Accuracy?

[mdi]

I'm returning to my lifelong hobby of shooting/reloading (just can't get away from it), and have been lurking around here for a few weeks.  I'm don't hunt, I just shoot paper for accuracy. Mostly handguns because I live in L.A. and the nearest long gun range is an hour plus drive away via L.A. freeways!
My question:
Is there any one caliber or cartridge that is intrinsically more accurate than others? I've heard of sub MOA rifles in .22 cal and .30 cal and I'm not asking about rifles, just calibers or cartridges. Thanks!

[mdi]

I mean rifle calibers and cartridges (.22, .25, 24/6mm, et al.)

thnx,
mdi

[John Traveler]

While iit's mostly true that any caliber/cartridge can be made to shoot accurately, a few cartridges have developed a reputation for being easy to make shoot accurately.

The .308 Winchester, .223 Remington, and .222 Remington come to mind.  The first two have received extensive development as match competition cartrtidges and the last won most championships in benchrest competition for a couple generations.  If you want easy-to-achieve accuracy, it's hard to beat them.

[beemanbeme]

For sheer, pure fun of shooting, darn economical, available just about everywhere, get you a Mark II Ruger, standard or bull barrel, with or without a scope and a brick of standard velocity long rifle ammo and have yourself a ball. 
If you're wanting something you can reload, they make a single shot pistol (for the life of me I can't remember the name of it) where you buy the action and the stock and then can change out the barrel to just about anything you want to try.  As soon as I send this, I remember what the name of the pistol is. 

[mdi]

Thanx Beemanbeme,

Got one (Ruger), plus my inventory runs like; Mod. 629, Dan Wesson 6" .44,Taurus .357 6", Taurus 2" .38, assorted .22s, 25s, 9mm in handguns. My long guns include a Handirifle in .223, Military surplus rifles in 6.5 Swedish Mauser, .303 British, and 7.65X39mm. I've reloaded most the pistol rounds and the .223 and 7.65X39. Life Problems forced the sale of the reloading equip a few years ago (2 presses and all assorted dies and essential equipment). I'm finally getting back to shooting and will start reloading soon, the .44 first, and then the .223, or .38/.357.

My question is for future (not too distant) purchases. I'd like a T/C Encore or Handirifle, or (hopefully) a Ruger #1. I am still in the "Dream Stage" and trying to decide on caliber/cartridge. I would prefer factory avalible brass and a good assortment of available bullets.

Thanks again

[Graybeard]

I don't believe in intrinsic accuracy of any cartridge. I think it's just a myth perpetrated by magazine writers so they'll have some thing to write about. Accuracy is a result of a combination of variables and they all have to mesh correctly for accuracy to happen. Some guns are more accurate than others but it's more because they are made better to closer tolerances.

Since you say you are limited to handguns you can find superbly accurate ones in .22LR, .38 Special/.357 Magnum and .44 Magnum from many different makers. Or you can chose a Freedom Arms in any chambering you like and can expect superb accuracy. Most all S&W guns I've owned have been more than accurate enough to suit my needs as well as have TC handguns. Many folks rave about the accuracy of Dan Wesson guns and at one time long ago under far different owners than today they did do very well on the competition circuit.

Just get what you want and what appeals to you. They can all be extremely accurate if YOU are an accurate and experienced shooter. Worry less about intrinsic accuracy and more about your own shooting and use whatever appeals to you.

If I were trying to milk the absolute nth degree of accuracy from a firearm generally recognized as a handgun by most folks I'd probably chose a scoped TC and if a single shot didn't appeal then a Freedom Arms revolver.

[dave375hh]

As far as accuracy goes, the benchrest guys are mostly using the 6PPC. It also has the balistics to make it a reasonable deer rifle. To get their level of accuracy takes an expensive rifle & scope. For a while Sako was chambering rifles for it and the .22PPC. Try and find one of them, and you'll be good to go.

[Grumulkin]

In my opinion, there are inherently accurate cartridges.  Despite the popularity of the 6mm & 22 PPCs, the world record bench rest group is still held by the 222 Remington.  I do not look at the 223 Remington as inherently accurate.  Inherently accurate cartridges for T/C Encore and/or Contender handguns would include:

17 HMR
222 Remington
Anything based on the 308 Winchester cartridge like the 243 Winchester, 308 Winchester, 7mm/08, etc.

