What is acceptable accuracy?

[WNYBuckHunter]

1 hour ago, beachpeaz said:

  I highly doubt the true world record group at 1,000 yards is found by googling it.

You are out of touch with modern technology. That's all I can say. 

[chrisw]

I couldn't resist but to chime in on some of the ridiculous comments on this thread.
A 1" group at 250 with a rifle is easily achieved.  Modern rifles and optics are WELL in access of those types of groups.  I'm just getting back into shooting now.  I have a 6.5 creedmore and I can easily shoot a 1" group at 200 yards......and I am not proficient yet at all.  Do you think a sniper plans on missing by more than an 1" at even 1,000 yards?
As far as archery goes, all the big talkers with their 70, 80 yard + deer kills are also laughable.  I've hit my spot on a 3D target at 100 yards a couple times.  Shooting a target has ZERO translation to shooting a deer at that distance.  There is no way a single hunter is letting an arrow go at that distance and has any clue how the wind, density of the air, movement of the deer, etc will ultimately effect the impact point.  You are guessing, and guessing is unethical.  If you are ok with the fact that you may kill the deer or you may wound it with a bad shot, you shouldn't even be allowed in the woods.

Serious question... Are you related to Stubby?

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

31 minutes ago, beachpeaz said:

, I will say that the original comment made by someone was that a 1" group at 250 yards is NOT possible. 

I'd like you to go back and find that quote

[moog5050]

29 minutes ago, beachpeaz said:

 

So, yes, people in here are out of touch with reality if they think you can't shoot a 1" group at 250 yards. 

I know I can't shoot a 1" group at 250 but that's me.  But just based on the numbers, wouldn't that be .4 MOA which means not only does the gun have to be far more accurate than most manufacturers advertise, but also the ammo and, even more impressive, the shooter?  Based on that googling thing, it seems that snipers shooting .3 moa at 1000yds is incredible and that's the top in the world.  Could we really expect the average hunter to be only slightly worse?  And yes Biz, I realize its easy for you.  I mean us regular guys.  Theory and actual results are two different things.

[beachpeaz]

On 9/13/2017 at 7:58 AM, Culvercreek hunt club said:

That is 0.4 MOA. Your comment is just wrong. 

You mean you comment right here?

[steve863]

14 minutes ago, chrisw said:

 

Serious question... Are you related to Stubby?

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
 

All he needs to do is take a photo of his fingers and post it. 

 

 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

7 minutes ago, beachpeaz said:

You mean you comment right here?

yeah....what was I referring to? 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

8 minutes ago, beachpeaz said:

You mean you comment right here?

1" group at 250yds with leadsled rest can be done by anyone with a decent gun. 

 

Do you stand by that comment? If you do YOU are wrong too

[BizCT]

6 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

1" group at 250yds with leadsled rest can be done by anyone with a decent gun. 

 

Do you stand by that comment? If you do YOU are wrong too

Just to clarify, I admitted I may be wrong. It's not the shooter, its the sled holding the gun in the same exact spot for back to back shots. I consider a weatherby a decent gun. I do not even consider brands like Remington, Winchester, etc. to be "decent"

[beachpeaz]

5 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

1" group at 250yds with leadsled rest can be done by anyone with a decent gun. 

 

Do you stand by that comment? If you do YOU are wrong too

The level of selective reading in here gets better every day. 

I never said that it was achievable by every Joe with a gun.

I also never said that it was achievable with every gun off the shelf.

I also didn't say it was easy.

But, do not tell me that .4 moa is not achievable though when I have personally been with someone who can achieve that with multiple guns without batting an eyelash.

So, for the ignorant people in here who argue about things they know nothing about, I can only LOL.

Edited September 14, 2017 by beachpeaz

[Culvercreek hunt club]

24 minutes ago, beachpeaz said:

.

But, o not tell me that .4 moa is not achievable though when I have personally been with someone who can achieve that with multiple guns without batting an eyelash.

So, for the ignorant people in here who argue about things they know nothing about, I can only LOL.

Again douchebag, where did I or anyone say that? Maybe YOU should learn how to read. The quote was about the every Joe. grabbing a decent gun and throwing out .4MOA groups.  and if you think that is still true you don't know you a$$ from a hole in the ground. 

Edited September 14, 2017 by Culvercreek hunt club

[beachpeaz]

1 minute ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Again douchebag, where did I or anyone say that? May YOU should learn how to read. The quote was about the every Joe. grabbing a decent gun and throwing out .4MOA groups.  and if you think that is still true you don't know you a$$ from a hole in the ground. 

Ah, yes, the epitome of intelligence and class....name calling.

That's when you know you already lost the debate when the only thing you can come up with is calling someone a douchebag.

Good job.  .4 moa groups are definitely not possible now.  You are correct.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

4 minutes ago, beachpeaz said:

Ah, yes, the epitome of intelligence and class....name calling.

That's when you know you already lost the debate when the only thing you can come up with is calling someone a douchebag.

