Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Current rifle accuracy and the truth

The only rifle that would not shoot worth a darn is a Ruger made back when the barrels were bad.

I still have it because it is chambered in 250 Savage.
I did find one load that it shot like i thought it should and it was with a 75 grain V-max.

I have not given up on it but i sure got tired of trying.

Does not matter how many targets.
If the distance/conditions/wind remains constant, 1" high at 12 o'clock is 1" high at 12 o'clock on any target.

Doing it when conditions are variable is the true voodoo.

I can't say ALL newer designed and factory built rifles are any better than SOME older factory builds. But it is easier to find a rifle today with modern optics mounted using the excellent factory loadings available today that can give a strong handicap to the inexperienced shooter.

The idea is to check the variability of the cold bore shots, one way or the other.

Roger that!

This point is evidently lost on some, especially the paper queen.

Useful words rarely heard here. I'd rather see pics of ten-shot offhand groups than the three shot bench groups we usually see.

Getting back to the original topic, I suspect that such improvement in out of the box accuracy as we see nowadays is down to a combination of better QA and tolerances at the mass-production end, both of rifles and ammunition.

Better manufacturing methods have allowed rifles to be built to tolerances which once required hand-fitting, lapping, and various other fettling to achieve. As well, I think there's little doubt that ammunition has also benefited from better manufacturing, and that has not only enabled new rifles to shoot better but also I suspect it has allowed older ones to do better too.

There's no reason to believe that older rifles can't shoot. I have rifles from the 70s, 60s, and even the 40s that will consistently beat 1 moa for five rounds. I have one built in about 1900 that will nearly do it with iron sights - probably would do it with a scope and/or a better shot than me too ;-)

I disagree. There's always been some accurate factory rifles out there. What's changed is consistency. Also, barrels are definitely better. But what I've noticed is most people reporting their group size shoot 3 shot groups. Back in the day most groups reported in gun magazines were 5 shot. Nobody paid attention to 3 shot accuracy. My old 1966 Model 70 .270 Win. with good hand loads would shoot 5 shots into an inch at 100 yards and occasionally it would shoot 3/4". With factory ammo 1.5" to 2" was more the norm. It would shoot 3 shots at about 1/2". That rifle has been pillar bedded and the trigger is at 2-2.5 pounds. I have several deer rifles and that one is still my go to hunting rifle. I have a few other factory rifles that won't top it in accuracy but were all made since 2005. All except one that is. I have one Savage 110 pre accu-trigger, actually way before the accu-trigger, probably made in the 80s if not before that is chambered in 7 Rem. Mag. that will shoot 3/4 inch 5 shot groups pretty consistently. Like I said, back in the day there were many rifles that were pretty darn accurate but not as consistently so as today.

I don't recall anyone from even 40 years ago that thought a scoped bolt action rifle that could only shoot 4MOA was good for anything other than pounding nails with.

That being said, I believe there have been a couple of big changes that really made factory rifles more accurate. The first is when Savage took one of their tupperware stocks and molded pillars in them. All of the sudden their average rifles shot lights out, and everyone else had to get to work because a cheap Savage outshot everything else on the rack, looks be damned. The second is the wave of outstanding bullets that became available to handloaders and the factories, led by the Nosler BT's. They were head and shoulders above everything else when they came out. Now, you can get virtually any of the fantastic component bullets made by any manufacturer in a factory box of ammo.

Unless you are shooting deer or game 'off hand' that is a waste of time and components.

The only deer I've shot off hand have been running...... a very small percentage of my shooting.


Jerry

I agree FC. 40 years ago was 1979. I have magazines and books from that time era and 4" MOA was totally UNacceptable.


Jerry

So...I enjoy shooting off-hand, even more so when there are rabbits involved.

I also don't really give a toss if I miss as I do it for the fun, if I want a feed I shoot out of my vehicle.

easy there Jeb, I was responding to 10 shot groups off hand.


Jerry

There isn't any personal animus involved.

I would point out that I also enjoy waving my rifles off-hand at paper...wasteful or not I simply enjoy it.

The best groups turned in on the Campfire wouldn’t make the cut for any bench rest competition at any range in the U.S. There is no doubt they look good on your computer screen, but looks won’t kill anything.

I have sighted plenty of rifles in on rocks and had more than enough accuracy to hit small targets at 350-450 yards. One thing all paper shooters may overlook is that even a 1.25 inch group means that the bullet still is hitting within half the distance of the group size from where the crosshairs are held.

Another overlooked part of shooting is the so-called “flier.” If the gun shoots it, I don’t know how you can’t consider it part of the group. What causes the flier may be an assortment of reasons, but because it isn’t nice and tight, how do you not consider it part of the group?

