And if there were any inherently inaccurate calibres then no one would buy them and they'd die out. So by default, everything available is inherently accurate.
Inherently accurate calubres?
- Thread starter finnbear270
- Start date
And if there were any inherently inaccurate calibres then no one would buy them and they'd die out. So by default, everything available is inherently accurate.
bluesako
Well-Known Member
as above said, all my rifle,s are accurate if they wasnt they wouldnt be in my cabinet. bs
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Accurate cartridges tend to be those that are nicely balanced, not too snappy and not too high pressure.
.222, 7x57, 6.5x55, 6.5cm, 308, 375h&h all have a reputation of being easy and nice to shoot and too fussy about what ammo you put through them.
On the other hand high velocity, high pressure and overbore cartridges Tend to be much fussier with ammo they use. 243 win is one that springs to mind. Mine shoots the old version of RWS 100gn very well. They then changed the load seating bullet a bit deeper. It hardly stays on the paper.
glasshalffull
Well-Known Member
Anything in 6.5mm 
Sausage fingers, Mike.What's a Calubre ?
I think I know what calibre means, and I think I know what Americans mean when they miss-spell it as caliber but I haven't come across calubre before.
Respectfully, you're full of sh.t.
That was excellent shooting
, and as they say I know cos I was there.....That was a run of the mill Tikka T3 stainless synthetic, little bit of trigger work and a whole heap of load development, over something like five years.
Tell me again why I sold that thing
There’s only one way to objectively answer the question, using data.
What do the champion shooters use? Well then you must ask which competition?
Take F-Class Mid-Range. The champion shooters all use either 6mm Dasher or 6.5x47. So there’s your answer. In Long-Range, they all use a 7mm of some sort, usually a .284 Remington. So there’s another answer.
So unless there’s something you know that they don’t, get one of those or shoot something else!
What do the champion shooters use? Well then you must ask which competition?
Take F-Class Mid-Range. The champion shooters all use either 6mm Dasher or 6.5x47. So there’s your answer. In Long-Range, they all use a 7mm of some sort, usually a .284 Remington. So there’s another answer.
So unless there’s something you know that they don’t, get one of those or shoot something else!
Overlay
Well-Known Member
many years ago I had a BSA majestic in .270 ( no mod) It was accurate and devastating on Red and Roe
but it Kicked like a mule and didn’t like Roe - short story
i gave it to a deer farm in Battle Nr Hastings
swearing blind I’d never have another
last year at bisley a friend of mine had a McMillan rifle in .270 and it was like shooting a .243 Very very accurate and easy on the shoulder - what a difference- if it wasn’t for the fact of no room in the now bursting gun safes I would have probably
have one now. Really impressed with it. But yer can’t have them all.
I feel your pain....I've yet to find an accurate rifle. None of my own shoot well; I've tried my friends' set-ups and they all shoot terribly; I've even borrowed from neighbours at the range, and they are simply awful pieces of trash. It is very frustrating...I just can't understand it...
Funny thing is, those same rifles seem to be inherently accurate in anyone else's hands
As Caberslash says, what is accuracy.
I have a friend who's 100% stalker, the closer he can get to a deer the better for him. His version of accuracy is four inch square at 100 yards.
For me as an engineer a rifle isn't really interesting unless it has the ability to shoot 0.25 MOA, that makes me try much harder to achieve that accuracy, not just the rifle build but the selection of the right component and the making of the round, and lots of time spent accurising the hand load.
The rifle that followed the .22/250 that Tim was talking about was a Sako Finnlite in the same calibre. It would print 1 MOA maybe a little better with hand loads but I didn't put the time into it to develop the best load, and soon sold it.
What followed was a 6mm XC semi custom, which is truly frustrating to hand load for. There's no point in load development at 100m. If all five rounds aren't basically touching you've probably forgot to do something or you're free handing the shot. I haven't tried it but you could probably pour the powder in by eye and she'd still print 1 MOA
I have a friend who's 100% stalker, the closer he can get to a deer the better for him. His version of accuracy is four inch square at 100 yards.
For me as an engineer a rifle isn't really interesting unless it has the ability to shoot 0.25 MOA, that makes me try much harder to achieve that accuracy, not just the rifle build but the selection of the right component and the making of the round, and lots of time spent accurising the hand load.
The rifle that followed the .22/250 that Tim was talking about was a Sako Finnlite in the same calibre. It would print 1 MOA maybe a little better with hand loads but I didn't put the time into it to develop the best load, and soon sold it.
