"minute of bad guy myth"

[dave3006]

A lot of people want to justify loosey shooting rifles by claiming they are minute of "bad guy" accurate. Ie, they can hit a man sized target at, say, 100 yards. I think this is a myth. For a civilian, accuracy is important. Minute of "bad guy" is not good enough.

Once the shooting starts, no one will stand out in the open. All you will have is a head, foot, leg, ect.. to shoot at. Accuracy will matter because even the small targets won't be there forever. On a related topic, the more cover your rifle can penetrate the better. Since the bad guys will be hiding behind things, better penetration effectively makes your target bigger.

In a SHTF scenario, you will probably will not have a team to lay down a volume of fire. You will need as many first round hits as possible. First round hits mean you will expose yourself less and live longer.

 

[AK103K]

Once the shooting starts, no one will stand out in the open.

There ya go! And those you do see in the open will be getting small fast. I think to much emphasis is placed on target type shooting and not enough on realistic shooting at realistic targets or parts of targets. A bullseye target only shows you have the basics down and can hit a little ball at a known distance with plenty of time and preparation, and that applies even during rapid fire strings. I think a better way to determine shooting skill would be a two second snap shot at 100 yards and less, and better yet, on a moving target. 500 yard shots are not normal, reasonable or realistic shots for the basic rifleman, even if he has a weapon and skills that can make it, is it really the smart thing to do, especially on targets that might have supporting arms?
I think most of the military arms out there are capable of making good hits at realistic ranges under realistic conditions if the shooter is capable. As much as the target shooters will cry about it, even the much maligned AK's can do it. Its not the guns fault if you cant work it.

 

[hillbilly]

AK103K

You are absolutely right that 500 yard shots are complete unreasonable for "riflemen."

Your idea is completely supported by all those Soviet troops toting AK variants who got plunked from 500 and beyond by Lee-Enfield toting mujhadeen back in Afghanistan in the 1980s.

And that's exactly why all the M14s have been dug out of storage and sent to Afghanistan in the 2000s....because no rifleman has any realistic reason to shoot at targets 500 yards away........

That's espeically true in wide open country without much vegetation, which would include only far-off, exotic places that American riflemen are unlike to ever visit like Afghanistan and the steppes of Asia.........oh yeah, and most of the United States from Kansas City, Missouri, west to California

Okay, got it.......thanks for clearing all that up for us, AK103K.

hillbilly

 

[Gewehr98]

So what are you proposing, Dave?

That military-issue firearms should have benchrest-level 1/4 MOA accuracy?

My understanding of "Minute-of-Bad-Guy" terminology is that it's the same as the accuracy standard for an issued military weapon system.

The accepted accuracy, as issued, for a 1903 Springfield, M1 Garand, M14, AK-47, FAL, and M16 are certainly not sub-MOA. But they're more than accurate enough to cause enemy casualties, nobody would argue that. And that, to me, is the essence of "Minute-of-Bad-Guy" accuracy.

My Bulgarian AK can produce a 2" 100-yard 5-shot group. That's not benchrest PPC accuracy like Bogie's custom rifles can do, but it's more than accurate enough for combat conditions.

 

[Art Eatman]

Seems to me that worrying over aspects of "minute of bad guy" is sorta on the nitpicking side of things. After all, it's basically a joking term used in reference to typical military-rifle accuracy. (From an accuracy standpoint, "military" includes the semi-auto para-military look-alikes.)

It seems to me to have come about from discussions (arguments?) over comparisons in group-size of such as the plain-vanilla ARs, AKs in general, and Mini-14s.

Overall, I've taken it to mean that one need not make it an absolute requirement that one's SHTF or home-defense rifle be capable of better than one MOA. And that's about all it means...

Art

 

[AK103K]

And that's exactly why all the M14s have been dug out of storage and sent to Afghanistan in the 2000s....

If that were the case, then why are not ALL troops issued the M14? Are all the troops that are issued the M14 just basic riflemen, or are they not Designated Marksmen with better skills and given specific targets to deal with? I'm not saying longer range rifles are not useful, just that not everyone is a long range shooter, even if you might have a rifle that will make the shot.(I love the way all the .30 shooters think thats all they are going to do, sit there and pick everyone off out in the open at 600 yards like they are shooting woodchucks that just sit there and wonder "what was that?" ) I also think you have to think about if that shot should even be taken, especially if your alone or in a small group, with no support against someone who might have it. Is it not better to close with them quietly and annihilate them outright up close, then to alert them to you being there and letting their bigger toys spoil your day? Your advantage is not distance here, its closeness. You may get one or two with your M14, they will hammer you. They cannot call support if your among them in danger close. Up close, a shooter with fast, reasonably accurate shooting skills wins over a precise target shooter any day. I'd rather have that M4 or AK over that M14 95% of the time. But that just me. YMMV Are there times it would be nice to have a long range capability, of course. Just how often is it realistically used and do you want to be the one with it when things get hot and heavy up close, where things tend to happen more?

