Holy crap. I want to be able to do that.
- Thread starter mfloski
- Start date
well, as somebody mentioned, your rifle has to be capable, and your setup needs to me spot on and consistent.
for one thing, the scar is supposed to be a "precision" gun, and i don't think they ship them if they don't shoot 1 moa or better.
the adjustable stock ensures a perfect fit is possible, and i can get a perfect setup without any strain or reach, completely relaxed.
it has a 2 stage geissele super scar (ssa) trigger, which for somebody used to a 12lb da handgun trigger (and recoil), it almost foolproof.
it has a very good (imo) if not top tier scope (mark 5hd) on it.
and i am shooting 175gr fgmm, which is close enough to the m118lr (175gr smk) the rifle was designed to shoot.
so really everything is stacked in my favor and if i cannot shoot this very well, there is nothing to blame but me.
*plus as i mentioned, even people that hate the scar 17s find the scar 20s extremely easy to shoot well.
add the surefire – MB762SSAL/RE muzzle brake i have on mine and it is a joy to shoot (jmo).
Gun Review: FN SCAR 20S Precision Rifle - The Truth About Guns
If you're an FN SCAR lover, the 20S is your next fling. If you aren't, well, she may very well be the one you settle down with.
www.thetruthaboutguns.com Last edited:
Recoil impulse is different
bolt action is one hit
AR you got 3
the initial hit
BCG and buffer going aft
BCG and buffer moving forward back into battery
bolt action is one hit
AR you got 3
the initial hit
BCG and buffer going aft
BCG and buffer moving forward back into battery
with a scar, it is even more complex
muzzle blast recoil
short piston pushing (massive) bcg rearward (countering recoil)
bcg compressing spring into recoil plate
(massive) bcg going back into battery
also, there is no hammer shake in a bolt gun as there is only the sear release.
Last edited:
You’re not understanding natural point of aim. NPA is not being behind the rifle while not influencing it. A true NPA is when the rifle is connected you and you are only adding balanced/in-line forces to it. You can’t have a natural point of aim if the rifle is not attached to you. YOU are the source of your natural point of aim, NOT the rifle. What you are describing is free recoiling, not natural point of aim. Also l, using a locking head will complicate NPA because you now have a mechanical influence on your aim.
I never said don’t use a cheek weld. It’s about balance. When standing you will typically need more cheek weld to balance the force of the front of the rifle on the tripod/barricade. I typed up about 7 paragraphs explaining different scenarios and forces to balance different positions but I think it would take a whole book to make sense of it lol. So I cut and pasted it to notes for later.
When I write about NPA I’m usually referring to prone/mod prone. While the pressures/forces may be slightly different for other positions, the concept is the same- only balanced/in-line forces can be used for a true NPA and the rifle must be attached to you for a true NPA.
Not every time, but once or twice a guy ought to put 20-40 rounds into the same place and get a true idea of the cone of fire. Not all at once, and call your fliers. Nonetheless 20+ solid shots will tell you what you can expect on any given shot. Very very few bolt gun + ammo combos are truly 1/2 MOA. Print a ton of 5 shot half minute groups, sure. Not hold it for 20 shots though. I'd imagine most AR style rifles with their thinner aluminum barrel interface and gas system are slightly worse.
Multiple 5-10 shot groups are only statistically viable if you correlate PoI vs PoA for each group. I've consistently seen MPOI wander up to .3 MOA from the first 5 shots to where it winds up after 20-50.
AR-15 with single-point, cut-rifling Krieger barrel.
Sierra 55 Grain BlitzKing
3-shot group: 0.088 MOA
5-shot group: 0.206 MOA
10-shot group: 0.439 MOA
10 "quarters" shot in a row at 100 yards. Over-laying the 10 quarters on each other using RSI Shooting lab produced a 0.45 MOA 10-shot group.
...
AR-15 with button-rifled Lothar Walther barrel.
77 grain Sierra MatchKing
10-shot group: 0.585 MOA
10-shot string over the chronograph: extreme spread of 17 FPS and a standard deviation of 4 FPS.
…..
Sierra 55 Grain BlitzKing
3-shot group: 0.088 MOA
5-shot group: 0.206 MOA
10-shot group: 0.439 MOA
10 "quarters" shot in a row at 100 yards. Over-laying the 10 quarters on each other using RSI Shooting lab produced a 0.45 MOA 10-shot group.
...
AR-15 with button-rifled Lothar Walther barrel.
