inherent accuracy
 

Of the big 3 wsm calibers which one has the most recognized inherent bullet accuracy. Not concerned about which gun they will be in just which one has the accuracy. I hear some say the 7mm bullet has the most inherent accuracy, others say 300 and then some say the 270. What' s the real deal?

RE: inherent accuracy
 

as far as I' m concerned the term " inherent" accuracy is a serious misleading of truth. There is no such thing as inherent accuracy. It' s not true that a .308 is more accurate than a .30-06 because it' s a .308

Accuracy is a result of many factors including the shooter. Frankly I believe it has nothing to dowith the cartridge.

RE: inherent accuracy
 

Bowace....I really dont understand what you are asking. What is the most accurate of the 3 WSM cartridges? What caliber bullet is more accurate?

With the 30 caliber bullet being probably the most popular made, you have the widest selection to choose from. From a true accuracy standpoint using match type bullets, the order would be .308, .284 and way down on the list the .277.

Unlike Vapodog I would say that cartridge design has alot to do with accuracy. The new short/fat designs such as the WSM' s are derived from the 22 and 6mm PPC' s. They tend to optimize burn efficiency, making them very consistant. If cartridge design dosent matter why is the 6 PPC considered the most accurate round ever and not the 243 Win. ?

just my thoughts....;)AA;)

RE: inherent accuracy
 

I guess it is all in what you want to believe ,You cans say one is more accurate than another but can you prove it would be the bottom line . Not what you read but rather what you can prove. I' m with Vapodog ,don' t tell me ,show me .:D

RE: inherent accuracy
 

Probably because most people shooting the 6mm PPC are shooting them out of high dollar, ultra-precise, tight toleranced and highly accurized custom specialty rifles, and not the typical out-of-the-box mass-produced loose-tolerance one-size-fits-all factory rifles that most people shoot .243Win out of.

I think that accuracy of a perticular cartridge has less to do with the design of the cartridge itself, and for more to do with the many other issues such as the quality and tolerances of the rifle itself, and the quality and consistancy of the ammo, and how well the ammo suits the perticular taste of that rifle.

I think that the accuracy gains that can be had by using cartridges like the .22 and 6mm BR or PPC cartridges are so small that it would likely be noticed only by the competition benchrest shooters that measure their groups by the thousandths of an inch and a .250" group will take last place. I also think that, while the BR cartridges do provide some small accuracy gains themselves, I think that much of their reputation for accuracy can be attributed to the fact that most people shooting such specialty cartridges are doing so in custom specialty rifles that are manufactured to standards and tolerances that mass producers couldn' t sell to the general populace. We' re talking about $5000+ rifles specially built with only accuracy in mind, but not a practical rifle one would tromp around the woods with.

If one were to spend the time and money to build a rifle chambered in a common cartridge like .243Win or .308Win, or whatever, to the same specs as a typical benchrest rifle, and used the same precision handloading that benchrest shooters employ, then I think you' d see similar accuracy results with whatever cartridge you chose to shoot.

So out of the three WSM cartridges I' d speculate that their accuracy, out of nearly identical rifles, would be very similar. Down range performance will vary slightly with things like muzzle velocity and bullet BC. My question is what are you going to be shooting at and what ranged are you REALISTICALLY going to be taking shot. A 1/2MOA rifle is nice, but it' s not really necessary when you' re shooting at an elk at 300 yards or less. Since you' re asking about the WSM' s I' m guessing you' re not planning on varminting so you won' t be trying to hit a 3" target at 400 yards, and probably wanting it for mid-sized big game where the vital target area is 8-16" across. If you' re only planning on punching paper then I' d suggest you go with a lighter recoiling round. The lower the recoil the better you are likely to be able to shoot it.

Mike

RE: inherent accuracy
 

There is some truth to both of the above arguments. Some cartridge types (look at Benchrest records) have proven themselves to be what is called inherently more accurate than others. But the truth of the matter is those are measured in fractions of inches that will only matter in bench rest matches. Rest assured that expensive " Benchrest Rifles" have been chambered in calibers other than those that set all the records. The reason those rifles are built in those cartridges is because they have a proven track record of being more inherently accurate.

The difference is insignificant when you start to talk about hunting rifles fired from field positions. I am NOT saying that I won' t take more accuracy rather than less. What I am saying is that the difference in inherent accuracy in any of the short magnums is probably not worth worrying about in the field. And something that wasn' t even mentioned yet is that by designing ultrashort-sharp shouldered cartridges (functions that usually help inherent accuracy) are cartridge features that normally make functioning harder to insure. Look at how cartridges intended for use on dangerous game are intentionally designed. Most have more gently tapered cases and shoulders meaning fewer " sharp" edges when feeding from magazines. Making the transition from magazine to chamber both smoother and more certain. (I know you can find exceptions to both of the above.) But exceptions are just that....exceptions. Also one other consideration that may or may not be relevant to some. Short fat cartridges designs usually lose magazine capacity of one or two cartridges to cartridges of more standard design. Just like magnum cartridges usually have reduced magazine capacity as well. Not important to some....but more important to others. A good example is I own a .350 Remington Magnum in a Md 673 Remington. The cartridge capacity is three cartridges in the magazine and one in the chamber. A .35 Whelen (which equals the .350 Mag ballistically) will hold four cartridges in that same magazine design. Not important to a deer or elk hunter....but it might be for some one in brown bear country!

