Thread: Acceptable group size at long range ?

I am talking about groups because this is what this thread is about Gimp. This is where this will go around in circles all day, what's the point in trying to hit the target in the 1st place if you don't have the load to do the job. A good load to begin with makes the whole process so much easier. If you take shortcuts fine tuning your load, shortcuts with your drop chart and shortcuts with your practice....well good luck

it's your opinion vs anothers

Go about your long range shooting as you wish

Originally Posted by Tui4Me

This is where this will go around in circles all day, what's the point in trying to hit the target in the 1st place if you don't have the load to do the job. If you take shortcuts fine tuning your load, shortcuts with your drop chart and shortcuts with your practice....well good luck

it's your opinion vs anothers

Go about your long range shooting as you wish

That's a strawman. Of course you're not going to consistently hit a 1moa target with a load that groups 3moa. I'm not saying that.

What I'm saying is that since no-one is practically trying to shoot .25moa targets, and improving your theoretical precision to .25moa from say .5moa does not practically improve your ability to hit a practical sized target, then it is a waste of time.

I haven't said anything about taking shortcuts on my dropchart, in fact I think that it is a very overlooked area of long range as well, where most people simply plug numbers into a PDA and trust it. From my observations at the long range shoots I've attended that certainly isn't a 100% solution for anything.


I'm also trying to make the point that you can practice all you like, if you're not practicing the important things, it's no good to you.



These are things that are continually ignored and overlooked in favour of "how do I get a .25moa load"

Before someone jumps in with some ad hominem, I'm not claiming to be a brilliant shot and able to hit the target perfectly everytime either. I need a lot of practice at the moment, I just maybe have a different idea about what is important to practice... and it comes back to honest self-assessment

While I dont know you gimp it seems you have a real bee in your bonnet about groups.
It is what the thread is about, and what is pratical to strive for...as a group.
It goes without saying if you cant put that group in the kill zone or the bull you need to practice more or get closer

I think this also goes without saying, but I will spell it out for Gimp to avoid a possible backlash, that it's very important not to create an obsession around group size, spending time, money and energy striving endlessly for the last few mm's that won't come!

it's not a mission impossible effort to do a bit of load development at the longer ranges, and establish a load that seems to preform the best it can. It's up to the individual where they choose to leave this step, which is the point of this thread!

I think Gimp's point adds to the thread, personally.
The thread is about groups at LR but if you cant fire that group central in the intended target whatever the range, they are pointless.

Surly if you're just interested in groups then the smallest you can shoot is king?

Originally Posted by Wildman

Surly if you're just interested in groups then the smallest you can shoot is king?

The most sensible/achievable smallest average group you can shoot, is what this thread is about, what size is it ? what would you be happy with ?

Originally Posted by Kiwi Greg

The most sensible/achievable smallest average group you can shoot, is what this thread is about, what size is it ? what would you be happy with ?

That needs some context though. Or are you asking for various contexts?

MOA, its the person behind it thats more important

My "resident know nothing" opinion is that 0.5MOA is what a good LR rifle should shoot. But as is mentioned, there is no point in this if you shoot two groups - one group @0.25MOA but 4MOA high then a 0.125MOA group 4MOA low.

In my opinion, the requirement is a combination of 0.5MOA groups in a consistent vertical location. At least with this, it give the nut behind the butt the best oppourtunity to achieve the kill. From there - any larger group sizes come from the nut behind the butt, and it is easier to correct without the variable of an inaccurate rifle.

For me - I know my rifle can do 0.25 MOA. I have had days were I have shot several groups at different ranges that have met this. But I also know that I am not the best shot, and I have days where I pull the shots, typically up and right. BUt because I have removed the variable of the accuracy of the rifle, I can work on the rest

So my short answer without the rambling - 0.5MOA groups

Originally Posted by Mossie

My "resident know nothing" opinion is that 0.5MOA is what a good LR rifle should shoot. But as is mentioned, there is no point in this if you shoot two groups - one group @0.25MOA but 4MOA high then a 0.125MOA group 4MOA low.

