"Inherently more accurate"

[elkaholic]

I think in order to believe that case design has zero to do with accuracy you would have to believe that a case a foot long and an 1/8" wide would act no different than a 308 case with the same capacity. Does anyone believe that?
Yes, I know thats extreme, but it makes the point that there are differences. Its the same with neck length. We normally say a long neck is better than a short neck, but when does it become too long or too short?
We all know that you can list exceptions, but when we are talking about winnng a match by groups measured in thousandths, there has to be a difference in the internal ballistics of a given case!
Do I know exactly what that is; not by a long stretch but there seem to be general rules that exist and are proven by thousands of shooters.
There is a saying that I use and believe:
I dont consider myself to be that smart but I am smart enough to pay attention to what smart people do.

 

[Mram10us]

Just pointing out that everything seems to placed on equipment. The guy behind the gun matters more, especially at 1000.
I'm not saying that there aren't very good arguments to made for one case or another, just pointing out that the guy shooting and winning very well could have won with a case not mentioned.

Not knocking br 1000yd stuff, but I think this video shows that the shooters form might not be the deciding factor This is what makes me think the cartridges get tested for inherent accuracy in their sport.

 

[nmbarta]

Fair enough.
So help me with this, I'm not arguing my point. I love to learn.
If you can get accuracy to your liking (with any case) and get you sd's to your liking, which is very doable with many different cases.
How would the bullet still be effected by the case after it leaves the barrel?
A bullet having left a barrel is no longer aware of the case.

 

[Mram10us]

Fair enough.
So help me with this, I'm not arguing my point. I love to learn.
If you can get accuracy to your liking (with any case) and get you sd's to your liking, which is very doable with many different cases.
How would the bullet still be effected by the case after it leaves the barrel?
A bullet having left a barrel is no longer aware of the case.

Good question. I'm assuming the powder burning in the short fat case resembles as close to a sphere as we can get in a chamber, which is the most efficient. I'd like a better answer also. We're all here to learn

 

[Deleted member 48126]

Not knocking br 1000yd stuff, but I think this video shows that the shooters form might not be the deciding factor This is what makes me think the cartridges get tested for inherent accuracy in their sport.

im not going to lie that was pretty cool. I don't think I could shoot that smoothly. That was definitely a timing thing, trying to get those rounds down range before a wind change. Also, I'm sure his skill was in the set up of his equipment and making sure the rifle returned to the same point every time. I guess that proves your point about it being an equipment game.

 

[LongBomber]

The CM and a 260 are too close to call case design wise. Could toss in the 260ai as well. I have both a cm and the ai, rifles are similar but not the same spec. And both will do nice tight groups with es under 20 for 20 shots.

There is a big difference between talking, LR hunting, shooting prs matches and shooting f-class or LR bench. The number of shots put on paper for score changes what you need from your equipment.

I am not a real competator, I go to a couple shoots a year to have fun. At an f-class match I pull out the 300wsm with the 200.20x berger, prs I run a 6.5 cm/143eld. The 300 does give slightly more consistent numbers, and a hair more leway in the wind.

 

[reelhardmt]

#cityfolk

 

[elkaholic]

Here is another way to say it. We all agree that some shooters are better than others. We all agree that some equipment is built better than other equipment.
Why is it so difficult to believe that a case design is any different?
Lets take an internal combustion engine. Do all engines with the same displacement run the same? Do they run on the same fuel?
Here is some proof of what Im saying and others that have built them will agree.
My long action 338 Sherman and 338 SS are very close to the same capacity and will reach close to the same velocity, although the ss has a little edge based on less capacity. The long action round prefers the slowest powder you can feed it and the SS prefers much faster powder. If I ran Varget in my Long action at the same charge I put in my SS, it would blow the primer clear out of the case. So if internal ballistics are that complex, does it not make sense that one just might be more efficient/consistent and possibly have better accuracy because of it.

 

[J E Custom]

There is so many variables to accuracy that can effect accuracy that It is impossible to prove that one cartridge is inherently more accurate.

