Thread: What exactly is a MOA rifle??

In the good old days of the .303 sporterized Lee Enfields a 3 MOA rifle was a keeper, deer have not got any smaller hunters have become poorer shots and unable to stalk close to animals
more time should be spent on bushcraft and less on wasting money trying for that mythical .5 MOA rifle

Originally Posted by shooternz

In the good old days of the .303 sporterized Lee Enfields a 3 MOA rifle was a keeper, deer have not got any smaller hunters have become poorer shots and unable to stalk close to animals

Or maybe they just can't be bothered putting up with rubbish equipment if they don't have to.

Originally Posted by shooternz

In the good old days of the .303 sporterized Lee Enfields a 3 MOA rifle was a keeper, deer have not got any smaller hunters have become poorer shots and unable to stalk close to animals
more time should be spent on bushcraft and less on wasting money trying for that mythical .5 MOA rifle

So.... A hunter "these days" can place a projectile within a 6 inch "kill zone" on an animal at 600+ yards with plenty of practice and a well set up rifle that shoots well, but hes a "poor shot" compared to great uncle Rupert who could slay a deer at 60 yards in the bush with his 303? Im not sure I follow your train of thought?
Im sure you will find that a lot of todays long range hunters are also very adept in the bush but thats not the terrain or discipline in which they choose to hunt. Nit everyone can go out and make that 600 yard shot without plenty of skill garnered through practice and a well set up rifle that shoots well.

You're nit wrong Ryan

I once hunted with a guy from Texas , who always said, " if I do my bit, all my guns can shoot a ragged hole ! The problem is I don,t often do my bit"
And this is generally a fact, most modern guns will shoot 1moa when clamped to a bench, as for shooting deer at 600mtrs , Good if you can do it,

Originally Posted by suthy

At what point can you call you rifle a MOA rifle?

It requires a confidence level given as a % for the shots comprising the group lying within 1 MOA, in combination with the number of shots taken to form that group. Without these two parameters or equivalent the definition becomes arbitrary.

An example that appears reasonably frequently online to demonstrate this underlines my aversion to 3-shot groups: a 3-shot group gives you 95% confidence that future shots won't impact outside a circle about 3 times bigger than that single group. So if a rifle shoots a single 3-shot 1 MOA group does that make it a 1 MOA rifle or a 3 MOA rifle ?

Originally Posted by Puffin

It requires a confidence level given as a % for the shots comprising the group lying within 1 MOA, in combination with the number of shots taken to form that group. Without these two parameters or equivalent the definition becomes arbitrary.

An example that appears reasonably frequently online to demonstrate this underlines my aversion to 3-shot groups: a 3-shot group gives you 95% confidence that future shots won't impact outside a circle about 3 times bigger than that single group. So if a rifle shoots a single 3-shot 1 MOA group does that make it a 1 MOA rifle or a 3 MOA rifle ?

Which is why you use the results of multiple lower shot count groups from a barrel that is not intended for long strings of shots, as has been pointed out a number of times. There is absolutely no point going nuts and finding out the 'accuracy' if the result of finding out means it is no longer accurate. That would be about as useful as crash testing to destruction every car off the production line.

jeesh...all this technical stuff. & I thought it was a musket that the natives used for hunting moa ?

I say Fuck MOA
Go MIL

Originally Posted by Paddy79

I say Fuck MOA
Go MIL

MOA is less granular. 1 Mil is 10mm at 100m, compared to 1/4MOA at about 7mm.

Yeahp but in NZ we deal in mtrs and mm and km and kgs not pounds miles yards or inches
And I shoot in metres

Originally Posted by Paddy79

Yeahp but in NZ we deal in mtrs and mm and km and kgs not pounds miles yards or inches
And I shoot in metres

To me the actual units mean diddly squat, the conversion is easy enough.

Yards sounds further.

Originally Posted by Shearer

Yards sounds further.

But it isn't.

got a shoot just shy of 110 yards to shoot 100 Metres