PDA

View Full Version : What 'magnification' is enough for 50, 100, 200yds?


pgatour
03-13-2008, 4:35 PM
also adding this post here since this is AR specific, and not getting much feedback in the 'optics and sights' forum:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi, just finished a new AR-15 build and I'm looking to add either a scope or holographic/red dot sight.

I will mainly just be target shooting at 50-100yds, maybe 200 in the future.

My question, does a 1x magnification really allow you to see a 4" bulls-eye at 100yds? At 50 yds, the 4" bulls-eye takes up the entire 'pin hole' on a standard rear MI flip-up sight, so it was difficult to zero in on the 'exact' center (yes, let's assume 20/20 vision). Since I've never peered thru anything else before, I'm wondering if the popular EOTechs with 1x magnification will have enough magnification to see at 100yds (without a magnifier), or if I should consider scopes (looking at the Bushnell Banner series) that are 3x9x40.

Just trying to get an idea the difference between 1x holographic/red dot devices vs. 3x9x40 scopes and what that really translates to on the range in terms of being able to see 'pin-point' targets at 50 yds..100yds. Much appreciate your feedback and experience.

Jicko
03-13-2008, 4:43 PM
1x is.

If you REALLY want mag, then maybe 3x or 4x.... but for < 200yds, 1x EOTech is FAST and accurate. Especially with the 1MOA dot and 65MOA ring.

aplinker
03-13-2008, 4:48 PM
1X means no magnification.

For 0-200yds like that, I like the EOTech. 2-3X is nice for the 100-200yds shots. You can add a magnifier

Knight
03-13-2008, 4:56 PM
If it's just for target shooting and nothing else, then I would say go with something higher power than 1-4x. My .223 bolt rifle with a 6-24x works wonderfully anywhere from 50 to 400 yards.

The higher-powered scopes can also be cool in that you get instant gratification from those medium-distance shots, as you can usually immediately see where your shot landed.

brando
03-13-2008, 4:59 PM
Yup, an EOTech or Aimpoint is fine for that distance. If you really need magnification for identification at that range, a Trijicon TR-21 is better (in my opinion) than an ACOG. From my experience the ACOG is only good for fixed defensive conditions like being stuck on tower duty.

ViPER395
03-13-2008, 5:01 PM
I've never gone wrong with a 3-9.

My next scope is going to be something more powerful, tho.

pgatour
03-13-2008, 5:03 PM
Thanks guys..

since 1x is no magnification, is that realistically enuf to pinpoint a 4" bulls-eye target 100 yds away? At 50 yds, the 4" bulls-eye already filled the entire pin hole on a rear flip-up sight (since I'm only using flip up sight, I'm equating that with 1x magnification, aka 'no magnification') so it was impossible to zero in on the _exact_ center. And, at 100 yds it was impossible to see to the exact center. So, I'm wondering since most of the holographics are 1x if that's really enough (without a magnifier) to shoot 100yrd targets.

pgatour
03-13-2008, 5:10 PM
wow.. I was just typing my response when another 3 people responded. That's why I like this forum!! thanks everyone..

Does anyone have thoughts on this? I know there's better out there, but for the price, seems pretty decent. And, I don't think Bushnell is a bad brand either??

http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-trophy-1x32-riflescope-730132p.html

rksimple
03-13-2008, 5:16 PM
What types of targets do you plan on shooting? If its a 4" bullseye and you're shooting for groups, 1x ain't gonna cut it. What type of shooting do you plan on doing with the rifle?

pgatour
03-13-2008, 5:22 PM
What types of targets do you plan on shooting? If its a 4" bullseye and you're shooting for groups, 1x ain't gonna cut it. What type of shooting do you plan on doing with the rifle?

Mostly paper target shooting at the gun range... maybe occasional 'open area' shooting eventually (sorry, I just picked up this hobby, haven't researched/learned yet what is legal in CA to shoot, i.e. open land, forest areas, etc.), and hopefully NEVER for home defense but if the situation calls for it...

rksimple
03-13-2008, 5:43 PM
Mostly paper target shooting at the gun range... maybe occasional 'open area' shooting eventually (sorry, I just picked up this hobby, haven't researched/learned yet what is legal in CA to shoot, i.e. open land, forest areas, etc.), and hopefully NEVER for home defense but if the situation calls for it...