77 grain Sierra MatchKing
10-shot group: 0.585 MOA
10-shot string over the chronograph: extreme spread of 17 FPS and a standard deviation of 4 FPS.
…..
Last edited:
Yep. I have one that will do it with the right factory ammo. Now, someone with more skill than I have built it.
I'd like to see the data book for that one. I'd bet about half of the X and just out side the X. (How many hit the spotter disk?)
Small frame and large are different
Many can shoot an AR15 fine but struggle with an AR10 because of the very real differences
Mixing the two in this type discussions is dangerous- wrong sense of results.
Gee nobody says I should fire 40 rounds to see how my bolt gun shoots why do I have to waste 40 rounds in a gasser?
The bs people try to use to lie to themselves is crazy I can gauge a rifle with out wasting two boxes at 100.
We aren’t group shooters why move the goal posts to make something one. I can check my F Class gun for 20 rounds it’s supposed to shoot groups. But my gasser is not a grouping tool.
Many can shoot an AR15 fine but struggle with an AR10 because of the very real differences
Mixing the two in this type discussions is dangerous- wrong sense of results.
Gee nobody says I should fire 40 rounds to see how my bolt gun shoots why do I have to waste 40 rounds in a gasser?
The bs people try to use to lie to themselves is crazy I can gauge a rifle with out wasting two boxes at 100.
We aren’t group shooters why move the goal posts to make something one. I can check my F Class gun for 20 rounds it’s supposed to shoot groups. But my gasser is not a grouping tool.
Last year, 2019, some of the Marines were shooting Service Rifles and MK 262 Mod 1 at 1k for the scored Navy Long Range Match at Quantico. They were in the 180's. I would have like to have pulled targets for that.
I've shoot 1k once with a Service Rifle and hot 82's and was still at the mercy of the wind. The wind let off and I went from centered to off target.
ETA: Service Rifle in this case is a National Match A2 or A4, not an rack grade rifle.
Last edited:
Could you expound on this a little bit? (Not the moving the goal post part, I get that of course). Agreed, the ar-15 is a lot easier to shoot than the ar-10 or variant.
Mass
Bigger heavier bolt carrier moves more including the shooter.
Bigger heavier bolt carrier moves more including the shooter.
I have a pretty good stable of different gas guns, and pretty much all of them will do 1 moa or better with the right ammo, even the short barrel m4-ish guns. Any of them that can't, have went to new homes. My most consistent 6.5 Grendel is under .5 anytime i try.
I do have a 458 socom built with some rather budget parts that is probably more in the 1.5-2 range, but I have not really tried to really dial a load, and its not like it's intended for longe range precision anyway. I also have an old dpms in 243 that is my only factory built rifle that seems to just stack bullets in one hole no matter the ammo I feed it.
I do have a 458 socom built with some rather budget parts that is probably more in the 1.5-2 range, but I have not really tried to really dial a load, and its not like it's intended for longe range precision anyway. I also have an old dpms in 243 that is my only factory built rifle that seems to just stack bullets in one hole no matter the ammo I feed it.
i totally understand it. sorry, but you just aren't understanding me.
npa for me is achieved by my body position and the connection to my shoulder pocket.
tripod is completely different because it "locks".
you are the one that said "mash", not me.
again, i see no reason why anyone would mash anything unless their scope was too low for their face, , so i am taking your word for it,
i am not saying you are wrong, i am just saying i have to drive the rifle.
anyway, i don't compete, and i generally shoot groups except to see how consistent i am, not the rifle.
i bought the rifle to pound targets out farther than i can see, not to shoot tight groups. i just need the latter to do the former.
Last edited:
@theLBC and @Precision Underground I think you are arguing positions and shooting styles more than "NPA". Prone with a sling is different than prone bipod. Both will result in a poor shot when done wrong. If done right both are on target after recoil. The difference being that with a bipod you should be able to see your impact.
thanks, i think that is part of it. and using a tripod as an example confused him even more.
npa means i can relax everything and poa doesn't change except from my breathing
Last edited:
I’m definitely confused because you said you were “doing what Precision Underground told you not to do” when you shot better groups. Then you compared natural point of aim vs driving the rifle as if they were two different things. Im not sure what you think I told you not to do but I’m pretty sure you misread it.
probably.
my point is i have to be actively driving the larger caliber rifle. that may or may not be in conflict with your advice.
What do you consider actively driving?
