Which influences accuracy most?

[Pond, James Pond]

As I started resizing the first of my 1000 .223 cases last night (with a hand press!), I contemplated the task ahead.

Doing so I sighed and thought "Well, this had better all be worthwhile!!".

From there I began to consider that more broadly and I wondered to myself which aspect of reloading had the greatest effect on accuracy in a given rifle.

Is it the condition of the case?
Is it the bullet used?
Is it the powder?
Or COAL?

If you hand picked each and every one of the above to make you perfect round for your gun, which would you expect to contribute the most to the combination's resulting tack-driver accuracy?

[jwrowland77]

Case (most inconsistent to begin with) prep if I had to pick just one thing.....but alas, it's much more than one single thing.

It's a combination of things working together perfectly/consistently the same way each and every time, including the shooter.

[1100 tac]

"Including the shooter"

[Slamfire]

I am of the opinion that three factors constitute the "95" percent of accuracy: bullets, barrels and bedding.

There have been good barrels for decades now, and bad barrels for longer. I won't go down this path as it should be obvious that a bad barrel won't shoot. A poor chambering job will ruin the best barrel accuracy, so there are several assumptions, that the barrel is of good quality, it was chambered and installed properly.

I have taken older rifles and shot quite exceptional groups with modern bullets. I recently talked to a bud who took his M52B to the Lapua test range and it shot almost as well as his Anschutz with its favorite ammunition. The effects of poor bullets is easy to see in good barrels. Cast bullet weight is critical for accuracy, I have BPCR buds who weigh their bullets and toss out all but the very perfect. One bud set a National Record at 200 yards, his 45/70 shoots sub MOA, and he does not size his bullets, claiming sizing ruins accuracy. Bullet jacket concentricity and weight distribution are critical for jacketed bullets. Crimping is generally bad as crimp dies will deform the soft inner core of the bullet. This will move the center of gravity of the bullet outside the axis of rotation. This inaccuracy increases the further you go back from the target. I know of no Nationally ranked Highpower competitor who crimps their target bullets. Here Speer shows how distorting the bullet through a crimp die ruins accuracy.




Bedding is more critical the more powerful the round. I have several Anschutz rifles that shot no better after bedded, so as long as the action is not bent, I am not convinced that action bedding is all that critical for rimfires. I do believe nothing should touch the barrel during recoil, as barrel harmonics have been shown to effect group size. But, centerfire rifles will not shoot well if the action is not firmly fixed in the stock and is stress free. Bent actions do not shoot well. I am a believer of free floating barrels as I have seen the inaccuracy that results when a barrel touches the barrel channel of the stock.

Given all this, I have been in the pits, and on the line, when poor shooters missed the 8 X 8 foot target (standing and long range prone particularly) with rifles capable of sub MOA with match ammunition. If the squirrel has the nut, but not the teeth, philosophical arguments over equipment accuracy are vain.

[MarkCO]

Consistency is #1: OAL, charge weights.

After that it is bullet, powder and cases last.

I have full processed, match prepped 223 brass and some that is just sized and trimmed. The difference is minimal at best, like maybe 10% difference in group size.

Changing powders, I can get as much as 50% difference in group size.

Changing bullets, I can get as much as 500% difference in group size.

That is all considering that I hold OAL to within 0.005" or better and charge weights vary by no more than 0.2 grains.

[F. Guffey]

The rifle, then the shooter, could be the shooter and the rifle.

I know "Do it like the bench resters" Bench resters do it this way and or that way etc.. I have a few very unusual rifles that are most accurate. One is a Springfield 03 Remington stamped Santa Fe. Another is a 1905 Ross 303. Then there is the M1917 Remington rifle voted 'the most UGLY'.

I also have a last ditch Mauser, at the range I thought the bullets were tumbling, the holes were so close it was difficult to tell until the target was retrieved.

then there is the non-Weatherby chambered to 300 Win mag. It shoots one hold groups. With the same ammo at the same time I shot a new Winchester model 70 chambered to 300 Win mag. The Winchester shot patterns like a shotgun. I called Winchester, they said I needed to shoot it more. We had words.

F. Guffey

[Marco Califo]

The shooter.
No component, tool or trick can fix a bad shot.

