Practical limit to group size wonderment

[CoalTrain49]

It has been said in this thread, just not this way. For the hunter (at least IMHO), a highly accurate rifle boosts confidence. As in many disciplines, including shooting, one important factor is the mind game.

If this is true I wonder why more hunters don't shoot more than they do.

 

[Skylerbone]

For me the "holy grail" is the clean kill every time. I care about accuracy as much as the semi-typical enthusiast, but lack the equipment, skill level, and mindset for discipline required to wring out that .2 MOA group at real distance.

Why is that and why should I not care? As a practical hunter, my targets simply aren't located beyond a few hundred yards and so to practice beyond those limits without being more than mildly acquainted with accuracy within 200 yards is striving to sprint before mastering the jog. I'm taking my specific geography in to account.

When I'm truly curious as to my rifle's accuracy potential I hand it off to a better rifleman. Either way, I can still head shoot squirrels from 30 yards and down a deer at 150 without concern so for now the "holy grail" is conservation of that skill level while trending toward modest improvement.

 

[Jason_W]

For me the "holy grail" is the clean kill every time.

When I'm truly curious as to my rifle's accuracy potential I hand it off to a better rifleman. Either way, I can still head shoot squirrels from 30 yards and down a deer at 150 without concern so for now the "holy grail" is conservation of that skill level while trending toward modest improvement.

On some level, doing those things under field conditions with an out of the box firearm is more interesting and impressive (to me) than printing a cloverleaf group at 600 yards with the aid of of tens of thousands of dollars worth of guns and gear.

My goal as I get back into shooting is to be able to consistently hit an 8" diameter target at 100 yards from the offhand position. Very few out of box centerfire rifles aren't mechanically accurate for that. The limiting factor will be the man, not the machine.

 

[Sam1911]

Very few out of box centerfire rifles aren't mechanically accurate for that. The limiting factor will be the man, not the machine.

There is a kind of a sliding scale of magnitude of error which comes into play with discussions around that kind of statement. Some folks will point out that if your own skill let's you contain your wobble zone to about 8" at 100 yds, and you've got a rifle that won't shoot better than 4 m.o.a., it's very possible for the two of you to combine your errors and end up shooting groups that are 10" in spread. Whereas, a really good rifle that might do 0.2 m.o.a. would only allow your own error to show, limiting your group size to be equal to about the size of your wobble zone.

And that's true. However, shooting successfully is all a function of knowing your own skill, your rifle's mechanical accuracy, and the size of the target you need to hit. If you need to hit an 8" vitals zone, and your rifle is an average shooter, say capable of 2 m.o.a., and you expect to hit your target well at 200 yards, you need to either develop the skill or improve your shooting position/rest to limit that wobble zone to around 3.5" at 100 yds. (Just as an example.)

When you start thinking of shooting in those terms it becomes a practical exercise and not simply an infinite, open-ended quest for precision without purpose.

 

[hq]

Whereas, a really good rifle that might do 0.2 m.o.a. would only allow your own error to show, limiting your group size to be equal to about the size of your wobble zone.

A very notable factor is that the shooter induced variation, wobble zone or whatever we might want to call it, varies hugely with the rifle too. A lightweight, well balanced 2MOA rifle is likely to be equally or even more accurate in practise than nominally ten times more accurate, heavy bull barreled varmint or benchrest rifle when shot from sticks, offhand and in quick shooting situations, simply because ergonomics are a much better match to the situation at hand. It's when the rifle becomes as natural extension of shooter's hands as possible, instead of having to fight it.

 

[George Dickel]

I used to shoot .22 rimfire benchrest and really enjoyed it but premium ammo just got too expensive. I also shoot rimfire silhouette and have shot a couple F TR matches but I don't hunt. So should I make disparaging remarks about hunters because I don't hunt? Same thing with hunters that believe an AR can't be an effective hunting rifle and should not be allowed. Shotgunners that don't think anyone needs a "sniper" rifle or a semiauto rifle. I shoot what I enjoy, you do what you enjoy.

 

[Bart B.]

Whereas, a really good rifle that might do 0.2 m.o.a. would only allow your own error to show, limiting your group size to be equal to about the size of your wobble zone.

Group size equals rifle-ammo accuracy plus wobble area plus bore axis angular movement while the bullet goes through the barrel,caused by the variables in how the rifle is held and/or supported. Sometimes this last part causes the biggest spread of shot holes on target.

Example: half MOA rifle/ammo + half MOA holding area where all shots are called inside of + one MOA bore axis area during barrel time = two MOA group.