As I stated...and this is fact: Accuracy is more dependent upon the shooter than the weapon itself...agree?
Agree? Not really, although I would agree that some shooters will get closer to a gun's potential than other shooters. If that was NOT the case, there would be no need for the Ransom Rest evaluations, which assess the innate mechanical accuracy of a given steel-framed weapon.
Even the best shooter can't take a horrible gun and turn it into a tack-driver. On the other hand -- and it's probably your point -- a horrible shooter isn't going to get "tack-driver" performance out of the best gun.
That said, it seems to me that a well-designed and manufactured handgun, made with attention paid to proper fitting and tolerances, should shoot pretty well, regardless of the barrel-locking method -- as long as the sights and barrel generally end up together after each shot -- if the shooter uses the sights!
A rotating barrel system may not move as much vertically during the firing cycle as a tilting barrel design, but it does rotate, and that rotation can also cause changes in a bullet's point of impact if that barrel isn't perfectly aligned throughout it firing cycle. It's moving in both cases, before the bullet has left the barrel. Will the rotating barrel system go as much awry? I don't know. Will a rotating barrel system lock up with greater consistency than a tilting barrel system? I don't know.
I'd like to see some Ransom Rest tests of the rotating barrel systems, to see how they perform -- and show us whether theory and reality coincide. Seems like they SHOULD, but I've never seen that put to a test.