Obviously there must be several kinds of loonies if you want to shoot paper then put your gun away, but I would rather shoot a rock, then go shoot prairie dogs or gophers for a few days and not worry about what a group looks like on paper.

It is fascinating to see all the attention to groups and paper with little regard for just how much accuracy you really need to hit something other than paper.

Of 60+ new out of the box off the shelf hunting rifles in the last 20+ years, tikkas, kimbers, rem 700, model 70's, x-bolts, rugers, etc, with random ammo factory and reloads, most shot around 2 to 3 inches for 5 shot groups. Tailored reloads and factory loads they liked brought most between 1-2" on average for 5 - 5 shot groups, maybe 10 of those rifles would shoot 60% of those groups with specific ammo around an inch with many smaller "wallet groups" and just as many larger. Most small caliber varmint rifles will generally average under an inch with ammo they like. Have never seen one of those mythical rifles that are posted about on forums that will shoot 1/2" groups "all day long" except for short range custom benchrest rifles. About half of those factory guns were "broken in", overall average the broke in rifles averaged the same as the ones that weren't before abandoning the procedure. I only break in benchrest barrels now to smooth the throat, still don't know if it makes any difference. Stainless barrels foul less and clean easier than blued. Borescope says blued erode faster than stainless. Just my experience, thats about all I learned from all those 5 shot groups, about 5 thousand rounds of centerfire a year.

I wore my cap guns every day when I was 5 in 1956.
I got a BB gun when I was 10 in 1961 and started target practicing in the garage.
...
Lots of other gun stuff in my life..

By 1991 I was 40 and looked like I would be like my dad, and own a 22, a 12 ga, and 30-06.

In 1994 at age 43, I got a job where they put a Spark Workstation on my desk where I had access to email and usenet ... rec.guns and rec.crafts.metalworking

I started buying many guns per year.

In rec.guns every rifle needed to get a 1" 5 shot group at 100 yards.
I went to the Issaquah range, the Renton Fish and Game range, the Tacoma Sportsman range.
I never got a 1" group.
I saw hundreds of other shooters, and none ever got a 1" group.

By 2002 I chambered a light varmint Lothar Walther barrel on a Mauser and with a 40X scope and 75 gr Vmax in 257 Roberts Ackley, I was getting a 0.5" group of 5 shots at 100 yards.
To reach this point I had to overcome internet advice and make up my own rules.

It seems that benchrest accuracy rituals make up the bulk of internet folklore and have virtually nothing to do with ordinary shooters getting a 1" group.

e.g. do not deburr flash holes, but do only go to the range when there is no wind
e.g. do not weight each powder charge, but do practice dry firing to see the crosshairs stay on the bullseye.
e.g. do not weigh and sort brass, but do be suspicious of a Copper fouled barrel

I have 2 rifles out of 12, 13 if you count my 94 Winchester .30-30, that will shoot 1" 5 shot groups and will on occasion shoot under. And both those rifles are not the latest and greatest. They just happen to be well made with few flaws in their machining.

Also, the shooter, me, has put quite a number of rounds down range in the past 60 years. I think that has more to do with it than anything. And that's all with reloads. I don't think I've ever shot 5 shots at one sitting under an inch or even an inch in my entire life with factory ammo. To shoot that accurate in my opinion you need to employ proper bullet seating and that requires hand loading.

To shoot five shots inside an inch with factory ammo is asking more than a production rifle is capable of. Even a bench rifle would be challenged to do it with factory anything because bullet seating depth is totally left out of the equation and that right there is a very very very important part of extreme accuracy.

How much load work goes into a bench shooters competitive load? I believe many many rounds and adjusting powder charge weight and bullet depth as well as trying different bullets. If you buy a box of factory ammo that gives you that kind of accuracy you need to go buy yourself a lotto ticket immediately if not sooner.

That simply isn't true.

The saving grace here is that for hunting medium-large game you don't need that kind of accuracy. unless you've bought into the idea of shooting at game in the next zip code that you can't see without powerful, expensive binos. I limit myself to 400-500 yards and that's the extreme. 300 yards is pushing it for most people. Too many things can go wrong for that to be ethical for shooting at game. Punching paper is quite another thing. If you hit the paper in the wrong place it's not going to die a lingering painful death. I won't even shoot at a hog at long distance, just because I don't want to make any creature suffer like that. Most shot at game are within 100 yards with occasional shots out to 200-300 yards. I remember once I shot a hog a long way off. He ran about 20 yards before dying just off the sendero he was crossing when I shot him. He was a 200 pound bore. When I first shot him I thought he was 400 yards or more. Later my son in law used his range finder and determined he was only 300. It's easy to over estimate range in the wild. I believe that's the reason we hear about so many fantastic shots.