Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Accurate Pistol Caliber Rifles

My sample size is relatively small at 6, but I have never had a pistol caliber rifle that I considered accurate. Some were adequate, but none even scared MOA. The best I could hope for with the best loads was about 2.5 for a 3 shot group at 100. Even then, with the best of rifles, that wasn't repeatable over the long haul.

2x Ruger 77/44
Marlin 1894 44 mag
CVA Scout 44 mag
Ruger PC9
Henry 327 Fed

Have any of you had pistol caliber rifles that you considered accurate? Reading across the internet, it's a rarity.

2-2.5" at 100 with a CVA Scout 44mag and about the same with a Handi in 44mag.

Considering the deer shot with both were probably 20-30 yards away on average, they're accurate enough.

2.5 certainly gets it done for deer at any pistol caliber rifle range. My Scout was infuriating. I could put two touching, then one would be 2.5 off. Out of 5 groups, at least one of the groups would have a wicked flyer and open up 4-6. It's been that way with all of them. To be fair, I haven't given the 327 a good ringing out yet.

I've never seen one. My first ruger 44 carbine was good enough for southeast deer hunting, but i was shooting under 100 yds.

Factory ammo or hand loads? My scout like 300's, my Handi like 240's

Yep, I had a Scout 44 as well. Same issues. Sometimes it would cluster 3 touching. Seemed to be really finicky about forend placement on the rest. Tried fiddling with the forend hanger and that did nothing. Not sure what the issue was. I know their barrels are good. Maybe sloppy chamber, rim headspace, or throat? Not sure. Thought it would make a great youth gun, but not with that issue.

1894 Remlin was at least consistent, but never better than 1.5-2"

Currently have a 77/44. That model is a struggle to find a load, but it is fully capable of solid 1.5-2" groups. For it's purpose, that is fine. I know it is going to be a 100 yard or less gun anyhow.

So, question for you Scout guys: did your FIRST shot go to point of aim consistently? Mine does, and, considering it's a single shot I use for hunting, 5 shot groups are not on the radar.

I have a 788 .44 Magnum that is a tackdriver. I have a Ruger 77 .357 that does pretty well, considering its fixed 2 1/2X scope. Marlins in .41 Mag and .44/40 are "deer accurate", but not exactly awe inspiring.

Each type of rifle has its own tricks. For instance, Paco Kelly describes how to tune lever guns at https://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/chapter23.htm I never tried any of it but what he says makes sense.

The only one I ever owned, a Marlin 1894 in 44 Magnum, shot about like the ones you listed. I bought it for hunting little deer in thick brush where shots are rarely over 50 yards. Trajectory and accuracy were adequate for that so I never worried about pushing it farther. I just focused on making fast, accurate offhand shots with it. I put peep sights on it and killed a little blacktail with it, then got bored and sold it.

With enough time, money, profanity, and loading components, you can probably get any of them to 1 MOA. I'd start by matching bullet weight to rate of twist. Then I'd make sure that the bullet was supersonic at 100 yards to avoid the weirdness that happens as it passes through the sound barrier. Then I'd look at crimp.

Beyond that, I have no idea.


Okie John

I’m sure guns are more capable of accuracy that the shooter can’t get. I do have a Beretta CX4 Storm 9mm carbine that is very accurate. I have an Aimpoint red dot sight on it and I can hit any rabbit I see out to 75 yards. My limiting factor is a red dot sight and how well I can see my target.

The Aimpoint is a great sight, but it won’t cut it to shoot groups at 100 yards…

Probably not a clean barrel first shot. Most of the time it was close on a fouled, cold bore first shot. But again, too many inconsistencies to put much trust in it. Those things really play mind games when out hunting.

I've had a few that were decent over the years, but none that I can recall have been tack drivers by the usual standards of hunting rifles. For the distances they're used at, they're perfectly fine, imho. If I can't hit something at 50-100yds with a 2-3MOA shooting rifle, that's not the rifle's fault 🤷‍♂️

I've also had a couple that were spectacularly bad shooters... *finger pointed squarely at Ruger 96/44 and Win 94 Trapper in 45 Colt*

Yep,

I have a Spanish Destroyer Carbine in 9mm Largo that with handloads will plunk them consistently in the just under an inch to just over an inch at 75 to 100 yards. Maybe not accurate enough for some’s standards, but for a 100 year old militia rifle basically thrown together without much regard for fit and finish…it shoots pretty good and is a hoot to plink with. I have 2 of them, my brother has one, and two other friends each have one, and they all are quite respectful in regards to accuracy.