"pushing" the rifle on target against the bipod, if i am shooting from a bipod.
this is slightly more than "taking the slack" out of the legs, at least in part because the rifle itself is heavy and "building a bridge" requires the bipod to be fairly firmly planted. this again reinforced by my need to use spikes in soft dirt or loose gravel for consistent results.
i used the tripod as a more extreme example because the frame of the rifle flexes in every direction, so i fire it with both hands on the rifle like i would shoot off a barrier without a bag.
who would have thought that we've got a whole thread of snipers here! Let's just replace the Army and some international teams with everyone in this thread...lol
hahaha! i'm no sniper, or even a long range shooter.
i just happen to have a rifle that can and i found out it is fun to shoot stuff so far out that i cannot even see with my naked eyes.
Jeff was running a bone stock LMT in class.
ha, all good brother but this thread is chock full of rifles that would make even the best Army rifle team member envious! lol
That’s the catch when relying on forward pressure. Not only is it difficult to create consistent pressure day to day but you are SOL if you end up in a position where you can’t create forward pressure.
You said you shot fast on the group you posted. Do you typically shoot better groups when you shoot faster?
tbh, i try not to "shoot groups". i was trying different things.
the first "group" of 5 shots was the rifle from the tripod without putting any real pressure on the rifle.
the poa was the same as it would be if i was not touching the rifle at all, but i was still behind the rifle.
this gave me that evenly dispersed 5 shot group.
second group of 3 was with the poa of the rifle resting in the tripod a couple inches above the diamond.
this time held the rifle and pushed it onto the diamond held it there and took 3 shots slowly.
when i saw those three shots were close together, i pushed a little harder and shot the rest of the mag quickly just to see if it would stay together the same way.
Last edited:
Pushed harder on the same POA?
no, driving harder moved the poa lower (below the other 3 shots).
i did not adjust the tripod between the 2 groups, i just pushed a little harder.
i get that i am not normal. i don't shoot for the same reasons or with the same expectations as most of you.
instead i am a cheap ass fucking poor that stumbled upon his "unicorn" rifle when it came out as a limited edition (200 rifles).
i didn't buy it because i dreamed of being a sniper or even a good long range shooter, i bought it as a fuck you to people that hate freedom.
now stuck with this rifle i am determined to be able to use it.
for me that isn't shooting small groups, winning contests or even being able to ring steel at 1000+ yards.
i want to be able to put 10-20 shots where they need to go as fast as possible in defense of my right to own the rifle in the first place.
or hunt for food if it came to that. (i will rationalize my spending every which way possible).
the last year i have just been adding things like the tripod to make that even easier.
luckily it is also fun, so at least there's that.
I say you should shoot 20-40 rounds out of anything to have a statistically significant sample size. It's not some rando on the internet, it's basic statistics and confidence intervals. The "load development" that most people do falls prey to white noise-- to the point that they should just save the barrel life and throw ammo together and not pretend they're conducting a proper test because the results are so muddy it's impossible to derive useful conclusions from it.
Is the second half of your post a serious question? Or should we all be measuring capabilities by experience?
The group at 100yd of a statistically significant sample size provides the baseline of angular dispersion present in the system (rifle+ammo in the most basic sense, rifle+ammo+shooter in an individual sense). It's the biggest piece of the puzzle in hit probability, determining effective range for a given target size or effective target size for a given range. Those 20 shots give you a single hi-res picture of realistic capability.
I don't care if the rifle shoots .25 MOA every group or if it shoots 2 MOA every group. What I'm saying is that it's important to know which one it is before you go slinging lead at targets. My experience, however, is that rifles that are truthfully and consistently sub 1/2 MOA are much less common than the internet might suggest. Any time other than this stupid year it'd be an easy/cheap test. 1 box of ammo to tell you both your realistic system limitations and your true MPOI. Admittedly though, despite thousands of rounds in an accuracy fixtures with accoustic targets and external ballistics lab at my disposal, I have not yet developed the necessary experience to replace statistics. The fact is, the more shots you shoot into a group (larger sample size) the smaller the error bars get on your assumptions that you plug into a ballistic solver. YMMV.
I am not a statistician, but took a couple of classes on the subject. When I was shooting 10K rounds a year in training and in competition I hardly took 20-40 shots minimum to tell me whether I can take the load to the prone matches where we shoot at 1 minute X ring and 2 minute 10 ring at 6 and 1000 yards.