In my opinion, the requirement is a combination of 0.5MOA groups in a consistent vertical location. At least with this, it give the nut behind the butt the best oppourtunity to achieve the kill. From there - any larger group sizes come from the nut behind the butt, and it is easier to correct without the variable of an inaccurate rifle.

For me - I know my rifle can do 0.25 MOA. I have had days were I have shot several groups at different ranges that have met this. But I also know that I am not the best shot, and I have days where I pull the shots, typically up and right. BUt because I have removed the variable of the accuracy of the rifle, I can work on the rest

So my short answer without the rambling - 0.5MOA groups

I would just like to add that guys who shoot LR sometimes can often have cases of extreme miss as the variables can move vertical the impact as much as 1m at times due to vertical wind effect, temp. humidity, mirage, air pressure ( not height above sea level).. Guys need to understand these variables to shoot well over a broad range of country and seasons.....

Another point I would really like to hammer down and this is the use of chronigraphs....
It is imperitive for consistantcy of your chrony info over the range of variables and shooting to gain solid knowledge of what your load is doing speedwise, I have found this to be a/the major contributing issue on and in many cases is a poor reading chrony IE a chrony reading way out (and most of the F1 chronys do) combined with the poor BC information = no thanks please come again.... (yet guys swear there loads doing such and such)
You really do have to do alot of shooting to understand this, but purchasing an oehler chrony was the best thing ive ever done, I now solidly know how fast my loads are going....

The next thing is the use of fair and proper BC measurements... And when Im shooting targex I have my own devised figures taken from matching trajectorys over a number of range sessions.... Brian litz book is a MUST OWN to anyone that wants to shoot 400m or further...

Have one of the above out and you will find yourself testing at the range, then on an animal on the hill and miss OR even both slightly out... Ive seen the question itself asked on these forums many times (Y DID I MISS...sniff sniff)..

Ive found that with finally having the gear and knowledge to ensure my numbers are spot on theres more room for error than ever before and the use of a rangecard is much more accurate through the variable ranges.......

So basically if you can't transfer your close range group accuracy to targets at greater distances then the size of your group is irrelevent...

A somewhat unusual discussion.

Have had the good luck to shoot in many comps/championships over the years and I would say quite clearly that practice to achieve precision grouping on the range always improves field hunting accuracy - whether single or multiple shots. We do not win events without this practice, and nor do maintain consistent high level field accuracy without it.

I have never yet met club, provincial or NZ champions who prefer shooting just single shots at a target and disdain groups - for any reason. You would not be carrying the trophy for long.

I think in practical terms the time spent shooting range groups, and the very precise skills acquired over time in this process, prepare shooters very well for field accuracy situations. It is precisely how I and other old has-beens sharpen young hunters' field accuracy (and stats) today. .

Personally I would not differentiate between precision shooting and accuracy as you have. Simply, whether on range or in field, in both cases we are trying to place the round(s) precisely where we want them.

If we wish to assess the merits of an ammunition load or make, a particular rifle, or for that matter a competing shooter, we would never do so with single shots. We do so with groups - it is the best measure for these purposes, and this is why we shoot in this manner for most competitions.

Note competitions vary widely - some comps actually require movement from target to target as with small bore, and some specifically do not allow a fixed posture e.g. some NZDA standing or running target events with high recoil centrefires.

Maintaining fixed bench position and pressures can give us greatest accuracy, but even then we quite often shoot consecutive groups on seperate targets e.g. with club shoot rimfires. It may be 5 or perhaps 10 into one target at 100, then a slight positional move to left for another target/group.

I think you will find the target variation that you are looking for is actually covered in a number of different disciplines - less so with centrefire bench/LR.

But - whether we are shooting groups in a single target category, or handling small positional movements as we travel from one target to another, shooting groups on the range is standard practice. It is how we test ourselves and equipment, practice precision accuracy (my terms), learn to recognise and concentrate on minute details, then learn to do these quickly and consistently for range and field. This is how people get to win events, and I have to say experienced competition shooters certainly carry their range practice benefits into the field - achieve at a higher level.