What do you consider good enough group wise for a rifle at 100 meters?

[User00014]

Simple, the better your rifle the better your groups. A lousy rifle never helped grouping.
edi

I don’t completely agree with this, I shoot a ruger m77 in 270win cost me £270 now this is a rifle that 85% of stalkers would not even look at, I also know of several Parker hale rifles that shoot under .5 moa!

Accuracy with home loads under .5 moa with factory just under moa at 100m.

Accuracy all comes down to what your happy with and it takes practice, 1“ at 100 is plenty as far as I’m concerned

 

[Tazz]

The sub MOA discussion will rumble on my simple view is you need to try to achieve the best results possible in terms of rifle/bullet/support and practice as much as you can you owe it to the live game you are stalking

When I did my DSC1 a few years ago two guys struggled with the shooting one was down to limited experience and practice the other guy “choked” with people watching and the pressure of passing the test. I used to clay shot a lot to a good standard and used to watch guys who could shoot well in front of their mates but in a registered event with a squad, referee, adherence to registered rules and a published score shot way below their ability. It’s producing a result under pressure in a sport where normally that’s not the case the only witness is the deer and your own pride !

 

[tarponhead]

The short answer is that the right group and accuracy is the one you are happy with.... get as close to your quarry as you can and than to humanely and safely dispatch it.

+1. It depends on if you want to be a hunter or a shooter. Nothing wrong with either, but one doesn't always begat the other.

 

[mannlicher308]

For me i'm only happy with a group of .5 inch or there abouts. If i had a grouping of an inch or more i would be concerned as it would be a two inch grouping at 200 which could result in a miss.

 

[Malxwal]

For me i'm only happy with a group of .5 inch or there abouts. If i had a grouping of an inch or more i would be concerned as it would be a two inch grouping at 200 which could result in a miss.

+1 here. I like to see all bullet holes overlapping as a minimum before I'm happy. That does not mean to say I'm capable of that in the field, but at least I know the rifle is capable.

 

[John Gryphon]

The short answer is that the right group and accuracy is the one you are happy with.

Fur hunting/field conditions my view is:
First consider what would be the typical average distance at which you shoot your quarry.
Secondly what size killing zone are you looking at.

For example, a 3" group at 100 Yards with a deer caliber is absolutely fine - there is plenty of margin with a 6-8" killing zone. (Broadside h/l shots)
However a 2" Group at 50 yards is no good when trying to head-shoot rabbits with a .22Lr....

So having put things into perspective take a reality check and ignore all the comments about the importance of high precision accuracy. The reality, you will find, is that most stalkers do NOT achieve the 'clover-leave' and 'sub-1" group' at 100 yards they claim to achieve, even under controlled bench-rest conditions on a range. In real live hunting under field conditions we use sticks or a branch or a gate-post...and these wonderful groups of which some people even proudly post pictures are not achievable by most. What really matters is to get as close to your quarry as you can and than to humanely and safely dispatch it.

A now await many posts from people who tell you I am wrong and that your rifle and amo combe really, really should achieve a 5mm group at 100 yards or otherwise there must be something wrong with your kit or you . Oh no there isn't...

Totally 100% agreed Eric H I shoot "MOS" minute of sambar with my deer rifles.

I have posted prev that I am yet to see anyone replicate their printed target results over the bench here.

 

[Chasey]

Good enough for what?

If one of my group can hit within the 6" kill zone with a 308 or simila thats fine for chest shot

If they can hit within a 2" kill zone with a 243 thats fine for chest shot

If they can hit within 1" kill zone that's good for head shot

But I expect all these to be on target. A 1" kill shot that an inch high and an inch left isn't much cop for a reliable head shot

Bench rest shooting is not a great indicator of ability, so id preferably see these shots & groupings from a high seat.

90% of the time its the shooter not the rifle but if someone is failing to qualifie, id offer them a re shot with a rifle I know is sub 1"

Biggest thing I notice is new shooters with 270s, 308s and 30 06 rifles not being able to cope with the recoil. Stick a 243 or 6.5 55 in their hands, and suddenly they can shoot a whole lot better

For these people its either training to cope with the recoil, or sell up and get a more suitable rifle.