Jeez, never mind the big game opportunities, I'm jealous of all the rabbits you have out yonder. I can't even remember the last rabbit I saw in the woods here. See them in neighborhoods, but that's about it.

Wow….. I’m getting very close (2 9/16” for 4 shots) to your 2.5” groups with my 460 XVR (8 3/8”) using my cast bullets @ 100 yards. I would think that most rifles should have done much better than your results! memtb

Both.

I consider that pretty damn good.

By way of comparison I have had single shot and lever 45-70s that could easily and regularly best MOA and never had flyers. What is it about the pistol calibers?

My favorite "pistol caliber rifle"



Browning High Wall



ya!

GWB

That's getting it done right there.

That's awesome!!

My dad had a Marlin 1894 in 357 that I bought for him in the late 80s, he sighted it in at 50 yards with open sights and never really shot it for groups. One of my uncles told him he would mount a scope on it for him. If I remember correctly it was a 1-4x20 Walmart scope. My uncle could get two shots touching at 100 yards and after that always a 2-3" flyer. My dad never shot a deer further than 30 yards with that rifle and wasnt really concerned about how accurate that rifle was at 100 yards

My Marlin 1894 .44 mag sucked. 3-4" @ 100 was the best it would do. My 1894C .357 will do 1.5 -2" @ 100 with loads it likes.

Dan should be along shortly to show how his little jewels perform.

For my part, the accuracy I get is sufficient for the task, within the practical range of the rounds. Have shot a mere two deer with .44 mags, one each with a rifle and handgun, and the power is there too. IME, inline MLs might have an edge in accuracy with the same bullets in sabots.

Mike Bellm IIRC says factory chambers in pistol-caliber rifles aren’t optimal for accuracy, and he recuts them. My Henry SS .357 hasn’t wowed me thus far. Might let Bellm rechamber it to .350.

My Remington 788 .44 Magnum shoots like a laser beam, 5 shot groups are one ragged hole with Hornady 240gr. XTP handloads.

Got a Ruger 77/44 to meet the requirements for the southern part of my goofy state.

Has a 2-7 Leupold on it

Tried a bunch of factory loads in 240 and 300 gr.

The most accurate is PMC 240gr TCSP which is 2"

Will never win any competitions but will be good enough to whack deer at 75 yards

Complaining about 2" groups out of a PCC is decidedly a first world problem.

Makes me feel a little better about my 50 yard groups with my Super Redhawk 44 mag.

I strive for the best load I can create. I haven't found MOA from a handgun caliber in a rifle. However, even if it's a 2 MOA load, it's going to work for the distance in which it was intended. How many 400 yard pokes at game with a pistol caliber do you plan on? :-)

He did a 357 for me into a 357 Max instead of the 350 L.

Nobody in this thread has complained about 2" groups, best I can tell.

Of course, nobody will ever see evidence of that.

I haven't put it on paper in years but I have a Universal .30 carbine that shoots way better than you'd expect. Even with only it's 2.5x weaver.

I have a custom 350 legend on a 700 action that thinks it's a bench rest gun. Way more accurate for what I need but is sure is fun to shoot 4" steel plates at 200 consistently.

I sight my .357's in at 60 yards and both my 1894 and ruger 77 ( especially) are right around an 1", with the ruger slightly the better of the two.
158 xtps with Lilgun.
Plenty for what I'm doing with them.

The attraction of the .350 is the abundant and cheap ammo, unlike the Max, for which even brass is sometimes unavailable (Starline is frequently in stock, I know). I might even forgo loading for it. OTOH, Bellm says the Henry chamber is similar to his, just with a shorter throat, so a little futzing with seating depth may be all that’s needed to make it shoot better. I certainly don’t need another deer rifle, and the Henry is pretty heavy for what it is. Be pretty hard to improve on the walnut too. I definitely won the wood lottery. Wish it had the original forend style with wrap-around checkering like my .410.

The .360 is another option, though the standard twist is 1-12” rather than the 1-16” of the others. Ammo is about $30 though, and like I said, I don’t need another dedicated deer rifle, really.

A shame, when all other accuracy/inaccuracy statements here are provided with hard evidence.