Printable View
I've often heard/read over the years that a 3 shot group tests the rifle and a 5 shot group tests the shooter.
I do 3 shot groups with my centrefires and 5 (or sometimes 10) with 22LR because the ammo is cheap and its fun. All hunting rifles, I'm sure competition target shooting is a different story.
Most modern rifles I've used have been capable of pretty reliable sub-MOA 3 shot groups with ammunition they like.
In the good old days of the .303 sporterized Lee Enfields a 3 MOA rifle was a keeper, deer have not got any smaller hunters have become poorer shots and unable to stalk close to animals
more time should be spent on bushcraft and less on wasting money trying for that mythical .5 MOA rifle
Or maybe they just can't be bothered putting up with rubbish equipment if they don't have to.Quote:
Originally Posted by shooternz
So.... A hunter "these days" can place a projectile within a 6 inch "kill zone" on an animal at 600+ yards with plenty of practice and a well set up rifle that shoots well, but hes a "poor shot" compared to great uncle Rupert who could slay a deer at 60 yards in the bush with his 303? Im not sure I follow your train of thought?Quote:
Originally Posted by shooternz
Im sure you will find that a lot of todays long range hunters are also very adept in the bush but thats not the terrain or discipline in which they choose to hunt. Nit everyone can go out and make that 600 yard shot without plenty of skill garnered through practice and a well set up rifle that shoots well.
You're nit wrong Ryan :D
I once hunted with a guy from Texas , who always said, " if I do my bit, all my guns can shoot a ragged hole ! The problem is I don,t often do my bit"
And this is generally a fact, most modern guns will shoot 1moa when clamped to a bench, as for shooting deer at 600mtrs , Good if you can do it,
How far away is the deer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rushy
With work rifles if they don't do MOA all the time they get rebarrelled, not three shot or five or even ten shot groups. If they can't do that they are sold to a pig islander, thrown in the gully, used as fire pokers. Yes I have a bushmaster barrel for a fire poker :D They haven't got to do 1/4 or even 1/2, but MOA is critical. (There's three or four at the gunsmiths now)Quote:
Originally Posted by suthy
I did have that one regret rifle I should never have sold. A butt ugly 6.5X55 but fuck could that thing shot, myself and someone else put two bullets same hole with the thing more than once. the third shot would just make the hole a little bigger, by a little I mean we were out with a micrometer checking. But this fucking idiot I know sold it to buy a Ruger 308.
Ha ha :) Can't resist This IS a good question!
In common usage it is 5 shot groups at 100 M or 100yd.
Generally its group diameter Max spread of centers. AcCuracy and zero holding aren't included.
group siZe shows POTENTIAL for accuracy.
As stated range is relevant.
for -22 RF a lot of gun / ammo become unstable and shoot well at 25 but not at 50m. I've had this with-303 too. 2inch group at 50m then nothing on target at 100.
for long range rifles many variables deteriorate moa precision at 1ong range. eg velocity spread and thats not counting wind. Rifle/ Shooter performance is often expressed in minutes of elevation.
of course grouping is notjust a property of rifleand ammo. Type of rest equipment used and scope power are crucial.
Brian Litz adds' together variation from different Sources using a 'root mean square' method which assumes an underlying normal distribution and the cited "group size' is say 95% confidence interval which is mathematically valid. You can estimate confidence intervaIs for the underlying standard deviation (elevation and wind age separately). If youshoot 3 shot groups you cant effectiveley estimate that s-d. There are not enough degrees of freedom.
I would be happy if the average group size is under 1 moa. The more group5 you fire the better of course. However GIMP's guide of 5 groups would stand up to mathematical scrutiny.
It requires a confidence level given as a % for the shots comprising the group lying within 1 MOA, in combination with the number of shots taken to form that group. Without these two parameters or equivalent the definition becomes arbitrary.Quote:
Originally Posted by suthy
An example that appears reasonably frequently online to demonstrate this underlines my aversion to 3-shot groups: a 3-shot group gives you 95% confidence that future shots won't impact outside a circle about 3 times bigger than that single group. So if a rifle shoots a single 3-shot 1 MOA group does that make it a 1 MOA rifle or a 3 MOA rifle ?
Which is why you use the results of multiple lower shot count groups from a barrel that is not intended for long strings of shots, as has been pointed out a number of times. There is absolutely no point going nuts and finding out the 'accuracy' if the result of finding out means it is no longer accurate. That would be about as useful as crash testing to destruction every car off the production line.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puffin
jeesh...all this technical stuff. & I thought it was a musket that the natives used for hunting moa ?
I say Fuck MOA
Go MIL:thumbsup:
MOA is less granular. 1 Mil is 10mm at 100m, compared to 1/4MOA at about 7mm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy79
Yeahp but in NZ we deal in mtrs and mm and km and kgs not pounds miles yards or inches
And I shoot in metres