ATB

 

[Jagare]

I'm sure we all want a rifle that shoots sub 1" groups and shooting of the bench is a good way to do this it also gets you used to your rifle and any of its peculiarities. Practice with a rifle that mimics shooting in the field, off sticks, high seat, sitting, knelling and off hand is the way to go to get the best out of you and your rifle.
Most of my hunting is off hand shooting so thats what i practice. Summer weekends down the range shooting the running targets and at least twice a week in the back garden shooting stationary targets with the .22
I was shooting down the range on Saturday on the running boar range with a chap who is a exceptional shot at the running moose and boar and no slouch on the skeet. A very modest man.
We had the range to our selves and we were talking about how bad in general Swedish hunters were with a rifle and why so few ever practiced. I recall doing the for runner of the DSC1 many years ago and the appalling level of shooting skill in the shooting test. My years of being a member of a small shooting club in the UK that was stalking orientated and the awful standard of shooting ability from some of the members who only ever shot off the bench.
I've got a feeling that in the modern world of deer stalking that many never shoot there sub 1" rifle enough to ever get any mastery of there rifle. Reading between the lines of some of the stalking guides that post on here they must cope with some amazingly bad stalkers.

 

[Chasey]

Suggesting that having a better rifle will solve shooting accuracy problems is daft.


If you have access to 20 different rounds for your rifle and can blast away through all of them, then you might be lucky to find a factory load & weight that's great for yours.

If you have the patience of a saint and access to a range so you can fiddle, home loads can cure most problems.

If your stuck with what ever ammo your mate recommended and your new rifle, you could try realy hard and fail to get a good grouping.


I was shooting a Blaser R93 last week and most believe that's a accurate rifle but whilst I could get about 1" with 243 and 6.5 55 I could only get a 2" group with 308. This could be recoil or could be the load as I only had Sako Hammerhead and my home loads to compare.


One thing I will say is heavier rifles are MUCH easier to shoot accurately. My Sako 75 in a heavy laminate Jo West Tactical thumb hole stock sits down hard on the bench or sticks and seems solid as a rock, but my T3 or even my heavier R93, is a lot harder to get steady on target. Mt Sako 595 heavy barrelled, heavy wooden stock 22.250 however, is very stable and shoots by far the best of all my rifles.

Open hill I wouldn't consider using either of my heavy rifles but then id not bother with a head shot. High seat shooting, they are the nuts for spot on hits.

 

[8x57]

I'm sure we all want a rifle that shoots sub 1" groups and shooting of the bench is a good way to do this it also gets you used to your rifle and any of its peculiarities. Practice with a rifle that mimics shooting in the field, off sticks, high seat, sitting, knelling and off hand is the way to go to get the best out of you and your rifle.
Most of my hunting is off hand shooting so thats what i practice. Summer weekends down the range shooting the running targets and at least twice a week in the back garden shooting stationary targets with the .22
I was shooting down the range on Saturday on the running boar range with a chap who is a exceptional shot at the running moose and boar and no slouch on the skeet. A very modest man.
We had the range to our selves and we were talking about how bad in general Swedish hunters were with a rifle and why so few ever practiced. I recall doing the for runner of the DSC1 many years ago and the appalling level of shooting skill in the shooting test. My years of being a member of a small shooting club in the UK that was stalking orientated and the awful standard of shooting ability from some of the members who only ever shot off the bench.
I've got a feeling that in the modern world of deer stalking that many never shoot there sub 1" rifle enough to ever get any mastery of there rifle. Reading between the lines of some of the stalking guides that post on here they must cope with some amazingly bad stalkers.

Bang on target as usual Jagare.

I know a chap who has some of the best

(and most expensive) ​

rifles and scopes that you could possibly buy. I have only ever seen him shoot these rifles from a solid rest, never ever from a normal shooting position.
Admittedly the groups that he shoots are very good but he can't say that he is developing loads because all the ammunition that he uses is factory ammo.

