Moa vs hunting?

[Marbles]

You are not serious. My 6.5 is a thousand yard BR gun. However, I never back down from a true face to face with witness's present challenge.
So, I live in AZ. We have ranges here suitable for any competition you could want. Come on down and bring cash. This is going to be a fun deal as I have good video equipment. If by some chance you can out shoot me with any type firearm I will post the video in full.
So, lets play. I will do any type of competition you are capable of. Rifle, handgun, shotgun and air rifle.
BTW bring cash, and I don't mean a little. Everyone needs a lesson in life, maybe you are the one to teach me mine.

You clearly did not read the challenge laid out. He specified the challenge and the weapons.

You use your 6.5x284 while he uses a 30-30.

Both of you do it at home. Looser just changes their signature.

You sure you want to put money on timed off hand and seated unsupported shots at 100 yards using a BR gun starting from standing with a pack on?

Of course, it sounds like you are already trying to back out by not taking the challenge offered and trying to make it something else. You are the one that brought a BR gun to a field shooting conversation, so own that decision and accept the challenge as offered rather than running your mouth. The challenge as offered is most applicable to the debate in this thread.

 

[Jordan Smith]

I've done some statistical analysis and simulation of how sample size affects group size, as well as WEZ simulation for various variables.

In the first, I plotted shots fired using Gaussian distributions of shot location on a grid, analyzing average ES group size, mean radius, and mean distance between shots, with 100,000 shots fired for each sample size (e.g., 3-shot groups means 33,333 groups fired, 5-shot groups means 20,000 groups fired, etc.). I made the assumption of ~0.75 MOA on average for 3-shot groups, which I thought was fairly realistic for a decent hunting rifle and load. I have a lot of data and results, and here are a few of them:

As you can see, with large populations of 100,000 shots fired for each sample size, 35- and 50-shot groups average about double the size of 3-shot groups.

And assuming that a rifle/load averages ~0.75 MOA for 3-shot groups and ~1.5 MOA for 50-shot groups, here's a WEZ using a 1 MOA rifle/load at 400 m (with various other parameters and uncertainties):

 

[Dan Carey]

You clearly did not read the challenge laid out. He specified the challenge and the weapons.

You use your 6.5x284 while he uses a 30-30.

Both of you do it at home. Looser just changes their signature.

You sure you want to put money on timed off hand and seated unsupported shots at 100 yards using a BR gun starting from standing with a pack on?

Of course, it sounds like you are already trying to back out by not taking the challenge offered and trying to make it something else. You are the one that brought a BR gun to a field shooting conversation, so own that decision and accept the challenge as offered rather than running your mouth. The challenge as offered is most applicable to the debate in this thread.

If you think for a nano second I would trust anyone to a competitive competition on their terms you have underestimated me by a long shot. It will be face to face or nothing. You may have guessed I didn't read his whole proposal and you would be right. Its not what I'm interested in doing. I'm a competitive competition shooter in registered matches. I don't do bush tracks unless there is money involved.

 

[Steve300xcw]

sounds about right.

 

[BLJ]

If you think for a nano second I would trust anyone to a competitive competition on their terms you have underestimated me by a long shot. It will be face to face or nothing. You may have guessed I didn't read his whole proposal and you would be right. Its not what I'm interested in doing. I'm a competitive competition shooter in registered matches. I don't do bush tracks unless there is money involved.

What kind of matches?

 

[Marbles]

If you think for a nano second I would trust anyone to a competitive competition on their terms you have underestimated me by a long shot. It will be face to face or nothing. You may have guessed I didn't read his whole proposal and you would be right. Its not what I'm interested in doing. I'm a competitive competition shooter in registered matches. I don't do bush tracks unless there is money involved.

This is funny. Not in the least because I estimated you spot on and everything about his response confirms it.

You may have guessed I didn't read his whole proposal and you would be right.

Thanks for the confirmation that you have not even been attempting a rational, good faith discussion.

 

[Macintosh]

This is a stupid pissing match.

Of course a more accurate rifle is better. That is not the question and never was the question.

The question also had zero to do with matches of any sort, least of all benchrest matches.

The question was:

Is there a point where tweaking a gun / cartridge has no real world effect on your hunting abilities, lets say out to 500 yards

The answer—definitively—is YES, there IS a point where the mechanical precision no longer matters enough to bother with functionally, which is where hit rates become low-enough due purely to positional instability and inability to read wind well enough.

Have an anatomical measuring contest over where that point is, but at least argue the actual question.

Also, 500 yards is beyond anyones “point blank” range, and wind is rarely not an issue. Therefore it is squarely “long range”. Feel free to change my mind, but thats probably a different thread.

 

[Steve300xcw]

due purely to positional instability and inability to read wind well enough.

Amen

What kind of matches?

I like the old strike anywhere kind. Ya know the ones you could pop with your thumbnail! Tweakers ruin everything....

On the bright side, I bought a 30-30 tonight

 

[Dan Carey]

This is funny. Not in the least because I estimated you spot on and everything about his response confirms it.


Thanks for the confirmation that you have not even been attempting a rational, good faith discussion.

Do you even know what your talking about?? Because I don't have a clue what your talking about.

 

[Deeker]

This is a stupid pissing match.

Of course a more accurate rifle is better. That is not the question and never was the question.

The question also had zero to do with matches of any sort, least of all benchrest matches.

The question was:



The answer—definitively—is YES, there IS a point where the mechanical precision no longer matters enough to bother with functionally, which is where hit rates become low-enough due purely to positional instability and inability to read wind well enough.

Have an anatomical measuring contest over where that point is, but at least argue the actual question.

Also, 500 yards is beyond anyones “point blank” range, and wind is rarely not an issue. Therefore it is squarely “long range”. Feel free to change my mind, but thats probably a different thread.

Thank you for the reply.

 

[Dan Carey]

I want to thank you all for the banter, It was fun and it got my post count to he target number

 

[Steve300xcw]

I don't have a clue what I'm talking about.

No shit?

 

[Dan Carey]

What kind of a person changes another's post to make himself look smart??
"Do you even know what your talking about?? Because I don't have a clue what your talking about."