|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 21, 2015, 03:43 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 3,318
|
intrinsically accurate calibers
Decades ago one would hear / read a lot about this.
Has it been debunked or is / was there an element of truth to it? |
October 21, 2015, 03:49 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 28, 2008
Posts: 10,442
|
That would be hard to prove.
There's so many variables that come into play for guns, ammo and manufacturing differences. But .22 rimfires and .44 Specials do seem to be very accurate in most everything I've tried.
__________________
Walt Kelly, alias Pogo, sez: “Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.” |
October 21, 2015, 03:58 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 1998
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 4,294
|
I have come to the realization that consistency of ammo, efficient burning of powder before the bullet exits the muzzle, bullet shape, and good barrels are all more important than a specific cartridge.
|
October 21, 2015, 05:27 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 15, 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 10,786
|
Cartridges that are shorter have proven to burn powder more efficiently than longer cases resulting in slightly better accuracy. 308 vs 30-06, 300 WSM vs 300 WM, 6.5 Creedmore vs 6.5X55 etc. In every example the shorter case will develop very near the same bullet speeds and with better accuracy than the longer counterpart.
The difference is small and the typical shooter isn't good enough, nor has rifles or ammo good enough to notice the difference. But it is there. |
October 21, 2015, 07:50 PM | #5 |
Staff in Memoriam
Join Date: November 13, 1998
Location: Terlingua, TX; Thomasville, GA
Posts: 24,798
|
In my ignorance, I'm guessing that the benchrest crowd has done more experimenting in this area than have most others. Probably more likely to find an answer at one of those websites.
|
October 21, 2015, 09:19 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 8, 2015
Posts: 1,021
|
I have read in a number of places that handgun cartridges that don't break the sonic barrier (38 special and 45 acp) are generally more accurate than those that break the barrier (approx. 1100 fps) because breaking the barrier but not greatly exceeding it as most handgun cartridges do causes some destabilization and affects accuracy. Hence 45acp and 38 special have historically been favored by bullseye shooters.
I wonder if the same accuracy principles apply to subsonic 300 blackout. |
October 22, 2015, 11:26 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,468
|
It's generally agreed on, in the precision shooting games, that keg shaped rounds with powder closer to the source of ignition and packed into a more dense by case length charge are far more consistent in burning charges.
But then, the 45-70 was once the king. Of precision shooting, and later, the 30-06. You can resolve the question accurately and easily by looking up bench rest associations, and look up past competition records. The records will include stats on the winning gun. |
October 22, 2015, 07:06 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 8, 2015
Posts: 1,021
|
Right now I believe the 260 Remington and the 6.5 Creedmore are the preferred calibers for long-distance shooting competitions. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that.
|
October 22, 2015, 08:23 PM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,577
|
JMR40 pretty much nailed it. Short , fat cases. Better more consistant powder burn. I can add one to his list. 243 and 243WSM. Not a Bible rule, but pretty much.
__________________
NRA Certified RSO NwCP- Performance Isn't Optional |
October 22, 2015, 08:39 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2010
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 3,318
|
I always heard good about 222.
|
October 22, 2015, 10:59 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 25, 2008
Location: In the valley above the plain
Posts: 13,392
|
I agree that 'short/fats' typically seem to be fairly accurate.
But, at the same time, I don't really believe in the 'inherent accuracy' theories. The barrel is more important than the cartridge. And, most short/fat cartridges were designed for, and are used in rifles that wouldn't be caught dead without damn good barrels. Was it the chicken, or the egg?
__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe. |
October 22, 2015, 11:17 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2011
Location: NY
Posts: 801
|
Yes, the triple deuce is known to be highly accurate. Some pretty amazing groups have been shot with that caliber. My father has a first year rem 700 carbine in just that caliber. Pretty rare gun these days. If i only get one of his guns in the future...it will be that one.
|
October 23, 2015, 03:38 PM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 5,468
|
The history of bench rest shooting, all.seventy years of it, is incredibly complicated. God only knows exactly how this evolved. You had groups who all focused on their own things. Warren Paige was action and barrels, Ferris Liddell was cartridges, I don't really know who's the group who drove the development of the VLD designs.
The .222 was the king of short range bench rest, then the ppc cartridges were created for short range and morphed into long range. Bench shooting was genuine scientific research, just like any other. Bench research created mile long sniping. Garage mechanics led to the hemi.. nerd boy and his thousands of droppings, Eric, I mean drones, created Windows out of a garage. |
October 25, 2015, 01:21 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 12,453
|
Inherent accuracy has a mathematical formula. Only a wee part of the thing though. Math can be used to prove anything.
"...created Windows out of a..." Windows was stolen from Apple. Apple had GUI interface long before St Bill.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count! |
October 25, 2015, 02:10 PM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 3, 2006
Location: Brockport, NY
Posts: 3,715
|
Quote:
There are cartridges that ' should ' be inherently accurate due their design, and most of them are in practice, and then there are cartridges that shouldn't be spectacular but are, in spite of their shape.
