Hunting Rifle Accuracy

[frednaz]

I hunt with several centerfire rifles. Most are fairly accurate, at least in my opinion. Two shoot 1- 1 1/2 inches, one shoots an inch, the other varies between 1-2 inches. The one that varies is one I have at the gunsmith. It is a Ruger 77 Mark II. He has worked on the trigger of a former Ruger and improved the accuracy. I realize that the Ruger triggers cannot be adjusted, only replaced if they seem unsuitable. I dislike innaccurate rifles, but I try not to go overboard with 1/2 minute accuracy in a deer rifle.

What do you expect from your hunting rifle's accuracy ? Do you glass bed and replace factory triggers, or are you content with 1-1 1/2 inch at 100 yards ?

 

['Card]

I think there's a point of diminishing returns with accuracy, beyond which, each dollar spent yields less of an improvement. But let's face it, there are some guys that just really like getting all worked up about 1/2 inch margins at 100 yards. There's nothing wrong with that. It's a valid part of the hobby, and if people enjoy tinkering with that sort of thing, then more power to them.

For me and where I hunt, I can't remember a single deer I've killed in the last 10 years or so that was more than 100 yards off when I shot it, and most were probably less than half of that. At those kinds of ranges, speed and being able to hit a moving target count for a lot more than hair-splitting precision. Don't get me wrong... I go to the range and tinker with my guns and scopes too, but 1.5" groups at 100 yards are dandy for me when the 'sweet spot' behind a deer's front leg is 6-8 inches across anyway, you know?

 

[Lennyjoe]

I guess the first thing we should ask is if your using factory ammo or reloading.

For factory ammo then 1.5" is acceptable but if I'm reloading then I want 1" or less. Since there is a possibility of taking a 300 yard shot here in Arizona I want the tightest group possible to help with the margin of error at that distance.

The trigger on my 30-06 is set at 4lbs. Since I sometimes wear gloves I prefer not to have a hair trigger on my hunting rifle. Also, I normally don't glass bed the rifle since it's going to take some abuse out in the bush.

All bets are off if its a bench rest rifle shooting for accuracy

 

[dakotasin]

What do you expect from your hunting rifle's accuracy ?

as much as i can get, and i will go to great lengths to attain it. it is a confidence boost, if nothing else.

Do you glass bed and replace factory triggers,

yep.

or are you content with 1-1 1/2 inch at 100 yards ?

no, i'm not. i will do all the tricks to a rifle i can think of, and then tailor a good handload for it. i won't stop at 1.5" of accuracy at 100.

 

[ACP230]

I have a Browning BAR that shot three rounds into an inch and an eighth at 100 yards for years with factory ammo. I was quite pleased with that.

A couple years ago I sighted it in with reloads, a bit hotter than normal, but with the same 150 grain Remington Core-Lokt PSP bullet. It put three shots into an inch at 100 yards. I was even more pleased.

I have a Ruger 77RL in .250 Savage. It used to put two touching at 100 and then drop one three quarters of an inch, or an inch, away. Lately, it hasn't been doing that well. I think it may need heavy duty cleaning.

I had problems with keyholing and shotgun patterns for groups from a sporterized Swedish Mauser Carbine. I finally put an Outers Foul Out to use and now it shoots three into an inch and a half at 100. That seems good to me from that gun, especially after what it used to do.

 

[JackOfAllTradesMasterAtNone]

Dakotasin saved me the typing. Almost word for word.

That said, the trigger on the Ruger77 MKII is so simple it's sick. Stone the mating surfaces and maybe take a little off the sear. Replace the single spring with one from Trapper. Worst case... Replace the unit with one from Timney or Jard.

The previous Ruger 77 was better in the trigger department.

-Steve

 

[30-06 lover]

Before anyone goes go to the range, they normally have decide what kind of accuracy they want. If you get anything other than the accuracy you are looking for, you will never be satisfied, and have little confindence. I found that one inch outside to outside is or better is what I am willing to shoot at 100. If it is less than that, I switch my load, buy aftermarket parts, or get a new rifle.
-Mike

 

[formerflyer]

For almost all hunters, under almost all circumstances, a rifle which groups under 1.5" at 100 is more than suitable. There’s a more important measure than bench accuracy, and that is what you can do with it from field positions.

