Inaccurate Rifle - Query

Sampo

Well-Known Member
Almost every 'Rifle - For Sale' ad states that the rifle is accurate and people go to great depths to keep it as accurate as possible. Unless competing at a professional level, I am of the opinion that most rifles used for stalking is more than capable for its intended purpose and its mostly the user who is at fault. So it got me thinking as to the other extreme, ie what do people consider to be an inaccurate rifle? Have you had one before and what did you do with it? What was the most common fix such as a change in scope or ammo or maybe a visit to the gunsmith to get some tweaks done.

And if you had an inaccurate rifle, would you sell it or scrap it or something else?
 
Salvage usable parts to sell.on , then Scrap it , if I'd done everything I can , and it's still a scatter gun

There's no way I'd pass it onto another shooter ,

It just ain't right , imagine getting your new purchase , and it's a disappointment !!!

It's no good if it don't shoot , just like having a blunt saw

And then the buyer has to put in a Variation and do the above , oh the ballache of it all,

Also you'd get a bad name for knowingly selling on a peice of carp

Kjf
 
Last edited:
I had a Winchester coyote lite .22-250 and that was very inaccurate 4” groups occasionally at 100m .
Had it from new tried all sorts to get it to group ! After two years I part exchanged it with a dealer for a used .243 that shoots better than I can
 
for me getting the right /most suitable ammunition to produce best results combined with all the usual bits, right scope, right mounts, right mod and practice with a basic cleaning routine
providing you get these all right and check all the above at a range together , everything needs a toot up to get shooting straight and a settle in shooting time over a few rounds

given all that and it’s come together nicely if it doesn’t shoot an inch 3 round group off a bench at your pre determined range or zero and there is no definite fault any where, for me it’s a gonner TBH

i’m not an anorak on shooting but if you get your bench shooting spot on there shouldn’t be any reason to miss off of sticks, having a rifle that you have confidence in is very important to success
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjf
If it can't shoot 1/2" after some rudimentary load development, and all basics checked, it's no use to me. I sold it as an action for rebarreling.
 
Lol, I'm.gonna zero a new to me 223 in tomoz , if its a scatter gun????????

Much cheapness to the new buyer as advertised lol

Said in jest

Kjf
 
Inaccurate rifle-
If new, see the rfd you bought it from
If second hand, go over everything, and if all else fails have it recrowned.
If all else fails, either sell on as needing a rebarrel (and be honest...), Or rebarrel and enjoy.
 
Almost every 'Rifle - For Sale' ad states that the rifle is accurate and people go to great depths to keep it as accurate as possible. Unless competing at a professional level, I am of the opinion that most rifles used for stalking is more than capable for its intended purpose and its mostly the user who is at fault. So it got me thinking as to the other extreme, ie what do people consider to be an inaccurate rifle? Have you had one before and what did you do with it? What was the most common fix such as a change in scope or ammo or maybe a visit to the gunsmith to get some tweaks done.

And if you had an inaccurate rifle, would you sell it or scrap it or something else?
Personally I want 1/2 MOA from my rifles if not better. Because the bigger the best groups under ideal conditions the worse the result under less than ideal ones.
So that said what would I do? So far I have had one rebarreled. I bought it from a RFD didn’t realise it had a problem, till I had tried loads of different load’s. In the end I got a new barrel fitted.
Otherwise I will go through all the usual suspects, tighten everything up and possibly re crown etc.
Worse case sell as a donor.
 
Almost every 'Rifle - For Sale' ad states that the rifle is accurate and people go to great depths to keep it as accurate as possible. Unless competing at a professional level, I am of the opinion that most rifles used for stalking is more than capable for its intended purpose and its mostly the user who is at fault. So it got me thinking as to the other extreme, ie what do people consider to be an inaccurate rifle? Have you had one before and what did you do with it? What was the most common fix such as a change in scope or ammo or maybe a visit to the gunsmith to get some tweaks done.

