Precisely. I see posts somewhat regularly on different sites about shooters talking up their sub-1 MOA rifle or saying that rifles that shoot 2-4 MOA are junk or whatever...when the shooter saying that isn't capable of shooting that well. If you have the world's best PC but you only use Facebook, Minesweeper and MS Office...you could have put those funds to something better.
There are definitely folks capable, but it's no where near as common as 2-4+ MOA shooters.
I think "1 MOA" has somehow become a mantra or baseline that is not helpful for most people, like "you need 1:7 twist" (but the guy only shoots 55gr bullets) or such other things. The M16 itself, according to my Appleseed instructors, is a 3 MOA rifle in its stock configuration. Most combat rifles do not need to be 1 MOA.
That said, the OP's use case for the rifle as well as his abilities can help narrow recommendations or specs.
Few things:
(1) Most shooters, especially in densely populated areas like New England, NY, NJ, CA, etc. don't have access to sufficient length rifle ranges to really test themselves or their guns. If I put up a poll asking how long NES members' rifle ranges are, most people would say 100 yards, some would say 200, a few would say 300, and a very few would say over 300. Further, a lot of clubs can have restrictive rules such as requiring all shooting be done from a bench. There are no shooting benches in "the real world." In the rest of the country, a lot of people shoot from truck hoods - I have never seen a NES'er post pictures like that. From a shooting bench, and this was like seven years ago, so don't ask for pictures of targets, I could get 1" groups at 100 yards with a M91/30. If that was the extent of my universe - shooting from a bench at a paper target 100 yards away - the M91/30 would be a 1MOA rifle. Of course, Mosins generally aren't that accurate, which I learned when I shot at 200 yards and quickly saw my nice groups turn into 6" or 9" or 12" groups. Point is this: many people lack the facilities to really test themselves and their guns and I think that some guys fool themselves about accuracy because they shoot in artificial conditions, such as from a bench with sandbags or a rest.
(2) "Other forums" can be as legit or crap as here. The guys on Sniper's Hide know their shit and back it up with results. Sniper's Hide has threads where guys can have sub-MOA groups at say 600 yards and still demanding more accuracy. Sniper's Hide is also more prone to call out fakers and bullshitters promptly and mercilessly. While there's quite a few posters on here who know their shit, a place like Sniper's Hide is really better for lurking at and learning and asking questions.
(3) The industry standard for rifle-making precision has moved towards 1MOA within the last generation. Savage 10/110s have been known to be 1MOA rifles for quite awhile if the shooter can do the job. The AR market is similarly trending in that direction. The precision rifle trend is all about ringing out as much accuracy as possible. I don't think using the M16 as a metric for accuracy is really fair anymore. M16s are made to a lowest bidder standard and have giggle switches - as civilian consumers, we generally don't have the option of full auto, nor are we confined to only buying from one source that also happens to be the cheapest source.
Put it this way, own and wear some GI boots and tell me how great "milspec" is.
With a lot of good glass and a good prone or seated rest I can make some moa groups on shorter ranges fairly regularly. I’ve done (poorly) in a few matches over the years but mostly would like to build a gun that’s more accurate than me by a long shot. If I’m way off it’s nice to know it’s all my fault. By the same token, if I wanted a real tack driver I’d be going with a bolt action rifle.
This will do double duty as a camp/home defense rifle and a target gun.
You're describing three different rifles doing three completely different tasks.
A bench rifle, or a "target rifle", generally has features such as a heavy barrel, a 3-4lbs trigger or lower, a 3-18 or 5-25 optic, a fixed or target stock, and an 18-20+ inch barrel. I'm not sure what you mean by a "camp" rifle, besides the British term for an effeminate homosexual male, but what I interpret that to mean is a rifle for taking into the woods or when camping or being outdoors. Guns like that are ideally 6-8 pounds and might not even have an optic; they're also generally guns that are carried more than they're shot. Finally, a home defense gun is something these days such as a SBR or a 14.5" pinned or welded or a 16" carbine with a red dot that prioritizes ambidexterity and modularity, such as being able to carry on the fight if you're somehow disabled or a wife or child also being able to use the gun.
Ask the competitors at the matches you shoot about combining a home defense gun and a target gun and most of them will say that they don't do that except for the guys who are new to the sport and don't have the money for a $2000-3000 target gun and a $1000 home defense gun. Its like other shooting sports - the guys with the top scores at USPSA matches don't use their 3lbs target pistols for home defense nor do champion skeet shooters use a Krieghoff over/under for home defense.
Building a sub MOA rifle isn't as easy as it sounds. A white oak upper with matching bolt would be a good STARTING POINT. You will need some high quality components. But the WOA barrel from their DMR line (18") is a great basis. Krieger, Lilja, Criterion, Ballistic advantage Hanson or performance series, Bartlein, Noveske, they should all get you there if you use match nuggets (~$1/pop). A good trigger, and a good stock as well as a free float handguard are all paramount for accuracy. Good luck finding just about any of that shit right now tho.
Also, he would want to get into handloading, both to hopefully avoid some of the current ammo shortages and to maximize potential accuracy.