It is true, that a well made gun can be made to shoot just about any cartridge accurately at certain ranges.  Handgun cartridges like the 44 Remington Magnum may do great at 50 yards and not so great at 100 yards (likely because of available bullets).  For longer ranges, it will probably be easier to get good handgun accuracy with cartridges originally intended for rifles.

[Lone Star]

I don't believe in intrinsic accuracy of any cartridge....

I'm pretty much with GB here, especially when considering non-competition cartridges.  The most important factors in a firearm's "intrinsic" accuracy are the quality of the barrel/chamber, action, and bedding.  Quality dies and the skill to use them are vital too.  Custom rifle builders - the few who specialize in real accuracy - can make a sub-1/2 moa rifle chambered in almost anything, and a 1/4 moa rifle in most chamberings (as long as bullets of high quality are available in that caliber).  .308s and .223s are often very accurate because the consumer expects them to be in a rifle designed for accuracy.  A .35 Remington or .375WCF or .30-30 would see the same accuracy level in a rifle designed for accuracy.  Hint - a M366 Marlin is not an "accuracy" rifle.   

Then of course there is the shooter - in spite of what you read in this and other forums, very very few shooters con consistently shoot 5-shot groups under 1/2 moa on demand.  Almost anyone can get lucky and shoot an occasional 1/2" group, then report that as "normal".   

There is something to the superioroty of short cases versus long, at least for long range shooting.  The .308 simply shoots tighter groups at 600 yarda and beyond than a .30-06 does.  The main reason is a lower extreme velocity spread, which begins to matter a lot at long range.  But for non-long range shooters, a quality rifle, quality loads and excellent shooting skill will make 95% of the difference.


BTW, accurate long range bullets are available for the .44 Mag.  We shot various .44 bullets out to 220 yards on silhouette ranges with groups around 2 moa - in quaity revolvers (usually not Rugers).  Bullet quality is a factor as we could watch poor bullets corkscrewing as they traveled downrange. 

.

[Grumulkin]

There is something to the superioroty of short cases versus long, at least for long range shooting.  The .308 simply shoots tighter groups at 600 yarda and beyond than a .30-06 does.

That would appear to contradict your hypothesis that there aren't intrinsically accurate cartridges.  Once a bullet leaves a gun, it knows how fast it's going, how fast it's spinning and how stable it is.  It has no idea (forgive me for pretending a bullet has a brain) what cartridge shot it so, if it weren't more intrinsically accurate, there would be no reason for a 308 Win. to be more accurate at 600 yards than a 30/06 Springfield.

I would agree that firearms can be made to shoot a variety of cartridges very accurately but that has nothing to do with an intrinsically accurate cartridge.  There are several reasons a cartridge could be intrinsically accurate.  Case design would be one.  The necks on the 223 Rem. & the 300 Win. Mag. are too short.  A longer neck would favor better bullet alignment and better accuracy but, in a well made gun they shoot well.  Some cartridges also do better with certain powders that you might say have a longer and smoother transition from mid pressure to high pressure loads.  For instance, the pressure curve on RL-22 seems relatively flat compared to say H110 which means half a grain of powder one way or another makes much less difference when using RL-22.  Of course, H110 is also used in smaller volume cases where small load differences have more of an effect on velocity.  Another factor would be the available bullets which one can have in much greater varieties in some calibers than in others.  Some cartridges are made with heavier more uniform cases (i.e., better made) that would favor accuracy.

I would be interested in what bullet/powder combination you used for your highly accurate 44 Rem. Mag. loads.  I've never been able to get that cartridge to perform nearly that well even at 100 yards.

[LaOtto222]

The cartridge has something to do with accuracy. We are talking gilt edge accuracy here. Most people will not tell the difference from one cartridge to the next every thing being equal. Long range matches(600 yds) were dominated by the 30-06 at one time. This was because of it's "intrinsic accuracy".Target shooters have found they can get more accuracy out of the 308. You do not see serious shooters using the 30-06 any more. Not the the 30-06 is not accurate, it is. The 222 dominated the 100 yard bench rest for years because of it's "intrinsic accuracy". Now it is the 6mm PPC. We are talking little difference between one to the other. Like Lone Star said the average shooter is not going to tell the difference between one to the other. He is right about shooting sub 1/2" MOA. I have been trying for a while now and it ain't easy. I have one center fire rifle that I could do it with right now on a consistent basis, but If you said I would have to do it right now on the spot, I would probably blow it. Buy the rifle type and cartridge that suits your need. Make careful reloads and do not worry about .2 MOA accuracy between one to the next. You will not know nor should you care about difference.