Here is a sample. I did a short ladder from the bench at 200 yards, this is with irons. Load work was with 0.4 increment. When I saw the two that were close elevation wise I loaded one in between the two powder charges. When it landed at almost the same elevation, I cranked down on the sight and loaded 10 rounds with that center load, 47.9 grains and shot a 5 shot group. Satisfied I cranked 2 minutes left and fired 1 round, cranked another minute and fired 1 round, another minute and fired 3.
With that load and with that number of rounds I took it to a 1000 yard match and won it.
BTW, primers were not BR4s
Here is another one, an AR this time . New barrel same 600 yard load from a previous barrel, fired 2 rounds after bore sighting, 4 o'clock, cranked up to see if it follows, 2 rounds it did, adjusted for center 3 rounds, clustered. 200 yards with irons. I was done, won or placed in many matches at 600 yards, prone and sling.
Another one, in Scotland while on a business trip, borrowed rifle from a friend there 10 rounds. Why do I need 20-40 rounds? Guess what, after days of shooting I was awarded a British NRA medal in the match that followed up in Blair Athol where we shot up to 1000 yards.
Last edited:
Ledzep,
Now, here is your 40 shot group. I cranked out a 14 barrel from a blank for a Polytech M14 type receiver topped off with Navy SSR scope mount. I wanted to see whether I needed M118 LRs or the plain old M80s are good enough to guarantee a hit in the boiler room (forget about head shots, those are reserved for those guys with higher pay grades). Yup, did not have to waste LRs on hogs. Group is at 200 yards, good enough. These were the first few shots served as settling rounds after bedding and final assembly
Now, for deer hunting MexMatch M118 LRs with hunting 180 Elite Hunter, here is a cold bore shot at 200. I do multiple cold bore shots several days before hunting season. Love them 1 shot groups... those dang deers in Webb County don't stick around for 5 shot groups.
Now, here is your 40 shot group. I cranked out a 14 barrel from a blank for a Polytech M14 type receiver topped off with Navy SSR scope mount. I wanted to see whether I needed M118 LRs or the plain old M80s are good enough to guarantee a hit in the boiler room (forget about head shots, those are reserved for those guys with higher pay grades). Yup, did not have to waste LRs on hogs. Group is at 200 yards, good enough. These were the first few shots served as settling rounds after bedding and final assembly
Now, for deer hunting MexMatch M118 LRs with hunting 180 Elite Hunter, here is a cold bore shot at 200. I do multiple cold bore shots several days before hunting season. Love them 1 shot groups... those dang deers in Webb County don't stick around for 5 shot groups.
Last edited:
You had a good combination with any of those powder charges and your tests that led you to pick one was a waste of time. Nonetheless in your 0.4gr ladder there may have been about 0.3 MOA of variation across the 'ladder' for total dispersion from low to high. Typically milder loads shoot better. Anyway, 10 shot groups usually multiply in size by 1.3-1.8x by the time you shoot 20-35. The biggest contributors good barrels, good bullets, and a powder type that is a good fit to the case volume. Increasing/decreasing powder charge takes gross adjustment (1gr min. Usually) to see changes worth noting and as I mentioned above they're not huge over the range of useful charges.
LL surely you've got 20 rounds to throw at it and prove that I'm completely full of shit and you've got an armory full of 1/2 moa ARs. You can dodge the questions and laugh all you want. If you don't understand what I'm getting at that's fine, but just because I'm in the minority-- one of a small handful of people that are setting up proper tests to analyze data doesn't mean I'm wrong. I'm not here to BS anyone, nor am I selling anything to anyone. I have documented thousands of rounds in controlled tests and have data to back up my claims. Whether you or anyone else believes or gets your ego hurt isn't my problem.
There is no cheating statistics. When you test low sample sizes you subject yourself to wide error windows. Low probability events still happen and you don't know if what you shot was the low probability event or the norm until you have a large enough sample size to shrink the error window and have confidence in the result.
If a method that relies on 1-5 shots of a given variable exists and achieves an acceptable result, I maintain that you could have skipped the test and loaded the components at any load and ran with it and been equally happy.
How do you think thrown charges in mass produced Match ammo works?
Again, all I'm saying is that "1/2 MOA" depends on how many rounds.
For how many rounds determines the +/- error window on the back of that "1/2 MOA.
At about 20 rounds, IME that +/- diminishes to not worth noting. 5 shotters... the rifle will throw .25, .4, .5, .7..... 35 shotters are the same every time
For how many rounds determines the +/- error window on the back of that "1/2 MOA.
