Moa vs hunting?

[Antares]

Come on girls, you're both pretty. Let's move on.

 

[RWT]

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):

Curious what this looks like for a 5 shot group that is 1.75”

Asking as that is what most of my Fudd buddies shoot from their rifles. I would like to show them the hit % at 400 yards. But then again it may show them they have a 70+% chance and would make a poor decision.

 

[WeiserBucks]

Curious what this looks like for a 5 shot group that is 1.75”

Asking as that is what most of my Fudd buddies shoot from their rifles. I would like to show them the hit % at 400 yards. But then again it may show them they have a 70+% chance and would make a poor decision.

Have them shoot at 400 and they'll show themselves.

 

[JPW13]

I’ve got a buddy who’s always chasing precision—0.5 MOA is better than 1, and 0.25 MOA is better than 0.5. He’s a phenomenal shot, and I can admire the tiny clusters he prints, but I’ve never understood the time he pours into shrinking groups on paper, when he self identifies as a hunter, not a benchrest shooter.

On the flip side, I shoot at a range with a steel ram at 500 meters. Every fall guys show up (almost always with 300 Win Mags), burn 10 rounds at 100 yards chasing zero, then lob 5–7 shots at the ram. Usually 1 or 2 connect—often on a leg or a horn. Then they proudly announce they’re “ready for hunting season” with their 3 rounds left.

It’s astounding. They’ve just demonstrated they can’t ethically shoot that far, but somehow because 1 in 7 rang steel, they believe they’re long-range hunters. That isn’t precision; it’s ego mixed with a lack of critical thinking.

What is it in human psychology that allows people to ignore clear evidence and still believe they’re more capable than they actually are?

 

[BLJ]

What is it in human psychology that allows people to ignore clear evidence and still believe they’re more capable than they actually are?

When you figure that out PM me and we’ll both be rich.

 

[Formidilosus]

What is it in human psychology that allows people to ignore clear evidence and still believe they’re more capable than they actually are?

Parents, family, and society that teach children self delusion and never force them to look for evidence, see reality, and modify behavior.

 

[Lionheart]

View attachment 938929This is what brought the question up in my mind today. ( ignore the bottom shot. It was my son with his .223). These are two five shot groups. 200yards right at about or under 1 inch. This is with my hunting rifle, off a bench, in zero wind, factory ammo. The part that pissed me off and got me thinking was on the upper dot I flew a shot higher and further right than the rest of the shots. I was legitimately mad about it until I started actually thinking about the level of accuracy “needed” to hunt at my self imposed max range of 500 yards. I was curious if there was a rule of thumb when it came to moa off a bench and hunting distances. I fully understand that more accuracy is more better.

What gun/caliber is that? Is it for sale lol?

 

[wind gypsy]

ROAL is street slang, used by children.

 

[Dan Carey]

View attachment 940217

apple's and orange's?

 

[Jordan Smith]

Curious what this looks like for a 5 shot group that is 1.75”

Asking as that is what most of my Fudd buddies shoot from their rifles. I would like to show them the hit % at 400 yards. But then again it may show them they have a 70+% chance and would make a poor decision.

If we take 1000 shots per group, we see that the average group size trends towards 3x the size of the average 3-shot group.

If we assume an average of 1.33 MOA for 3-shot groups and 1.75 MOA for 5-shot groups, this becomes 4 MOA for 1000-shot groups. Using 4 MOA as the ES for the rifle/load/shooter precision, we still mostly keep 1000 shots on a ~12" target at 400 m, assuming some skill in minimizing the other uncertainties involved (wind estimates within +/- 2 mph, etc.)

 

[RWT]

If we take 1000 shots per group, we see that the average group size trends towards 3x the size of the average 3-shot group.

If we assume an average of 1.33 MOA for 3-shot groups and 1.75 MOA for 5-shot groups, this becomes 4 MOA for 1000-shot groups. Using 4 MOA as the ES for the rifle/load/shooter precision, we still mostly keep 1000 shots on a ~12" target at 400 m, assuming some skill in minimizing the other uncertainties involved (wind estimates within +/- 2 mph, etc.)

Thank you. This is scary. Being the most accurate Fudd in my group of Fudds I see this and feel confident that I could make an ethical shot at 400. I am currently shooting 6” 10 shot groups at 300. Farthest I can shoot on my place. My 10 shoot groups at 100 hover between 1.1& 1.5 MOA. My Fudd buddies will see this and take from it a 97% chance of a hit. I see the dispersion and feel like I need to practice more.

I’ve noticed the difference in wind call between my 6.5cm and 223 at 300 requires more thought in the 223. I need more ammo and a longer range.