greenejc
Well-Known Member
Is there such a thing as inherent accuracy? Well, the term has been around for about 140 years or so, so I kind of think there's something to it. What makes up inherent accuracy is a good question.
I know that certain pistol and revolver rounds dominate(ed) the bullseye competitions of both the past and present. The .44 Special and the .45 ACP come to mind. Both rounds seem to have or to have had an edge over the .38 Special and the 9mm Parabellum in the same types of competition pistols and revolvers. This edge seems to be present in both hand loaded and factory ammunition where pure accuracy is concerned. (part of that edge is just bullet diameter, since a .430 0r .452 SWC cuts a larger hole in the target, allowing the bullet to cover more area and cut the line for the X or 10 ring when the actual center of impact is outside the ring.) But actual group size has just been better, especially at the 50 yard mark, which is why a lot of the custom competition bullseye pistols are in some flavor of .45 ACP.
During the era of the Civil War and the period following, the Sharps rifle in .52 cal and as a cartridge rifle and the Remington Rolling Block rifle as a cartridge rifle were considered to be the best long range rifles in the U.S. and won world titles in the Creedmoor matches against all comers. But the most feared chamberings by the plains Indians seems to have been the .45-90, 45-100, 45-110 and the "big 50" of the early 1870's, the .50-90. These rounds seem to have had a combination of range, accuracy and killing power that set them apart from other cartridges of the day. (the cartridges shot in the 1874 Creedmoor match were the .44-90 Sharps 520 grain paper patched bullet, and the 44-90 Remington 550 grain paper-patched bullet. I think that 'inherently more accurate' would be a good description of the combination of Sharps and Remington rifles and the ammunition over the match grade muzzle loaders of the Irish and other competitors in these matches. Also, some of the US shooters would load the cartridge and then load the bullet from the muzzle, effectively making the rifle a muzzle loading rifle. The combination of rifle and cartridge still out-shot the competition. Also, keep in mind the team from New York (not the rest of the country-just from New York) was a scratch team that took up a challenge from a professional world champion team and beat them. They again competed in the match in Ireland in 1875, where they won by a larger margin.
The 7.62X51 NATO had a demonstrable accuracy edge at distances of 500 yards and beyond over the 30-06 in all bullet weights that the US Army experimented with at the time of its development and testing. It may not be true today, but it was then. (Part of the reason for this was that the -06 had to work in the M1 without damaging the operating system, and the M1 was designed to operate with fast powders like IMR 4895 and H 4895 which gave the -06 about a 75% fill, where it gave the 7.62X51 a 90% or better fill, resulting in a more consistent burn.)
But if I wanted to know what combinations of projectile, caliber, cartridge and powders were inherently most accurate, I'd ask Speer, Hornaday, Sierra, Remington, Nosler, Winchester or one of the other manufacturers' ballistics departments what their research shows. They shoot and develop loads under laboratory conditions with various projectiles, powders, cartridges and projectile weights for both accuracy and velocity in all the commercial loadings, using universal receivers that are bench rest accurate, and have been doing this since they began manufacturing brass, ammunition and projectiles. I'd say that if you really want an answer to this, go to the sources of the most experimental data available and see what they say. Sierra's people will answer you for sure, and so will Speer's.
I know that certain pistol and revolver rounds dominate(ed) the bullseye competitions of both the past and present. The .44 Special and the .45 ACP come to mind. Both rounds seem to have or to have had an edge over the .38 Special and the 9mm Parabellum in the same types of competition pistols and revolvers. This edge seems to be present in both hand loaded and factory ammunition where pure accuracy is concerned. (part of that edge is just bullet diameter, since a .430 0r .452 SWC cuts a larger hole in the target, allowing the bullet to cover more area and cut the line for the X or 10 ring when the actual center of impact is outside the ring.) But actual group size has just been better, especially at the 50 yard mark, which is why a lot of the custom competition bullseye pistols are in some flavor of .45 ACP.
During the era of the Civil War and the period following, the Sharps rifle in .52 cal and as a cartridge rifle and the Remington Rolling Block rifle as a cartridge rifle were considered to be the best long range rifles in the U.S. and won world titles in the Creedmoor matches against all comers. But the most feared chamberings by the plains Indians seems to have been the .45-90, 45-100, 45-110 and the "big 50" of the early 1870's, the .50-90. These rounds seem to have had a combination of range, accuracy and killing power that set them apart from other cartridges of the day. (the cartridges shot in the 1874 Creedmoor match were the .44-90 Sharps 520 grain paper patched bullet, and the 44-90 Remington 550 grain paper-patched bullet. I think that 'inherently more accurate' would be a good description of the combination of Sharps and Remington rifles and the ammunition over the match grade muzzle loaders of the Irish and other competitors in these matches. Also, some of the US shooters would load the cartridge and then load the bullet from the muzzle, effectively making the rifle a muzzle loading rifle. The combination of rifle and cartridge still out-shot the competition. Also, keep in mind the team from New York (not the rest of the country-just from New York) was a scratch team that took up a challenge from a professional world champion team and beat them. They again competed in the match in Ireland in 1875, where they won by a larger margin.
The 7.62X51 NATO had a demonstrable accuracy edge at distances of 500 yards and beyond over the 30-06 in all bullet weights that the US Army experimented with at the time of its development and testing. It may not be true today, but it was then. (Part of the reason for this was that the -06 had to work in the M1 without damaging the operating system, and the M1 was designed to operate with fast powders like IMR 4895 and H 4895 which gave the -06 about a 75% fill, where it gave the 7.62X51 a 90% or better fill, resulting in a more consistent burn.)
But if I wanted to know what combinations of projectile, caliber, cartridge and powders were inherently most accurate, I'd ask Speer, Hornaday, Sierra, Remington, Nosler, Winchester or one of the other manufacturers' ballistics departments what their research shows. They shoot and develop loads under laboratory conditions with various projectiles, powders, cartridges and projectile weights for both accuracy and velocity in all the commercial loadings, using universal receivers that are bench rest accurate, and have been doing this since they began manufacturing brass, ammunition and projectiles. I'd say that if you really want an answer to this, go to the sources of the most experimental data available and see what they say. Sierra's people will answer you for sure, and so will Speer's.