At about 20 rounds, IME that +/- diminishes to not worth noting. 5 shotters... the rifle will throw .25, .4, .5, .7..... 35 shotters are the same every time
I agree with Ledzep.
If I wanted to ask the internet about AR accuracy expectations, I would take the claims with a picture of a wallet group with a pound of salt. Truth is, most people overestimate their rifle's performance, it is normal for people.
But if I know the poster well enough, I can trust them and like @lowlight and some other said, they do not keep one without 0.5moa accuracy. I wonder if he can throw a number of how many rifles he usually goes through before finding that rifle?
The problem is not that there are not many sub moa rifles. But there are many different aspects to it, which two of them the OP pointed out.
And many posts here refer to small frame, even the post asked about large frame and I confess, I did not catch that either the first time.
To create valid data (not opinions) from the internet, I think there should be listed at least rifle company, possible barrel, ammo used and some kind of documentation of grouping.
I am surprised how badly people here document their groups. At the rimfire side there is thread about shooting 6 groups of 5 shots each. It is the hall of fame there and provides really good data. I keep tight notes about dope and groups.
@lowlight I know you will include some swear words in your possible reply to me but I would really like to see your 20 or 40 shot group with live comments.
Overall, I really do not trust most people on the internet claiming they do even 1moa. It is just very human to register/remember only the good groups and base your accuracy by that.
If I wanted to ask the internet about AR accuracy expectations, I would take the claims with a picture of a wallet group with a pound of salt. Truth is, most people overestimate their rifle's performance, it is normal for people.
But if I know the poster well enough, I can trust them and like @lowlight and some other said, they do not keep one without 0.5moa accuracy. I wonder if he can throw a number of how many rifles he usually goes through before finding that rifle?
The problem is not that there are not many sub moa rifles. But there are many different aspects to it, which two of them the OP pointed out.
And many posts here refer to small frame, even the post asked about large frame and I confess, I did not catch that either the first time.
To create valid data (not opinions) from the internet, I think there should be listed at least rifle company, possible barrel, ammo used and some kind of documentation of grouping.
I am surprised how badly people here document their groups. At the rimfire side there is thread about shooting 6 groups of 5 shots each. It is the hall of fame there and provides really good data. I keep tight notes about dope and groups.
@lowlight I know you will include some swear words in your possible reply to me but I would really like to see your 20 or 40 shot group with live comments.
Overall, I really do not trust most people on the internet claiming they do even 1moa. It is just very human to register/remember only the good groups and base your accuracy by that.
I am out, no reason for any direct response, rude, or otherwise, other than a bit of hearty good luck with your quest.
Not wasting my time, so, please stop tagging me, I won't be responding anymore.
You have all the answers, so why waste my breath, I know what I can do, I have history on my side.
Not wasting my time, so, please stop tagging me, I won't be responding anymore.
You have all the answers, so why waste my breath, I know what I can do, I have history on my side.
Yep.
You can say your gun does 0.5moa groups. BUT... Even that does not mean the gun shoots 0.5moa!! If someone were to say 5 shots is enough, why is it 5 then, why not 3?
The problem is that math term sample size has a real meaning - it means that data should have uniformity.
Is there anyone else here ready to present documented groups from their 1moa AR? (I bet that rifle does 1moa at 100 yds, so good enough for me) Because this topic hits me close, as I too have wondered their accuracy (read: precision) capacity for some time.
If people here have noticed, only one proof of 1moa AR has so far surfaced and even that was not owned by a hide member, but belongs to a member of a state rifle team. And it was small frame, not large frame, which invalidates it for this thread but is still interesting nonetheless.
Sure, attached are my a few groups of less than one MOA strings with the following setup:
LMT MWS 20" barrel, stock buffer tube/spring/buffer (used rifle, I am not the first owner)
Geissele SSA-E trigger
SiCo Omega 300
PRIME .308 ammo - FACTORY AMMO
paper was at 100m on a bat shit cold Wisconsin day
Scope while shooting was a 5-25x56 BEAST
To answer the OP's intial question...Yes.
I'm not sure what the goal of this thread is after reading all the posts, sub-moa, accurate and precise AR10s / large frame semi-autos exist. To me my pictured groups don't prove much, except that I now know the rifle's capabilities at 100m(with some left on the table too) and trust the rifle. I'm no sniper, I just trust my training, apply fundamentals and frickin love shooting, wish I could do it more but the semi auto is a known can opener for excuses. I really believe most modern day ar platforms are sub moa rifles, but the shooter is not. I've owned Seekins Sp10, JP LRP-07, multiple LMT MWS, LWRC REPR all shot very well with the LMT shooting the best when group sizes were compared.