And if you had an inaccurate rifle, would you sell it or scrap it or something else?
Some very good questions there. Totally agree we’re spoiled for choice now with relatively cheap guns available off the shelf being capable of sub MOA. Bearing in mind that for the most respected service weapons of WWII, (Kar98’s, Moisins, LE Mk4’s, etc ) on which lives really depended, 4MOA was considered an accurate rifle.
And yes, it’s immensely satisfying to settle down on a bench and punch out those clover leaves at 100m in ideal conditions.
Capable is a very relevant word though, very dependant on the shooter and the circumstances, and accurate even more subjective. For example I have two 308s. One is a modern polymer stocked job, easily capable of sub 0.5moa accuracy off the bench, but loaded down with a bipod, big scope and a mod, weighs a bloody ton.
My other is a single shot feather light break-action thing with open sights, with which I’m lucky to get 3moa. But at realistic woodland stalking distances, or at least realistic to me, that’s always within a minute of deer. And being so light I can carry it all day without fatigue, hold it steady with minimal support and enjoy the satisfaction of stalking well. Which for me is more gratifying than slotting a beast at 600 yards. And I love the look of the gun.
 
When I first started shooting had a .22WMR that shot badly 2+MOA. But it took me a long while and a lot of different brands of .22 WMRs and a new scope to work it out and by that time the shop wouldn't take it back.
But for me, acceptable accuracy really depends on what the rifle is for.
I have a .243 Savage 99 Lever Action that is a quick smooth pig gun using 90gn+ projectiles.
It is 50+ years old and shoots to around 2 MOA. Plenty accurate for pigs and roos under 175m; which in the bush round here is a looong shot. I don't shoot long range with it. If I wanted to I would rebarrel it.
My .35 Whelen is capable of very tight groups as it has a Douglas XXXMatch Barrel. However I don't bother to even try to get better than 1-2MOA as it isn't meant to shoot targets or foxes at 300m.
It blasts through brush and destroys anything it hits.
My .223s on the other hand shoot 0.5MOA and if they didn't, I would be looking at; my loads, the muzzle, the bore wear ahead of the chamber and then if all else fails a new barrel.
 
The problem is not the gun but usually nut behind the but.
When I worked on the Arran Stalking Scheme, all participants had to shoot 3 rounds into a 4" circle, over the years I accrued nearly 700 targets and the story it portrayed was abysmal. There was only a handful and I mean a handful that turned up and shot well. Wish I had kept the targets it would of totally embarrassed quite a few of the so called experts.

So going back to the OP, I suppose the accuracy is dependant on what type of stalking you do, not point in having a sub moa gun when you only shoot 60yds.
 
The whole point of buying a secondhand rifle (to my thinking) is that you have the opportunity to examine it & try it.
 
I approached from the opposite direction , I bought a rifle that I was told was ," shot out " ,for a project . I took it home , scrubbed the barrel , played with the trigger , gave it a bit of a bedding job then did a bit of load development . It shot 1/2 inch at 100 yards with those handloads . A bit of fun before the action was harvested and used in my build . Not many £75 actions around.
If that had been a new rifle , my approach would have been very different and somewhat angrier. 🤣
 
I think most rifles can outshoot the user as a general rule. (With good ammunition) the black dot of doom thread showed that.

Regards,
Gixer
 
The problem is not the gun but usually nut behind the but.
When I worked on the Arran Stalking Scheme, all participants had to shoot 3 rounds into a 4" circle, over the years I accrued nearly 700 targets and the story it portrayed was abysmal. There was only a handful and I mean a handful that turned up and shot well. Wish I had kept the targets it would of totally embarrassed quite a few of the so called experts.

So going back to the OP, I suppose the accuracy is dependant on what type of stalking you do, not point in having a sub moa gun when you only shoot 60yds.

Which highlights the necessity for repetitive practice on the range and (controversially) a test perhaps to establish a base level of competence in firearms use - annually, biannually or on renewal of licence ,,,,,,

Outside of DSC
 
In this day and age, there should be an industry/international standard for out of the box accuracy. When purchasing any new rifle the manufacturer should provide proof of accuracy with factory ammunition detailing ammunition, load, range etc. and the resultant MOA. This should form part of the rifle's limited warranty. I think only some of the manufacturers do this currently.

When buying a rifle secondhand any RFD worth their salt should do likewise, perhaps with an accompanying bore scope video. Or, should allow the customer to test fire a used rifle before purchasing it. I can think of only a few RFD who do this currently.

Unless pursuing a bespoke riflesmith built rifle I wouldn't buy without a manufacturer's guarantee or 'try before you buy'. To my mind it should be no different to buying a car. Come to think of it, it's amazing that in this HSE day and age there isn't an MOT equivalent for secondhand firearms - consumer protection and all.
 
Back
Top