hunting rifle accuracy

[Hunter Ohlen]

For me, I would not want the 100 yard group to exceed 0.50 MOA. I would also shoot groups at my intended maximum range to insure that the rifle/load could maintain the same accuracy at the maximum range.

 

[DoneNOut]

For me, I would not want the 100 yard group to exceed 0.50 MOA. I would also shoot groups at my intended maximum range to insure that the rifle/load could maintain the same accuracy at the maximum range.

So, like...that's how one should do this!

 

[Varmint Hunter]

I think we're all on the same page with that and he's not disagreeing with it. A rifle doesn't know whether it's aiming at a 100 yard target or a 1000 yard target. We zero at 100yds to remove the effects environmental conditions have on the bullets flight to have an absolute true zero.

Past that, environmental conditions, the shooters ability to call wind accurately, bullet design, ballistics etc all play a part in that group size. But your .25 MOA rifle
doesn't just go to s*** because your aiming at a 1000 yd target. The rifle is capable, but maybe your ammo and or the shooter is not.

The point being, if your rifle is only capable at 2 MOA at 100 yards the absolute best you'll ever get at 1000 yards is 2 MOA and Vice versa, which is why we strive for the absolute best we can get at 100.

Removing ALL environmental factors and ALL shooter induced inaccuracies. A .5moa load at 100yds is not necessarily a .5moa load at 1,000yds. Bullets don't always diverge in a direct linear path. A .5moa load could easily not perform well over distance and the divergance will increase. Conversely, a bullet "can" decrease its moa over distance but it tends to be a rare occurrence. Bullets can become more stable or "sleep" (as its often stated) after a few hundred yards and then diverge less.

Guns that shoot a 1/2" at 100yds are common. The same guns will rarely shoot 5" at 1,000yds, even under the most ideal conditions.

Just my 2 cents on the issue of bullet divergence from the point of aim.

 

[StanleyActual]

Removing ALL environmental factors and ALL shooter induced inaccuracies. A .5moa load at 100yds is not necessarily a .5moa load at 1,000yds. Bullets don't always diverge in a direct linear path. A .5moa load could easily not perform well over distance and the divergance will increase. Conversely, a bullet "can" decrease its moa over distance but it tends to be a rare occurrence. Bullets can become more stable or "sleep" (as its often stated) after a few hundred yards and then diverge less.

Guns that shoot a 1/2" at 100yds are common. The same guns will rarely shoot 5" at 1,000yds, even under the most ideal conditions.

Just my 2 cents on the issue of bullet divergence from the point of aim.

That's why I stated ammunition as 1 of the factors affecting group size / accuracy at extended ranges…

 

[DoneNOut]

Removing ALL environmental factors and ALL shooter induced inaccuracies. A .5moa load at 100yds is not necessarily a .5moa load at 1,000yds. Bullets don't always diverge in a direct linear path. A .5moa load could easily not perform well over distance and the divergance will increase. Conversely, a bullet "can" decrease its moa over distance but it tends to be a rare occurrence. Bullets can become more stable or "sleep" (as its often stated) after a few hundred yards and then diverge less.

Guns that shoot a 1/2" at 100yds are common. The same guns will rarely shoot 5" at 1,000yds, even under the most ideal conditions.

Just my 2 cents on the issue of bullet divergence from the point of aim.

God, I'm so glad I don't have this divergence problem!

 

[boatmanusa]

Don't get me wrong, I want my rifle to shoot well at 100, but I'm more interested in what it does at 400-800 and even beyond shooting steel. If I cannot consistently hit what I am shooting at, at distance, I'm not willing to shoot at an animal at distance.

Very welll said....

 

[BlazerBeam]

IMO, this is patently incorrect. Numerous factors effect a bullet in flight that have nothing to do with how a shooter is shooting.
Shooting strictly from the bench, using BR rests and bags, a comparison of groups between 100yds and 1,000yds is easy to do. .5moa groups @ 100yds aren't all that difficult to achieve with quality guns and ammo. But .5moa groups at 1,000yds are infinitely more difficult.

