Acceptable accuracy in a rifle! What’s that mean??

[mdwest]

In my experience, I haven’t seen many vintage rifles that were low accuracy. Handloads or different factory ammo often turn a 4” group dullard into a 1” group rifle. I’m happy shooting any rifle that can produce 1.5” groups at a 100 yards considering almost all my hunting is inside of 250 yards.

Similar experiences here.

I’ve owned plenty of new as well as plenty of old rifles that didn’t shoot well with factory ammo…

Once I brewed up a decent hand load, it’s a rare rifle that can’t produce a decent group (assuming there’s nothing functionally wrong with the rifle like barrel shot out, chamber pitted, etc)…

Granted, all are not tack drivers…

But getting 1.5” groups out of most rifles isn’t a huge challenge… which for most hunters shooting at typical hunting distances, is plenty good enough…

Doesn’t matter if we are talking a $250 beat up old savage axis or Ruger American… or a $3500 brand new seekins precision.. almost everything can be made to shoot well enough for hunting…

 

[rookhawk]

Similar experiences here.

I’ve owned plenty of new as well as plenty of old rifles that didn’t shoot well with factory ammo…

Once I brewed up a decent hand load, it’s a rare rifle that can’t produce a decent group (assuming there’s nothing functionally wrong with the rifle like barrel shot out, chamber pitted, etc)…

Granted, all are not tack drivers…

But getting 1.5” groups out of most rifles isn’t a huge challenge… which for most hunters shooting at typical hunting distances, is plenty good enough…

Doesn’t matter if we are talking a $250 beat up old savage axis or Ruger American… or a $3500 brand new seekins precision.. almost everything can be made to shoot well enough for hunting…

My favorite rescue is on rifles with throat erosion. Going with heavy for caliber bullets closer to the lands, or going with copper bullets that are volumetrically larger seems to turn trash into treasure.

 

[pilar]

My favorite rescue is on rifles with throat erosion. Going with heavy for caliber bullets closer to the lands, or going with copper bullets that are volumetrically larger seems to turn trash into treasure.

I did that with a Lee enfield.303 had problems with 150gr ammunition and corrosive primers
Ran a bore brush dipped in Naval Jelly on an electric drill and reamed out All the rust, copper, primer junk , then mix of diesel and transmission fluid soak , then a coat amsoil gun oil , then started using 180gr Remington Cor-Lok .
And it was night and day.
Imo .303 needs 180gr + , anyway

 

[Doubleplay]

For a double rifle, if you can hit a paper plate from the sticks at 60-70 yards it's more than acceptable to me.

 

[Hogpatrol]

For a double rifle, if you can hit a paper plate from the sticks at 60-70 yards it's more than acceptable to me.

aka "minute of paper plate".

 

[MS 9x56]

aka "minute of paper plate". View attachment 644161

For me acceptable is minute of deer

 

[KTMpilot]

Here's how I go about all this...

Figure out the vital zone of what I'm after and at typical distances.

Figure out what the rifle & ammo combination consistently produces in group sizes during field practice (sticks, off-hand, etc.)

Then, whatever the verdict, I then double the expected group size to account for all the field variables I'm likely to encounter (adrenaline dump, out of breath, lousy shooting position, uncooperative animal, etc.)

I find this approach keeps me, for the most part, out of trouble dealing with poor shots, long tracking sessions, lost animals, etc.

YMMV.

Well said. One thing to add is "Figure out what the rifle & ammo combination consistently produces in group sizes during field practice (sticks, off-hand, etc.) with a cold barrell."

