I think i would have to go with the 308,or the 223.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

[This message has been edited by txhunter (edited 08-24-2001).]

------------------
May I be half the man my dog thinks I am.

This is a bit of a hypothetical question, as all hunting calibers can be made to shoot extremely accurately provided all the necessary components are built for accuracy.

Gatogordo,

Good to see you with us again my friend. have seen you here for a while.

------------------
saeed@ emirates.net.ae

www.accuratereloading.com

The manner in which you phrased your question allows opinions, so mine is: I FEEL the most accurate round is the one I am shooting at the time I shoot it.

However, if the question had asked which standard cartridge was proven to be the most accurate then I would refer to the various Bench Rest Associations ( IBM )( IBS )records of matches and that would be one of various cartridges that had won the championship. And since they are separated into various light and heavy gun categories there would be multiple answers.

The criteria would have to be agreed upon and it would have to be the smallest group officially measured at the greatest distance.

But then you said wildcats so proprietary cartridges should be allowed. Then it was amended to allow hunting cartridges so that opens the door to the 50BMG.

But in actuality the second most accurate is Warren Jensens, Lost River, .22-284 that shot a one inch group at 400 yards in the wind. And the BIG WINNER has to be that there fella Ray that shot that animal in Africa at 800 meters while it was running and that he has on video. Kinda wondering why he is now saying the 222 Rem is better. Must be a better story we haven't heard yet!

Could you repeat the question?

Kendall Dace.

300WSM - out of the box Browning ABolt Composite Stalker
- 165gr Fail Safe @ 3099 fps .375" 5 shot 100yds, 2.75" 5 shot @ 300 yds
- 150gr Hornady SST @ 3200 fps .355" 5 shot @ 100yds

I was going to have the action and trigger done but this is more than accurate enough for goat and sheep hunting. If a fellow was to accurize this little sweetheart I'm sure it would do well in benchrest and long range.

...Peter

I've heard this word "inherently" so many times...but never been able to found an "accurate" definition, just mere opinions, of course many of them backed with tangible "proof" ... but nothing else

To me, the real issue here, according to the original post, is what consitutes an "inherently accurate round"

Does anybody out there has a definition of the above ?? I mean a measurable one, independently of guns, actions, barrels, etc

Otherwise, IMHO, talking about this is just talking about statistics, contributing to the more "myths" than we can handle...

The challenge is, can we define a model capable of this, measuring efficiency among other parameters ??

I guess so, and kindly invite others to join into this, in order to terminate with speculation and small talk.

Regards,

I know the SST is a fine accurate bullet but have you shot any match bullets, or Gamekings out of it ? What bullets and loads have you in tried altogether ?

Also what powder's are you useing, and charges, and primer's ? I have an interest in this round for a super Lightweight MNTN rifle. It would be fun in a Sendero type rifle also, heavy barrel-28" tube-match trigger-super glass.

Thanks.......10

quote:

---

Originally posted by txhunter:
If it must be a hunting round then I'd say Ray is correct. 222Rem, I've killed 4 deer and my sister 1 with that round.

I bet sister 2 is nervous.
[This message has been edited by txhunter (edited 08-23-2001).]

---

You caught me! Guilty as charged.

I haven't tried any match bullets. Bullets tried are as follows.
- 150 gr CT Balistic Tip - factory & reloads
- 70gr IMR 4350, WLRM Primer - 3294 fps
- 150 gr Hornady SST
- 68gr IMR 4350, WLRM Primer - 3200 fps
- 165 gr Speer GS
- 67gr IMR 4350, WLRM Primer - 3082 fps
- 165 gr Fail Safe
- 69gr IMR4350, WLRM Primer - 3106 fps
- 165 gr Barnes XFB
- 67gr IMR 4350, WLRM Primer - 3099 fps
- 180 gr Win Power Point - factory
- 2955 fps
- 180 gr Barnes XFB
- 69gr RE 22, CCI 200 Primer - 3034 fps
- 180 gr Fail Safe - factory
- 2973 fps
- 200 gr Barnes XFB
- 68 gr RE 22, WLRM Primer - 2895 fps

All of these loads deliver 3 shot groups under 1 inch at 100 yds. This little rifle has a 23" barrel and is a joy to shoot. Although the 200gr X do kick a bit in a 6.5 pound rifle.

All load information is safe in my rifle but may not be in any other. Use the above information at your own risk.

...Peter

In order for a cartridge to be inherently accurate it must have reliable and consistant ignition, a case that is made of material resiliant enough hold bullets consistantly and a nearly 'square' powder charge that is held with little to no space to shift within the case. The charge diameter should be no more than 1 1/2 times as long as it is in diameter nor should it be more than as wide (diameter) as it is long; and the length should not exceed the primers ability to penetrate to one third it's length.