[Questor]

It's kind of hard to beat the 6mm PPC for benchrest accuracy, but there are other cartridges to consider depending on how distant the target is. For a long distance gun, I'd start with an accurized 300 magnum that's built for long range shooting.

[mdi]

Thanks men,

This is the type of info I was looking for. I know that the rifle (how it is constructed and the quality of construction), load (powder type and charge), bullet (type, construction, quality), shooter's ability, etc., etc, play 95% of the accuracy factor.

Just wondering about that other 5%, IE.; caliber and case design. All other things equal would a .222 Rem. be more accurate than a .243, or 7mm X 57mm? Or if you were to build a super accurate rifle, which cartridge would you consider?

Of course this is all theory for me, I own a Handirifle and I plan on another rifle in the future (my personal best for the Handirifle is a .223 handload; 3 shots into 5/8" with one flier out to 1' at 100 yds, must have been a perfect shooting day 'cause that's great for me!

[mdi]

correction; should say 5/8" with a flier out to 1 inch (although one foot wouldn't surprise me!).

Mike

[LaOtto222]

Conventional wisdom ( I am sure I will get some grief over this) today is the 6mm PPC for short range and the Norma 6MM BR for the further targets out to 600 yards for super accurate rounds. The target shooters seem to like the 6mm over the 224 caliber because of "wind bucking". Super high velocity does not seem to get to the nth degree in accuracy. There are plenty of people who will disagree with my statements here. I do not even own a 6mm, I am personally partial to the .224 caliber for my own reasons. For your amusement here is a target I shot one day last spring at 100 yards (5 shot groups) with a 223 bolt gun (a modified Stevens 200). I haven't got my 223 Handi there yet, but I am working on it.

[Grumulkin]

Or if you were to build a super accurate rifle, which cartridge would you consider?

That would depend on the range at which I intended to shoot.  If I were bench rest shooting at 100 yards, it would be the 222 Rem. or the 22 PPC.  For 200 yard bench rest shooting, I would favor the 6mm PPC.  If my choices were to be for long range varminting and not for paper my choice would be a little different (probably the 22-250).

[Lone Star]

That would appear to contradict your hypothesis that there aren't intrinsically accurate cartridges. 

Had you bothered to actually read my post you would understand why that statement does not contradice MY opinion.   You went to a lot of trouble to disprove nothing.   

I'm pretty much with GB here, especially when considering non-competition cartridges.....There is something to the superioroty of short cases versus long, at least for long range shooting....

I  would be interested in what bullet/powder combination you used for your highly accurate 44 Rem. Mag. loads....

We used 220 Sierra bullets and 21.0 grains of AA9 powder to get great accuracy - this was a pretty common accuracy load for silhouette revolvers.  But the real secret was not to even bother with a Ruger revolver!  We all shot DWs.


.

[MnMike]

I am not a competition shooter but do like playing with hand loading and targets. These are my normal results from different guns. I did not include "lucky" great groups.

.22 Buckmark - .75" - 25 yds. (iron sights)
.204 Handi - 3/4" - 100yds
.223 Contender 14" - 3/8" - 100 yds.
.243 Handi - 1.75" - 100 yds.
.25 ACP Beretta - 6" - 50' (iron sights)
7-30 Waters Contender 14" - 7/8" - 100 yds.
30-06 BAR - 7/8" - 100 yds.
9mm Keltech - 6" - 25 yds. (iron sights)
10mm 1911 - 3" - 25 yds. (iron sights)
.45 WinMag Contender 10" - 1.5" - 25 yds. (iron sights)
.500 S&W Handi - 1.75" - 25 yds. (iron sights)

I am not proud of most of this, and some of these are new and I am still working on them , but just thought I would pass it along.

mike