Good job.  .4 moa groups are definitely not possible now.  You are correct.

actually both of my quotes are right. 

[BizCT]

2 hours ago, Lawdwaz said:

I like my odds inside of 20 yards.  

Yes, odds inside of 20yds should be very high for any ethical archer. But are you saying that you won't shoot one at say 23yds or 27yds, or 31yds? if so, that seems crazy to me. I'm talking about an unalerted broadside shot.

I was under the impression (from this forum) that shooting a compound is tough. I only shoot once a week, but I could have been proficient at 25yds within a day or two of shooting for the first time. Going a step further, with a single pin, the only difference between 25yds and 45yds is what number your sight is cranked to.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

5 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

Yes, odds inside of 20yds should be very high for any ethical archer. But are you saying that you won't shoot one at say 23yds or 27yds, or 31yds? if so, that seems crazy to me. I'm talking about an unalerted broadside shot.

I was under the impression (from this forum) that shooting a compound is tough. I only shoot once a week, but I could have been proficient at 25yds within a day or two of shooting for the first time. Going a step further, with a single pin, the only difference between 25yds and 45yds is what number your sight is cranked to.

Just strap in down in a lead sled, Biz. Anyone can do that. 

[BizCT]

7 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Just strap in down in a lead sled, Biz. Anyone can do that. 

Do they make that for bows? That would be a good way to truly test the arrow drop at different distances. For this year, since its my first year and I haven't shot a ton out far I will have my sight set for 25yds and aim a little high low from 10-30yds.

[Lawdwaz]

2 hours ago, Doc said:

On all my 100+ yard archery shots, I always hang several wind socks down the shooting lane. And I only shoot at the old sway-backed bucks that can't hear or see and have no likelihood of moving away from the arrow. The good thing about these shots is that you always get a second, third or even fourth shot at those old deaf, blind, toothless, bow legged, arthritic ones.

LOL......who said you didn't have a sense of humor ??

[steve863]

9 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 I consider a weatherby a decent gun. I do not even consider brands like Remington, Winchester, etc. to be "decent"

And why would you say that they aren't decent?   I've seen them kill game just as dead as a Weatherby would.   A rifle doesn't need be glossy and expensive or have the Weatherby label on it in order to be good.  Plenty of rifles out there that can match Weatherby in accuracy and dependability that cost considerably less.  Absolutely nothing wrong with them, they will get the job done.

[BizCT]

And why would you say that they aren't decent?   I've seen them kill game just as dead as a Weatherby would.   A rifle doesn't need be glossy and expensive or have the Weatherby label on it in order to be good.  Plenty of rifles out there that can match Weatherby in accuracy and dependability that cost considerably less.  Absolutely nothing wrong with them, they will get the job done.

They don't shoot as fast/flat- is my understanding. Maybe I'm wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrisw]

The level of selective reading in here gets better every day. 
I never said that it was achievable by every Joe with a gun.
I also never said that it was achievable with every gun off the shelf.
I also didn't say it was easy.
But, do not tell me that .4 moa is not achievable though when I have personally been with someone who can achieve that with multiple guns without batting an eyelash.
So, for the ignorant people in here who argue about things they know nothing about, I can only LOL.

When you say it's "easy to achieve a 1" group at 250 yds with a rifle" you do in fact imply it's commonplace. You even went as far as to say "you can get well in excess of 1" at 250". How many .25 MOA rifles do you own? I'd be shocked if a single person on this site has a quarter inch gun. And you did in fact say it was "easy." And what individual are you talking about that holds .4 MOA or less with multiple guns "without batting an eyelash." Please inform all of us ignorant people who know nothing....

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

10 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 

They don't shoot as fast/flat- is my understanding. Maybe I'm wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Biz, come on. You are having an apples and oranges conversation.  Do you want to talk about how guns stack up or the performance of different cartridges?

[BizCT]

Biz, come on. You are having an apples and oranges conversation.  Do you want to talk about how guns stack up or the performance of different cartridges?

I don't want to look anything up. But if someone else want to put together a chart or something showing the bullet drop out to say 500ydd between a 7MM WBY Mag vs other 7MM Mag guns I would take a gander.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Culvercreek hunt club]

4 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 

I don't want to look anything up. But if someone else want to put together a chart or something showing the bullet drop out to say 500ydd between a 7MM WBY Mag vs other 7MM guns I would take a gander.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That would be the cartridge you want to compare then. When did this pop in on a discussion on accuracy of a decent gun?

[steve863]

12 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 

They don't shoot as fast/flat- is my understanding. Maybe I'm wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Remingtons, Winchesters, Rugers, Brownings, Savages, etc. are typically chambered for cartridges that were not designed by Weatherby, but that doesn't mean the others are not good or won't kill game because they surely will.  In fact, I'd bet they have killed more game than the Weatherby's which are more expensive to buy and shoot.

[BizCT]

Guys - I really don't care that much lol.

Back to OP topic. Acceptable Accuracy is 4-6" groups at whatever distance they may be (30, 50, 70, etc)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk