02:58 PM
MY friend has a Styer accubolt in 30-06 with a svarofski scope that is very much sub MOA. He can also tell me the primer,powder,bullet,case dimensions, and he keeps it sighted in for a clean cold bore shot. I think I slaughtered the spelling on that one but foreign names never were my strong suite.

tkendrick
September 10, 2007, 05:13 PM
I shot a deer last fall. Thought I had kilt him, but he get's up dust hisself off marches over to me and chews my a@#.

Crux was, he aint gonna fall down for some POS rifle that kaint drill 27 holes into the same spot at 42-11yards, so I beter get rid of that POS and buy a reel gun.

Boy, he wuz really pissed!!!

skinewmexico
September 10, 2007, 05:20 PM
I have a few, legitimate sub-MOA rifles. I have even more, legitimate minute-of -deer rifles. Like the Colonel said, only accurate rifles are interesting....

YodaVader
September 10, 2007, 05:24 PM
Getting a minute of angle rifle really isn't that difficult. You can go out and buy a Remington LTR and then shoot Federal Gold Match off a bench and reasonably expect to get MOA groupings. In fact if I didn't get MOA with that combination I would be upset.

That has been my experience with the exact rifle you mention. It is equipped with a Jewell trigger and Leupold Vari-XIII 6.5X-20X with target dot reticle. The bullets I use are mostly match Sierra and Berger. The Sierra bullet being the same used in the Federal Gold Medal factory loads. It is a .223 LTR. It is no great feat to shoot 100 yard sub-MOA with this rifle utilizing a solid benchrest.

GunTech
September 10, 2007, 07:43 PM
Charles S

The rifle show is a Remington 40x, with a 27.5 inch Hart barrel. It's mounted in an Accuracy International AICS and is fitted with a Jewell trigger and Tubb SpeedLock. The scope is on a 20 MOA TPS base wirth TPS rings. It's an original military contract Leupold Mark IV M3 10x.

My one complaint about this rifle is that the barrel is 1:12, so it won't stabilize heavy bullets well. However, I shoot 155gn Lapua Scenars, which have a BC of 0.508 and they get me to 1000 yards pretty easily. I use WW brass, weighed and sorted, and 45.5gn Accurate 2520 powder with CCI BR primers. I also use 42.0 gns VV N135 if I'm only shooting to 600. It groups better but lacks the velocity of the 2520.

Right now I am waiting for my new scope, a US optics ST-10 rigged out just the way I want it. With scope and everything, this beast weighs about 17 pounds.

pdh
September 10, 2007, 08:56 PM
These 100yd groups of different loads out of my .308 Rem700 Varmint Special are highly typical....


http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o312/hainespd/700Rem.jpg



http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o312/hainespd/2800fps.jpg


http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o312/hainespd/2700fps-1.jpg


http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o312/hainespd/2600fps.jpg

CheyennePilot
September 11, 2007, 12:50 AM
I had me a sub moa rifle once. I got bored with it at the local 100 yard range. Finally sold it. Now I live within five miles of a 1K range. Wish I still had the FNH A-4 .308 with a Leopold M1 8.5X25 50 Mil dot scope, and Harris Bipod. It was too heavy to hunt with, but a fine bench rifle.

My biggest challenge was timing the shot between heart beats. Watching the crosshairs move across the the target as much as 3/4 " was fustrating to say the least. I hear the new heart pumps being developed will be continous flow. Imagine, no pulse. Just hold your breath and squeeze the trigger.
Maybe some day we will outshoot our rifle?

Happy landings?
Cheyennepilot

Legionnaire
September 11, 2007, 06:46 AM
Cheyenne, welcome aboard. However, if you're shooting from a bench using proper technique, the rifle should be rock steady. If POA seems to be moving with your heartbeat, you haven't benched the rifle properly.

CheyennePilot
September 12, 2007, 11:44 AM
Thanks Legionnaire, I believe you're right! My heartrate didn't allways effect the POI. I must have slightly elevated the stock off the rear rest on occasion. I was concerned more about the rifle butt being tight against shoulder. I could hold a tight group as long as I timed the shot. Would have been easier if I made sure the stock was well grounded.

Happylandings!
CheyennePilot.

Meta
November 6, 2009, 12:00 AM
Minute of Fly at 100 yards. An inch at 100 is boring. :neener:

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n26/metaphysx/107_0706.jpg
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n26/metaphysx/107_0704.jpg

Broken11b
November 6, 2009, 03:40 AM
It's a combination of things, people overestimate range, people exagerate their grouping abilities. Sub MOA groups can be had, and the shooters are out there, but those are the rarities. I have a good friend who swears that his 30-30 with a tasco scope can hit pie plates at 800 yards. Its not true, but he's not being dishonest (he's really just that bad at range estimation).

benzy2
November 6, 2009, 10:49 AM
A couple of my rifles are capable of 1 MOA 5 shot groups if given the right ammo and a decent shooter. I handload every round that goes out of those rifles and have spent plenty of time at the range finding those loads. Those rifles aren't 1 MOA rifles with every load and have given me my share of big groups with the wrong loads. With enough time and development though most of the rifles I have bought to shoot from a bench are capable of consistent sub-MOA groups, if everything else is done right. I find that my abilities (when I'm doing everything right) dwindle out at .5" at 100 yards. Some people can shoot better than that but not me. Anything smaller for me is a fluke and something I can't repeat consistently. 1 MOA though tends to be within reason. I will also state that while MOA is MOA no matter what the range I do most of my shooting at 110 yards. Thats what the local range is setup for which limits me. I can't claim to shoot that well at further distances since I get no practice at longer ranges. 1 MOA at 100 yards isn't near as impressive as 1 MOA at 1000 yards.

rbernie
November 6, 2009, 10:56 AM
This thread is two years old. Let it go.....

Art Eatman
November 6, 2009, 10:57 AM
Sorry, but uber-long threads from the Land of Necrothreadia shouldn't be resurrected. Reference material, maybe. But best to start a new thread with a link back to the old one for those who are interested.

If you enjoyed reading about "sub moa rifles....riiiiight" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!