Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Marginal accuracy in a hunting rifle

With today's optics and rifle building, the modern bolt action hunting rifle with tailored loads should be capable of MOA accuracy IMHO. However, I have 2 that try as I might never consistently achieved that magical goal. They both shot around 1 1/2 groups and no amount of tweaking made a significant difference.
Recently I read a post on the Campfire about someone using the Tubbs Final Finish bore polishing system and decided for about $35.00 per rifle it was worth a try. The results were that both rifles will now put 3 shots from a cold barrel into 3/4 inch off the bench at 100 yards which I consider perfectly acceptable for a hunting rifle. BTW neither of these is a bull barreled varminter, 1 is a new FN M70 FWT in 270 and the other is Mrs Blacktailer's Kimber SuperAmerica in 308.
I'm not shilling for Tubbs, but if you have a rifle that hasn't responded to other things you have tired, this may be a solution.

Blacktailer - thanks for this info as I've a Savage in .223 that I will be trying the Tubbs "Final Finish" rounds on. Thru a borrowed bore-scope the bore looks like tank treads i.e. tooling marks. Accuracy now is "so-so" despite checking ring, base and action screws. Homesteader

Interesting... Can this be avoided with proper barrel break in?
I just bought a new SS x-bolt and trying to decide if barrel break in is really worth it or if you need to do a lapping.

Excellent! It's great that you have the hunting rifles shooting to your satisfaction. My hunting rifle is a Savage 10 TH XP, and it will shoot between 1 and 2 MOA (mostly on me, I would say, rather than the rifle). Acceptable for me, and I doubt the intended targets of my hunting rifle will know the difference between 1.5 MOA and sub MOA.

Barrel break-in may help but I have never seen much improvement from it. In the literature, they claim that since a bore has to be drilled, this leaves toolmarks that are perpendicular to the axis of the bore and even with button rifling these tool marks are not removed. Since bullet material is a lot softer than barrels, shooting bullets through the bore may remove some burrs but not toolmarks. The bullets with the abrasive impregnated in them actually smooth off the toolmarks. I can tell you that running a patch through these bores takes a lot less effort now and supposedly the bores will stay a lot cleaner longer.

Cold hammer forged barrels require neither.

Not trying to be a jerk. Just asking. Don't CHF barrel blanks have tool marks in the bore from being drilled prior to the blank being placed on the mandrel for CHF'ing ?

I am real curious to see if it would work on my EW Winchester. I already have 3-4 boxes through the rifle but would like to see if my accuracy would improve at longer distances with this process.

I have worked with metal a lot and it makes perfect sense to me. I read stories on how Marine Corp Snipers used to run polishing compound through their bores - lapping in the lands according to the article.

I just have never had the ba##s to try it.

1.75 inch groups at 100y and mores the point anything over 3.5 inches at 200y is marginal in my view for a big game (ie pig, goat, deer) rifle.

I know the expectations have changed but the size of the game animals hasn't. I will acknowledge however many hunters are shooting them much further out these days.

Sure I will work my bum off to get a rifle shooting sub moa but anything 1.5moa or under I am happy with as a general rule.

Sorry my post is a little away from the way the thread has panned out, I'm more responding to the thread title.

And I should qualify my post by saying 400y pulls me up even under the most ideal conditions.

Bob, I absolutely agree with you and if I was shooting game off a bench all the time 1.5MOA would work. In reality, I need all the help I can get even though I use a rest or shoot sitting most of the time. But the more accurate my rifle is, the better chance this old fart has of hitting something. Plus it just gives me more confidence. Maybe it's partly that I'm spoiled with an -06 and a 375 that are both custom rigs and will shoot MOA all day long with anything you feed them.

I gotta wonder about all those animals killed when iron sights were all there were. Rifles, bullets, barrels, etc. with iron sights were rarely MOA, and yet they still killed a heckuva lot of critters with 'em. They were probably 3 MOA at best, considering a person's eyesight pecularities.

I guess I'm wondering more about 1.5MOA being "marginal" than anything else.