There are however many reasons that One cartridge excels over another cartridge In a certain use. Bench rest shooters have a set of conditions and parameters that they need to perform well. Hunters have other needs and conditions that they have to contend with and totally different requirements. Long range hunting requires yet a totally different set of rules and requirements also, So If for example, if you put a 6 PPC up against a 408 Cheytac and tried to shoot 2000 yards, which would you think would be the "Most inherently accurate cartridge". If the reverse was tested would the Cheytac come out on top in a bench rest match, No for many reasons.

There are many cartridges that are less forgiving to accuracy than others but that doesn't make them Less accurate. So the term "Inherently more accurate" doesn't really apply for all types of shooting. The shooter has a huge effect on accuracy and setup of the rifle has to be suited for the use. Bench rest shooting uses rules and equipment that are not practical in other forms of shooting so it is like comparing apples to oranges.

Another reason that a certain group uses and like a certain cartridge is that if a shooter uses a certain cartridge to win a competition or make an unbelievable shot, before long, everyone will have to have one of these cartridges for themselves.
Most every record is shot buy some cartridge until someone best it and then the entire population in that use group has to have the new cartridge to compete because someone said "IT is Inherently more accurate". Most don't take the time to do a side by side comparison of two different cartridges because they are/can be ballistic equals, but there are many small differences that can make a huge difference if not addressed with different loading requirements for the ammo.

Just my take on this.

J E CUSTOM

 

[nmbarta]

Well said,
That's what I was getting at. There are reasons they choose those cases that aren't related to accuracy alone.

 

[Mram10us]

There is so many variables to accuracy that can effect accuracy that It is impossible to prove that one cartridge is inherently more accurate.

There are however many reasons that One cartridge excels over another cartridge In a certain use. Bench rest shooters have a set of conditions and parameters that they need to perform well. Hunters have other needs and conditions that they have to contend with and totally different requirements. Long range hunting requires yet a totally different set of rules and requirements also, So If for example, if you put a 6 PPC up against a 408 Cheytac and tried to shoot 2000 yards, which would you think would be the "Most inherently accurate cartridge". If the reverse was tested would the Cheytac come out on top in a bench rest match, No for many reasons.

There are many cartridges that are less forgiving to accuracy than others but that doesn't make them Less accurate. So the term "Inherently more accurate" doesn't really apply for all types of shooting. The shooter has a huge effect on accuracy and setup of the rifle has to be suited for the use. Bench rest shooting uses rules and equipment that are not practical in other forms of shooting so it is like comparing apples to oranges.

Another reason that a certain group uses and like a certain cartridge is that if a shooter uses a certain cartridge to win a competition or make an unbelievable shot, before long, everyone will have to have one of these cartridges for themselves.
Most every record is shot buy some cartridge until someone best it and then the entire population in that use group has to have the new cartridge to compete because someone said "IT is Inherently more accurate". Most don't take the time to do a side by side comparison of two different cartridges because they are/can be ballistic equals, but there are many small differences that can make a huge difference if not addressed with different loading requirements for the ammo.

Just my take on this.

J E CUSTOM

I disagree with the idea the br guys shoot cartridges based on others winning with it while not testing it themselves. They are the most anal reloader/testers/tinkerers out there. They don't spend tens of thousands on gear without making sure the groups are as small as possible.

 

[HARPERC]

The course and rules decide what's optimum. Time limits, weight limits, number of rounds in that group, as well as range.

 

[adam32]

Shorter actions are also stiffer which can relate to "inherently more accurate"... like the 300 WSM compared to the .300 Win...

It would be interesting to build some identical rifles in let's say...308 win, 30/06, 300 wsm, 300 win, 30/378 then shoot the same bullet out of all of them and see what happens. Build them all on long actions too.

 

[Mram10us]

Shorter actions are also stiffer which can relate to "inherently more accurate"... like the 300 WSM compared to the .300 Win...

I build my wsm on tikka or rem700 LA. I haven't noticed a difference between the two, but haven't compared with a short action