For your intended use, I'd go with a small variable scope. On the lower end, theres something like the millet DMS 1-4x. It'll work pretty well. Something like a trijicon accupoint is a little higher end, better glass, more reliable but it comes at a price. Then you have something like the S&B short dot at the top of the list. Whats your budget? And what type of upper do you have?

fairfaxjim
03-13-2008, 6:21 PM
Some are going to scream and laugh, but I've consistently shot sub MOA groups of Federal Gold Medal Match .223 Remington, 69 gr Sierra Match King from a 16" AR15 with a $50 Tasco 3-9X "World Class" mildot mounted with medium Leupold PRW rings on a GG&G Scout rail.

The same goes for a $50 Tasco 6-24X Target model.

.223/5.56 recoil isn't powerful enough to break one of these lower cost scopes. Just don't expect them to last on 6.8mm SPC or .308 rifles.

If you're just starting out, go with the lower priced scopes, spend your money on ammo and work on your technique.

Then go out and buy a good scope and mounts once you've reached the limitations of the cheap set up.

I have used the Tasco 2.5 - 10X 42 mildot Varmint on an AR with great success. It has the advantage of having an Adjustable Objective lens, costs about $65.00. 10X will be the most you need at the ranges specified. Don't drag it around, slam it, or drop it, because it won't handle that, but it will work. Mil dot reticle is accurate for hold overs to and past 600 yards (at 10X).

viras
03-13-2008, 6:40 PM
Mostly paper target shooting at the gun range... maybe occasional 'open area' shooting eventually (sorry, I just picked up this hobby, haven't researched/learned yet what is legal in CA to shoot, i.e. open land, forest areas, etc.), and hopefully NEVER for home defense but if the situation calls for it...

You must first figure out what is more important to you - is this scope primarily for plinking targets and getting good groups, or is this primarily for home defense?

If you can afford only one scope, (like me) go for the most important reason - to save your own arse (or your loved ones) in a HD situation, with plinking as a secondary.

In that case, I would recommend an Eotech. If you build your skills up and get lots of practice in, you can get pretty decent groups.

Fjold
03-13-2008, 6:57 PM
"Enough" is relative.

Shooting my 375 H&H Magnum the 1x4 Leupold is "enough" scope for hunting at 200 yards.

When I'm doing load development for my long range guns 16X to 24X is "enough" at 200 yards.

aplinker
03-13-2008, 7:01 PM
When they make a super-crisp, ultralight & compact, indestructible, FFP, illuminated, modifiable reticle (bright center chevron dot can be shut off from milling reticle) that's 1-25X, with external knobs, side-focus and infinite eye relief @1X, then that will be "enough" scope for me.

IMHO you'll be best served by the classic 3-9X... Get something with a milling reticle and made by a good company (Nikon or Leupold)

Prc329
03-13-2008, 7:27 PM
At those distances you really don't need an optic. As everyone has said an Aimpoint and EOtech will do fine. I used my aimpoint on my M14 (before I changed its setup) to 400 yards.

Paratus et Vigilans
03-13-2008, 7:56 PM
Get good with the irons first, which are more than up to the task out to 200 yards, THEN move on to optics. ;)

Before I started shooting High Power service rifle with irons out to 600 yards, I'd have said, "Iron sights at 600 yards?? NFW!!" Now I'm a believer! :D

The MOA on 1x red dots and holosights is going to be a challenge at and beyond 100 yards on a bullseye target. Those are designed to put lead on humans, not drill little holes in paper. The windage and elevation adjustments available on them will make it hard to zero in on the X ring, because they're not that precise, IMHO. For your taget shooting, you'll want some kind of variable 3x to whatever.