[jmorris]

In you list the bullet is most important. Everything else can be perfect but if the bullet is of poor quality your lucky to hit barn doors.

[Pond, James Pond]

The rifle, then the shooter, could be the shooter and the rifle.

Regrettably I cannot handload a better rifle, nor a better me. So those are given.

That is why I was looking at the components that can be used to handload a better cartridge.

[F. Guffey]

Regrettably I cannot handload a better rifle, nor a better me. So those are given

As I started resizing the first of my 1000 .223 cases last night (with a hand press!), I contemplated the task ahead.

Doing so I sighed and thought "Well, this had better all be worthwhile!!".

There was a time when a reloader would make an attempt to determine 'what the rifle liked'.

You started sizing 1,000 cases, I would not do that. I would determine the length of the chamber first. I would sort cases by head stamps and load in groups of 10. When testing for something the rifle like I am surrounded with very disciplined reloaders that load in groups of 3 and 4 rounds.

F. Guffey

[mikld]

I'm gonna go with the bullet. I believe I can do all the case preparations possible ( checking/matching capacity, uniforming primer pockets, deburring/uniforming flash holes, matching dimensions, etc.), but a "bad" bullet just can't be made to shoot accuractly. Jes playing around I tried reloading some .308", 147.0 gr., M2 "pulls" (or surplus). I sorted all the bullets by diameter and weight to within .3 gr. and could not get decent accuracy from my Ruger American in 308, which gives me sub 1" groups with Hornady 155 A-Max bullets. Fully prepped cases (as much as I know how), every charge weighed and OAL to .003". Jes couldn't make 'em choot...

[30Cal]

I'd go with bullet being #1, 2, and 3. Unless you're choose a picky bullet, the powder doesn't usually matter that much. Same with OAL.

Charge consistency is generally in the noise. Case prep is waaaay down in the noise. Unless you're really pushing the envelope, you'll be hard pressed to actually measure a difference.

[4runnerman]

It is said that each stage from beginning to end of reloading can gain up to 2% accuracy. All stages are important to gain the accuracy you want. You can have Lapua Brass if you want, but if you dont load right it will make no difference.
Then you can have the best load in the world, put it in a bad case and you still have junk. It starts with the sizing and does not end till you seat the bullet. Every aspect inbetween is important. How you handle each one of those stages will determine what will happen down range.

[Nathan]

1) that you have a consistent process which makes good ammo and is adjustable.

2) bullet selection....finding the bullet your gun shoots well is important.

3) case/loaded round fit to the gun. The loaded round should fit in the chamber the same every time.

4) getting better!

[Jimro]

I would say that all else being equal...

Bullet, barrel, powder, primer, case.

If you have good bullets, they will fly consistently IF

You have a barrel capable of consistent harmonics WHICH

Are influenced by powder charge THAT

requires consistent ignition by a primer IN

A case that holds the package together.

But it isn't that having good bullets is more important than having good cases, because inconsistency in ANY of these things is going to ruin your accuracy a bit.

Jimro

[F. Guffey]

http://www.americanrifleman.org/arti...mp-perry-1921/

Rifle, shooter or ammo.

He shot their rifle and their ammo, in the beginning when accuracy was not there he did not ask for different cartridges, he did loose time when he went to select another rifle from a rack that was off sight.

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/...record-100-8x/

When this story hit the reloading forums the story teller starting with "I told you so, all you gotta do is full length size, do like the bench resters" no one know what the rifle cost to build. The rifle was not a off the shelf rifle and the ammo was not available off the shelf", and? No one knew how the new cases fit the chamber.
When I chamber a rifle I select the cases, I know the difference in length between the chamber and the case from the shoulders to the case head and from the shoulder to the bolt face.

F. Guffey

[skizzums]

As long as your staying in the proper velocities for a projectile, I believe bullets to be the biggest factor. Weight/length to match barrels wants really changes things. Of course, you can't pick one over powder or bullet since you can't shoot an accurate blanks and bullet won't go far without the powder

[F. Guffey]

he was not the ordinary old-timer who turns up at National Matches now and again, never to finish in the money and seldom to reappear.

Rifle, ammo or shooter. Chuck Yeager was asked about the difference, it was explained to him he received the same training and flew the same plane. His answer was simple: " My eye sight".