A hunting load must be able to hold enough powder to propel a heavy bullet (for it's caliber) to around 2700 fps. Let's run this through with a .308 diameter bullet.
If we use a .6 diameter case we are limited to .9 inch length of charge and a case that is no more than 1.4 inches - not enough powder for a hunting load. We could use this 'ideal' load spec with a .22 or 6mm bullet and use a small rifle primer but if we wanted to keep it as a .308 caliber we would have to increase the diameter to about 3/4 inch and the length to 1 1/8 inch to the bottom of the neck. It would require a thick case (compared to 'modern cases' as they exist). With a charge of this diameter we would need a large rifle primer and slow burning powder. It would ignite and burn more consistantly than a long narrow powder charge and pressure would be more affected by powder burn rate than in the long narrow case. The draw-backs would be offset by the improved caracteristics of repeatability.

Drawbacks? Oh YES! An action that is 2 inches in diameter, the bolt would be almost 1 1/4 inches in diameter. The weight would be extreme and the gun, necessarily, massive.

The current cartridges that come closest to this 'ideal' are the PPC, and Bench Rest cartridges (7mm BR). The problem is that these cases don't typically meet the bullet weight and velocity requirements for hunting use by the general hunting population.

PaulS

------------------
stay safe and live long!

I understand that there are many wildcats and simi wildcats that are more inherently more accurate than a 222, such as the 22 or 6MM PPC, but I doubt the 22-284..I was approaching the question from the standpoint of Factory calibers.

------------------
Ray Atkinson

ray@atkinsonhunting.com
atkinsonhunting.com

Im watching the evolvement of this cartridge closely with that in mind.........10

I think you could do a lot worse than choosing this round for a mountain rifle project. Apart from its obvious inherent accuracy, the recoil using 150 and 165gr bullets is really mild. I believe you could drop the overall weight to 6 - 6.5 pounds before the recoil felt close to that of a 300 standard. I've never met anything on the top of a mountain that needed any more than a 180gr at 3000fps.

...Peter

In order for a cartridge to be inherently accurate it must have reliable and consistant ignition, a case that is made of material resiliant enough hold bullets consistantly and a nearly 'square' powder charge that is held with little to no space to shift within the case. The charge diameter should be no more than 1 1/2 times as long as it is in diameter nor should it be more than as wide (diameter) as it is long; and the length should not exceed the primers ability to penetrate to one third it's length.

A hunting load must be able to hold enough powder to propel a heavy bullet (for it's caliber) to around 2700 fps. Let's run this through with a .308 diameter bullet.
If we use a .6 diameter case we are limited to .9 inch length of charge and a case that is no more than 1.4 inches - not enough powder for a hunting load. We could use this 'ideal' load spec with a .22 or 6mm bullet and use a small rifle primer but if we wanted to keep it as a .308 caliber we would have to increase the diameter to about 3/4 inch and the length to 1 1/8 inch to the bottom of the neck. It would require a thick case (compared to 'modern cases' as they exist). With a charge of this diameter we would need a large rifle primer and slow burning powder. It would ignite and burn more consistantly than a long narrow powder charge and pressure would be more affected by powder burn rate than in the long narrow case. The draw-backs would be offset by the improved caracteristics of repeatability.

Drawbacks? Oh YES! An action that is 2 inches in diameter, the bolt would be almost 1 1/4 inches in diameter. The weight would be extreme and the gun, necessarily, massive.

The current cartridges that come closest to this 'ideal' are the PPC, and Bench Rest cartridges (7mm BR). The problem is that these cases don't typically meet the bullet weight and velocity requirements for hunting use by the general hunting population.

PaulS

Well done! your approach is very smart, defining a "short list" of desirable designing criteria. Hope this will start a more intelligent discussion here, regarding effectiveness, the real subject of analysis capable of shed some light, not "inherent accuracy" which is a more than vague term...

I will do my research as well, trying to recover an article with very good guidelines on this issue. The author was John Barness.

------------------
Safety & Ethics,Accuracy, Velocity, Energy
Joe M

Very precise...very well!

At last one of us along with PaulS, saying what others might want to elude. In short, no panacea here, there ain't such thing as a free lunch...

But me must consider, that cartridges itselves being objects under the rules of ballistics, can or can�t have some characteristics, as outlined by PaulS, desirable, in order to make them prone to deliver.

Tks!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slamfire:
Inherent means of itself, in other words this cartridge would be accurate in the worst rifle you could imagine.

---

I choose to look at it a little differently. Rather than best case/worst case scenario, I look at from the point of view of only the cartridge changing. Nothing about "worst rifle...". If you take that worst rifle & then put different cartidges in it, which one has the best chance of showing good accuracy? On the other end of the spectrum, you can put certain cartridges in a top-notch benchrest gun & never achieve meaningful accuracy.

PaulS

------------------
stay safe and live long!

Regards

Ray

Cheers

------------------
Good huntin', shootin', and spear chuckin',
RAB

quote:

---

Originally posted by R. A. Berry:
In the real world, if not the 6mmPPC, then the 416 Rigby with GS Custom bullets.

---

RAB, Based on your groups with Mitch's rifle, maybe the most inherently accurate cartridge is the .577 Tyranosaur!!! Thing is, besides you and Mitch, who'd ever know?! If there was such a thing as a "masochistic benchrest competition", maybe we could find out.

Canuck