What followed was a 6mm XC semi custom, which is truly frustrating to hand load for. There's no point in load development at 100m. If all five rounds aren't basically touching you've probably forgot to do something or you're free handing the shot. I haven't tried it but you could probably pour the powder in by eye and she'd still print 1 MOA
Heym SR20
Well-Known Member
Accuracy is just one component of any hunting cartridge. Bullet performance and terminal effect is more important.
And accuracy in field conditions from a cold barrel is what really counts.
Are you confident that you can put a bullet through the vitals of your chosen target so that you can kill it quickly, effectively and with minimum level of stress?
I am confident with my chosen rifles, bullets, loads, optics, sticks etc that I can confidently take a shot on any Roe Deer out to 150 or so, and with a good solid rest I will stretch this to 200.
On paper, from a rested position any of my rifles will shoot within an inch or two of point of aim out to 200. I sight a bit over an inch at 100.
Add in a bit of adrenalin, a target that can move as you squeeze the trigger, and a field position this will open up a bit.
But **** happens, and terminal effect is key. Using a high velocity frangible varmint bullet on a fox - head on and aiming for the bib, or rabbit or grow, any hit will cause massive damage and a kill. Very much a hit or miss scenario.
On a deer though, or a broad side fox, a bullet a bit far back or forward or high or low will cause a wounding shot that will not cause a quick death.
One stalker I used to stalk with on taking a guest out to the hill would down a can of coke and leave the can on a rock. And some indeterminate 100 ish distance later he would ask the guest to shoot it. If they could hit the can they went to the hill.
Agreed.
Another aspect of performance for hunting rifle chamberings is bullet drop (or lack of), a better word being bullet trajectory.
Why are lots of popular hunting chamberings 'over-bore', such as the venerable .270 and .243 Winchester which have on average muzzle velocities on or over 3,000ft/sec?
How fast is that in 'real world' terms?
In the field under normal stalking conditions (say, a shot under 200m) you really don't have the time or need to break out the rangefinder (or god forbid, Kestrel!) and work out a firing solution. If you are doing this then I would be asking questions...
So, on a 'snap-shot' you need a rifle with a trajectory and scope sighted in to work from 'point-blank' out to 300 meters or so to account for errors in range estimation. The fact that most scope reticles have the capacity for 'instant' range finding make this easier still.
Having being a big fan of dial scopes (I own three!) I would now say that for stalking in the UK they are completed unnecessary.
Why dial when you know holdovers and why hold when you know the round will impact within a three inch radius or less of the centre of the crosshair (within sensible distances)?
Chamerings such as the 6.5CM are great for range work as you can use bullets with a higher than average ballistic coefficient loaded to give you consistent trajectory which can be dialled in to distances all the way out to the point where you would struggle to see the target with the naked eye.
Still can't believe people are being sold 6.5CM rifles to shoot Muntjac and Roe deer out of a high seat at a distance well under 100 meters... but whatever floats your boat!
However, when it comes to varmiting I would say the best of both worlds (rangefinder, dial scope, ballistic computer and flat shooting chambering) is great, but maybe not for barrel life!
Triggermortis
Well-Known Member
Yes it can, if that weren’t the case .222 wouldn’t have held so many accuracy
world records for so long and no other calibre would have been able to take those records away ?
world records for so long and no other calibre would have been able to take those records away ?
I think accuracy is a matter of engineering tolerances: my most accurate rifle is the AIAE mk1 I got from Splash. It just happens to be in .308 but I am sure it would be just as accurate if it was in .260, .303, .222, 30-06, 7x57 or any other ordinary rifle calibre because the engineering tolerances with which it was manufactured are so tight compared to lesser rifles.
Overlay
Well-Known Member
I've yet to find an accurate rifle. None of my own shoot well; I've tried my friends' set-ups and they all shoot terribly; I've even borrowed from neighbours at the range, and they are simply awful pieces of trash. It is very frustrating...I just can't understand it...
sounds to me you need to visit the dark side of Blasers.
CarlW
Well-Known Member
I've heard of them. Aren't they the rifles people shoot while wearing a loden trilby with a feather in the hat-band...?sounds to me you need to visit the dark side of Blasers.
Calubres?, spent a happy hour on farm this am with my flat pack shooti’n bench, four rounds to sort the .25-06 wearing the PARD 007, A good bullet on bullet @ the requisite 220 feet.
.
Those hotcores by any chance?