CSACANNONEER
03-13-2008, 8:02 PM
Get good with the irons first, which are more than up to the task out to 200 yards, THEN move on to optics. ;)

Before I started shooting High Power service rifle with irons out to 600 yards, I'd have said, "Iron sights at 600 yards?? NFW!!" Now I'm a believer! :D

The MOA on 1x red dots and holosights is going to be a challenge at and beyond 100 yards on a bullseye target. Those are designed to put lead on humans, not drill little holes in paper. The windage and elevation adjustments available on them will make it hard to zero in on the X ring, because they're not that precise, IMHO. For your taget shooting, you'll want some kind of variable 3x to whatever.

+1
After you can repeatably shoot <2moa (I'm assuming that you don't have a sub moa rifle) with irons, you can try optics. Just don't expect to shoot <2moa with a holo type sight.

Sgt Raven
03-13-2008, 8:11 PM
Get good with the irons first, which are more than up to the task out to 200 yards, THEN move on to optics. ;)

Learn the basics with irons then move on. ;)

grywlfbg
03-13-2008, 8:47 PM
An A2 front sight is 4 MOA while an EOTech is 1 MOA so it's definitely possible to hit a 4" bullseye w/ an EOTech. However, my eyes are tired so I've added the EOTech 3X magnifier on a flip-to-side mount behind my EOTech 557.

3X is plenty out to 200 yds but if you want more they make a 4X as well.

http://www.one-ring.net/pics/mmgrip.jpg

onley11
03-13-2008, 8:47 PM
As I understand he wants an optic and his irons are buis. I got a 4x bsa (start laughing, it's ok) 5 years ago from wal mart for 25 bucks (they're 30 now) and it's just about perfect for AR distance shooting. You can mount the rifle while keeping your eye on the target from about 5 yards out and the target just gets bigger. No fooling around with settings etc, and I can shoot 2 moa prone unsupported with a sling and under 1 on sandbags. I had a eotech rev f on the gun for a while, but my favorite targets are clay pigeons, and they disappear when using an eotech at 80 yards out. The color of the reticle is just too close to the birds. Clays are great at open land ranges as they are legal targets, just the right size, and once set up, there is no reason to go downrange. When your're done shooting you just police your brass and leave.

There is an often overlooked advantage of having some modest magnifacation on a tactical rifle. As close as 40 yards it can be hard to tell a head from a rock and a boot from a stump (when the person... err... target you are shooting at is hiding from you, sometimes they do that. Airsoft may be for kiddies but you learn things...) And at 100 yards it is hard as hell to tell whats behind a pane of glass. 4x is low enough to take fast shots, and high enough to tell if that bush at 200 yards has a threat in it. Fixed power scopes are cheaper tougher and brighter as they have fewer moving parts and fewer lenses. They also weigh less and are a good size for a flattop.

YMMV Etc. and so on. And hey, if you don't like it you are out less cash money.

ETA:

And that's a nice Jp up there too. I agree with that set up but I still like the KISS deal with one optic and BUIS. But I grew up with rifles that were wood free and cheap scopes that rarely die, so I'm partial to my current set up. It wins NRA sporting rifle matches, so I'm happy. :) Mine works pretty much like the jp, I just took a different route to get there.:)

Scarecrow Repair
03-13-2008, 8:50 PM
I know someone who shoots Garands and can get a 1" group at 100 yards, prone, iron sights. He claims his rifle maker and coach can get a 1" group at 200 yards, offhand with a sling.

Me, not a chance. I am not 20/20. I experimented. At 100 feet with iron sights, I got a 6" group. With an Aimpoint and 3x, I got a 1" group, same AR15.

Just get whatever you want to get the groups you want. There is no set rule.

pgatour
03-13-2008, 9:24 PM
Thank you everyone for your feedback, excellent points and advice for me to think about. Much, MUCH appreciated!

I just started this hobby, so primarily it will be range shooting to work on my technique. I would like to perfect my shooting with iron sights, but my vision must be going bad because I can't see the bulls eye clearly through the rear pin hole at 75 and 100yrds. Thats why I was leaning towards sights with magnification. Once I learn more about AR15's, I would like to take her out to open land areas and try hitting little moving targets.

