Does anyone realy believe that one cartridge is inherently more accurate than any other cartridge? If so why do you think that is?? roger

Maybe the ? should be;Do u know of an inherently INACCURATE CARTRIDGE.

accuracy is predominately a function of precision of the firearm and the precision of the ammunition (assuming the shooter is capable).

We know that there seems to be a slight edge for short action cartridges.....but not because of the cartridge.....because the shorter actions are stiffer by a smidgeon!

Personally, I'm not buying the "inherently accurate" claims.....it's more internet urban legend.....

Here's another one.....incipient case separation!

I'll bet very few folks know what "incipient" means!!!! and yet you never hear anyone use the term case separation without the word incipient!

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Does anyone realy believe that one cartridge is inherently more accurate than any other cartridge? If so why do you think that is?? roger

Yep, sure do. Two come to mind, the 222 Rem and 308 Win (and there are others). Were the desingers ballistic "rocket sientists" or did they just get lucky? Who knows? I think, for whatever reason, the "perfect balance" was achieved. For those interested, you might want to see if you can find a copy of Wm. G. Hyatt's tretise "Balancing The Cartridge Equation".

Some rounds chambered in exactly the same rifles have been shown on average to produce smaller groups than others............................DJ

Roger, Roger, Roger


Haven't we discussed this before? More than once?

I'm with vapodog on this one, again. Accuracy is a function of a good barrel, good brass, good bullets, a balanced and tuned load, and a properly bedded rifle.

Otherwise you'd have a hard time explaining all of those cartridges with ungainly shapes that shoot just as well or better than the pretty ones.

Craigster, if you really think that there are inherently accurate cartridges, what makes them so? Is there a magic formula? You name the 308W as one. In my collection of Benchrest cartridges, I have about 30 different HBR (Hunter Benchrest) cartridges. The 308W is one of them. But all of the others are equal to the 308W in terms of accuracy. So you'd have to say that they all are inherently accurate?

I can show you a similar pattern with all other Benchrest cartridges from the point-blank ones (100 & 200 yards) to the long range boomers.



JMHO

Ray

it also seems to be that 224,6mm and 25 seem to be more accurate than the likes of a 338 +

or is that a shooter problem with recoil? anything based off the 308 seems to be accurate. and there aint too many 223s that are inaccurate. but there are a few 270s around that are!

quote:

I'll bet very few folks know what "incipient" means!!!!

True. But it sounds impressive!

quote:

... because the shorter actions are stiffer by a smidgeon!

That makes a lot of sense.

I have this theory about "inherently accurate cartridges". vapodog said it.

quote:

... accuracy is predominately a function of precision of the firearm and the precision of the ammunition ...

Basically, an inherently accurate cartridge would be one with tighter SAAMI specs! e.g. the 22 PPC - developed for accuracy. An inherently innacurate cartridge? The 22 hornet. Check out the SAAMI specs for that one and compare to the specs used in modern "accurate" rifles chambered for it. But that is just my theory. And bartsche did say he was stirring!

Yes, gotta agree with every above poster. In addition to what they said, it is also a function of Long Production Runs on Bullets and Cases, which produces more of each with less Variances.

Some Cases are designed where the Capacity happens to have vast types of Powders which work well at their level. The 223Rem and 308Win that Craigster mentioned are excellent examples.

I also believe there are Cartridges/Cases which are more difficult to attain the Accuracy levels which are easily accomplished with those two. Any of the 25cals come to mind. That doesn't mean there are not individual examples of them which shoot pretty well, but overall they can be quite difficult to get below 1MOA. Whether it is the Bullets, Powder, Cases or Rifles available, or a combination of all of it, I don't know. But it is readily apparent.

Good Hunting and clean 1-shot Kills.

haven't you guys been reading AR long enuf to know that all good things come from a lever actioned 45/70?

quote:

Originally posted by butchloc:
haven't you guys been reading AR long enuf to know that all good things come from a lever actioned 45/70?

Only in a Savage 99 with a thumbhole stock and a rabbit's foot hanging from the trigger guard.