__________________
You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth. |
|
October 25, 2015, 06:17 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 24, 2008
Posts: 920
|
intrinsically accurate calibers
Accuracy of a firearm is in the shooter, not the firearm! Clean the firearm and practice, practice, practice! Caliber is the bore, not the cartridge. Aim, breathing, stance, trigger squeeze, follow-thru, etc. is the rule for accuracy.
|
October 25, 2015, 06:24 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 22, 2009
Posts: 307
|
If people had to qualify their words with performance, there would be far less advice passed around.
|
October 25, 2015, 10:52 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 17, 2012
Posts: 1,085
|
No mention of 7mm Mauser or 7.5x55, yet? Two of the oldest and yet most accurate smokeless rifle rounds out there? Same goes for early pistol rounds which similarly are hard to beat by 100+ years of development (45acp, 9mm Luger and 30 Mauser). It's almost like this exact question was asked, and scientifically solved by engineers before the first cartridges were fielded
Are there any intrinisically inaccurate cartridges? Stuff that isn't made from recycled forks, and loaded to the nearest 5 grains with powder possibly containing the toenails of political dissidents? The concerns about transonic performance aren't so much a reflection of inherent accuracy, as understanding and respecting the limitations of range. Drag drops rapidly once you get a little further from Mach 1, but once the body is fully enveloped inside a shock cone, its stability/turbulence isn't much different from a faster speed (just the amount of drag force slowing it down) "Windows was stolen from Apple. Apple had GUI interface long before St Bill." What, you think it realistic that a text-based DOS interface would remain the standard? Please. At least Gates paid the dude from whom they sniped proto-DOS a fair market value for an underdeveloped product. Despite rose-colored history by hipsters, it's kind of open knowledge that Jobs & crew were a much more ruthless & bridge-burning set of business jerks of the type you'd expect from the '80's, hence their meteoric rise and fall. TCB
__________________
"I don't believe that the men of the distant past were any wiser than we are today. But it does seem that their science and technology were able to accomplish much grander things." -- Alex Rosewater |
November 2, 2015, 12:01 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 8, 2011
Posts: 135
|
I think manufacturing advances have helped all cartridges "become" more accurate. There are $300 rifles out there now that are MOA, check the Black Friday prices on RAR and Marlin X7 rifles.
|
November 2, 2015, 07:34 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2008
Posts: 2,604
|
If there weren't any difference, then serious benchrest shooters would be using dozens of different cartridges. They aren't. The 6mm PPC rules the roost and has for some time.
That said, the differences in accuracy are small enough that they aren't worth worrying about unless you are a benchrest shooter using a full house bench rifle. For example, a 308 is intrinsically more accurate than a 30-06, but I wouldn't let that influence which I chose for a sporting weight hunting rifle. |
November 2, 2015, 09:51 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,577
|
natman-6mm ppc only rules 300 yards and less, after that it is non existant in long range shooting ( 300 yards is really not long range). 6.5 and the 30 BRX are by far the most popular in long range. The 308 is also a very common one in 1000 yard matches. The 260 is great. I shoot a 6MMBR, it is a awesome accurate little sun of a gun too. If I had to make a pick-the 6MM and 6.5 in a variety of configurations are the kings.
__________________
NRA Certified RSO NwCP- Performance Isn't Optional |
November 2, 2015, 10:02 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 6,158
|
The 6PPC does not even rule at 100 and 200 yards. The .30 Br does. The 6 ppc is probably still king of small group shooting, but it does not even compete with the .30 BR at hitting center dots.
|
November 3, 2015, 11:21 AM | #23 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,617
|
Quote:
OK, the shorter rounds are more efficient powder burners, and can be said to be more intrinsically accurate, BUT that does not mean that every .308 is more accurate than every .30-06. It is a matter of the INDIVIDUAL rifle, ammo and shooter.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
November 3, 2015, 11:48 AM | #24 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: June 24, 2008
Posts: 2,604
|
Quote:
Quote:
The 222 is an extremely accurate cartridge and used to rule benchrest, but nobody uses it for serious work any more. Why? Because the 6mm PPC was even better and drove it out, thereby proving that cartridge design makes a difference in accuracy, at least at that level of competition. If the 30 BR is replacing the 6mm PPC it just reinforces the concept. It's not surprising that a cartridge designed for short range accuracy wouldn't be the choice in long range shooting where other considerations such as trajectory / recoil tradeoffs come into play. |
||
November 3, 2015, 07:59 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 16, 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,577
|
natman- Now that you reworded it, I agree with you.I have no doubt that someday the 30 will be replaced by another case as well.
Also 44Amps last paragraph is very true as well. Best rifle in the world in the hands of someone that can't shoot,means nothing.
__________________
NRA Certified RSO NwCP- Performance Isn't Optional |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|