I think your standards are unrealistic for a genuine, guts-on-the-ground hunting rifle.

I may try that.

I've tried every thing else in my 30/06 Rem men rifle including a custom barrel but really the best the rifle will do is 2 MOA which certainly works for hunting purposes but like every shooter, I wouldn't mind a little more accuracy.

obviously the more consistently accurate your equipment is the better off you'll be , but I think most guys have wildly UN-realistic expectations.
Hes WHY, Ive been a member of a loose group of obsessive elk hunters for over 40 plus years, members come and go, as we have aged, members move loose interest, guys die, get divorced, move out of the area, etc. but we generally meet at one of several local rifle ranges between two times a month near hunting season to once a month after the season to swap experiences, keep in practice and stage occasional shooting competitions, between member.
I know that Ive used a 340 wby on most of my opening day hunts, but once I start sneaking thru the timber, my 375 H&H carbine or my 7600 remington slide action in 35 whelen gets carried frequently and I,m certainly not alone, doing so.
Let me assure you that most of the older and more experienced members can easily keep a 2"-3" 200 yard group of a solid bench rest.
but under field conditions, theres the factor of the skill level of the guy operating the rifle , not just the mechanical accuracy limitations of the equipment alone to consider.
but even though many of the guys have above average experience and most have several, in some cases a dozen or more kills on our out of state trips Id bet a decent amount of money that if you had most of the members walk briskly for 100 yards, grab a quick field shooting position, like sitting or kneeling and shoot at a 3" orange dot at only 100 yards distance, a couple times (3 shots in under 1/2 minutes time, is what we use in competitions )trying to get the skill level up, too as fast as they felt they could shoot and maintain reasonable accuracy, that there would be more than a few bullet holes that were not cutting thru the orange dot , yet these guys have far better than average skill and kill records.
and I would also point out that back in the 1970s-80s most of these guys carried 270 win, 30/06,7mm and 300 and 338 mags and shared the belief that they would need to shoot out past 300 yards regularly.
over the last 20 plus years many member's have sons that have joined the group, and there's been a noticeable shift to lighter rifles and at times heavier calibers like 308 win, 338/06,35 whelen, 358 win, 450 marlin.
the guys have realized, after decades that elk are fairly large targets, usually the time to take a shot is rather limited, angles and conditions are rarely ideal, and ranges seldom have exceeded 200 yards. A rifle that can be depended on to place shots in a 3"-4" hundred yard group shooting from field positions might sound like its hopelessly in-accurate but it will kill a train load of elk in experienced hands

340mg, I am sure you are absolutely right. I have never owned a centerfire rifle that wouldn't put 5 shots in a 5" group at 200 yards. Most of them much better than that on the bench. Also, I have shot only one deer in my life so far farther than 200 yards.

That's because where I hunt, I'm not shooting across large open areas. If I am thinking I'm going to possibly get a shot at up to 400 yards, I will take a good shooting .25-06 or .270 Win. It is doubtful that I would take a shot at 400 yards except under perfect circumstances. But, for hunting in my normal spots a .30-30 lever or single shot or my Remington model 7 in .243 win are the pick. Any of those will shoot to the limit of my visibility where I do most of my hunting. I wouldn't hesitate a minute to take a shot at 200 yards with any of them either.

ETA: I tend to obsess more about whether my rifle is putting the group in the proper relation to POA than how small the group is it is putting there.

EJ

On most all my rifles Im quite happy and confident if I'm shooting 1.75 or better . Over that i start to feel like either im not shooting well or its not shooting well and that kills my confidence. I have one rifle I have a 4x with a pig plex reticle on and i am ok with 2 inch groups as I dont shoot anything much passed 150 yards with it and usually shots with it are less than 75 yards.

Well all I need is minute of grapefruit. If you can shoot that well you will fill a few arks with game. Inch or better is nice to have. I would not toss a good rifle if would not group that well. My Sako 75 338 shoots well enough thou is not a MOA gun all the time, because I am not an MOA shooter all the time, yet I killed every head of game I shot with it. My Blaser dose better in the Accuracy department. In the field, little difference between the two.