 

[mustanger98]

I don't know about ya'll, but my M1 Garand is zeroed for 100yds. If I gotta go long, all I gotta do is dial it up and then whatever the windage calls for.

Long range with their support toys, or up close and personal; either way, you're liable to have your day rurnt.

 

[dave3006]

All I am saying is that accuracy matters and that the targets won't be as big as some think they will be. They don't need to be 1/4 MOA. A 2 MOA Garand with decent ammo might cause you to get more first round hits on an enemies head at 100 yards than a 5 MOA Yugo with Wolf ammo.

Quicker hits means less exposure.

 

[Mannlicher]

that aint the only myth online about rifle shooting dave. Most of the time you see some guy saying his what ever rifle shoots 1/2 min. groups, thats a myth too.

 

[Boats]

The real myth is that any of us not issued one of Uncle Sam's weapons is going to get to shoot any human at ranges of 100-500 yards and not answer to a DA, full societal breakdown notwithstanding, and that doesn't appear imminent at all.

I'll take an AR, AK or shottie for close distances and my "minute of deer vitals" Savage bolt for anything else. My Garand is for shooting with and against other Garands at threatening paper bullseye matches just to hear the PING!

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

People who require benchrest accuracy from their combat rifles have never shot a rifle-10, which is a drill which requires running between shoot areas and shooting from more than one position at one target. for the record, I get better rifle 10 groups with a mini-14 than I do with my dad's m-1a NM

Shootability , or practical accuracy is the most important form of accuracy, and the hardest to measure, because it requires shooting from something other than a nice cement bench on a square range.

Next time you're out, put out a target at 100, and shoot it from prone, kneeling, sitting, and standing with your quarter inch MOA rifle. I guarantee the resulting group won't be a quarter inch.

 

[dave3006]

Andrew, I have experienced the same thing with my Mini-14 vs. my M1 Garand. My mini shoots an honest 2-3 MOA because I shortened the barrel to 16". Even though my Garand is more accurate, I shoot better, non-bench rest, with the Mini-14.

When I am shooting from a kneeling position at 6" x 6" targets at 100 yards, I will get more hits with my Mini. It is a lighter gun with less recoil. When I put my Aimpoint ML2 on my Mini's Ultimak scout rail, the hit ratio goes up even more.

 

[MAKOwner]

My AKs shoot somewhere around 4" 5 shoot groups at 100 yards (with elbows rested on a bench, gun unsupported). That's smaller than a head peaking out over cover and it's small enough to probably score hits on smaller body parts that are partially exposed most of the time as well. I think that's plenty... Their sights aren't ideal for target shooting but they seem to me to be simple and fairly quick to use in most other circumstances. Shooting offhand the groups don't open up that much, I still feel confident I could hit a head peaking around cover at 100 yards. Of course I haven't run 50 yards and dived over three barricades while taking enemy fire prior to shooting much either, so whos to say in real combat...

 

[armoredman]

The Mosin does 3.5 inch at 100 yards - good enough?

 

[Double Naught Spy]

"Minute of bad guy" is not a myth. As Art noted, it is a joking term. The more traditional term is "combat accurate."

In a SHTF scenario, you will probably will not have a team to lay down a volume of fire. You will need as many first round hits as possible. First round hits mean you will expose yourself less and live longer.

If you want to beat down myths, start by getting of the SHTF scenario bandwagon with all the bizarre and generally unrealistic mass invasions, battles, or social revolution where the loan good guy gun person has to hold off unrealistic odds. I loved the comment about needed as many first round hits as possible. You gotta love all these SHTF scenarios. Let's see, it could be social unrest, ethnic unrest, Red Dawn, invading Mexican regulars, a mass invasion from Canada, some sort of jihad (regardless of your religion), or shooting down some airliner before it crashes into you.

 

[Duke of Lawnchair]

OR

Some lunatic jumping into the back of your pickup truck while on I-5 doing 85mph.

The SHTF scenarios that some members fantasize about are absolutely, downright hilarious. Almost to the point where I defecate my pants.

-Jim

 

[MrMurphy]

Actually, invading Mexican regulars isn't a"Myth" they've crossed the border in armed Humvees and shot at people several times. Uniformed Mexican Army troops, escorting drug smugglers.


We should have invaded Mexico before Iraq.