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

For me acceptable is minute of deer

@MS 9x56
Minute of deer is fine for deer but not good enough for rabbits. They are a lot smaller so you may miss a lot. You will need minute of bunny for that not minute of Bambi
Just saying. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
Bob

 

[Grumpy gumpy]

Accuracy, to me when hunting, is hitting what I’m aiming at, roughly where I’m aiming, and what I hit dropping on the spot. I do a lot of culling and as long as the animal drops dead I am happy.
Target shooting is a different kettle of fish( I do wonder why they put fish in a kettle)
Gumpy

 

[mdwest]

@MS 9x56
Minute of deer is fine for deer but not good enough for rabbits. They are a lot smaller so you may miss a lot. You will need minute of bunny for that not minute of Bambi
Just saying. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
Bob

That’s why rabbits are hunted with shotguns…

 

[R eight]

Accuracy, to me when hunting, is hitting what I’m aiming at, roughly where I’m aiming, and what I hit dropping on the spot. I do a lot of culling and as long as the animal drops dead I am happy.
Target shooting is a different kettle of fish( I do wonder why they put fish in a kettle)
Gumpy

Wonder no more.

 

[OxfordTheCat]

Minute-of-Saucer is all I'm after:

The rifles I have are all more accurate than I am, especially offhand and in the bush.

I've never understood the obsession with sub-MOA when the majority of game is shot within one hundred yards, and I've yet to see a bench rest in the woods.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Minute-of-Saucer is all I'm after:

The rifles I have are all more accurate than I am, especially offhand and in the bush.

I've never understood the obsession with sub-MOA when the majority of game is shot within one hundred yards, and I've yet to see a bench rest in the woods.

@OxfordTheCat
MOA or smaller just instills confidence in your gear.
I know 4"at 100yards will kill an animal but once you get out to 200 with double the size things can get a bit iffy.
Having a rifle that shoots small groups enables you to have confidence in taking that longer shot if/ when it pops up.
Bob

 

[ChrisG]

Whatever your huntings killzone in MOA out to whatever distance youre shooting. For me, If a rifle produces 1.25-1.5 MOA. I call it good. Id rather spend my time hunting instead of turning money into noise at the range chasing that sub MOA load. Sometimes I find it right out if the box.

I also epoxy bed all my rifles before I even shoot them as it makes for a hardier stock/metal connection and gives you the cheapest, most noticeable improvement to accuracy you can expect. Usually tightens up a rifle a good deal. I had a Ruger MKII 6.5X55 that shot 5-6 MOA un-bedded, bedded in epoxy it turned into a 0.5 MOA tack driver with the same load. Not too bad for a $10 JB Weld bed job.

 

[woodsrunner]

If i can hit somewhere on a 9" pieplate at 50 yards shooting offhand with iron sights more times than not and every time off sticks with a big game hunting rifle, that's acceptable accuracy to me and i will have total confidence for the type of hunting i do and i won't be thinking about it any more. I read in a hunting article the other day, "It used to be that 3-inch groups were considered acceptable in a hunting rifle..." They still are, for most applications. You will hit the kill zone. No improvement required when you are doing that.

 

[MS 9x56]

If i can hit somewhere on a 9" pieplate at 50 yards shooting offhand with iron sights more times than not and every time off sticks with a big game hunting rifle, that's acceptable accuracy to me and i will have total confidence for the type of hunting i do and i won't be thinking about it any more. I read in a hunting article the other day, "It used to be that 3-inch groups were considered acceptable in a hunting rifle..." They still are, for most applications. You will hit the kill zone. No improvement required when you are doing that.

Hell I shot better groups than that with a smoothbore shotgun and pumpkin ball slugs. Now that we can use rifles we can be much more precise ensuring humane clean kills.

 

[CBeck]

You have already received many good answers, but I will throw my two cents in as well.

Acceptable accuracy, of course is open to interpretation from the seller and what one man’s acceptable accuracy is may very well not be the same for another.

In the context of what I’m understanding you are asking, an older rifle typically, though not always, may not shoot as small group as what we consider acceptable today.

We live in a world now of tactical scopes and sniper rifles built for long range hunting and everyone believes a rifle is no good unless it shoots sub MOA groupings.

