What constitutes “inherently accurate “?

[Mach 1]

Haven't read past a couple of pages.
Inherently accurate is a gun rag term, there is no such thing, never has been and never will be.

ANY chambering can spray bullets or put them all into one hole.

Simple really.

Cheers.

Some cartridges are just inherently accurate compared to others. I really don't see how this is debatable

 

[Deleted member 48126]

Some cartridges are just inherently accurate compared to others. I really don't see how this is debatable

Seriously - 9mm vs 6BR

Boom perfect example of a cartridge being more accurate

 

[coop2564]

So...would a small rifle primer be...inherently accurate?

No, could be inherently less explosive than a magnum.

 

[TwoMore]

Seriously - 9mm vs 6BR

Boom perfect example of a cartridge being more accurate

Come on now 300 lol really lets talk 300 wsm vs 6br vs 308 Winny and lets pick an inefficient round like, ah 30-30. I am sure that I could spin up a barrel tru an action use a modern bullet and throat set up and drill holes with it. would it be as efficient for benchrest ,No, but it would still be accurate. and probably pretty easy to find a load do to the amount of empirical data out there on it.
I have to apologize to the OP for my first post in this thread , I, in no way,have any problem with the creed chambering, I was just playin.

 

[Mach 1]

The inherent accuracy of a cartridge come from its consistency and it's ability to launch a high bc bullet , for that caliber, at an optimal velocity. Consistency comes from the powder needed to propel the bullet to the optimum velocity vs the actual case capacity and how the powder can burn inside the casing. The shorter fater cases seem to optimize the burn rate for the powder used. Also the less powder you burn to achieve optimum bullet velocity is more efficient. The less powder burnt, the lesser amount of heat is transferred into the barrel. Im not an expert on barrel harmonics but I'd say it definitely comes into play as well.

 

[TwoMore]

The only thing I would change(not that it matters at all) in that paragraph is the first line should say the inherent "efficiency" of a cartridge helps with constancy . we maybe discussing the same point just using different words.

 

[Orange Dust]

My $.02, and it's worth what you guys paid for it. Most cartridges shoot best with a pretty full case. It is easier to get a small capacity cartridge to shoot well than it is an overbore one. This is also due to the gun being easier to control, and it doesn't move as much in the bags with the little guys. Most any cartridge can be made to shoot well with a quality rifle and precision ammo. Here's a case in point. Last Saturday I finally got to shoot my new rifle. It's a 28 Nosler with a Proof carbon barrel. Lazy Saturday at an air conditioned, 100yd indoor range. Great place to break in a barrel in the hot summer. I started with 60 Hornady cases, reamed the flash holes, uniformed the primer pockets, turned the necks to .014, and weighed them all. I ended up with 38 usable cases. Loaded them with Forster benchrest dies. I shot 8 TMS bullets cleaning between each round. Then I shot 10 HBN coated 175gr ABLR loaded with a starting load of RE33. Ran a snake through the barrel every other shot. The 10 shot group was about 1/2". Next I ran a 100yd ladder just to find pressure, same bullets. 1/2gr increments from 84.5-88.5. The whole run was less than 1-1/2" and the last three were in the same hole. Gives me an idea that the load will likely end up somewhere between 87.5 and 88.5grs. This is with hunting bullets, not target bullets. Does this mean the 28 Nosler is an "inherently accurate" cartridge, or is it due to a well built rifle, with a good barrel, and very high quality ammo?

 

[Canhunter35]

It is obvious that there is a clear separation on this argument. When there is an acknowledgement of inherent inaccuracy, there has to be an acknowledgement of the counter argument. There is always at least two sides of an argument, i.e., hot vs cold, up vs down, guilty vs not guilty, etc. That is the whole point of a six sigma. Plots of data points will fall from either side of the spectrum/set upper or lower limits for correlation analysis/relationship to prove/disprove hypotheses or phenomenon under study. Like it or not, believe or not, it is what it is.

Yeah, it would take a ton of data, but in my mind an inherently accurate cartridge is 5-10% easier to find a SubMOA load. They're just more forgiving and stay within their node even with variations in powder, brass, etc.
But put a light varmint bullet in a Weatherby chambering and you will find out what inherently inaccurate is. Lol

 

[GunHawk]

It is obvious that there is a clear separation on this argument. When there is an acknowledgement of inherent inaccuracy, there has to be an acknowledgement of the counter argument. There is always at least two sides of an argument, i.e., hot vs cold, up vs down, guilty vs not guilty, etc. That is the whole point of a six sigma. Plots of data points will fall from either side of the spectrum/set upper or lower limits for correlation analysis/relationship to prove/disprove hypotheses or phenomenon under study. Like it or not, believe or not, it is what it is.

Correlation analyses are often misused; the data often violate distribution assumptions (normality of residuals, etc) and model fit is often ignored. And still inferences are made.

 

[bigngreen]

I think we can look at some general characteristics of chamberings that have proven over time and actual measuring, I would include the throat and throat angle into this since the reamer is set up in one shot and you can definitely see throat angle or types effecting how easily a round tunes. It seems very clear that shoulder angle somehow plays a part since we see so many cartridges absolutely come alive with a shoulder change even when the capacity stays the same as the parent chambering.

 

[Mach 1]

Yeah, it would take a ton of data, but in my mind an inherently accurate cartridge is 5-10% easier to find a SubMOA load. They're just more forgiving and stay within their node even with variations in powder, brass, etc.
But put a light varmint bullet in a Weatherby chambering and you will find out what inherently inaccurate is. Lol

No joke. I had a 270 weatherby and with the 130gr bullets I was using I could not get 10 thou of jump with enough bullet remaining in the neck of the case. They have way to much free bore

 

[FEENIX]

Yeah, it would take a ton of data, but in my mind an inherently accurate cartridge is 5-10% easier to find a SubMOA load. They're just more forgiving and stay within their node even with variations in powder, brass, etc.
But put a light varmint bullet in a Weatherby chambering and you will find out what inherently inaccurate is. Lol

Yes, it would require a substantial amount of data.

 

[FEENIX]

Correlation analyses are often misused; the data often violate distribution assumptions (normality of residuals, etc) and model fit is often ignored. And still inferences are made.

That is more of a researcher bias than a research design. It is the researcher' s responsibility to choose the right research design for the type of study. Also, to have credibility and validity to empirical research study, there has to be an independent review board process, i.e., peer review. So yes, if the research design is misused, it will show during the IRB.

 

[Orange Dust]

That is more of a researcher bias than a research design. It is the researcher' s responsibility to choose the right research design for the type of study. Also, to have credibility and validity to empirical research study, there has to be an independent review board process, i.e., peer review. So yes, if the research design is misused, it will show during the IRB.

Data will always be misleading in the shooting sports. Our sport is plagued with "Monkey see Monkey Do. In every faction of the sport everyone wants to shoot what the winners are shooting. Guns, Scopes, Accessories, and Cartridges. Any time anyone dominates any discipline of the sport, hordes will think they need the exact same thing to win. If I were to build a rifle around a heavy .257 custom bullet, using some obscure case that is hard to get and form, and then go on and dominate PRS for example for a couple of years, there would be instant demand for high BC .257 bullets, formed cases, and fast twist .257 barrels. They would all be on backorder everywhere for a time. It would be marketed as BC of a 6.5 and recoil of a 6mm. They would sell tons while the fad lasts. This transfers to all the shooting sports. None of us believe it is man over machine and skill is involved. Truth is the winners just work harder than others. Such is life.