Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 30-06 inherent accuracy

I think it really first come comes down to the chamber of the rifle, how true and tight the throat is, but also the loading. Most of the soft point hunting out there is going to be 1-2 moa from most rifles. If you use some modern premium ammo, that'll shrink some. But this is all just on average. There will be outliers at both ends.

The 06 makes a bigger hole?

Inherent accuracy is a myth. In fact, most of us seek precision as a means to evaluate a rifle. But here are some cold hard facts:

The cartridge chambering itself doesn't determine the precision of a rifle.
The quality of the barrel has a huge influence over the precision of a rifle.
Chamber dimensions vary depending on reamer design and desired bullet. Matching them correctly will result in optimal results, but that isn't done in most commercial markets.
Factory rifles tend to be designed such that they are first safe, but then tolerant to a wide variety of cartridges.
Some rounds get a reputation for being "inherently accurate" because the maker has done a good job of matching the reamer design to the bullets and cartridges the end-user will be using.
Some cartridges are easier to "tune" because the capacity results in putting a bullet in the node which the bullet the user has chosen is optimized.

The bigger hole deal reminds me about sighting in a few firearms.

My buddy, who owned the range we were at , had a 6.5 x 55 Swede ( Ruger M 77 in a
Mannlicher stock.) Fresh out of Brockmans custom shop.

I had a Savage 220 20 gauge shot gun.

Even though the 6.5 might have had a tighter group , the 20 ga. Holes made the 220 group appear more inherently accurate!

I have never had an 06 that wasnt pretty darn good for hunting for sure, and most have been extremely accurate regardless of manufacturer or age.

I know that you're probably quoting to point out a contradiction, but pay close attention. That isn't a matter of potential, rather a cartridge putting a given bullet where it wants to be. The problem is the user choosing the wrong bullet. Neither has any bearing on the potential of precision from the cartridge.

So how do you assess the 222 Rem vs. 22 PPC and then 6mm PPC?

Who's reamers? Who's bullets? What's the discipline?

drop_point,

There is indeed such a thing as inherent accuracy--and the 6mm PPC is a perfect example, along with several others designed for accuracy. I have explained a lot of this in my articles and books.

A big difference tends to be in the shape/dimensions of the chamber throat, but there are other factors.

The dimensions and chamber of the throat...that is exactly what I'm talking about. Prints, bullets, quality of brass tend to matter much, much more than the shape of the cartridge.

The thing about it is that people in benchrest play follow the leader and myth is born around it.

ETA: the recent revelations about 6mm-6.5x47 Lapua and its bad reputation for being hard to "tune". It turns out, everybody was building reamers off a bad reamer print and that it was no less "inherently accurate" than the similar size and capacity 6mm BR variants. I stand by the notion that given the proper chamber dimensions, bullet, and brass quality, any cartridge is capable of accuracy. It just so happens people don't bother.

Top level short range benchrest competition. That's the bleeding edge of precision group shooting. The rifles are built by the best gunsmiths using optimized reamers and the shooters use very precisely made bullets. There are no compromises suffered by one cartridge but not the other. All of the "mechanical excuses" have been dispensed with.

Added: I think any kinks in the reamer print for the competition 222 were worked out long before the PPC came along.

Yes, the shape of the cartridge also matters, along with shoulder angle. Plenty of evidence for this has been published--including the history of how and why the 6mm PPC was designed--along with later big game cartridges, including the short-fats.

There's also plenty of evidence in various ways. Before the .300 WSM appeared, a major bullet company used to be all their accuracy testing of new manufacturing batches of bullets with the .308 Winchester with lighter bullets, and with heavier bullets the .300 Winchester Magnum. And ALL their testing, as with most bullet companies, is done indoors in tunnels.

After the .300 WSM appeared, they started using it to accuracy-test ALL their bullets--because it has the combination of factors that result in consistent velocities, including a relatively short powder column 30-degree shoulder angle. And then there's the throat dimensions. All of them made a difference.

It is largely a game of "follow the leader". Are records set with 6mmPPC because of the cartridge or because the best in the game chose it and optimized it? Would those records have been different should there have been 50 years of research, development, and optimizing a different cartridge?

You're seemingly missing what I said about the 222. If there is a cartridge that had the holy heck optimized out of it before the PPC came along the 222 is it. The best in the game used and optimized it. These same best in the game people were subsequently able to get better results from the PPC.

They all went to the PPC because it became dominant immediately

Yet the run of the mill .300 WSM is no more precise than any other chambering out there. Was it truly chosen because of "inherent accuracy", or because it is squarely in the velocity windows which the users will use those bullets? You mention again throat dimensions, but those throat dimensions can be applied to any cartridge should one choose to have a reamer ground in such a way. I believe that we understand this as an industry now and recognize that is part of the success we are seeing with cartridges like the 6.5 Creedmoor seeming so much more accurate than cartridges of old.

It seems like you are deviating from cartridge design and discussing rifle chamber design. If a '06 or .270 Win chamber is built to the same dimensional tolerances and throat dimension:bullet diameter ratio as, let's say the darling of the moment, where does "inherent accuracy" come into play?

Full disclosure... love me my 6.5x55, 30-06, and .270 Win. Old School Stuff.

See my comments about the 222 vs the PPC cartridges in benchrest competition.

Link?