 

[victory]

My arsenal AK can shoot 2-3moa at 100 yards with me behind the trgger. That's not bad for accuracy. If it had a longer sight radius it would probably be solid 2moa or less all day. I still jokingly say it's "Minute of capitalist pig" but it is completely acceptable accuracy for a military arm.

On that note, i'm building an AR15 (RRA parts with a bushmaster dissy H-bar, free floated 16" barrel). Should shoot 1moa all day. That is exceptional accuracy for a military arm. That will be wonderful if i ever have to pick someone off at 500 yards, but, in the other 99.9% of likely engagements when the SHTF i'm far more likely to be moving to avoid fire in an urban landscape and hosing bad guys with bullets as fast as i can pull the trigger...

What's the most likely SHTF engagement where one would use a semi automatic carbine? Home invasion. I don't know about you, but the longest distance in my house is about 10-15 meters.

Anyway, i'll have more opinions on the subject after taking a tactical carbine course this april. (what a novel idea: training!)

 

[ConcernedCitizen]

"Minute of Bad Guy" does seem a little loose for accuracy standards, in my opinion.

That's why I like to train for "Minute of Pop Can" ...

And as for moving targets, they work well for those, too!!!

 

[dave3006]

OOspy, just because the big SHTF has not happened yet, doesn't mean it won't. Some mini SHTF situations have happened (remember Rodney King, Huricane Andrew?). The future is wide open. Someday, we could have the same problem a bunch of Iraqis have. If their SHTF, ours could too. It can happen.

Never say never (James Bond film title)

 

[Mulliga]

Let's see, it could be social unrest, ethnic unrest, Red Dawn, invading Mexican regulars, a mass invasion from Canada, some sort of jihad (regardless of your religion), or shooting down some airliner before it crashes into you.

You forgot zombie epidemic...

As for "minute-of-badguy" and the whole argument, I think no one here will say a more accurate, full-power rifle is a bad thing - just that a carbine caliber (5.56/7.62x39) in a shootable, 4 MOA platform can do the job for about 200 yards. After all, this isn't hunting - it isn't one shot, one kill, it's shoot until the threat is gone.

 

[carebear]

I also think you have to think about if that shot should even be taken, especially if your alone or in a small group, with no support against someone who might have it. Is it not better to close with them quietly and annihilate them outright up close, then to alert them to you being there and letting their bigger toys spoil your day? Your advantage is not distance here, its closeness. You may get one or two with your M14, they will hammer you. They cannot call support if your among them in danger close. Up close, a shooter with fast, reasonably accurate shooting skills wins over a precise target shooter any day.

I agree that "minute-of-bad guy" is more a cutesy way to say "reasonable combat accuracy (2-4 moa)" than a justification for 8 inch groups at 100m.

I also have a couple problems with this "wartime/shtf" choice in a true combat sense. If you are engaging multiple guys at 4-500 yds. in the open, what exactly are they going to be firing their supporting arms against? A circle 400m in diameter expanding outward? They'll have a guy go down, then hear a crack, then maybe another guy goes down. They all hit the deck till they figure out what direction the shot came from, then they look for a sign of where, then they get on the horn and call for fire blind? I'm a mile away by then. Shoot and scoot. It's not like I'm standing there popping 30 rounds offhand.

If I let a superior number get up close, I am not engaging at all. In the really real world, coolio wundercarbine and school-of-the-month training notwithstanding, outnumbered at close range is a sure bet on dead.

This recon man will take the "intermittant delaying fires at long-range option" every time, if forced to choose from the two, and wants a rifle capable of it.

 

[Mulliga]

If you are engaging multiple guys at 4-500 yds. in the open

Another consideration is, how do you even know these people are your enemies?

We talk casually about combat at extended distances, but IMHO it's hard to pull the trigger on people who probably aren't even a threat to you. I mean, how can you tell? Will they wear evil black ninja suits? Are they carrying guns (a poor indicator of hostility if the S really does HTF; wouldn't you be carrying a gun, too?)?

 

[carebear]

I was referring to a more traditional wartime or invasion shtf situation

 

[SteelyDan]

Well, if you're talking about a scoped deer rifle, 8" groups from a solid rest are pretty poor. But if you're talking about combat or SHTF accuracy, with an AR, AK, SKS, or similar, and standing or kneeling shots with iron sights and no support, I'm perfectly happy with 8" groups. Obviously, I'd prefer to do better, but my eyes aren't that good anymore. With a tree branch for a rest, the groups shrink to about 6" or less. If I practiced more, I'm sure those numbers would improve. The bottom line is that if people would be shooting back, I'd grab the less accurate, higher capacity rifles in a heartbeat.