The reality is for many years 2 and 3 inch MOA was perfectly acceptable by stalking standards.

My grandfather likely never took a shot at an animal over 80 yards… What was acceptable to him is not the same as a modern long range hunter shooting at 600.

 

[woodsrunner]

If i can hit somewhere on a 9" pieplate at 50 yards shooting offhand with iron sights more times than not and every time off sticks with a big game hunting rifle, that's acceptable accurary to me. I read in a hunting article the other day, "It used to be that 3-inch groups were considered acceptable in a hunting rifle..." They still are, for most applications. You will hit the kill zone.

Hell I shot better groups than that with a smoothbore shotgun and pumpkin ball slugs. Now that we can use rifles we can be much more precise ensuring humane clean kills.

I don't doubt it. I'm both saying and demonstrating - and have for many years, the majority of my kills have been heart-shots, one-shot kills, with this as described as my litmus of acceptable accuracy - that this represents an acceptable level of accuracy if you are experienced. The rest of our agonizing over this matter? With hunting as the goal, mind-you, not being a range marksman - is fetishism to my mind. The pursuit of grounds for braggadocio, as it often translates - bragging about our rifle, bragging about ourselves - as well as i suspect just garden variety boredom propelling a lot of it, given that most hunters today actually do very little hunting given the necessities of a deeply degraded world with challenged game numbers. Gotta have something to amuse oneself and build stories around as a hunter not-hunting for 90% or more of the year. Enter paper-hunting, "MOA". "I shot a paper plate five times in a row!" is not much of a story, as you point out, on its own. "I shot a paper plate five times through the same hole!" is - if you don't have a better story. No doubt if i were a long-range sniper when i hit the field i would obsess much more over this, but i am not, i am a hunter. My goal is one-shot kills and it's been a long time since i haven't met that goal. It's not a tragedy if i don't, but it's rare.

 

[nomspc]

With all the variables we might expect in hunting, (weather, terrain, a partially-obscured animal, a less than ideal angle, available light, wind, distance, time), I’m not looking for a rifle that makes the task more difficult.

 

[rookhawk]

I don't doubt it. I'm both saying and demonstrating - and have for many years, the majority of my kills have been heart-shots, one-shot kills, with this as described as my litmus of acceptable accuracy - that this represents an acceptable level of accuracy if you are experienced. The rest of our agonizing over this matter? With hunting as the goal, mind-you, not being a range marksman - is fetishism to my mind. The pursuit of grounds for braggadocio, as it often translates - bragging about our rifle, bragging about ourselves - as well as i suspect just garden variety boredom propelling a lot of it, given that most hunters today actually do very little hunting given the necessities of a deeply degraded world with challenged game numbers. Gotta have something to amuse oneself and build stories around as a hunter not-hunting for 90% or more of the year. Enter paper-hunting, "MOA". "I shot a paper plate five times in a row!" is not much of a story, as you point out, on its own. "I shot a paper plate five times through the same hole!" is - if you don't have a better story. No doubt if i were a long-range sniper when i hit the field i would obsess much more over this, but i am not, i am a hunter. My goal is one-shot kills and it's been a long time since i haven't met that goal. It's not a tragedy if i don't, but it's rare.

I agree with you to the largest extent.

An approximately 1 MOA gun is all I care to own. Even if my guns can shoot 3/8 MOA they won't after I select the best designed bullet for hunting rather than the most accurate bullet. Much of the loss of MOA comes from the trigger: yes a 1lb trigger is going to give you better groups than a 3.5lb trigger, but a 3.5lb trigger is an appropriate hunting trigger for safety and practicality off sticks.

I really don't care what a gun can accomplish prone or at a shooting bench, I've never hunted game from a shooting bench and I've only killed one animal from the prone shooting position in all my years of hunting. Can you get a gun on sticks (or a branch) rapidly, instantly get good sight picture, and make a clean shot inside of 200 yards? <- That's my measure of accuracy.