Maybe the problem is theoretical. Because that was the intial question, I think. What if a cheap rifle and an expensive rifle somehow had the same rifled barrel, matching to the 1/1000 of an inch and in practice were shooting 1 MOA at 100 and 1 MOA at 1,000, which would be a 10.47 inches spread, then is the cheapie equivalent to the expensive rifle, if they are producing the same results?
I am purposefully trying to discount other factors such as wind, humidity, even shooter error, which is significant. In fact, I attribute some of my fliers to my mistakes. More on that in a second, which has helped me understand what is going on with this thread.
If each rifle were in a vise on a concrete table and you could shoot them both and get the same results, are they equivalent? And is that answer necessary to justify buying the cheap rifle? Still a bit of a moot question. Most guys start out buying cheap rifles, many times, for hunting. Which is fine. We have to learn and the cheaper rifles are good for that. Give it some time and modify and find which trigger you like, etcetera. Some year down the road, you will appreciate the better quality stuff and learn to build or have built what you need to do what you are doing. But I don't think a person is going to get a Mossberg Patriot and win an F-Class. How do I know? I also have a Mossberg Patriot. Changing to an MDT chassis brought the average down to 1 MOA at 100 yards. Which is not saying that it will hold 1 MOA at 1,000. It is a thin and fluted barrel that had no threads. I have put a clamp-on brake from Kahntrol Solutions and that works great. So, I have spent money and took it out of the budget range, somewhat. Sidenote, Mossberg has no accuracy gurantees.
I was recently watching the guy from Canada who reviews affordable optics and scopes. And he pointed that we should quit blaming everything on the shooter. Many times, the problem is the equipment.
Again, the quality control costs money and time and trashed duds. You are paying someone to take the time to carefully ensure each piece is true and to exclude that which is not good.
An infamous example was the Backfire channel experience with the Mossberg Patriot in the walnut stock. Very pretty gun but it was shooting 4 to 5 MOA, regardless of the 3 different shooters. And those guys are good shooters with hunting experience, not just the same old range every time. They sent back for warranty. It was serviced and sent back and produced the same results. A few times, the shot did not even land on paper. I have since figured out what the problem is and it is the lack of proper bedding. The rear of the action will have too much movement that you cannot see. In their synthetic stocks, there is a gap in the rear action screw guide and it is made that way. Plus the plastic removable mag well is used as a shim. I would suggest to any hunter buying that rifle to assume that he will be getting a Boyd's with pillar bedding or a chassis, even for hunting.
Also, as far as shooting a rifle at 1,000 yards, even if you hit within a zone of 10.47 inches instead of just on the line, that is still a 1 MOA rifle, not a sub-MOA rifle. At least that is how it makes sense to me.