Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
"Inherently more accurate"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GMFWOODCHUCK" data-source="post: 1786942" data-attributes="member: 110748"><p>No one can prove that any one cartridge shape is inherently better than another.</p><p> </p><p>Someone pointed out in the beginning about horizontal accuracy (wind) and vertical accuracy. </p><p></p><p>We also shouldn't forget market share and advertising.</p><p></p><p>A 300 WSM is going to do better in the wind than a 22 PPC at 1000 yards. And a 22PPC appears to be better at 100 yard shooting that the 300WSM. The reasons for the 1000 yard shooting is pretty self explanatory. High BCs carry themselves well to the end. My guess with the 100 yards is that a 22PPC is less stressful on the shooter AND the equipment provided the equipment is the same.</p><p></p><p>Market share. This is easy to explain. Who wants to shoot a 50 BMG just to punch holes at 100 yards in a match with toggle wright limits? Naturally the smaller stuff will come to bear. 1000 out of 1000 competitors will pick a smaller caliber. Not because it's "better" but because they do just fine. So there's more of them.</p><p></p><p>Comparing the 260 versus the 6.5CM. I seriously doubt anyone can actually price that one is more accurate than the other. However we can prove that the CM can give you the same results with less powder. If you're a reloader and a competitive shooter that can add up to a few bucks. Especially if you're shooting 3000 rounds a month. That's a few pounds of powder. 40-60 bucks a month over the course of a few years can add up. Plus there the barrel longevity argument. It would stand to reason that less powder will eat less barrel given everything else is the same. Money matters if you don't have a sponsor or ten. So naturally more people will lean towards the efficient case shapes.</p><p></p><p>Continuing with market share. If everyone is using the same 10-30 different cartridges then that's what the manufacturers are going to produce. Lapua isn't going to produce 22 hornet and 45-70 cases anytime soon. There's no money in them.</p><p></p><p>I mentioned advertising. Hornady has done a wonderful job with the Creedmoor ads. So did Nike and Budweiser. We're all suckers to a good ad. It is what it is.</p><p></p><p>We're also suckers to GOAT. "Greatest Of All Time." We talk are going to use what the winners are using. It's just human nature. The last winner used a tool/toy so I'm going to too.</p><p></p><p>Much of this had already been said. And it's all psychology. Use what you will. You'll do the best with what suits you. Not with what someone says is "inherently more accurate".</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GMFWOODCHUCK, post: 1786942, member: 110748"] No one can prove that any one cartridge shape is inherently better than another. Someone pointed out in the beginning about horizontal accuracy (wind) and vertical accuracy. We also shouldn't forget market share and advertising. A 300 WSM is going to do better in the wind than a 22 PPC at 1000 yards. And a 22PPC appears to be better at 100 yard shooting that the 300WSM. The reasons for the 1000 yard shooting is pretty self explanatory. High BCs carry themselves well to the end. My guess with the 100 yards is that a 22PPC is less stressful on the shooter AND the equipment provided the equipment is the same. Market share. This is easy to explain. Who wants to shoot a 50 BMG just to punch holes at 100 yards in a match with toggle wright limits? Naturally the smaller stuff will come to bear. 1000 out of 1000 competitors will pick a smaller caliber. Not because it's "better" but because they do just fine. So there's more of them. Comparing the 260 versus the 6.5CM. I seriously doubt anyone can actually price that one is more accurate than the other. However we can prove that the CM can give you the same results with less powder. If you're a reloader and a competitive shooter that can add up to a few bucks. Especially if you're shooting 3000 rounds a month. That's a few pounds of powder. 40-60 bucks a month over the course of a few years can add up. Plus there the barrel longevity argument. It would stand to reason that less powder will eat less barrel given everything else is the same. Money matters if you don't have a sponsor or ten. So naturally more people will lean towards the efficient case shapes. Continuing with market share. If everyone is using the same 10-30 different cartridges then that's what the manufacturers are going to produce. Lapua isn't going to produce 22 hornet and 45-70 cases anytime soon. There's no money in them. I mentioned advertising. Hornady has done a wonderful job with the Creedmoor ads. So did Nike and Budweiser. We're all suckers to a good ad. It is what it is. We're also suckers to GOAT. "Greatest Of All Time." We talk are going to use what the winners are using. It's just human nature. The last winner used a tool/toy so I'm going to too. Much of this had already been said. And it's all psychology. Use what you will. You'll do the best with what suits you. Not with what someone says is "inherently more accurate". [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
"Inherently more accurate"
Top