Hunting Rifle MOA Rant

Greyfox said:

I support the OP's position. For most of my 50 years of hunting I have obsessed with the accuracy and consistency of my hunting and competition rifles....But, consider the stakes to be much higher with my hunting rifles where the clean dispatch of game is at stake. I think Bryan Litz does a nice job when he describes the WEZ(weapon employment zone). This concept is invaluable when assessing you and your rifles capability at a given max distance. I will try to achieve the highest level of basic accuracy/precision possible(<.5MOA) out of any of my rifles. It's probably the easiest aspect to achieve, and the most predictable of the shooting variables. With the current technology and information that's available, why settle for less. At the longer ranges, other factors come into play which are much less predicable, like wind, mirage, shooting position, etc. and the shot may have to be passed on regardless of the rifles precision. At the shorter ranges, like the OP, I'll take the ability to "thread a needle" with the best accuracy possible. IMO.

Click to expand...

We should all be responsible and do what we can to be as accurate and precise as possible but we also have reality to deal with.

There are very few sub MOA rifles out there and for those who can only afford factory rifles and ammo that number is infinitesimally small.

The difference between MOA and sub .5MOA is enormous and simply not achievable by more than a very small percentage of shooters and hunters with any equipment.

When you go to full customs, custom ammo, the best optics, etc that many of us are fortunate enough to be able to afford then that sub .5 becomes a lot more possible but in reality you're still talking about a ridiculously small number of rifles/ammo combos that can be found.

Dead is dead, aim small miss small, put it in the vitals and they die. Whether you're six inches or a foot left or right of your aim point, six inches up or down from it, for deer sized game and larger you're still making a killing shot.

For the rest, that's why God made prarie dogs, coyotes, and all the other little varmints and predators we enjoy shooting way the heck out there just because we can.

While we're striving for the best and to represent it well here we need to keep it realistic otherwise all were doing in the end is filling people's heads with expectations they'll never be able to achieve and in the end discouraging them from the sport altogether.

FlGunner said:

I'm about to start my drive to Montana next week any in preparation for that I've been doing single cold bore shots at different ranges. My gun is very accurate.... It's me that I worry about. So what I have determined is that I will not shoot at an animal out of my comfort zone. That varies with conditions. I took a cold bore shot yesterday around noon at 743 yds and hit low (roughly 3").... It was about 92° when I took the shoot and mirage was heavy with the high humidity the Bullseye looked like it was bobbing up and down lol. My wind call was good but I think my inability to get the bullseye focused with the heat I was seeing affected my range. But at 650, I was dead nuts. So conditions changed my effective rang, but I could see it clearly. So conditions effected my effective range. I won't take a shot on an animal that I know I can't kill with a 100% certainty of knowing where my bullet will hit. (Bullseye is a 3" diameter at 743 and 2" at 650. ) View attachment 107997 View attachment 107998

Click to expand...

Excellent shooting and great advice.

Conditions will always limit our maximum effective range.

Once the bullet leaves the bore we're completely out of control and those conditions can change, sometimes multiple times over the flight of the bullet.

WildRose said:

.......While we're striving for the best and to represent it well here we need to keep it realistic otherwise all were doing in the end is filling people's heads with expectations they'll never be able to achieve and in the end discouraging them from the sport altogether........

Click to expand...

MOA good enough in my recollection, more often than not, is a statement made encouraging new folks from stressing too much about not achieving the stellar results one sees in forums. Have fun, run what you brung, and keep working on it.

HARPERC said:

MOA good enough in my recollection, more often than not, is a statement made encouraging new folks from stressing too much about not achieving the stellar results one sees in forums. Have fun, run what you brung, and keep working on it.

Click to expand...

Part of what I enjoy most is always tinkering with what I have to see how much more I can get out of it.

I could sell my whole collection and replace it with three complete customs and might gain a little precision wise but it wouldn't be nearly as much fun nor anywhere near as personally satisfying.

