Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Inherent Accuracy: Fact or Fiction?

They did actually. There was more shot on the warehouse that just what is listed in the article.

One thing they found in the warehouse is lighter loads shot better inside, but in real world outside conditions a little more velocity worked better.

+1

Some tidbits from the warehouse. TJ Jackson was a retired U2 pilot. Frank Wilson is a retired accounting firm owner, about 96 yrs old, lives on the golf course in Burnet,Tx, Frank still plays golf most mornings and still shoots, Ralph Council made the Council bullets and a very mean moonshine. John Jones was my fellow native American buddy. John was a toolmaker and made a lot of one off engine parts for the race car folks. Everybody knows that Ed Shilen made barrels and the DGA receivers. Not many knew he made model airplane engines and used to own the Champion Sparkplug model airplane plugs. He assembled and sold therm. Ed was a pilot and also had a powered glider that he flew. Ed had a vintage Formula Ford that he raced and another of his many loves was learning to play the piano. Of course Harold Broughton originated the Broughton barrel Co. and built custom rifles. Harold was instrumental in building the BR range at the NRA Whittington Center. Don Geraci is a hoot. He is an excellent shooter and builds rifles. He built a rifle for Don Trump Jr.
A great group of guys, but a few have passed on.

Quite an interesting list of characters. I learned some stuff.

Thanks for sharing.

DF

. One of the other aspects of why the 6mm PPC was one of the most accurate rifle cartridges ever and has set records that still haven't been broken.
Is the quality of the Lapua 220 Russian brass that it's made from.
27.2 grains of Thunderbird t32 and a 65 grain miles Hollister bullet was my match load.
29 grains of Norma N201 with a 55g ballistic tip.Was my vermin load.

Dave

Does the rifle cartridge case sidewall taper affect "inherent accuracy"? Seems like the newer cartridge designs have less sidewall taper. I once read that a sidewall taper was designed into military cartridges for easier case extraction.

My inherent accuracy should be improving all the time. Haven't tried the longnecks. I recall Mule Deer posting a story about someone having a few before a competition to calm his nerves. Cute story. Must be something to it....grin

IMO, accuracy has less to do with the head stamp and more to do with picking the right reamer, picking a good barrel maker, picking the right gunsmith to put the package together and making good ammo for the package.

Assuming all those things are done equally well, could you see some cartridges simply working a little better than others?

Interesting.............gliders are not powered. contradiction in terms..........was it a powered airplane or a non powered glider ???????????

Powered glider - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_glider#:~:text=A%20motor%20glider%20is%20a,with%20or%20without%20engine%20power.&text=In%20the%20US%2C%20a%20powered,of%203%20kg%2Fm2.

Maybe....for instance if you had the same caliber as well as the same bore to case capacity ratio in two different cartridges, a very good trigger puller might be able to discern a difference. I think it would take many barrels however, to come to any sort of conclusion.

Once bore to case capacity ratio grow further apart, conclusions about cartridge accuracy would be easier to come by.

IMO, inherent accuracy has merit as a concept with evidence it exists. But, from a practical standpoint, most any round can be set up to shoot really well. The difference between rounds, all equally maxed out technically, has to be in minute fractions.

Now, with bench rest and such, minute fractions make or break a competition.

But, for the rest of us, I think this is just an interesting Loony discussion.

So, where one is coming from makes this a big deal, or NOT....

DF

Theories are like azzholes, everybody has one. My theory, if you went out and bought 5 off the rack new rifles in each popular cartridge, tested them on target with commonly available Wal mart grade ammo, certain cartridges would score higher in aggregate....such as the .308.

Every factory rifle I have bought has shot well enough to hunt with , except a 6 mm Remington.. and when it was new I bought 100 gr bullets and it would shoot like a 12 ga with Buckshot.. the dealer that sold it to me dident say anything about not using 100 gr bullets.. I sold it and bought a 243.. it was ok.. the guy that bought my 6 mm remington used 85 gr bullets an killed a truckload of antalopes with it. pissed me off that the dealer diden't know about the twist problem in the new remington caliber.. I really liked the rifle , but never bought another.

Was that a problem with the chambering, or a problem caused by using a bullet too long for the barrel twist? Sounds like the latter.

Okay, let me ask the corallary question: Are there any inherently inaccurate chamberings?

I've heard that 6.5 CM is the whizzbang epitome of inherent accuracy. What would be the anti-Creed? Let's say. . . oh, I don't know. How about the 44 Remington Magnum. It's fat and squat and it has no shoulder, because it's a straightwall cartridge. Is the 44 Mag inherently inaccurate? How about the 444 Marlin. The 44 Mag's big brother. Is that inherently inaccurate?

I'm just asking.

There are 'trends' when it comes to accuracy, in relation to cartridge and many other variables.

Only one way to find out about accuracy in a given application.......

That's my opinion FWIW.

Of a train load of rifles I've owned since 1972 I have ONLY had 1 (one) that would NOT group 4 shots in 1". I'll not call the brand but the company in Morgan Utah (lol) could not make it right. They replaced it -- shock almighty !

IMO inherent accuracy will be found by Competition Shooters.



Jerry