We’re demanding too much of it. 

Blasphemy! Sacrilege! Too much bullet placement precision? That can’t be possible. 

But it is. 

At the risk of being drummed out of the corps, let me step more deeply into this quicksand. 

First, of course, hunters want to employ tools that get the job done. And when that job is putting projectiles packing prodigious levels of energy where they’ll most effectively terminate the game we target, precise placement is important. But how much precision is essential? I agree that life’s too short to hunt with an inaccurate rifle, but are the 1/2 MOA and even 1/4 MOA rifles advertised and built these days necessary? 

Second, hunters want tools that are easy, even enjoyable, to carry and operate. This is why deer hunters continue buying and shooting break-action single shots, falling block single shots and lever-action designs from the 19th century. Most of us know, or at least assume, that a heavy, target-style bolt-action repeater will likely shoot rings inside the groups those other action styles shoot. But at what cost? Does anyone really enjoy packing a 10- to 15-pound target rifle through the elk mountains? Or even the deer woods? 

Third, the proliferation of new rifles shooting (or at least reportedly shooting) MOA right out of the box has increased demand for this level of accuracy. If Frank’s $1,200 rifle and Colton’s $400 starter rifle both shoot MOA, then by golly my $3,500 semi-custom had better print 1/2 MOA if not 1/4 MOA! 

Fair enough. Anyone spending that much for a precision tool ought to get it. But is it accurate to say that the preponderance of low- to medium-priced hunting rifles really are shooting MOA? And must they? Is MOA mandatory in an effective deer/elk/bear and even pronghorn rifle? 

Probably not. 

The truth is a few, perhaps even a significant minority, of inexpensive factory rifles can group three consecutive shots MOA—once in a while. But consistently? Some MOA accuracy guarantees hinge on one three-shot group spanning 1-inch or less at 100 yards. Shoot enough three-shot groups with good ammo and you’ll eventually get your MOA group. 

This is why 5-shot groups are a better standard, 10-shot groups better yet, and 100-shot groups truly telling the tale. I would add that a 10-shot cold barrel group fired over the course of several months is the most accurate test of all. That shows how consistently a rifle will print its bullets under varying lighting conditions and temperatures. 

Let us now contemplate MOA precision beginning with a definition of that term. MOA means minute-of-angle which is 1/60 of one degree on a circle divided into 360 degrees. That’s a tiny slice of pie, but it grows with distance. At the gun’s muzzle, MOA is a point on the bullet’s tip. At 25 yards it has spread to span 1/4 of an inch. At 50 yards it’s 1/2 inch, at 100 yards it’s an inch, or more precisely 1.047 inches. Extend this to 1,000 yards and the MOA circle is 10.47 inches. 

The reason hunters admire and want an MOA rifle is because it clusters its bullets within a 3-inch circle at 300 yards, a 6-inch circle at 600 yards, and an 8-inch circle at 800 yards. This would seem sufficient precision for the broadside vital chest diameter of a whitetail or mule deer—roughly 10 inches. 

Missing from this description is the seldom recognized reality of bullet dispersion from point-of-aim. A true MOA rifle and shooter not only park bullets inside a 1-inch circle at 100 yards, but within a half-inch of the aiming point. In other words, your bullet will fall within 1/2-inch of your aim point at 100 yards, within 1 inch at 200 yards, 1.5 inches at 300 yards, and within 3 inches at 600 yards. 

With this degree of precision, your bullets should strike within the vital zone even if you pull a shot by a couple of inches at 600 yards. And really, how often do you shoot game at 600 yards anyway? 

To further illuminate this concept, consider a 1.5 MOA rifle (which, realistically, corrals most of them.) At 300 yards a 1.5 MOA rifle should keep its projectiles within a 4.5-inch circle. At 500 yards a 7.5-inch circle. That is easily the vital heart/lungs area of a pronghorn, even a little Coues whitetail. This also explains why hunters throughout the 20th century generally got their game. 

None of this suggests you should settle for a 1.5 MOA rifle, but if you have one and you rarely shoot beyond 300 yards, you need not toss it aside. As recently as the 1990s rifle makers were, at best, guaranteeing 1.5 MOA accuracy and hunters were happy to see it. Many were tickled if they hit the bottom of a 5-gallon bucket at 100 yards. Thereafter they hunted and ate well. No, they did not routinely take shots much beyond 300 yards, mainly because they had no tools for accurately measuring those distances on the fly. 

With this understanding of MOA precision, we should be in a better position to judge the performance potential of our hunting rifles. Grandpa’s old 2-MOA lever-action can punch bullet after bullet inside a 4-inch circle at 200 yards, probably 50 yards farther than most of us care to shoot a 30-30 Winchester anyway. Dad’s customized ’03 Springfield 30-06 might scatter 168-grain spire points across a 5-inch circle at 400 yards, but that’s putting them in the old boiler room every time. Certainly, we would appreciate better shot-to-shot precision—and in many of today’s rifles, we can get it—but sub-MOA precision may not be the be-all, end-all of rifle performance. 

If I might be so bold, I suggest each of us assess our rifles for their balance, carry convenience, durability, “feel,” appearance and all the intangible characteristics that endear us to a simple tool that does more than fling bullets with precision. Our hunting rifles are vehicles to adventure and touchstones to history. They bolster our confidence, inspire our dreams, motivate our goals, connect us to the land and tie us more tightly to friends and family. If those magical tools can also drive bullets within a gnat’s eye at 100 paces, so much the better. But subordinating all values and attributes to precise shot placement seems rather shortsighted. Life may also be too short to hunt with an ugly gun.