Some of the stuff we read makes it seem like shooting critters at 1000 is something you can learn to do in a few weeks of shooting. The fact is, it's rare to find a rifle/shooter combo that call pull that off with any consistency. It's just the math.
A 1/2 moa rifle is only capable of 5 1/4" groups under perfect conditions at 1000 yards, but this doesn't account for es/sd. An es of 30fps will amount to around 6" at 1000 in a typical hunting rifle. Half of that 6" needs to be added to the 5" that the rifle can pull off. Now you have 8" groups at 1000 without factoring in the current conditions, and the fact that your not on a bench.
Miss the wind by 1mph and you just added another 4" to the 8" your already shooting.
Now You've got a 12" shot radius assuming you pull the trigger perfect.
Miss the elevation by 500 feet and you just added another 2"
This is why first round hits in a kill zone are so hard to pull off.
I guess the point that I'm making is that the close range accuracy of the rifle is important, but likely will account for less than half of the reason you miss.
In most typical long range hunting rifles, the difference between a 1/2 moa rifle and a 3/4 moa rifles is less than 1mph of wind at 1000.
Accuracy is important, but if your not well versed in all the aspects of shooting long range, it's unlikely that you'll even wound an animal let alone kill one.
The guys that don't wait for perfect days to shoot little groups, that go shoot in the wind and the rain in the conditions that they'll face will be far more effective at long range hunting than the guys chasing 1/4" groups under perfect conditions.
I do a lot of both, and there's a **** good reason I don't have any 1000 yard kills, I've never tried, because I'm not good enough. Give me one at 700 and decent conditions and I'll ruin his day every time!
There's my rant.

nmbarta said:

Some of the stuff we read makes it seem like shooting critters at 1000 is something you can learn to do in a few weeks of shooting. The fact is, it's rare to find a rifle/shooter combo that call pull that off with any consistency. It's just the math.
A 1/2 moa rifle is only capable of 5 1/4" groups under perfect conditions at 1000 yards, but this doesn't account for es/sd. An es of 30fps will amount to around 6" at 1000 in a typical hunting rifle. Half of that 6" needs to be added to the 5" that the rifle can pull off. Now you have 8" groups at 1000 without factoring in the current conditions, and the fact that your not on a bench.
Miss the wind by 1mph and you just added another 4" to the 8" your already shooting.
Now You've got a 12" shot radius assuming you pull the trigger perfect.
Miss the elevation by 500 feet and you just added another 2"
This is why first round hits in a kill zone are so hard to pull off.
I guess the point that I'm making is that the close range accuracy of the rifle is important, but likely will account for less than half of the reason you miss.
In most typical long range hunting rifles, the difference between a 1/2 moa rifle and a 3/4 moa rifles is less than 1mph of wind at 1000.
Accuracy is important, but if your not well versed in all the aspects of shooting long range, it's unlikely that you'll even wound an animal let alone kill one.
The guys that don't wait for perfect days to shoot little groups, that go shoot in the wind and the rain in the conditions that they'll face will be far more effective at long range hunting than the guys chasing 1/4" groups under perfect conditions.
I do a lot of both, and there's a **** good reason I don't have any 1000 yard kills, I've never tried, because I'm not good enough. Give me one at 700 and decent conditions and I'll ruin his day every time!
There's my rant.

Click to expand...

Good post.

Something I've said for years is that errors are measured in inches but misses are usually by feet.

Even with what we can control there is so much beyond our control that true sub MOA shooting at a thousand yards is not something more than a tiny handful of shooters and rifles are even capable of.