My cousin shoots a .30-378 which will group into about .8 inches, but he cannot shoot it from anything other than sandbags. When I challenged him to match me shot for shot at the 6” steel plate at the 200 yard line from field positions, he hit it once in 15 shots. I, on the other hand, hit it 13 for 15 from a tight slung sitting position with my 1.6” grouping .308. Which of us do you think was more capable of taking a deer that year?

Have realistic expectations of your rifle (1.5” is fine), have realistic expectations of yourself (250 yard shots are uncommon as hens teeth for most shooters, even in wide-open country), and practice the way you will use it in the field.

 

[MCgunner]

With a bolt rifle, I'll strive for the magic 1 moa, but with modern rifles that's not really that hard to accomplish without bedding and all that other BS. I keep the factory trigger, too, so long as I can adjust it to a crisp 3 lbs pull. My Savage and two Remingtons both are set for that. That's my ideal trigger weight for a hunting rifle.

But, I've used a 3 moa (Chinese SKS) rifle for woods hunting. Out to 200 yards, it's max effective range on deer, it groups 6 inches. Now, in the unlikely even of a shot in the woods that far away, the bullet will strike within three inches of the aim which means it'll work for a broad side shot. I've taken one deer with it at 80 yards on a hard facing shot and had no problems making the hit.

So, I guess its sorta up to what kind of shooting you are doing. If you're a 400 yard prairie dog shooter, you ain't gonna consider my SKS very effective. You're going to be one of those glass bedding, free floating, Timmeny trigger types. Me? I'm a deer, hog, etc hunter with an occasional shot at a coyote. 1 moa even in the mountains is bliss for me. I don't need no stinkin' glass bedding or fancy triggers for that. I can get that done with an out of the box rifle and a little judicious handloading.

 

[HankB]

In a hunting rifle, what's more important than absolute accuracy is having a rifle that will hold it's zero.

If, due to bedding problems, stock warping, barrel temperature, or whatever, your zero tends to wander, then you simply can't depend on your rifle hitting where it's supposed to. (This assumes there's no problems with your sighting equipment.)

I'd much rather hunt with a 1.5 MOA rifle that dependably centers it's 1.5 MOA groups in the same place all the time rather than a 0.5 MOA wonder that constantly has to have the sights "tweaked" to bring the group back to where it's supposed to be.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I've killed a lot of deer with a Model 94 Winchester that struggled to shoot 3" groups from the bench. But I can hold 12" from an unsupported off-hand position with that rifle, and rarely have I tried a longer shot without a rest.

I think accuracy should be a question of "How well can you shoot the rifle under hunting conditions?"

On the other hand, it's fun to tinker with rifles and try to get gilt-edge accuracy out of them -- I worked with my M82 Kimber in .22 Hornet for years before I got it to shoot 0.5" groups.

 

[~z]

I have always felt it was a matter of pride. Sure, you can kill a deer with a rifle that will "put one in a pie plate at 50 yds" But I take a great amount of pride in my rifles, reloads, and shooting. I like .25moa off the bench and .5- .75moa from a supported field rest. I expect that from myself and my equipment, I know much much less will do the job, thats just me.
~z

 

[Thefabulousfink]

I have a 1917 Enfield that was sporterized, rebarreled and scoped sometime in the 1960's or 1970's. I bought it for $200 from my friends grandpa. This ancient rifle and scope will shoot under a 1" group at 100 yards with 30-06 cor-lokts. Not bad for a 90 year old rifle. That being said, for hunting, any rifle that you can consistently hit a solfball sized target with is more than adequate for deer. Most deer are large animals, and unless you are using a very small cartridge, they don't need to shoot through the heart or spine to kill them. An accurate rifle helps and it is bad to only wound a deer, but there is no need for a "sniper rifle" with sub MOA to get the job done.

