There isn't a cartridge out there that WONT shoot sub MOA. But there are plenty of GUNS that cant. These groups in a hunting rifle are substantially more than adequate. The short mag theory is to find something wrong with the existing offerings, and sell it as new and improved. Take a 140 grain .27 caliber bullet and make it go a little faster. Now shove that into a different case than a typical 270 add a magnum primer, and convince buyers its their ticket to better hunting success. The idea was a smaller package that has more punch. The guns weigh the same. Bullet does the same amount of damage. The gain is selling the same amount of brass, lead, and copper plus a tad more powder for 2-3 times the price of its counterpart, and having a monopoly on it. The buyer pays more for the same ammo, and buys the same gun, then to top it off, the magazine holds one (or two) less rounds. The "rave" reviews are guys who write articles about guns for companies they want to be in good graces with, on the off chance they will get something for free. Then comes along Ruger and T/C. New guns with new offerings. Its called a superadequacy. Ever notice when a food item says "New look, same great taste? Whats the point? So maybe my experience with short mags is only limited to messing with someone elses 7mmWSM. I really only had about 10 minutes of experience with it. It took two minutes to figure out that it was a load of bull, and eight minutes figure out how not to hurt the owners feelings.

Marketing. You have to get them before they get you.

But each to their own, if you really want something that will help make a successfull hunt, buy good boots.