It's a CMMG lower from Irvington Arms, and Stag everything else (sold as a bundle for only $633 including shipping!!) at AR15sales.com. It came with a rear MI flip up rear sight. I just finished her last weekend, but will post pics once I dig my camera out.

If I get a scope, I'm leaning towards: http://www.tactical-store.com/ts-bu-rs-713949i.html

and if I get a 'red dot' device I'm leaning towards: http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-trophy-1x32-riflescope-730132p.html

as you can tell, budget is a concern since this is my first gun.

aplinker
03-13-2008, 9:57 PM
I can't type well because my keyboard is in an awkward position, but let me say this...

You're not supposed to see the target clearly. It doesn't even matter. what matters is CONSISTENCY of your sight picture.

Can someone else with the ability to type long posts explain fundamentals or direct him to where to get them?

Thank you everyone for your feedback, excellent points and advice for me to think about. Much, MUCH appreciated!

I just started this hobby, so primarily it will be range shooting to work on my technique. I would like to perfect my shooting with iron sights, but my vision must be going bad because I can't see the bulls eye clearly through the rear pin hole at 75 and 100yrds. Thats why I was leaning towards sights with magnification. Once I learn more about AR15's, I would like to take her out to open land areas and try hitting little moving targets.

It's a CMMG lower from Irvington Arms, and Stag everything else (sold as a bundle for only $633 including shipping!!) at AR15sales.com. It came with a rear MI flip up rear sight. I just finished her last weekend, but will post pics once I dig my camera out.

If I get a scope, I'm leaning towards: http://www.tactical-store.com/ts-bu-rs-713949i.html

and if I get a 'red dot' device I'm leaning towards: http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-trophy-1x32-riflescope-730132p.html

as you can tell, budget is a concern since this is my first gun.

1lostinspace
03-13-2008, 9:59 PM
eotech hands down

1lostinspace
03-13-2008, 10:02 PM
I know someone who shoots Garands and can get a 1" group at 100 yards, prone, iron sights. He claims his rifle maker and coach can get a 1" group at 200 yards, offhand with a sling.

Me, not a chance. I am not 20/20. I experimented. At 100 feet with iron sights, I got a 6" group. With an Aimpoint and 3x, I got a 1" group, same AR15.

Just get whatever you want to get the groups you want. There is no set rule.

I call bull on 1" at 200 yards if your talking 5 rounds.

We call those guys Robocop where I come from

aplinker
03-13-2008, 10:02 PM
Just reading these four sample chapters will help him improve
http://www.jarheadtop.com/chapters.htm

Thanks, Ted! Those are good links and info. They'll help him tons. I think I'll now refer to you as TascoTed after your posts. :p

ar15barrels
03-14-2008, 12:02 AM
I think I'll now refer to you as TascoTed after your posts. :p

They've both been replaced by Leupolds ;)

Too late.
The new nickname is staying.

sb_pete
03-14-2008, 12:52 AM
Optics are great and for 50-200 yds, any magnification will work. Less than 50 and you don't want magnification though. Anything you buy (red-dot, holo, low variable 1-4x, low fixed 4x, std long range fixed 10x, etc.) will teach you alot and give you a much better understanding of what different kinds of optics are good for and not so good for. I personally have had bad experiences with cheap optics and would say that if you are going to do it, then spend $100 give or take on a decent entry level scope, then another $50 on good rings and bases and have a gunsmith put em on. There is nothing more annoying than a constantly shifting zero from poor mounting.

That said, I think you would be better served by investing in some contact lenses and going out to an informal NRA service rifle match. Look, learn and ask questions. You will learn alot about how people manage to nail those tight groups using irons at 200-600 yds. You will also probably have a great time.