There's an old targets shooter's saying. Beginners talk about guns, decent shots talk about ammo and the winners talk about wind.

nmbarta said:

Some of the stuff we read makes it seem like shooting critters at 1000 is something you can learn to do in a few weeks of shooting. The fact is, it's rare to find a rifle/shooter combo that call pull that off with any consistency. It's just the math.
A 1/2 moa rifle is only capable of 5 1/4" groups under perfect conditions at 1000 yards, but this doesn't account for es/sd. An es of 30fps will amount to around 6" at 1000 in a typical hunting rifle. Half of that 6" needs to be added to the 5" that the rifle can pull off. Now you have 8" groups at 1000 without factoring in the current conditions, and the fact that your not on a bench.
Miss the wind by 1mph and you just added another 4" to the 8" your already shooting.
Now You've got a 12" shot radius assuming you pull the trigger perfect.
Miss the elevation by 500 feet and you just added another 2"
This is why first round hits in a kill zone are so hard to pull off.
I guess the point that I'm making is that the close range accuracy of the rifle is important, but likely will account for less than half of the reason you miss.
In most typical long range hunting rifles, the difference between a 1/2 moa rifle and a 3/4 moa rifles is less than 1mph of wind at 1000.
Accuracy is important, but if your not well versed in all the aspects of shooting long range, it's unlikely that you'll even wound an animal let alone kill one.
The guys that don't wait for perfect days to shoot little groups, that go shoot in the wind and the rain in the conditions that they'll face will be far more effective at long range hunting than the guys chasing 1/4" groups under perfect conditions.
I do a lot of both, and there's a **** good reason I don't have any 1000 yard kills, I've never tried, because I'm not good enough. Give me one at 700 and decent conditions and I'll ruin his day every time!
There's my rant.

Click to expand...

WildRose said:

Good post.

Something I've said for years is that errors are measured in inches but misses are usually by feet.

Even with what we can control there is so much beyond our control that true sub MOA shooting at a thousand yards is not something more than a tiny handful of shooters and rifles are even capable of.

Click to expand...

While I fully agree with many of the points made in these posts, I'm open to shooting game at 1000+ yards....and have done so with success. I can vividly remember a time when a 500 yard shot at game was viewed with equal skepticism. Time, information, and technology has changed this. Whether 500 yards or 1200 yards, uncertain conditions can result in the forfeiting of the shot, and this will always be the responsibility of the hunter.. Again, citing Litz, most all of the conditions can be accurately determined at long range with two exceptions. 1) What is the wind actually doing between you and the target: and 2) the certainty of the ballistic performance of the actual cartridge being fired. He labels these, "indeterminants". All the other factors(distance, ballistic calculation/inputs, angle, shooting skills, etc) enable the ability to be understood and measured....these are labeled "determinants". Either determinants or indeterminants can impose a limit on range, but the determinates can be mastered if one has the tools, knowledge, and desire to do so. Understanding them at the time of the shot determines whether you should take the shot at all. IMO, key is to get the best handle possible on the indeterminates. Eight years with the same rifle/load and lots of LR practice have improved my statistical certainty of the ballistic performance of my load(<.5MOA/ES<12FPS), as well as dealing with wind. Mastering the wind will be a lifetime endeavor, and has been responsible for more "passed" long range shots for me then any other factor, but practice does make a difference. I must admit, even with a hunting rifle/equipment/skills that is "capable" to 1000 yards, game taken past 1000 have been few and far between with the bulk of my LR game taken between 500 and 800 yards. This "window" seems to be the LR hunting sweet spot when closing the distance in open terrain. But, 1000+ yard shots are very possible under the "right circumstances".IMO.

If you really want to know how your rifle shoots your ammo, take it to the range and shoot all of it at the same target. Measure the group and you're done. You don't have any left, but you will have your answer, and a couple empty MTM boxes. The whole ammo supply group is the "population". Within the confines of that population your rifle is just a random number generator. Your groups are a "sample". How big does that sample have to be to predict accurately how big the population will be?

A three shot group isn't even a great predictor of what the next 3 shot group will look like.

huntsman22 said:

I'm of a different school of thought. 'Time and effort' would be better spent on learning to shoot from field positions(for hunting), rather than worrying about 1/2 moa accuracy from your rifle. Case in point, I went to a hunters shoot competition where EVERY rifle was a 1/2 moa gun. Of the 30-some shooters, only 2 were able to hit a 8 plate at 200 on the first shot, offhand. And they were no better offa shooting sticks. But when they were able to go prone with a rear bag, they shot great....