I have to agree with Vapodog. However I place a little more emphasis on shooter competance. The development of consistant"bench technique" is paramount to accuracy. GOOD LUCK and GOOD SHOOTING!!!

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:Basically, an inherently accurate cartridge would be one with tighter SAAMI specs! e.g. the 22 PPC - developed for accuracy. An inherently innacurate cartridge? The 22 hornet.

303 Guy

SAAMI and CIP specs are not "tight" or "loose". They both have max cartridge, min chamber dimensions.

Did you mean that cartridges like the 22PPC are chambered tighter? I can agree with that but it does not mean that the cartridge itself is more accurate than any other.

BTW, is there a SAAMI spec for the 22 PPC? I couldn't find it.

Ray

I'd wager a guess that if one chambered the .308 win in a long action the result would be to equal the accuracy of the .30-06.....further if one was to chamber the .30-30 in a Remington 700 short action and feed it single shot the accuracy would equal the .308 Win.

If this proved to be true.....would anyone ever claim the .30-30 to be "inherently accurate"?

As to the .222 Remington post.....I've owned six .223 rifles and three .222 rifles and couldn't see any difference in accuracy.....all were superbly accurate.

The .222 has a long history of winning benchrest shoots and the .223 isn't able to make that claim.....This one seems to be unique but most people attribute the long neck to it's success......if this is true where does that leave the .308?

Below are two cartridges. One is a shortened 308W and the other is an improved version of the 30-30. Which one is inherently accurate?

Ray

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:The .222 has a long history of winning benchrest shoots and the .223 isn't able to make that claim.....This one seems to be unique but most people attribute the long neck to it's success......if this is true where does that leave the .308?

The reason you used to see the 222R winning more BR matches was because that is what the guys were using. It came along before the 223R and once it was entrenched, shooters weren't about to switch. The short neck of the 223R is always blamed for its unpopularity but there are 222R wildcat BR cartridges that have necks just as short, and shorter. The short vs. long neck controversy has been laid to rest but it keeps coming back more often than a movie monster.

Ray

quote:

Did you mean that cartridges like the 22PPC are chambered tighter? I can agree with that but it does not mean that the cartridge itself is more accurate than any other.

BTW, is there a SAAMI spec for the 22 PPC? I couldn't find it.

Yes, that's what I meant - and I was very inaccurate (excuse the pun ) when I said 'SAAMI specs'.

I think Hot Core hit the target in the bull! (Again).

Cheechako, I must say the improved 30-30 just looks better! A question I have had on my mind for a long time is this, those two cartridges have two separate qualities, the one has a bullet protruding far into the throat giving it good initial alignment, right? The second has a long neck for good alignment of the bullet if the neck area of the chamber is tight. Which is better?

Two more. Long neck vs no neck. Which is inherently accurate?

Since we have no takers on the term "incipient case separation" I'll elaborate.....

"incipient" means "early"....or "the start of" or "in the early stages of" or "infancy"

incipient case separation simply means the first signs of case separation......now go back to everywhere the term has been used and see if it fits!

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
I'd wager a guess that if one chambered the .308 win in a long action the result would be to equal the accuracy of the .30-06.....further if one was to chamber the .30-30 in a Remington 700 short action and feed it single shot the accuracy would equal the .308 Win.

Actually your guess is wrong. The Military did tests with statistically signifigant numbers of M-1 Garands chambered in both 308 and 30-06. Essentially identical rifles and actions the only difference being 308 or 30-06. The 308's on average were a good bit more accurate.

Firearms companies that shoot their essentially identical rifles and keep records of them can show you other calibers that consistantly tend to shoot better than others.

Bullet manufacturers that shoots hundreds of thousands of bullets in tests can tell you that some calibers shoot the same bullets more accurately.

It has been conclusivly proven beyond any shadow of doubt that some cartridges are on average more accurate than others, period. It's well proven fact.


Now this is not to say that every 308 is more accurate than all 30-06's for example. And it's not to say that 30-06's aren't more than accurate enough to hunt anything you want to with them. It's saying that if you take something like 1000 M-1 Garands in 30-06 they might average around 2.0 MOA and 1000 Garands in 308 will average 1.25 MOA (2.0 and 1.25 aren't the actual figures I forget the exact number off the top of my head).