Correct the varying environmental conditions affects bullet in flight and can change what prints on a target at distance. But not considering wind (or at least having stable conditions) and having a properly stabilized bullet….a rifle doesn't print 1/2 MOA groups at 100 yards and then magically have them open up at distance due to a rifle or load issue. If you are only speaking of the rifle and load capabilities, it is the same all the way out. You can be confident in the rifle's precision with what you see at 100 yards.
Illustrated by Litz's shoot through targets: the 1/2 MOA groups on the 100 yard target were still 1/2 MOA when they impacted the next target at distance. The 1.5 MOA were still 1.5 MOA when they impacted the next at distance. He states that all the gibberish about a bullet "going to sleep" and all that stuff about a rifle shooting better at distance than close (or vice versa) is false. The shooter themselves may shoot better at one or the other though.

 

[BlazerBeam]

A .5moa load at 100yds is not necessarily a .5moa load at 1,000yds. Bullets don't always diverge in a direct linear path. A .5moa load could easily not perform well over distance and the divergance will increase. Conversely, a bullet "can" decrease its moa over distance but it tends to be a rare occurrence. Bullets can become more stable or "sleep" (as its often stated) after a few hundred yards and then diverge less.

How do you know this?

 

[boatmanusa]

I have a HIlls Country 280 Ackley that will shoot 2 in groups at 400 yards and will stack bullets on paper out to any range I shoot it...( if I have a gun that shoots left or right I either fix it or sell it) I will shoot that gun at large game out to 600 yards because I know what the effective range is for the 162 ELDX im shooting is...that being said my 300 Rem ULTRA MAG shooting Accubond 180s shoots a 3 in group at 300 and I have shot multiple elk at just over 500 yards but for me thats the limit of what I will shoot that gun at...I m a hunter not a paper shooter and this works well for me...

 

[StanleyActual]

.

 

[littlebighorn]

For over a decade my go to hunting rifle was a light weight, off the shelf,1 MOA rifle. It has never dropped a firing pin on anything beyond 500 yards (maybe that's blasphemy on LRH) but it has accounted for lots of game, including 3 of my 4 NA sheep. I've never felt handicapped by carrying it.

 

[Varmint Hunter]

Correct the varying environmental conditions affects bullet in flight and can change what prints on a target at distance. But not considering wind (or at least having stable conditions) and having a properly stabilized bullet….a rifle doesn't print 1/2 MOA groups at 100 yards and then magically have them open up at distance due to a rifle or load issue. If you are only speaking of the rifle and load capabilities, it is the same all the way out. You can be confident in the rifle's precision with what you see at 100 yards.
Illustrated by Litz's shoot through targets: the 1/2 MOA groups on the 100 yard target were still 1/2 MOA when they impacted the next target at distance. The 1.5 MOA were still 1.5 MOA when they impacted the next at distance. He states that all the gibberish about a bullet "going to sleep" and all that stuff about a rifle shooting better at distance than close (or vice versa) is false. The shooter themselves may shoot better at one or the other though.

I respectfully disagree and have seen this theory disproven many times. If it were true, most of the accomplished shooters here on LRH could win 1,000yd BR matches with their deer rifles.

You should try the Litz test yourself and report back on your 100yd & 1,000yd groups.

I mean no disrespect towards anyone; I'm just in disagreement with your premise.

 

[BlazerBeam]

I respectfully disagree and have seen this theory disproven many times. If it were true, most of the accomplished shooters here on LRH could win 1,000yd BR matches with their deer rifles.

You should try the Litz test yourself and report back on your 100yd & 1,000yd groups.

I mean no disrespect towards anyone; I'm just in disagreement with your premise.

I am definitely not trying to be disrespectful at all either. I think debating and discussion is important.
Guys winning benchrest matches with their deer rifles…..I'm not saying it is as easy to shoot 1/2 MOA groups at 1000 as it is 100. Because it is not…..but that is not due to the RIFLE and the LOAD changing its precision over distance. It is because it is harder to shoot that precise at distance, in my opinion. And apparently also Bryan Litz's…..and his testing.

I also definitely agree with listening to the hornady podcast. Worth thinking about what is said in there. Guys shoot too small of a sample size and formulate a gospel based on that sample. In the podcast they state that you need a sample of 30 shots to be able to hang your hat on something….group size, velocity, and even your zero.

 

[dogz]

IMO---by and large rifles are a lot like vehicles they can do a lot more than the drivers can.

A lot of shooters do not have near the capabilities than they're equipment has.