A crew member on the plane Crips all Mighty almost got into trouble when the commander flew the plane and complained about the sights. The crew member informed the commander the pilot of the plane stuck the guns into the ears of the enemy pilot before shooting.

F. Guffey

[44 AMP]

which aspect of reloading had the greatest effect on accuracy in a given rifle.

Overall, I'd say consistency / uniformity.

But its a two stage process, and consistency is only the first part.

Understand the difference between accurate ammo, and ammo that shoots most accurately in your rifle.

All components as close to uniform as you can make them means all should shoot as close to the same as possible, giving the smallest group = accuracy.

BUT, any particular combination of components while accurate among themselves may not shoot the best in your rifle.

Ammo that makes a one hole group from a test gun might make a shotgun pattern from your gun, or somewhere in between. This is because of your rifle, and its "quirks".

Consistency / uniformity of the ammo means your quest for accuracy devolves upon your rifle and how it shoots that particular ammo. (and, of course, how well you shoot the rifle).

So, you do each round as close to identical as you can (accurate ammo), and you search for case, primer, powder, & charge, and bullet that shoots the best from your rifle.

Load A might deliver a 1.5" group, no matter what you do, Load B (everything the same but for a single component change) might group 1" or better. Or worse. Its all a matter of how your rifle responds to a given load.

You can often see the same thing when the only change is the powder charge weight. Some combinations group better than others. Which does what can only be learned by trying it in your gun. There is no other way.

[Metal god]

Of the 4 you give . I think you need to add the distance to target .

Bullet first , only because there are some real bad bullets and some REALLY good bullets

powder and less the powder and more consistent charge weight

case prep third because you and your rifle need to be able to shoot very well to see the differences .

COAL . depending on who you ask . some say COAL is a big deal others say not so much because as the throat erodes the jump gets further . Accuracy tends not to change as the throat erodes for quite awhile . Case in point Fed GMM , they all have the same COAL but seem to shoot well no mater if they are up close to the lands or jump a good distance . For what ever reason they tend to shoot well in most rifles regardless .

When loading for the AR you are stuck with a max 2.260 OAL or it round will not feed in the mag

[AllenJ]

I agree with Metal god, bullet and powder are a very close 1 & 2, case prep and C.O.A.L. 3rd and 4th.

C.O.A.L. may move up if you're using long range bullets such as Berger's VLD's, they seem more sensitive to this than others such as SMK's.

[RaySendero]

Pond, James Pond asked:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I started resizing the first of my 1000 .223 cases last night (with a hand press!), I contemplated the task ahead.

Doing so I sighed and thought "Well, this had better all be worthwhile!!".

From there I began to consider that more broadly and I wondered to myself which aspect of reloading had the greatest effect on accuracy in a given rifle.

Is it the condition of the case?
Is it the bullet used?
Is it the powder?
Or COAL?

JP,

My answer is none of the above has a greater +/- effect on accuracy than the consistency and quality control of your reloading procedure and equipment.

[Longshot4]

I had a old model 94 Winchester. The action was loose and the bore pitted... I believe you don't have a chance to get good accuracy unless you start with a quality rifle. No mater how good the ammo quality is. It's simple as that.

[Clark]

I resized 7,000 223 cases, poorly, while watching TV in the living room.
They are mixed brands. I got them for $63. I was ~ 7 gallons, so 223 cases are ~ 1000/gallon.
The necks were not concentric, but the only way to fix them is to shoot them again. I will never use that sizer die again.

I got the blemished bullets for 7.7 cents each in 2006. They are supposed to be 35 gr Vmax, but they only weigh 33 gr.

The powder is 15 gr Blue Dot.

I seated them long enough to jam into the lands of any 223 that I chamber, but I can never reach the lands of a NATO chamber with any bullet.

I built this rifle, sighted it in, and this is a pic of the first group (5 shots) at 100 yards Sept 2013. I doubt is it that accurate now. I would need to clean the bore.

Bad mixed brass
blemished bullets
pistol powder

What did I do right?
The 2.17" OAL reached the lands, so at least one end of the bullet was concentric with the bore.
And Blue Dot is not a bad powder.
And blem bullets are often accurate.

[Metal god]

Clark :

So nothing matters or only the rifle ?