What kind of accuracy do you expect from a battle rifle

[DMK]

Assuming a full size 30 cal cartridge (7.62x51, 30-06, .303, 7.62x54R, 8mm, etc), what kind of accuracy do you expect from a battle rifle?

I'm talking surplus or basic "out of the box" rifle (like a surplus Mauser, Enfield, ODCMP Garand, or new FAL, M1A, CETME, etc). Not a National Match or accurized target rifle.

 

[WayneConrad]

I'd sure like to have minute-of-goblin out to 400 yards.

 

[Father Knows Best]

Is the question what do you expect a typical off-the-shelf battle rifle to do with milsurp ammo? Or are you asking what our criterion for "acceptable" accuracy out of a battle rifle?

There are lots of battle rifles out there that I would only "expect" to get 4-5 MOA using milsurp ammo, or worse if you are shooting rapid groups without cleaning or letting the barrel cool down. That's not what I "expect" from a good one, though. I believe that a good 7.62x51 battle rifle should do under 3 MOA with typical milsurp ammo and with no sacrifice in terms of reliability. High quality FAL's, M1A's and G3's can easily meet that standard. A great one can reach 2.5 or even 2.0 MOA with milsurp ammo, and may make 1.0 MOA or close to it with high quality ammo.

 

[MrTuffPaws]

I just want it to be on the paper. Give me the best rifle in the world and I doubt I could get 4-5 MOA.

 

[jefnvk]

I believe I remember hearing that US standards are < 4MOA.

That said, I don;t think 2-3 is unreasonable.

 

[DMK]

Is the question what do you expect a typical off-the-shelf battle rifle to do with milsurp ammo? Or are you asking what our criterion for "acceptable" accuracy out of a battle rifle?

Maybe a little of both. I'm asking what is acceptable, realistically speaking. Obviously, 1MOA would be nice, but pretty unrealistic for surplus Battle Rifles or even a brand new basic M1A.

 

[Chuck R.]

I voted for 2-3MOA.

My DSA SA58 gets that reliably with surplus, and does a little better with handloads. The M1A I had shot a little better than that, but is was due mostly to its better trigger.

Chuck

 

[iamkris]

I like the WWII standard for M1 Garands...4 MOA. At 400 yards, this is 16 inches...roughly (?) the size of a human torso.

 

[Father Knows Best]

I was getting 2.5" five shot groups off the bench at 100 yards out of my PTR-91, using Portuguese milsurp and iron sights. That was with the horrible factory trigger (lots of creep and around 14 pounds weight). The trigger pack just came back from Bill Springfield with all of the take-up and creep removed and almost zero overtravel, and the pull weight is down to about 5 pounds. I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of groups I can shoot with it now. With a scope and match grade ammo, it just may get to 1 MOA, but I'll be quite happy with 1.5.

 

[GunGoBoom]

the answer is 4-5 MOA, for iron sights, my skills, and bulk ammo - that's the best I can possibly expect with that criteria set, even if the rifle may be *capable* of 2-3 MOA or better. So if they question is what do I expect it to be capable of, then 2-3 MOA. What do I actually expect it to do (in my hands)? 4-5.

 

[Swampy]

I like the WWII standard for M1 Garands...4 MOA.

Uh... the spec was a bit more specific than that....

USGI Armory spec for the M1 rifle was "Maximum group of 4.0 MOA for 8 shots @ 100 yds with M2 ball". This was a "pass-fail" spec. If a rifle could not meet it it was sent back for repairs or replacement.

At 400 yards, this is 16 inches...roughly (?)

Uh... again, not quite. If a rifle is shooting 4.0 MOA at 100 with GI ball ammo, groups are going to get larger (in real size as well as angular spread) as distance increases due to variances and inconsistencies in the ammo itself. That 4.0 MOA group becomes 4.5 MOA at 200, 5.0 MOA at 300, 6.0 MOA at 400, and etc.....

Even with today's highly consistent target grade rifles and fine Match bullets, every Highpower shooter knows that in order to have a 1.0 MOA rifle and ammo combo at 600 yds (the size of the "X" ring on the MR target), that same combo had better be capable of 1/2 MOA at 200 yds.

Just my thoughts,

Best to all,
Swampy

Garands forever

 

[iamkris]

Next time I will be more specific. My sincere apologies for trying to simplify. I will reference your answer for all future discussions on this.

 

[artherd]

I said 1MOA because I'd like to be able to hit with a 'full sized' cartridge out past the .223 fragmentation thresholds.

Hey, if the ammo is 2x the weight, the gun 4-5+lbs heavier plus optic, and a good foot longer, it damned well better perform *any* better at all right?!

 

[Onmilo]

MOA to 600 meters optimum.
MOA to 400 meters in the real world.

