I guess I am a little picky. If I cannot get a 1/2 inch group from factory ammunition or 1/4 inch group with my reloaded ammunition I start looking for another rifle. I don't care what caliber it is or how old or modern the rifle is. It will not stay in my gun cabinet. In my opinion shot placement is key to good hunting skills and without an accurate rifle all else is fruitless. What are your thoughts and opinions.

I have similar expectations

as long as it can put the bullet when it needs to go i'm fine. for a rifle above .25 caliber anything around an inch is fine. under that I expect a bolt gun to shoot a bit better.

most hunters can't shoot as good as their rifles are capable of to begin with so its a moot point.

you don't need a rifle that shoots 1/2" groups at 100 yards to snuff a deer under a feeder or eating corn in a road at 100 yards

imo, if people would spend less time focusing on raw accuracy and more time learning animal behavior, patterns and characteristics, ie; actually learning to hunt, they would be much more successful.

Depends on the rifle. If you're looking for those types of group with an AK, SKS or even a Ruger 10/22 at 100 yards, you're going to be sorely disappointed. But those guns aren't built for that purpose either. They each have advantages over your bolt guns that offset their accuracy deficiencies for some purposes.

I don't personally think 1/2" groups are required for anything other than killing paper. 1" groups at 100 yards are just fine for just about any Texas hunting, and you can get that out of nearly any bolt action. My little brother's Mossberg 100 ATR can do that all day long.

On the other hand, if you're talking about a Barrett 50 BMG sniper rifle, then yeah it hard darn well better shoot like you're talking about.

I prefer sub moa rifles, I have few that aren't and have killed deer with them. I normally grab the one I have the most confidence with.

Good points all. By the way, I am not talking about punching paper. I am talking about shooting past feeder legs or between trees and brush. Any one ever shoot a coon off a feeder leg. I have seen it done with a very accurate rifle. In this case a rifle with a 1" group or larger would have put a hole in a feeder leg. There are situations where the capability to thread the needle will mean the difference between meat on the table or not.

I agree BOBO. It all boils down to the confidence factor.

so your telling us a 3/4" rifle meant a dead coon but a 1 1/4" gun would have been a miss?

calling B.S on that

I watch a lot of deer hit the ground a year with anything from open sighted 30-30's that shoot softball sized groups and custom guns that shoot ragged one hole groups

in every single case, the capability of the rifles accuracy has nothing to do with the success of the hunt when kept within normal hunting ranges.

I won't own a rifle that doesn't shoot 3/4 moa or better.

It's your money. Spend it how you want. Just because you won't own it doesn't mean it won't get the job done just the same. An SKS will shoot dinner plate groups just like those 30-30s and plenty of meat has been put on the table with those over the years.

txtrophy85 is right. In real hunting situations, the raw accuracy of the gun is one of the least important factors.

6.5 Creedmoor. or 270 WSM that is all I have to say

You can call it BS if you want. As the coon was on the backside of the feeder leg at 80 yards with his head peeking from behind the leg, any thing more than 1/2 inch would have put a hole in the leg. Head shot was all that was available. Regarding the venerable 30/30, there have probably been more game killed with one than any other caliber. In the woods with shots at a reasonable range it certainly has its place. But how many were missed or wounded and not recovered. The same goes for the SKS. I have both but for that reason they would not be my first choice.

Human error would easily cover that 1/2" outta a blind



Not worth arguing over I doubt only 1/2" of coon head was visible from behind the feeder leg.

Patriot07 I have to disagree that in real hunting situations, the raw accuracy of the gun is one of the least important factors. I believe it paramount to a successful ethical hunt. If nothing else the confidence factor plays a huge factor in success. Of course if all you have is one rifle that shoots 1+ MOA then you get used to it and can do quite well within it's limitations no matter what caliber. Beware of the man with one gun.

Lots of good points here.

I'll add that accuracy builds confidence. I know that when I head out for a hunt, my rifle is capable of 1/2 moa out to as far as I have practiced which is usually out to 500 yards. I hand load and tweak loads until I find the accuracy sweet spot. I don't chase speed unless I can safely move up to the next node.

When game presents a shot out at 3, 4, 500 yards, provided I can get into a solid shooting position, that critter is a dead critter.
I know for a fact, my gear is capable, but am I up to the task when it's nut-cuttin time?

My logic is to develop the most accurate system (rifle, optic, ammo) that I can which may help minimize any fault I might introduce to the scenario when the shot breaks.

There's no argument that there are certain things a 3/4 MOA bolt action can do that an SKS or 30/30 literally just can't do even in the hands of the best shooters. For normal hunting situations in Texas, the 3/4 MOA bolt action is nearly always the better choice if you have one. That doesn't mean the others don't have their purpose or aren't worth owning. That's all I'm saying.

Patriot07, I agree with you totally. Kind of the point I was trying to make, rather badly I'm afraid.

RHutch, your logic is my own. Then when I shoot it is all in my hands. I don't have to worry about my equipment doing it's part if I do my own.

1/2 MOA or less, is what I expect. But I've been shooting the same 260 in competition as well as hunting. The rifle has been sub 1/4 MOA. I hate shooting groups, and hate shooting paper, so I don't know exactly when the last time was.

I think the ultimate test for my new dedicated hunting rifle will be a 5 shot group under 1 MOA, with 5 cold bore shots. CBS is the one shot at an animal, anyway.

To me "accuracy" is better termed as consistency. I want to rifle/ optic/ ammo to consistently hit the target a X distance every time.

Exactly the way I see it.

Jason brings up a great point on CBS.

I have a 7-08 with a #3 Broughton barrel that puts the first shot 1/2" high at 100yds on a clean bore, but the first shot on a "dirty" bore goes right into the x-ring. I don't clean that rifle anymore before rifle season.

Know your gear. Get out there a shoot those rifles in the off season.

Growing up, my brothers and I never heard terms like MOA. In fact, I had to look it up when I started hanging out on the THF. We used the term accurate in the following two scenarios

1) A person is accurate when they hit what they are aiming at.
2) A rifle is accurate when the person can hit what they are aiming at.

We generally sighted in our deer hunting rifles once with half a box of ammo. Checked zero before every season. Dad taught us how to shoot with BB guns. By the time we were old enough to use 22 rifles, we never shot at paper. We would shoot at objects like cans for practice/target shooting, or kill pesky critters when the need arose. When we each got our first high powered rifles, dad spent some time with us on the bench focusing on our trigger and sighting skills. I guess we never tested the limits of how accurate our rifles were.

I am very confident when I go hunting that I will hit what I am aiming at.

Consistent small groups = precision.
Consistent small groups measured to point of aim = accuracy.

Sample significance, IMO, begins at five 5rd groups fired on five separate identical targets.

I wouldn't ditch my surplus rifles because they don't shoot sub moa.

I think the accuracy needed depends on how long your shots will be. I never had a problem hunting with my Mauser with iron sights, and the deer dropped where they were too. The shots were under 100yd. With that said, I don't want minute of pie plate for longer shots, and I do want a scope. I have other rifles for that.

I don't expect 1/2" from factory ammo. It takes a lot of trial
and error to figure out which factory loads my rifles like.

But I do expect better than 1/2" on handloads that I ladder tested.

Good point about surplus rifles. I wouldn't ditch them either. I just recognize their limitations in hunting situations. I love my 8mm Mausers and would never get rid of them especially since I have worked up loads for them that produce 1 MOA at 100 yards, perfect for hogs.