We hear it all the time. Short actions are inherantly more accurate than a long action rifle. Which is generally true. BUT.............. it seems that the vast majority of the opinions on this is that the bolt being shorter and the receiver being shorter make them more stiff and this is conducive to better accuracy.

Now before I get started explaining my thoughts about this let me say that I do know why short actions of the same caliber are generally more accurate. I has everything to do with the shorter powder columns and the more moderate velocities generated.

When you look at a bolt action rifle the bolts lugs are on the front of the bolt. The lug seats are inside the front of the receiver. The recoil lug is in front of both of the other two. So being that the recoil is transfered to the stock before it ever gets past the recoil lug seats what differance could it possibly make how stiff and rigid the rear of the bolt and receiver are? They don't do anything but just sit there looking pretty until you cycle the action.

So why do the majority of folks always say that short actions are more accurate because they are more stiff?

Anyone else have an opinion on this?