Acceptable Accuracy

[BushmasterFanBoy]

What accuracy is acceptable with a 14.5inch barreled AR, shooting 55gr. FMJ commercial/ surplus (brass cased, not wolf) from the standing position at 100 yards? What difference would this be with a "marksman's" stance" or a "squared up" stance?

[RD62]

I'm certainly no expert, but is there ever such a thing as too much accuracy? I always strive for better accuracy and faster follow ups, whether it be rifle, shotgun or pistol. I figure that the better I do on a square range, the better I'm likely to do in reality if the time ever comes.

I guess I mean that, I don't think there is ever really any right answer to your question. It's like asking a race car driver what is an acceptable speed? As fast as damn possible! Or at least faster than the other guy. So acceptable would be as good as possible or at least better than the other guy! :D

Someone better qualified than me will no doubt be along to answer your question directly!


-RD62

Edited to add: with standard sights, a standard chrome lined barrel, and standard 55gr FMJ, standing and firing at a reasonable rate, I'd have to say minimum of COM on a standard silhouette target give or take a little.

[BushmasterFanBoy]

I'm certainly no expert, but is there ever such a thing as too much accuracy? I always strive for better accuracy and faster follow ups, whether it be rifle, shotgun or pistol. I figure that the better I do on a square range, the better I'm likely to do in reality if the time ever comes.

I guess I mean that, I don't think there is ever really any right answer to your question. It's like asking a racer car driver what is an acceptable speed? As fast as damn possible! Or at least faster than the other guy. So acceptable would be as good as possible or at least better than the other guy! :D

Someone better qualified than me will no doubt be along to answer your question directly!


-RD62
Okay, Mr. funnyguy,;) how's this for a question: What is the general level of accuracy given the aforementioned circumstances that a shooter should meet to be considered "proficient"? Again, this is offhand, with carbine and surplus ammo, from both a traditional stance, and a squared away stance.

[Low Drag]

Chest hits, the same as you'd need to hit on a white tail deer.

[FJB]

Short answer is "Minute of Tango (Terrorist)" or basically 8"-10" diameter in the upper chest or Thoracic Cavity region. This holds true for 100, 200, and if possible 300 yards. Of course ability and avaibility of establishing more stable positions than the off hand are desired.

Regarding classic marksman off hand vs. a "squared up" stance, one was established for accurate "one way range" competition and the other for fighting on the "two way range" of real life. If you use the classic marksmanship off hand that essentially blades, if not completely exposes your flank, to enemy fire the danger is that the enemy can place a shot that will penetrate your lung, then your heart, then your other lung. Similiar to the perfect kill shot of a hunter on big game. The "squared up" stance makes you a larger target but less likely to loose all three organs simultaneously from one shot. Also, when wearing body armor you want the most amount of that between you and your opponent so that you have an advantage. Remember fighting is not a game and there is no second place winner in a gunfight, only a dead first place looser.

Recommend that you take a LAV or Pat Rogers carbine course so that you start learning more first hand.
S/F

[Mojo58]

Short answer is "Minute of Tango (Terrorist)" or basically 8"-10" diameter in the upper chest or Thoracic Cavity region. This holds true for 100, 200, and if possible 300 yards. Of course ability and avaibility of establishing more stable positions than the off hand are desired.

Regarding classic marksman off hand vs. a "squared up" stance, one was established for accurate "one way range" competition and the other for fighting on the "two way range" of real life. If you use the classic marksmanship off hand that essentially blades, if not completely exposes your flank, to enemy fire the danger is that the enemy can place a shot that will penetrate your lung, then your heart, then your other lung. Similiar to the perfect kill shot of a hunter on big game. The "squared up" stance makes you a larger target but less likely to loose all three organs simultaneously from one shot. Also, when wearing body armor you want the most amount of that between you and your opponent so that you have an advantage. Remember fighting is not a game and there is no second place winner in a gunfight, only a dead first place looser.

Recommend that you take a LAV or Pat Rogers carbine course so that you start learning more first hand.
S/F

I've finally become comfortable with the "squared up" stance that was taught to me by one of the "guys in the know". It was foreign to me when I first became aware of it but it makes perfect sense so I forced myself to convert. The "minute of tango" sounds good enough for me. The whole "8"-10" perameter reminds me of Plaxco's Shooting Priciples. Larry Vickers has a great write up on accuracy: http://vickerstactical.com/Tips/accuracy.htm