Click to expand...

This^^^
Real world hunting vs. table-top paper punching. I equate it to folks that practice with their pistols at targets with slow controlled shooting, but never practice quick draw point-and-shoot center of mass scenarios for self defense. Both are great and develop a oneness with the firearm, but real world use is definitely not a slow controlled environment. Same with a bow, etc etc.

I hope I didn't come across wrong. I have zero issues with someone capable taking shots at game at whatever distance they determine is ethical.
These are personal choices, and need to remain that way.
I was speaking more about the obsession of the accuracy of the rifle rather than mastering the variables.
Once I have a load developed, I rarely shoot targets closer than 500
I do plan on being good enough to take game at 1000+, but even in decent conditions, (7mph consistent wind or less) my first round hits on a 10" targets aren't consistent enough for me to take game.
That's just where my skill level is right now. There are guys and gals both that shoot much better than me. Very few that don't have years of long range shooting behind them though.
I consider my effective range to be 800 at the moment, less than half the range I regularly practice to. This has resulted in a 100% success rate on long range shots at game (500-800) on well over a dozen animals.
I have no doubt that you and several others on this site are capable of 1000+.
You are correct, almost all of the factors I mentioned can be accounted for, it just takes time, and more importantly practice to understand what those factors do, and how the slightest mistake on one factor can result in a miss or a wound
You guys/gals are the exception though, not the rule.

Greyfox said:

While I fully agree with many of the points made in these posts, I'm open to shooting game at 1000+ yards....and have done so with success. I can vividly remember a time when a 500 yard shot at game was viewed with equal skepticism. Time, information, and technology has changed this. Whether 500 yards or 1200 yards, uncertain conditions can result in the forfeiting of the shot, and this will always be the responsibility of the hunter.. Again, citing Litz, most all of the conditions can be accurately determined at long range with two exceptions. 1) What is the wind actually doing between you and the target: and 2) the certainty of the ballistic performance of the actual cartridge being fired. He labels these, "indeterminants". All the other factors(distance, ballistic calculation/inputs, angle, shooting skills, etc) enable the ability to be understood and measured....these are labeled "determinants". Either determinants or indeterminants can impose a limit on range, but the determinates can be mastered if one has the tools, knowledge, and desire to do so. Understanding them at the time of the shot determines whether you should take the shot at all. IMO, key is to get the best handle possible on the indeterminates. Eight years with the same rifle/load and lots of LR practice have improved my statistical certainty of the ballistic performance of my load(<.5MOA/ES<12FPS), as well as dealing with wind. Mastering the wind will be a lifetime endeavor, and has been responsible for more "passed" long range shots for me then any other factor, but practice does make a difference. I must admit, even with a hunting rifle/equipment/skills that is "capable" to 1000 yards, game taken past 1000 have been few and far between with the bulk of my LR game taken between 500 and 800 yards. This "window" seems to be the LR hunting sweet spot when closing the distance in open terrain. But, 1000+ yard shots are very possible under the "right circumstances".IMO.

Click to expand...

No doubt you are absolutely correct on every part here but when we get down to the last line because of all the factors we've pointed out we're talking about an infinitesimally small percentage of even the LR crowd who are truly competent, able, and competent beyond 800 yds.

In general I hold with the theory that 600yds is where long range begins because that's where gravity and the wind really begin to show and life starts to get complicated.

At a thousand, well, that's where things really start to get complicated because of the magnification of errors, flight time, and everything that can/does happen once the bullet leaves the barrel.

I've taken exactly one long range shot on a game animal over the last decade or so that I regretted.

Just as I squeezed the trigger I caught a slight shift in the wind due to a change in the bend of the grass but the hammer was already falling.