Hope that helps,
-Pete

PS. I know you said it wasn't your primary concern but I wouldn't plan on using that thing for home defense until you get some training though. Get a pump 12ga or risk putting rounds into your neighbors kids rooms. If you don't know what you're doing, you could cause more harm than good.

caldude
03-14-2008, 8:33 AM
Funny, whenever the subject of optics comes up, everybody assumes the OP has perfect eyesight. I know that without optics, I can't even see a target at 100 yds, and 4x is probably the minimum I would use if I want to hit the target accurately.

ocabj
03-14-2008, 8:43 AM
To the OP: I posted in your original thread in the Optics forum last night, but saw no response from you. Summarized: I think your head is too far away from your rear sight when you are using your iron sight.

pgatour
03-14-2008, 11:07 AM
To the OP: I posted in your original thread in the Optics forum last night, but saw no response from you. Summarized: I think your head is too far away from your rear sight when you are using your iron sight.


Sorry, I wasn't getting much feedback in that forum initially so I tried this one instead. I went back late last night and read your post... and you were absolutely right. I was playing around at home looking down a long hallway and varying the eye relief distance. Found out I had the tactical stock too far back for one thing, and that caused the eye-relief to be to0 great. Once I moved the stock a few clicks forward, I understood what you meant. Thank you VERY much!

(As a new shooter, my habit was to extend the stock all the way back because in the collapsed position is sure feels like my face is awfully close to that chamber!!)

pgatour
03-14-2008, 11:10 AM
Just reading these four sample chapters will help him improve
http://www.jarheadtop.com/chapters.htm

Thanks Technical Ted/Tasco Ted/Leupold Ted!! That was great read, can't say I understood everything he described, but I will go back and read that several times and try it on the range. Excellent article to understand the basics of aiming...

pgatour
03-14-2008, 11:18 AM
That said, I think you would be better served by investing in some contact lenses and going out to an informal NRA service rifle match. Look, learn and ask questions. You will learn alot about how people manage to nail those tight groups using irons at 200-600 yds. You will also probably have a great time.

Hope that helps,
-Pete

PS. I know you said it wasn't your primary concern but I wouldn't plan on using that thing for home defense until you get some training though. Get a pump 12ga or risk putting rounds into your neighbors kids rooms. If you don't know what you're doing, you could cause more harm than good.

Good tip.. I do plan on getting a Glock and shotgun eventually. It isn't my primary concern because I live smack in between LEOs on a small court, so neighborhoods pretty safe (I know I know... false sense of security!) I'll look into local NRA matches and attend a few, that's a great idea. As far as mounts, how important is brand? i.e. I know to stay away from Leaper's scopes, but can their mounts also be that bad??

ar15barrels
03-14-2008, 12:16 PM
I know to stay away from Leaper's scopes, but can their mounts also be that bad??

Yes.

xrMike
03-14-2008, 1:13 PM
I call bull on 1" at 200 yards if your talking 5 rounds.I'm glad someone said this, because I was thinking it. :D

Summarized: I think your head is too far away from your rear sight when you are using your iron sight.Where's your nose, Jon? Touching the charging handle, slightly back, what?

I've been experimenting, not sure I've found the ideal cheek weld yet. I'm using the smallest of the 3 rear apertures that WOA sends you. I think it's marked "38". Not sure which one of those I should be using either.

ar15barrels
03-14-2008, 1:23 PM
He claims his rifle maker and coach can get a 1" group at 200 yards, offhand with a sling.

David Tubb is his rifle maker and coach. ;)

RobG
03-14-2008, 2:18 PM
I was in the same boat as you with my first AR. I went with a cheapie red dot and a scope (3-9 power). I found that while the red dot would work at 100 yds I wanted to see the target and hits better. Pick up a cheaper/used version of both and see what you like. You live in San Ramon, so you can afford it ;)

maxicon
03-14-2008, 2:56 PM
To the OP: I posted in your original thread in the Optics forum last night, but saw no response from you. Summarized: I think your head is too far away from your rear sight when you are using your iron sight.

I also posted in that thread, including how to calculate how many MOA your aperture is by measuring the distance from your eye.