 

[jcampbellsmith]

Suggesting that having a better rifle will solve shooting accuracy problems is daft. ...

I don't agree. I shot 2.5 inch groups with a Ruger MKII in.25-06 - this was fine for red deer, but unacceptable for roe deer. I changed to a Sako 75 in .243 Win and started shooting sub inch groups and that was acceptable for roe deer. Both rifles used the same scope and bipod and this was in pre-sound moderator days with available factory ammunition.

A better rifle won't address poor technique or lack of practice, but it's an essential foundation to shooting well.

Regards

JCS

 

[Chasey]

I don't agree. I shot 2.5 inch groups with a Ruger MKII in.25-06 - this was fine for red deer, but unacceptable for roe deer. I changed to a Sako 75 in .243 Win and started shooting sub inch groups and that was acceptable for roe deer. Both rifles used the same scope and bipod and this was in pre-sound moderator days with available factory ammunition.

A better rifle won't address poor technique or lack of practice, but it's an essential foundation to shooting well.

Regards

JCS

I am sure Rugars spec for that rifle is not a 2.5" group. Id pretty much guarantee I could get your Ruger MKII sub 1" with load development.

My mate Pete has a Win 700 that cant hit a barn door with 100g amo but shoots sub inch with 70g. It can be as simple as that.

 

[jcampbellsmith]

I am sure Rugars spec for that rifle is not a 2.5" group. Id pretty much guarantee I could get your Ruger MKII sub 1" with load development.

My mate Pete has a Win 700 that cant hit a barn door with 100g amo but shoots sub inch with 70g. It can be as simple as that.

You're still missing the point. I was using the kit and ammunition that was readily available at the time. I did not reload for rifles at that time. The simplest thing for me to do was to take advice and buy another rifle.

In over 50 years of centre fire rifle shooting, I've shot a lot of rifles. Some shoot and some don't. The rifles I have now all shoot very nicely with factory ammunition and reloaded ammunition.

Regards

JCS

 

[Chasey]

You're still missing the point. I was using the kit and ammunition that was readily available at the time. I did not reload for rifles at that time. The simplest thing for me to do was to take advice and buy another rifle.

In over 50 years of centre fire rifle shooting, I've shot a lot of rifles. Some shoot and some don't. The rifles I have now all shoot very nicely with factory ammunition and reloaded ammunition.

Regards

JCS

Wouldn't it have been cheaper / easier to buy different ammo?

A quick search on the Ruger MKII finds many suggesting its a sub MOA rifle and then theres some finding issues with the synthetic stock needing more clearance.

The only rifle I have ever had issues with was my Ruger 10/22. Baught it and shot 1/2" groups at 50m with Ely Subs.

Bought another batch of Ely and had a 4" grouping???? Went back to the last few remaining of my old Ely batch and yes bang on .5" again

Bought some Winchester and now have a 1"ish grouping but I know its the ammo not the gun.

Had I bought that rifle and shot the second batch of Ely and some Winchester, id have told the world how rubbish it was, but with the right ammo I know its good


I think its fair to say some rifles are fussy on ammo and others are not. I put this down to barrel harmonics

 

[jcampbellsmith]

Wouldn't it have been cheaper / easier to buy different ammo?....

No, is the short answer. If memory serves me correctly, 117 gr Federal and 120gr Remington were available to me back then. Neither shot sub 2.5 inch at 100 yards. I need rifles that are not fussy, otherwise they don't get cabinet space. I suspect many folk on here are in a similar situation with limited time to tune ammunition and limited availability of ammunition to purchase.

Regards

JCS

 

[stubear]

My .308 and .300WM are right about an inch at 100y shooting off a rest. My .25-06 is probably 0.75". All are relatively lightweight sporting rifles which are designed for hunting.

I think if you're getting an inch or under on the range in good conditions that is MORE than accurate enough to take stalking. Even the kill area on a muntjac is 4" so conceptually your rifle is accurate enough that you could shoot a munty at 400y off a bench, not that I would in any way recommend doing it!