So if you call Inherantly Accuracy as being more likely to shoot smaller groups than another round, Inherant Accuracy does exist............................DJ

DJ

Lots of information gaps here.

First, testing loads for accuracy in a Garand does not really tell us a lot. It's hardly a suitable platform.

Second, what loads were used? M2 Ball 30-06 ammunition is loaded to a 600 yard accuracy level of 7.5" mean radius avg whereas the 7.62x51 Ball is loaded to a 5" mean radius avg. M72 (Match 06) is loaded to a 3.5" mean radius avg, the same as the M118 and M852 (7.62x51 Match).

So, the 06 is capable of the same accuracy levels as the 7.62x51, it's just not loaded to its full potential in the average combat round. Just as the 30-30 is capable of Benchrest accuracy but factory ammunition is not loaded to that level.

Where and when were these tests done? I'd like to read more about them.

Ray

- ROGER!!!! -


You've been having a lot of fun with this sort of thread recently, haven't you?

You oughta take a drive up I-5 one of these days (next March?), come visit me, and we'll mosey over to the K-Falls area and shoot about two box-car loads of sage rats to entertain you instead....

Ray & Vapodog, I believe you are absolutely on the money here.

As to different cartridges being tested in the exact same rifle, excuse me, but I have to doubt that. No two rifles are exactly the same, no matter how much we may try to make them so. Even the very best gun makers, using parts as identical as they can obtain, and barrels chambered with the same reamer, can't (except for occasional luck) build two guns in a row which shoot exactly the same.

Why...well, reamers wear when they are used, all man-made parts have tolerances, and about a zillion other reasons.

And statistiical averages really don't prove much. They are still false (misleading) mathematical summarys of what happened on "N" numbers of occasions "throwing the dice"....a strictly artificial construct which may or may not represent anything about the results of an infinite number of dice throws.

There is NO way to predict which gun, of which chambering, in whose hands, will win the next shooting contest, unless the contest is limited to cartridges of only one chamber designation allowed. (And there is only one shooter.)

OK Roger

We did all the heavy lifting. Now it's your turn. How do you answer your question?

Ray

quote:

Two more. Long neck vs no neck. Which is inherently accurate?

OK. So which is it?

I really do want to know! How does the 'no neck' perform?

quote:

Originally posted by Cheechako:
OK Roger

We did all the heavy lifting. Now it's your turn. How do you answer your question? Ray

You are right . All the heavy lifting has been well handled. I doubt if I could really add anything significant to this discussion.
I have never accepted the idea of inherent accuracy in any cartridge. All of the 7.62 X 39 I've ever shot or seen someone shoot were not great. Yet Krochus has put together one that is a serious accuracy competeter.

The attention to detail in puting the rifle together and doing the necessary tweeking along with great bullets, powder and consistancy in loading far out weigh the shape and size of the brass container.

AC I may just take you up on that.

Ray, I relived this topic because I still see where people use the term and probably believe in it.They may or may not be right but I have never seen any real objective unargueable evidence to substantiate the inherent lable to any cartridge. roger

quote:

... incipient case separation simply means the first signs of case separation ...

That was my understanding vapodog, but when you asked I suddenly thought I might have it wrong! Thanks for clarifying!

Ummmm ..... Cheechako .... the suspense is killing me!

You can start by reading this:

http://www.snipercountry.com/Articles/AccuracyFacts.asp


there's plenty more data around but you'll have to do some digging which I seriously doubt anyone will do because they have their opinions that they don't want to cloud with actual facts.
Most rounds can be made into accurate rifles. The question is are there rounds that are easier or more likely to shoot well and that answer is yes. It's a fact proven by millions of rounds shot in controlled conditions. Check with the rifle companies like HS Precision that accuracy check every rifle, check with the bullet manufacturers. It's true, some of you just don't want to beleive it..................................DJ

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
...I have never accepted the idea of inherent accuracy in any cartridge. ...I have never seen any real objective unargueable evidence to substantiate the inherent lable to any cartridge. ...