I like 9x-12x to shoot groups to measure the capability of my rifle and ammo at 100 yards. 4x is OK, but not really good enough for my aging eyes.

pgatour
03-14-2008, 6:02 PM
I was in the same boat as you with my first AR. I went with a cheapie red dot and a scope (3-9 power). I found that while the red dot would work at 100 yds I wanted to see the target and hits better. Pick up a cheaper/used version of both and see what you like. You live in San Ramon, so you can afford it ;)

haha.. it's BECAUSE i live in San Ramon that I can't afford it.. mortgage and property taxes through the roof!! sounds like you know this area well..

I'm starting with a small red dot (call me shallow - I think it looks better), but I'm sure in 1 month I'll probably get a cheapie scope. After some of the suggestions from this thread and good reads, I do need to work on my technique first so hopefully the learning curve will be fast. I think you summed it up best... 1x will work, but I would like to see how close grouping I can get eventually.

CSACANNONEER
03-14-2008, 6:19 PM
I call bull on 1" at 200 yards if your talking 5 rounds.

We call those guys Robocop where I come from

That's only .5 moa and I know many people who have guns that are capable of that. Why do I know their guns are capable of .5 moa? Because, they have shot the groups in offical compititions. Personally, I've only been able to shoot .6 moa, 5 shot groups at 1000 yards. But, I'm hoping to break the .5 moa mark soon.

ocabj
03-14-2008, 7:42 PM
I'm glad someone said this, because I was thinking it. :D

Where's your nose, Jon? Touching the charging handle, slightly back, what?

I've been experimenting, not sure I've found the ideal cheek weld yet. I'm using the smallest of the 3 rear apertures that WOA sends you. I think it's marked "38". Not sure which one of those I should be using either.

I'm nose to the handle in prone and sitting. In standing, I'm maybe an inch rearward than in prone and sitting. I also use a .038".

You should use the smallest aperture that your eyes allow such that the image is still bright and in focus. Many people will use a larger aperture because the image is too dim. But some choose a larger aperture because the image isn't sharp in focus, when in actuality, a smaller aperture may give a better image for their eyes. It's a good idea to try different ones to find the best size for you.

Pthfndr
03-14-2008, 8:48 PM
I call bull on 1" at 200 yards if your talking 5 rounds.

We call those guys Robocop where I come from

Ok, how about 28 rounds out of 30 into 2" at 200 yards, sitting, using a sling, and match sights. It's the record (not by me, by retired CWO3 Dennis Demille)

http://www.tonyrogers.com/humor/images/dennis_demille_cover_560a.jpg

ar15barrels
03-14-2008, 9:10 PM
That's only .5 moa and I know many people who have guns that are capable of that. Why do I know their guns are capable of .5 moa? Because, they have shot the groups in offical compititions. Personally, I've only been able to shoot .6 moa, 5 shot groups at 1000 yards. But, I'm hoping to break the .5 moa mark soon.

Offhand with iron sights?

maxicon
03-15-2008, 11:51 AM
Ok, how about 28 rounds out of 30 into 2" at 200 yards, sitting, using a sling, and match sights. It's the record (not by me, by retired CWO3 Dennis Demille)


There's no doubt that people are able to shoot that well, but it's a pretty durn small percentage of shooters, compared to how many claim the ability.

This is a perfect example. This is a 1 MOA group, and it's a record! How many people claim their off the shelf name brand upper shoots sub MOA, and often they're using off the shelf ammo, too.

This guy's shooting a super-custom bolt action race gun, and with carefully crafted handloads, no doubt, and his shooting ability is far above the average.

Now, many of those "sub MOA" claims are based on 3 shot groups, which are worthless for determining the accuracy of anything - rifle, shooter, or ammo.

5 round groups are the absolute minimum, and I shoot 10 round groups and throw away one round when I want to accurately measure something.

Then there's the ammo spec. Getting sub MOA rounds out of military spec ammo is statistically extremely unlikely, as it's only spec'ed for 2 MOA. Sure, it's possible, but to read teh internets, you'd think that every RRA upper out there will shoot sub MOA with XM193.