These groups were from the first day of having the rifle, first 12 shots ever with the rifle after installing the new barrel that day. The smaller group is a 5 shot group when shooting slow and for group size, the star shaped group is a 7 shot group in a "rapid fire" style where it was quick cadence of: bang, trigger reset, bang, trigger reset, bang and so on 7 times.
These groups are not conversation pieces or framed on my wall, they're what I start with when I get a new rifle. Does it group well when I apply my skillset yes/no, if yes I move on to the next shooting string/distance/position/training agenda item, I don't dwell on it at and spend a ton of time at 100m. If no, I try to diagnose: was it me, is everything torqued down correctly, did things stay torqued down, etc.
This rifle is extremely accurate, at least for me, when deer season comes along like it did a few weeks ago, I throw the razor 1-6 on it and it gets the job done.
End of the day sure some rifles have manufacturer issues that effect accuracy but I believe there are many "sub-moa" semi-autos out there but probably fewer "sub-moa" semi-auto shooters.
Just because you have a V16 Cadillac doesn't mean you'll win the race, you have to be able to drive it too.
Attachments
Last edited:
Rock River Arms Large Frame AR's are guaranteed 1 MOA, small are .75 MOA. They use BHA Match, MK262, and M118LR or suitable ammo. Not surplus XM something.
On a bag both Rock River NMA2 uppers and the A4 upper I built with a Satern barrel are under a minute. I wouldn't doubt their large AR's would meet their guarantee.
This is the best 20 shots I've seen with an AR10, 200-15 at 1000 yards. Just barely larger than 1 MOA. This shooter and the one I showed with the 200-18 at 600 both shot for the state. I did shoot with them after my stint with the state team cut short by my 4 year expat to China.
Keith won the President's Hundred in 2016 with the barrel we spun up in my garage shop. The following year the Reserves recruited him.
This match was at Atterbury in 2018. He was the only gas gunner among the top prone shooters in the country.
Just as a point of reference, another forum has been running a "1 MOA all day" challenge for the last 6-7 years. The challenge requires you to shoot 5 consecutive 5 shot groups on a single piece of paper at 100 yards. They have a number of divisions including one for AR's. Can use a sandbag/bipod up front and a small bag at the rear. Any kind of optic and hand loads ok. 128 people have submitted targets in the AR division. Obviously no way of knowing how many people did challenge and then didn't submit anything because their groups were disappointing. Also, I think it's fair to assume that this challenge only attracts people who think they (and their rifle) are capable of great accuracy.
So this is certainly not a random group of rifles/shooters.
The results are interesting. If you're average for those 5 groups was under 1/2" you would be the second best shooter to participate in the challenge. Under .7" would put you in the top 20.
So this is certainly not a random group of rifles/shooters.
The results are interesting. If you're average for those 5 groups was under 1/2" you would be the second best shooter to participate in the challenge. Under .7" would put you in the top 20.
Ehhh, there’s a lot of doubt in the top 3 spots in the Semi auto division. The guy in the top spot was booted from the site for bad business practices and all out lying if memory serves correct.
There are some great shooting AR’s out there, and some in that thread, but I think the biggest challenge is for the shooter to put it together for 20+ shots, when using a small bag.
There are some great shooting AR’s out there, and some in that thread, but I think the biggest challenge is for the shooter to put it together for 20+ shots, when using a small bag.
Don't really know the history of the challenge. My point is that there are a lot of people who claim they can shoot .5 or .75 "all day". I think that's why the challenge was created. Seems to me if that's the case averaging .75 over 5 groups shouldn't be that hard. Particularly since you only have to do it once. I mean if you're sufficiently determined you could put up 4 separate targets and then do the challenge 4 times. Come back the next week and do it again. And again. In theory, you could shoot the challenge 100 times and then submit the very best target from those 100. Surely, if you have a .50" rifle putting up one target where you're average for five 5 round groups is .75" should be a piece of cake. Shouldn't really take more than one or two tries.
Bottom line, I have no doubt that there are a few shooters and a few rifles that can shoot .75" groups pretty consistently. I mean if you're consistently winning service rifle competitions, made the President's 100 at Camp Perry, etc. you're obviously a pretty good shooter and presumably have gone through a bunch of barrels to get a real tack driver. But that also puts you in the top one half percent of shooters with top equipment. I do think that for the 99% of us with stock factory guns, commercial ammo and less than perfect skills if you can average 1.5 MOA you and your gun are doing pretty well.