Think back to the Groups you have seen made with 22Hornets and then mentally compare them to groups from 223Rems.

Or 25-06s compared to 30-06s in the same style rifle.

Do you notice a difference?

"Inherent" accuracy, whether real or imagined, sure ain't magic. Some cartridge designs are superior to others, a fact proven by many wildcatters and military cartridges that refuse to fade into oblivion. As good as the 308(7.62X51) is, is it vastly superior to the much older 7.62X53R Russian?

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Think back to the Groups you have seen made with 22Hornets and then mentally compare them to groups from 223Rems.

Or 25-06s compared to 30-06s in the same style rifle.

Do you notice a difference?

OH....GOOD....I get to argue with Hot Core!!!!
Hey Hot Core......I really don't remember any .22 Hornet rifles that was equivalent to the quality of most of the .223 rifles today.....further I suspect you may be dangeling on the cliff of the opposite question eluded to a while back....."Are there inherently inaccurate cartridges"

I'd submit that (like the .218 Bee, .30-30, .25-35 etc) some cartridges were never chambered in precision guns.....but if one had a .22 Hornet in a well made single shot and custom chambered for that cartridge he would shoot equally good groups as the .223 or even the .222 Rem.

As to the .25-06 and the .30-06.....I've owned plenty of each and can't really say one shot better than the others except for one thing..... it's a heck of a lot easier to shoot the .25-06 than the .30-06 and I'd submit that therein lies the difference and not in the physical dimensions of the combustion chamber!

quote:

.....but if one had a .22 Hornet in a well made single shot and custom chambered for that cartridge .....

Isn't the 22 Hornet a popular target round in pistols? Who builds the single shot bolt action 22 Hornet varminter?
Then we have the 'inherently accurate' 6.5x55 Swede! Is it simply because of that long bullet protruding out and into the throat that makes it more forgiving of a military type chamber? Also, the original x55 case was quite thick walled - perhaps that has something to do with it too.

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
...I have never accepted the idea of inherent accuracy in any cartridge. ...I have never seen any real objective unargueable evidence to substantiate the inherent lable to any cartridge. ...

Think back to the Groups you have seen made with 22Hornets and then mentally compare them to groups from 223Rems.
Or 25-06s compared to 30-06s in the same style rifle.Do you notice a difference?

In all honesty I personally have not had a great deal to do with the 22 hornet; some, but not a lot. So an expert here I am not. My question here would be, has there ever been any serious,dedicated effort in producing a commercial high quality, accurate 22 hornet rifle such as some of the high end .223 varmint rifles? I think not.

Currently I own 3, .223s. Their degree of accuracy varies one to the other using the same ammo. So that is rifle related I would think and speaks nothing of inherent accuracy. With tweeking and accurizing all three could be made to shoot pretty much as good as the current most accurate. Again that has nothing to do with inherent accuracy.

The worst rifle for accuracy I ever shot was a 7.62 X 39 SKS fallowed next by a .223 mini 14. Again fire arm related.

You ask of my experience with the 06 compared to a 25-06. I've had excellent shooting HUNTING rifles in both calibers. I also built a 6mm X .270 ( long cartridge ) that was an absolute tack driver. Started life with a 30" barrel but wound up at 26" cause it was to hard to get out of a saddle scabard but still was dead on.

If I were asked if the .308 or the 6mm.ppc better lend themselves to being able to acquire a more accurate rifle ,my answer would be yes. This ,however, in my mind reflects the attention and effort put into making good quality accurate rifles to handle these cartridges. The super popularity in each cartridges market place has warranted the attention of the rifle makers to put time into perfecting these rifles to a high degree. Again we are talking rifle quality and not cartridge inherent accuray.

One of the postings indicated that those who did not believe as he did in what he called evidence were being closed minded to facts. That type logic realy works both ways. I can see no 1+1=2 scenario here.

My cousin shoots at bullet holes at 200 yards with his Ruger varmint 22-250 and does a fantastic job. Does that mean that the 22-250 cartridge has inherent accuracy? Nah.I have two 22-250s that don't do nearly as well with the same ammo.

