M M , you said above ^^^
"Of course the rifle is most important. Given what you've set in bold it seems that's the idea you're strongly attached to. However that's not really the point when it comes to the existence (or not) of cartridge derived inherent accuracy. The evidence for/against that idea must come out of situations where other variables are controlled, variables such as rifle quality and shooter ability."
I am not really arguing that there are no inherently accurate cartridges.
I am approaching this from the hunting/practicality standpoint.
ATST those inherently accurate cartridges are so NOT by great margins but REAL esp. in comp. shooting.
For Hunters greydog said,
" The 308 and the 300 Savage liked 4895 and 150 grain bullets with the 300 using a couple of grain s less.
Both cartridges were used in a Remington 40xBR and used the same Hart Barrel. Both would shoot right at 1/4 moa and both produced the occasional group under .2. I was never able to manage a .250 aggregate with either one because of fatigue, I suspect. This was a 10 1/2 pound rifle and recoil was a factor."
That's a pretty small diff.
also, "That the rifles did not shoot quite as well as the 40X is less indicative of any shortcoming as far as cartridge design is concerned than it is indicative that the 40X is a better platform than the Ruger 77 or the P14"
EDIT to ADD > "In this particular example, I think there is no question the PPC is better than the 6x47. So is the 6 BR"
"In the end, I can say that most cartridges seem to work just fine and the rifle is more important than is the cartridge."
I am agreeing about the 'platform' for hunting / hunters. I want to point out I'm talking HANDLOADING those cartridges
and not relying on factory ammo ONLY.
We are not that far apart on this subject.
Jerry
Last edited by jwall; 04/01/21.