 

[Chris Rhines]

I don't care about MOA - I care about hitting targets. I would like a battle rifle to be able to print every round in an 8" circle. The range at which the rifle can no longer do this is the effective range of the rifle.

- Chris

 

[Swampy]

I would like a battle rifle to be able to print every round in an 8" circle. The range at which the rifle can no longer do this is the effective range of the rifle.

With this criteria, MOST battle rifles will not suit you past 200 or 300 yds., max.

In most cases, it will take a rifle with a new barrel, some tightening up of the action, and match quality ammo to better this.....

Best regards,
Swampy

Garands forever

 

[mustanger98]

Well, with my CMP M1 and LC69 I've busted clay birds from standing with sling at 100yds. That was on a good day and that's about how I like it.

 

[mustanger98]

Me:

Well, with my CMP M1 and LC69 I've busted clay birds from standing with sling at 100yds. That was on a good day and that's about how I like it.

I neglected to mention I was on the line at my local gun club's range. Well, I said it was on a good day.

them:

were you being shot at? The clay pigeon is head sized, but was it bobbing around cover? Were you using ear protection? YOu won't be, in combat, most likely.

Did I say it happened in combat? No. Is this thread about combat? Not necessarily, because the original question seemed more about accuracy in a battle rifle and not "what can you personally do under combat conditions?". No, a clay pigeon is not head sized; it's smaller and looks like a dot at 100yds on a bank of red clay. Yeah, I was using ear (and eye) protection on the range as per range rules. Some of us just like to see fragments or clays or rocks or whatever go flying for the fun of it.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

2-3 MOA. Nice that I got better than that with my SAR-48. But I guess I wouldn't expect better.

 

[DMK]

Man, a lot of cranky posters in this thread. We're talking about rifle capabilities, not how good you can shoot. Let's not take it personally.

So, looking at the poll, most folks seem to be expecting 2-3 MOA from an "off the rack", completely stock battle rifle. Is this generally realistic on average? Granted there are always the exceptionally accurate rifle, but is this the kind of accuracy one should expect when they take their Springfield Armory M1A, CMP Garand, Yugo Mauser, PTK-91, etc out of the box?

I'm not doubting any one's experiences here, just wondering if we are talking about the exceptions to the rule here. Do a large percentage of the battle rifles out there shoot this good? (assuming good condition, good bores)

 

[DMK]

Thank you to whichever moderator cleaned this thread up.

 

[Swampy]

So, looking at the poll, most folks seem to be expecting 2-3 MOA from an "off the rack", completely stock battle rifle. Is this generally realistic on average? Granted there are always the exceptionally accurate rifle, but is this the kind of accuracy one should expect when they take their Springfield Armory M1A, CMP Garand, Yugo Mauser, PTK-91, etc out of the box

Just my experiences with various Mausers, FAL's, M1's, and Enfields..... but I'd say, "No". With an "off the rack" stock battle rifle and military issue ammo, I'd say 3-4 MOA @ 100 yds is a more realistic expectation.

As stated, there are always the the exceptions, but they go both directions. Some are going to shoot 2-3 MOA, others will shoot 4-6 MOA.

ON AVERAGE, I'd expect 3-4 MOA.

Just my thoughts...

Best to all,
Swampy

Garands forever

 

[mustanger98]

Another thing one of our illustrious cranky posters can't come to grips with is that battle rifles like the M1 Garand and M14 were fighting rifles before becoming match rifles, and as such, are shot in target accuracy-based matches in their "as issued" configurations as opposed to National Match configuration. I recommend looking up the regulations for rifles used in John C. Garand matches. I happen to like a lot of guns, including a good old .22, and I like to engage in 100yd plinker sessions with anything I own and shoot, but this thread was on accuracy in battle rifles. No, I don't think of it as combat; I think of it as "what do I feel like shooting today".

 

[Onmilo]

DMK did ask how accurate one expected a battle rifle to be, he did not ask how well can one shoot a battle rifle in the heat of combat,,,,,,,

 

[DMK]

Just my experiences with various Mausers, FAL's, M1's, and Enfields..... but I'd say, "No". With an "off the rack" stock battle rifle and military issue ammo, I'd say 3-4 MOA @ 100 yds is a more realistic expectation.

... battle rifles like the M1 Garand and M14 were fighting rifles before becoming match rifles, and as such, are shot in target accuracy-based matches in their "as issued" configurations as opposed to National Match configuration.

Good points guys. I do suppose match ammo is allowed for the "John C. Garand matches" and "service rifle" competitions though, right? Or is it service ammo only?

Does anybody know the typical sizes of the 10 and x rings for these "off the rack service rifle" shoots?