In contrast, when I say I can consistently shoot sub MOA with several bolt guns, I mean it. Never done the 1 MOA challenge with a bolt gun, but I can tell you my last outing with my Tikka I shot five 5 shot groups and my worst group was just under 1",. In a friendly competition with my Sig SSG I shot a 20 round group that was just over 1" using FGMM. And that was a one shot deal. Didn't get 20 tries to shoot that group. Of course, that's no great accomplishment, both because I think bolt action rifles themselves are consistently more accurate than semi's, and as we've been discussing, they're significantly easier to shoot well.
Bottom line, I have no doubt that there are a few shooters and a few rifles that can shoot .75" groups pretty consistently. I mean if you're consistently winning service rifle competitions, made the President's 100 at Camp Perry, etc. you're obviously a pretty good shooter and presumably have gone through a bunch of barrels to get a real tack driver. But that also puts you in the top one half percent of shooters with top equipment. I do think that for the 99% of us with stock factory guns, commercial ammo and less than perfect skills if you can average 1.5 MOA you and your gun are doing pretty well.
In contrast, when I say I can consistently shoot sub MOA with several bolt guns, I mean it. Never done the 1 MOA challenge with a bolt gun, but I can tell you my last outing with my Tikka I shot five 5 shot groups and my worst group was just under 1",. In a friendly competition with my Sig SSG I shot a 20 round group that was just over 1" using FGMM. And that was a one shot deal. Didn't get 20 tries to shoot that group. Of course, that's no great accomplishment, both because I think bolt action rifles themselves are consistently more accurate than semi's, and as we've been discussing, they're significantly easier to shoot well.
A guy can also take the baseline of a bolt gun and compare PRS division scores from "Open" vs. "Gas Gun" for reference of how a semi-auto shoots. Obviously this includes shooter error into the mix. I'm not aware of any good relevant data on the mechanical accuracy difference between semi autos (which is likely platform-dependent) and bolt actions, though. The difference from open to gas gun divisions has multiple "noise" factors involved and that's worth noting, but the fact that gas gun scores average considerably lower than open division scores is telling.
It doesn't hurt my feelings at all if someone has a rifle+ammo combination that shoots superbly. It's just my experience that when you really put it to the test, the "All day long" crumbles away for MOST shooters/combos. I have found true 1/2 MOA combinations that shot 20 rounds into a 1.01" group at 200yd, and I'm certain that it can be improved upon... But analyzing my results has also shown that shooting 1-5 shots per variable will only get to the same result unreliably or with luck. There are trends to follow but not absolute rules. Dispersion is a random distribution and you simply need sample size to minimize error in the results.
Another point, on the 5x5 and 6x5 challenges... If you're ever bored enough, take the photos of the groups from those challenges and overlay all of the shots into one composite group. Obviously this only works if the shooter used the same relative POA on each group, but it is yet another eye opener as to the true limitations of the gear being used. And that's not a bad thing! I'm not saying this to dog anyone or anything... It's just interesting how much weight this industry has and continues to place on sample sizes that are irrelevant. If the rifle will average 5 shot groups that are 1/2 MOA but with a POI shift of up to 0.3 MOA in any direction, then why not just say the rifle is capable of 1.1 MOA? I fear that too often the answer isn't for any reason other than it doesn't sell as well or sound as cool.
All I'm saying is if the rifle shoots 1.1 MOA, say it shoots 1.1 MOA, and find the true MPOI of that 1.1 MOA group and run with it. Whether you say it's a .5 MOA or 1.1 MOA rifle isn't going to change the equipment, but treating the system with the false belief that it's more capable than it is will end up fucking you down the road when you think you're experiencing POI shift because you set your zero off of a 5-shot MPOI, or think your MV is wandering when you wrote down the average from 5 shots over the chronograph (with a 3 fps SD LOL.... a whole 'nother topic) or scratch your head when you miss a 1 MOA target at 400yd. If you do 20 shots once, there's no bullshit. Whether or not you "need" to or not depends on you and what you want to do. End of the day do what makes you happy-- Like I said, I have no skin in the game... but if you really want a better understanding of what is going on, it takes more work than 1 shot per charge weight ladder/satterlee tests.
