Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36
  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Port Elizabeth
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    I am beginning to think now (Yes I know), accurate calibre - accurate cartridge, big difference and I have punting every calibre can be accurate.
    I have not been answering the question because I raced ahead again.

    Any calibre can be as accurate as any other, but some case designs make for easier accuracy achievement.

    What is the factual answer to this?

  2. #22
    Moderator Skaaphaas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    18,528

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    Consider the .350 Legend. By all accounts a 1.5 to 1 MOA cartridge. I wanted one for the hell of it. But I cannot accept that kind of accuracy. Looking at it, it headspaces off the case mouth. Ie without a perfectly cut chamber and a perfectly perpendicular cut of the case mouth, concentricity and consistency are out the door. The difficulty in attaining those two suggests to me that the cartridge as whole is inherently unlikely to be accurate.
    Last edited by Skaaphaas; 22-02-2022 at 09:10.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Stella
    Age
    46
    Posts
    10,870

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    Just to stir things up a bit :

    "They were able to rate the relative accuracy of various benchrest calibers. Under the perfect warehouse conditions, the .22 outshot them all, followed closely by the 6mm."


    From https://precisionrifleblog.com/2013/...ifle-accuracy/

  4. #24
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Potchefstroom
    Age
    30
    Posts
    328

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    I can't say I've come to a conclusion, but if this thread has shown me anything it's that this is a more complicated topic than I initially thought. I also don't think you can separate the cartridge from the chamber design either. Maybe it's better to talk about cartridges that are more conducive to accuracy than others due to the various design factors like neck length and the shape of the powder column in the case.

    Sent from my GM1901 using Tapatalk

  5. #25
    User 414gates's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    26 9' 6" S, 28 13' 44" E
    Age
    58
    Posts
    4,696

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Leigh View Post
    I am of the opinion that the laws of physics favour some calibers over others due to ratios etc. on pure science.
    I'd say that the available powders favour combustion in certain case dimensions. When a new powder comes out, and someone finds it's fantastic for an old, little used caliber that nopbody ever got good results with, that will be the next inherently accurate cartridge.

    Like the .284. It was floating around for decades untill someone put the right bullet and right powder in it, and now it's a F-Class standard.

  6. #26
    Member Andrew Leigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Gansbaai - Western Cape
    Posts
    7,334

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    Quote Originally Posted by krieger View Post
    Inherently accurate is what people spend their money on in the belief that it will compensate for their lack of skill.
    Herein lies the crux of the matter for the average shooter.

    Competition shooting I believe is a different matter.
    One too many wasted sunsets and one too many for the road .........

  7. #27
    User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Cape
    Posts
    1,302

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    Just buy a 30-06. What you lot on about?Just because I reach X quicker and easier with A rather than B doesn't mean A is better than B. Just means B takes a bit more #insert time,effort, finances etc. B is just less efficient.Fine A is better than B.

  8. #28
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Noord van die biltong gordyn.
    Age
    56
    Posts
    9,116

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    Methinks there are 2 types of shooters:

    1. Those who need to explain to everyone how accurate/expensive/good their rifles, cartridges, points etc. are and
    2. Those who put their bullets in the bullseye and the points on the scoreboard.

    The first group think that accuracy sits in a rifle, cartridge, bullet or whatever gizmo and that this accuracy can be bought.
    The second group know that accuracy is a product of hard work and dedication, and is available to anyone who is willing to put in the required effort.

    The people of the 2 groups do not usually get along with each other. They speak different languages, drink different liquids and laugh about different jokes.

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Port Elizabeth
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    But ???? - AR, are you saying a good shooter will be accurate with a inaccurate rifle ? _ I doubt thats what you mean.
    You firstly need a accurate rifle, then you can see what you or the joker drinking oxygenated water can shoot.

    I have been questioned so many times as to why I am so interested in my rifles shooting off bags on a perfectly still day with a perfect load. " yerra Treeman you have no bags in the bush and you do not get to choose the weather either, so why you worry so much about off the bench?" The subject has become much heated on a few occasions, and I still stick to my theory, if you have a reading of what the rifle can do, what it is capable of, then and only then can you test your shooting ability.

    The rifle is more accurate than you! Well great then, now I got something to aim for. My .303 with my present load will shoot a quarter inch at 100 m, I do not care how good you are, you will not better that.

    My .270 shooting GS Customs can shoot 3 touching holes at 200 m - I usually can't, but have achieved this on occasion. Now! at 300 m I am lucky to shoot a 4 inch group (more like 5inch actually depending on how long the fire has been burning) To the best of my know, a rifle that shoots under a inch at 200 m would likely be capable of at least 2 or 3 inch group at 300 m - from this I can deduct that it is I the shooter that is at ability deficit when it comes to 300 m and not the rifle.
    I only know this from measured results at a very controlled bench session.

  10. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Port Elizabeth
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: A question about inherent "cartridge accuracy"

    That Houston Warehouse article is still a good read, even # 20 times.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •