Alex Wheeler
Well-Known Member
I'm a scientist with some extra letters in front of my name on my email signatures to customers, so I feel I can address some of this (in reverse order).
1) There is no such thing as exact science, but reloading/shooting ideally should be pursued with every bit of rigor as biochemistry (as should financial decisions, food choices, socioeconomic policies, etc.). Science is a methodology and philosophy that works better at predicting events than any other in the history of mankind. It is not magic, nor does it claim to be. It does not require "belief" or "faith", and in fact requires the exact opposite. Science requires testable, repeatable, and verifiable results, which result in the ability to reliably predict outcomes for future events. The problem with all that, is that "laymen", and even "experts", often don't have the tools to rigorously evaluate results. BUT...We all should strive to do so, to the best of our abilities...
2A) If test guns or a high end bench rest apparatus can't reproduce 1/10th MOA (or even 1/4 MOA), then it's unlikely a rifle with a human behind it can either. If one looks up bench rest shooting results, they'll note that most of the matches are won with averages in the half MOA neighborhood. If you've really got a "half MOA all day long" gun, then you could probably make living at shooting.
2B) If test rigs can't do it, off the shelf ammo/guns probably can't either. I'd consider myself pretty handy with any gun, and have perhaps 10,000 rounds of experience trying to "aim small, miss small" with magnified optics and good rests. The best I've ever been able to hold and break the trigger, with lead sled type rests and high powered optics, is about 1/8 MOA. Bipod and bags, maybe 1/4 MOA. I've never seen a 1/4 MOA rifle in person. EVER. So I don't think there's many rifles that are "capable of" outshooting a decent shooter.
In summary, after a lot of data crunching from my own results and published match results, I'd maintain that an EXCELLENT shooter, with EXCELLENT equipment would be world class, sponsored, and I-make-a-living-shooting, if they average 1/3 MOA precision, and 1/2 MOA accuracy.
If you look up short range Benchrest results you will see most are won with a high .1 to low .2 moa aggregate. For a Benchrest rifle to be competitive it does in fact need to be a .1 moa rifle. Long range Benchrest will have a lot more "conditions" in the group sizes, but they are still .1 moa rifles in ideal conditions.