Just my $.02

 

[Thefabulousfink]

For those of you who posted their love of finding accurate rifle/round combinations, that is a fine and admirable thing. It has nothing to due with hunting, other than the fact that you then take those rifles out and use them. I am not trying to discredit your accurate rifles, but people have been hunting successfully with smooth-bore muskets for hundreds of years, pin-point accuracy is not that important.

 

[smokemaker]

Ross Seyfried wrote that hitting a pie plate at 100 yards every time constitutes practical hunting accuracy. This is not from a bench, but field shooting. I can do at least that with all my hunting rifles, but not my slug gun. (Which is why I quit using a slug gun for deer). Off the bench, my Remington 700 Classic in .35 Whelen will do 1/2" at 100 yards with handloaded Sierra Gamekings. It's more like 2 1/2" from a sitting position, 2" from prone. My Omega in .50 shoots 2" groups at 100 from the bench, but I can do 2" from sitting as well. Peep sights on the T/C and a scope on the 700 are probably the reason I shoot the muzzleloader more consistently, but who knows?

I guess what I'm trying to say is the hunter has to be able to shoot well. The fact that the rifle is benchrest-awesome means diddly squat in a snowstorm, on a ridge, in the southern teir of NY (or anywhere else) where you may be lucky enough to have a tree to lean against as support.

 

[MCgunner]

I was always taught to use a rest. Never shoot off hand if you can use a rest! I've shot running game standing off hand, but I always use a rest if I can and plan for it when I'm sitting. I either use the one in the stand/blind I'm in or carry my shooting stix when I sit on the edge of a draw or something.

 

[formerflyer]

Seconding what MCGunner said. As Cooper has said a number of times, "Remember the rule of the rifleman, 'If you can get closer, get closer. If you can get steadier, get steadier.'"

I'm glad some of you have hunting rifles that are benchrest competition capable, but it is kind of beside the point. 1.5" capable guns are very, VERY appropriate for hunting. Anything under 1.0" is gilding the Lilly. If that's your hobby, fine, but lets make sure that people asking for practical hunting information don't get caught up in PII (Preoccupation with Inconsequential Increments).

 

[~z]

You are right FF, I'm sorry, I like my Lillies gilded, sometimes I put perfectly cut diamonds on them to simulate dew drops. But you are correct, 1.5moa is plenty good for hunting, but the orig question was:
What do you expect from your hunting rifle's accuracy ?
Me?... Pass that gilding... I think I missed a spot.
~z

 

[bowfin]

Two inches or under at 100 yards is fine for me for deer. More important to me is if a rifle feels comfortable and handles well for me, and how well I can shoot it from off the bench.

Besides, I cannot pick the exact, best spot to hit a deer within a couple of inches while they are on the hoof. If I can't pick the bullseye more precisely than a couple of inches, I guess I can't use alll that extra accuracy.

Of course, I never turn down as much accuracy as I can have, all things being equal.

 

[smokemaker]

MCgunner, you are 100% right.

I use the rest on my tree stand, and carry home-made sticks when on the ground. I also practice prone shooting alot nowadays, as I've had to crawl up on deer a few times in the recent past.

Always use a rest if you can.

 

[frednaz]

Hunting Rifle Acuuracy

I love listening to the dialogue and I appreciate your opinions. I have learned some things from those who are older, wiser and more experienced and from those who are younger as well. I want to continue to be a lifelong learner.
Thanks you !!

 

[Tomekeuro85]

I would definitely prefer my hunting rifle to have sub-moa groups. I want to be confident that I could hit a deer in the eyeball. I wouldn't necessarily do that, but just knowing I could makes me feel better. 1/2 MOA is the way to go.

 

[Mannlicher]

`Card pretty much summed up my feelings. I hunt in thick cover, where its rare to get a shot over 50 or so yards. While I love an accurate rifle, and can't tolerate one that is not, accuracy is not an obsession.
If I can consistantly put my shots where they need to go on a deer or hog, then I am happy.
I have always gotten a chuckle out of the guys that scream about accuracy who can't seem to duplicate those 1/2 MOA groups when shooting off hand in the field, after a hard stalk, and that 'deer of a life time' quartering away.