It doesn't hurt my feelings at all if someone has a rifle+ammo combination that shoots superbly. It's just my experience that when you really put it to the test, the "All day long" crumbles away for MOST shooters/combos. I have found true 1/2 MOA combinations that shot 20 rounds into a 1.01" group at 200yd, and I'm certain that it can be improved upon... But analyzing my results has also shown that shooting 1-5 shots per variable will only get to the same result unreliably or with luck. There are trends to follow but not absolute rules. Dispersion is a random distribution and you simply need sample size to minimize error in the results.
Another point, on the 5x5 and 6x5 challenges... If you're ever bored enough, take the photos of the groups from those challenges and overlay all of the shots into one composite group. Obviously this only works if the shooter used the same relative POA on each group, but it is yet another eye opener as to the true limitations of the gear being used. And that's not a bad thing! I'm not saying this to dog anyone or anything... It's just interesting how much weight this industry has and continues to place on sample sizes that are irrelevant. If the rifle will average 5 shot groups that are 1/2 MOA but with a POI shift of up to 0.3 MOA in any direction, then why not just say the rifle is capable of 1.1 MOA? I fear that too often the answer isn't for any reason other than it doesn't sell as well or sound as cool.
All I'm saying is if the rifle shoots 1.1 MOA, say it shoots 1.1 MOA, and find the true MPOI of that 1.1 MOA group and run with it. Whether you say it's a .5 MOA or 1.1 MOA rifle isn't going to change the equipment, but treating the system with the false belief that it's more capable than it is will end up fucking you down the road when you think you're experiencing POI shift because you set your zero off of a 5-shot MPOI, or think your MV is wandering when you wrote down the average from 5 shots over the chronograph (with a 3 fps SD LOL.... a whole 'nother topic) or scratch your head when you miss a 1 MOA target at 400yd. If you do 20 shots once, there's no bullshit. Whether or not you "need" to or not depends on you and what you want to do. End of the day do what makes you happy-- Like I said, I have no skin in the game... but if you really want a better understanding of what is going on, it takes more work than 1 shot per charge weight ladder/satterlee tests.
I'm glad I saw this thread.
I bought my first AR-15 a while back. I'm not a huge AR-15 fan, but I wanted one for the experience. I bought a Core Rifle Systems M-Lok Scout in .223.
The trigger was not exactly a Timney, so I stuck a LaRue in it. Not a match trigger, but more pleasant than mil-spec.
I had seen Internet people shooting this gun well. I picked up a bunch of Australian Outback 55-grain Sierra Blitzking ammo, and I shot prone at 100 yards. The target I am posting shows what happened. I quit and went back inside, wondering what was going on. I thought maybe the scope had come loose. The first 5 shots went into the bottom-left target, and they were pretty clearly sub-MOA. Then I shot another group, and the rounds went all over the place.
It sure looks like the gun can shoot, and I have no problem shooting sub-MOA with my RPR, so I don't think I'm hopeless, but obviously, something is amiss.
What on earth can I be doing wrong to shoot two groups this different?
I was not expecting insane accuracy, but this is horrible.
I bought my first AR-15 a while back. I'm not a huge AR-15 fan, but I wanted one for the experience. I bought a Core Rifle Systems M-Lok Scout in .223.
The trigger was not exactly a Timney, so I stuck a LaRue in it. Not a match trigger, but more pleasant than mil-spec.
I had seen Internet people shooting this gun well. I picked up a bunch of Australian Outback 55-grain Sierra Blitzking ammo, and I shot prone at 100 yards. The target I am posting shows what happened. I quit and went back inside, wondering what was going on. I thought maybe the scope had come loose. The first 5 shots went into the bottom-left target, and they were pretty clearly sub-MOA. Then I shot another group, and the rounds went all over the place.
It sure looks like the gun can shoot, and I have no problem shooting sub-MOA with my RPR, so I don't think I'm hopeless, but obviously, something is amiss.
What on earth can I be doing wrong to shoot two groups this different?
I was not expecting insane accuracy, but this is horrible.
I totally get what you’re saying. I’ve done that particular challenge 3 times with 3 different AR’s and all averaged under .75moa. I’ve done it a few times with bolt guns and went into the .4’s, one was over 40rds iirc. The 40rd average was actually smaller than the 25rd average iirc.
I think the OP has been answered several times. Yes, you can expect .5 - 1moa or better from a quality gas gun. If if doesn’t have 1 or 2 guys that can shoot a gas gun try it. Most of the time it’s the shooter.
Similar threads