That threw my shot off by more than 2' passing just below and in front of the hip bones.

I was unable to find him for nearly thirty hours and before I did the coyotes had done their work.

Just one split second and a final wind call would have made all the difference in the world but at over 1,200yds there simply were too many things out of my control.

I always try to think of that shot and the results when I'm stretching another one out.

Greyfox said:

While I fully agree with many of the points made in these posts, I'm open to shooting game at 1000+ yards....and have done so with success. I can vividly remember a time when a 500 yard shot at game was viewed with equal skepticism. Time, information, and technology has changed this. Whether 500 yards or 1200 yards, uncertain conditions can result in the forfeiting of the shot, and this will always be the responsibility of the hunter.. Again, citing Litz, most all of the conditions can be accurately determined at long range with two exceptions. 1) What is the wind actually doing between you and the target: and 2) the certainty of the ballistic performance of the actual cartridge being fired. He labels these, "indeterminants". All the other factors(distance, ballistic calculation/inputs, angle, shooting skills, etc) enable the ability to be understood and measured....these are labeled "determinants". Either determinants or indeterminants can impose a limit on range, but the determinates can be mastered if one has the tools, knowledge, and desire to do so. Understanding them at the time of the shot determines whether you should take the shot at all. IMO, key is to get the best handle possible on the indeterminates. Eight years with the same rifle/load and lots of LR practice have improved my statistical certainty of the ballistic performance of my load(<.5MOA/ES<12FPS), as well as dealing with wind. Mastering the wind will be a lifetime endeavor, and has been responsible for more "passed" long range shots for me then any other factor, but practice does make a difference. I must admit, even with a hunting rifle/equipment/skills that is "capable" to 1000 yards, game taken past 1000 have been few and far between with the bulk of my LR game taken between 500 and 800 yards. This "window" seems to be the LR hunting sweet spot when closing the distance in open terrain. But, 1000+ yard shots are very possible under the "right circumstances".IMO.

Click to expand...

Not a note of disagreement there to or from me GF but a better and more detailed explanation.

His indeterminates are my "out of our control" and the things that can change many times between the muzzle and the target.

While math and engineering are making this more of a science than art or sport in many ways, even with the best data and equipment however often those tough shots come down to "feel" and experience. Anyone can observe conditions but it takes the others to anticipate changes as yet unforeseen and take that extra second or two to adjust or call the shot off completely.

I have all the respect in the world for Litz and the work he's done, he's got an amazing mind for ballistics.

Ckgworks said:

I don't know the numbers, and I'm not going to guess......BUT I know the majority of animals killed every year are killed at very short ranges. This is where good enough comes to play. As huntsman said, most people would be ahead to spend more time shooting as if they were hunting than worrying about eking out the last bit of accuracy out of a rifle that they can't shoot better than anyway. Very few people actually get the opportunity to shot at game long range.....I brought my daughter rifle elk hunting in Western Washington last year, and we were loading up after our morning hunt when another hunter pulled up to go into where we just were. He had a heavy, long barreled rifle, with bipod and a yard of scope mounted on it...... the area we just hunted was Washington second growth, and I don't think you could have found more than a 60 yard shot. I feel he would have been much better served with a fast handling rifle with a low power scope that shot "good enough". I still try squeezing everything out of my rifles regardless of use, but for the majority of people, "good enough" kills game. Be thankful you can shoot every single decent rifle .25 MOA, because from my view, you are in the elite class of shooters......I'm no where near that, on most days I probably hover between .5-.75 MOA.

Click to expand...

I have heard the same statements as all of you have, and they will often add that all those shots would kill a deer meaning keeping all hits in the vitals ! Now how many MOA is the entire vitals ? They consider that good enough ! I am not as critical as most of you are but I do strive for a factory out of the box gun to shoot a MOA ! Now a rifle that I would be using for long range hunting or shooting I would agree with you and strive for 1/2 MOA !