In sumation it is my contention that a gun smith dedicated to making accurate rifles can produce super accurate rifles built around any cartridge. Than put that rifle into the hands of a knowledgeable precision loader and shooter and the repeatability of that combo will debunk any idea any cartridges inherent inaccuracy as suggested of the 22 hornet.

boy! I sure got windy. roger

quote:

My question here would be, has there ever been any serious,dedicated effort in producing a commercial high quality, accurate 22 hornet rifle such as some of the high end .223 varmint rifles? I think not.

You posted just before me! Yes there is. It is a single shot heavy barrel bolt action.

Perhaps it is inherently easier to make accurate chambers for some cartridge designs?

Here is an acnecdote; I watched a friend loading up some 22-250 rounds. That was scary!!! He pulled those bullets that were seated too deep out to position using a pair of pliers .... OK, so range tests - would you believe perfectly good groups? Some of those rounds had visible runout! Some were partially crimped! Go figure!

quote:

... worst rifle for accuracy I ever shot was a 7.62 X 39 SKS ...

What I am wondering is whether the 7.62x39 needs more care in chambering for because the case is short and there is no exposed bullet shank to align itself in the throat?

quote:

Originally posted by 303Guy:

quote:

My question here would be, has there ever been any serious,dedicated effort in producing a commercial high quality, accurate 22 hornet rifle such as some of the high end .223 varmint rifles? I think not.

You posted just before me! Yes there is. It is a single shot heavy barrel bolt action.

If there is you make the overall point and if you tell us what that 22 hornet bull barreled , commercial, bolt actioned wonder is I may just buy one. and if it does good I'll send target fotos to Hot Core.

As far as accurizing the 7.62 X 39 check with Krocus as he has done it in spades.Thanks roger

Inherent accuracy=308Win,300WinMag,7mmRmag,300RUM. Inherently inaccurate=270Win,30-06,270WSM and other garbage.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:
...OH....GOOD....I get to argue with Hot Core!!!!

Hey Vapo, Is it really possible to "argue" opinions? I'm not sure I could argue with you, cause I typically find myself in complete agreement with your posts.

Do you use Thingys?

I see this a bit different than something like the people who try to argue with the Facts which support the HSGS as being totally worthless.

quote:

Hey Hot Core......I really don't remember any .22 Hornet rifles that was equivalent to the quality of most of the .223 rifles today...

Hey Vapo and Bartsche, Correct me if I am wrong(unlikely ), but I thought the folks at Anschutz make a 22Hornet.

Also thought the "King of Barrel Swapping"(aka Bartsche) might have a 22Hornet barrel in the stable. Seems like using the exact same Action with different barrels would remove a bit of the potential Variation.

I know you can get both 22Hornet and 223Rem barrels for a Contender, but I'm not sure the Barrel Quality from the YANKEE T/C plant would prove anything to anyone's satisfaction.

I had a few Win M43s in 22Hornet. Have no idea if any of the Chambers were close to Spec, but the Cases had "short lives", even with normal 22Hornet level Pressure.

Also had a 22Hornet barrel for a Contender . It did shoot as well as the old M43s, but the Accuracy would be there one day and gone the next(same as the M43s) - using the exact same components.

On the other hand, I don't recall ever handling a 223Rem which would shoot small groups one day and double the size a few days later.

Do you all?

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Hey Vapo,

Do you use Thingys?

No....but an old girlfriend of mine did once..... and let me tell you a few things about thingys.....
sorry...this is the reloading forum and not the Unloading forum!

quote:

Originally posted by shootaway:
Inherent accuracy=308Win,300WinMag,7mmRmag,300RUM. Inherently inaccurate=270Win,30-06,270WSM and other garbage.

Garbage in garbage out roger

quote:

Ori I thought the folks at Anschutz make a 22Hornet.

They do, but it does not eqaul the effort put into achieving the superior results others have put in with for example the .223 and the .308.

When it comes to the 22 hornet the question is " Why bother" ? roger