I do think that people sometimes expect a bit too much from their stalking rifles. If you want a 1000y paper puncher then you're going to want a heavy barreled 30" long monster with a scope that goes up to 25x magnification to optimise your performance. Yes it will be deadly accurate at 100y but who on earth is going to want to carry around a 15lb rifle on the hill? Thats going to get really old, really fast. All day lugging my win mag about is plenty believe me, and thats well under 15lb.

For stalking you want a lightweight rifle and moderator with acceptable accuracy, a scope that goes up to maybe 10x or 12x with good light transmission and the whole rig should be able to hack a bit of abuse without losing zero.

If you're getting ~1" at 100y then that should be ~2" at 200y - In anyones world thats a dead deer if you do your job.

Personally I think you're bob on - load up and go stalking!

 

[Zetter]

Cheers for all the replies everyone I guess I do get hung up on small groups this is probably coming from when I started as a air rifle club shooter where chasing small groups was the order of the day. To be fair to all my rimfire/ centre fire rifles they all put down <1 MOA groups at 100 yards off the bench consistently which from comments above is good enough by far.

Looking back over the years virtually all of my misses have been pilot error and I have / do suffer from bouts "buck fever" even after a fair while hunting and even on bunnies dunno why but I do sometimes have to take a breath and calm down before a shot praying quarry doesnt wander off in the mean time.

Doesnt happen with the shotgun on birds for some reason guess I dont have time to think about it.

 

[tarponhead]

Cheers for all the replies everyone I guess I do get hung up on small groups this is probably coming from when I started as a air rifle club shooter where chasing small groups was the order of the day. To be fair to all my rimfire/ centre fire rifles they all put down <1 MOA groups at 100 yards off the bench consistently which from comments above is good enough by far.

Looking back over the years virtually all of my misses have been pilot error and I have / do suffer from bouts "buck fever" even after a fair while hunting and even on bunnies dunno why but I do sometimes have to take a breath and calm down before a shot praying quarry doesnt wander off in the mean time.

Doesnt happen with the shotgun on birds for some reason guess I dont have time to think about it.

Its odd how these things afflict us. I gave terrible trigger freeze on shotguns unless I shoot gun down and yet never on rifles, but do get the odd dose of buck fever. Also of note are the moments when you are in the zone and get a zen like sense of certainty of the kill and it all happens as planned. Having a rifle that you are confident in is part of that state of mind.

 

[Zetter]

Its odd how these things afflict us. I gave terrible trigger freeze on shotguns unless I shoot gun down and yet never on rifles, but do get the odd dose of buck fever. Also of note are the moments when you are in the zone and get a zen like sense of certainty of the kill and it all happens as planned. Having a rifle that you are confident in is part of that state of mind.

I think confidence in equipment is key for me a lot of the time. I am an awful workman and tend to blame the scope, rifle, bipod, ammo ect etc given half the chance even though I know its me. This also get backed up when I check on targets and then clearly find out its me not the kit.
Shooting gun down on shotguns is something a friend of mine has to do or mentally it gives him issues. This is fine on birds but causes him real issues on clays for some targets

 

[Sako75Hunter]

It's doing what it was made to do, it's fine, just go out shooting and enjoy your self.

+1

It's interesting to reread what Jack O'Connor had to say about accuracy. In the 'What is Accuracy?' chapter of my much-treasured copy of his 'The Rifle Book' (1949), he says:

"Once upon a time I had a beautiful 7-mm. Mauser that illustrates many of the things I am trying to point out. It was really a good grouper and on a certain day with a certain load it could be depended upon to keep its shots in a bit less than two inches at one hundred yards."

So a rifle capable of giving a two inch group in the right conditions was exceptionally accurate as far as O'Connor was concerned, and he presumably used plenty of other rifles that didn't group so well at all. Yet he was one of the most successful and celebrated hunters of his day. I'd say if it was good enough back then, it's good enough now.