I believe it when I see the groups on the paper. Show me multiple 5 or 10 round groups on the same target that are MOA or smaller, and I'll shake your hand and call you a fine shooter. Heck, I consider 2 MOA groups in casual shooting very good results, but I don't shoot $1 a round ammo much.

OK, enough of that rant.

aplinker
03-15-2008, 12:00 PM
There isn't a quality AR out there that can't shoot <MOA with match ammo, magnified optic and rested/bipod (assuming the shooter is capable, but the above takes a lot out of the equation) - and that's with 10shot groups.

What's impressive there was 200yds, no optic, not rested. That's all about shooter.


There's no doubt that people are able to shoot that well, but it's a pretty durn small percentage of shooters, compared to how many claim the ability.

This is a perfect example. This is a 1 MOA group, and it's a record! How many people claim their off the shelf name brand upper shoots sub MOA, and often they're using off the shelf ammo, too.

This guy's shooting a super-custom bolt action race gun, and with carefully crafted handloads, no doubt, and his shooting ability is far above the average.

Now, many of those "sub MOA" claims are based on 3 shot groups, which are worthless for determining the accuracy of anything - rifle, shooter, or ammo.

5 round groups are the absolute minimum, and I shoot 10 round groups and throw away one round when I want to accurately measure something.

Then there's the ammo spec. Getting sub MOA rounds out of military spec ammo is statistically extremely unlikely, as it's only spec'ed for 2 MOA. Sure, it's possible, but to read teh internets, you'd think that every RRA upper out there will shoot sub MOA with XM193.

I believe it when I see the groups on the paper. Show me multiple 5 or 10 round groups on the same target that are MOA or smaller, and I'll shake your hand and call you a fine shooter. Heck, I consider 2 MOA groups in casual shooting very good results, but I don't shoot $1 a round ammo much.

OK, enough of that rant.

Scarecrow Repair
03-15-2008, 4:07 PM
I posted the original comment about a friend who shot 1 MOA at 100 yards prone, and who told me his coach and rifle builder shot .5 MOA at 200 yards offhand with a sling.

Obviously I can't vouch for anything about his coach. But my friend is himself as honest as they come and takes shooting and learning about shooting very seriously, and is himself coaching other friends of mine. I believe that he thinks his coach shot that group, and he has said previously that his coach is (or was) a state match champion. I don't know when or where and I'm not going to waste time asking. My friend thinks it is a legitimate claim, so I take that as a limit on how well I could do with perfect vision. For all I know it was a fluke 5 shot group and he usually only shoots half that. I don't care. I know something about statistics, and if someone shoots a lot, they are going to have good days and bad days.

My intent in posting it was not to brag on a third hand claim, but to make the point that some people can shoot iron sights as well as their rifle can handle. Others, like myself, simply can't see targets well enough past some distance. There is no blanket answer to the original question.

tankerman
03-15-2008, 4:22 PM
That's only .5 moa and I know many people who have guns that are capable of that. Why do I know their guns are capable of .5 moa? Because, they have shot the groups in offical compititions. Personally, I've only been able to shoot .6 moa, 5 shot groups at 1000 yards. But, I'm hoping to break the .5 moa mark soon.
The original post claimed these groups were shot with a Garand. I have never shot a Garand Match, I was unaware that Garands were capable of .6MOA at 1000yds.

I've only shot my CMP Garands and with only that experience I was surprised to hear sub MOA was possible at 100yds with those rifles. Even accurized I wasn't sure Garands had that potential, well learn something new everyday

ocabj
03-15-2008, 5:24 PM
In order to get a Garand shooting sub-MOA, you'll need someone who really knows what he/she is doing to build/accurize the gun. It's not going to be easy to get a Garand shooting sub-MOA with quality ammunition. It takes a lot of skill, knowledge, attention to detail, and a decent chunk of change.

The AR on the other hand is very simple to get shooting sub-MOA and is less expensive to attain that accuracy, as well as maintain it during between each lifecycle of the barrel.

That is partly the reason why the AR is so dominant among High Power service rifle competitors.