There have been cartridge designs that have been proven more inherently accurate. But unless you are getting into " Benchrest Target shooting" I wouldn' t let it concern my decisions....especially when buying a hunting rifle!

RE: inherent accuracy
 

I may be all wet here but this is my opinion.

In a hunting rifle in hunting situations, the rifle and shooter have much more to do with accurace than the cartridge. Only after the shooter and gun become ' target' grade does the accuracy of the cartridge need to be considered. The cartridge becomes the difference of 45 out of 50 ' x' rings vs 47 out of 50 ' x' rings for the inheritly accurate round.

For someone shooting at the lungs of a deer, no difference. For someone shooting paper, a difference.

RE: inherent accuracy
 

I understand what you are asking.

I do believe in this inherent accuracy. I do believe that short actions can be more accurate than long actions. It is hard to make a 308 shoot bad in my opinion. After chonying several calibers, it is hard to get a Spread below 50fps with a 300RUM, but very easy for a 308.

Sure, several people out there gets their 30-06 to shoot the eye out of a squirrel at 100 yards. But take that bad boy out to 600 yards or even further. That velocity spread can catch up with you.

RE: inherent accuracy
 

There are any factors that give a particular cartridge the potential to be more accurate than another. Every other factor being equal (we all know this isn' t possible) other than the bullets and cases used certain things have the potential to bake a bullet more accurate than another one.

Starting with the three calibers, not cartridges, listed the 7mm bullet usually has more potential to be more accurate than the others unless you get into some really specialized bullets and weights. Then the 30 moves ahead of the 7mm.

A short fat case has the potential to be more accurate than a longer skinnier case.

A sub sonic bullet is potentially more accurate than a super sonic bullet.

A cartridge that head spaces off of the shoulder instead of a belt or rim is potentially more accurate than the other two.

Certain shoulder angles are more accurate than others. I believe it is somewhere between 35* and 40*? I can' t remember what angle is considered to be the most efficient.


Of course we all know that there other things that go into a bullet being accurate other than the case and bullet itself like the gun, powder used, uniformity of the cases, primers used, etc.....etc....

RE: inherent accuracy
 

Per Vapodog: Absolutely correct. There really is no such thing as an inaccurate cartridge or bore size, there are only inaccurate rifles and sighting systems!

RE: inherent accuracy
 

Ok, Eld, are you saying that there is no such thing as a more efficient burning cartridge to another. And are you saying that larger Velocity spreads won' t affect you extreme long range accuracy? Curious what you think?

RE: inherent accuracy
 

For 99.9 % of anything you will ever ask of a big game hunting rifle...inherent accuracy of cartridge designs will not be a factor. For a long range varminter that percentage fiqure drops considerably. For a " bench rest competitor" that difference is the difference between coming in first....or coming in last.

Contact the personnel in the ballistic' s departments at company' s like Sierra, Nosler, etc. (not customer service reps) and ask them if there is a definitive difference in ballistic efficiency and inherent accuracy from different cartridge designs. These company' s have put more time, money, and research into answering that question then the average lifetime of hunter' s will either need or want to know! (And they usually don' t even provide the custom..." made one at a time" .....bullets that the custom makers produce for many benchrest match users.)

If after your conversation with these individuals you still have any doubts?!? Let me know! But once again if you only need to know concerning " hunting accuracy" , save yourself the bother. Pick the cartridge that you believe comes closest to meeting your needs and desires...and enjoy using it!

RE: inherent accuracy
 

NO! I am not saying that at all! I am saying that there are no particular cartridge designs that are inherently INACCURATE! What I mean by this is that it is possible for ANY cartridge to produce an acceptable level of accuracy if the combination of gun, load, and sighting equipment is right! Granted, it is EASIER to develop exceptionally accurate loads for some cartridges than for others. Many " over-capacity" (whatever that is!!) cartridges are much fussier about what you stuff in them, for sure!

I am well aware that short, fat powder columns, like those in the PPC cartridges, the wildcats based on the .284 Winchester, etc., generally produce more efficient, consistent burning of the powder charge, and hence, less variation in muzzle velocities. I am also aware that loads which produce the least velocity variation are thought to be the most accurate, but very often are not! I have personally chronographed loads in some calibers which gave more variation in shot-to-shot velocity and produced smaller groups than some more consitent loads! This means, for example, that the Lyman Handbook' s " POTENTIALLY MOST ACCURATE LOAD" often does not turn out that way in any given rifle.

RE: inherent accuracy
 

The original topic was a question as to the " inheritant accuracy of three WSM (.270, 7MM, and .300) cartridges. I challange anyone to make a case to show one is " inheritantly" more accurate than the other.

One might argue that there' s more .30 cal bullets available and that makes for a higher chance to find a " sweet" load in a .30 cal..that granted...there' s a heck of a lot of .270 and 7MM bullets out there too.

To insinuate that a cartridge is accurate because it " inherited it" from it' s lineage is simply a misnomer.

I' ve had 6PPCs in a varmint rifle that didn' t shoot any better than a .243. I' ve owned .308, .30-06, .300 win Mag, and .300 H&H and could never say one was more accurate than the other.

Bear in mind that I' m a hunter...not a benchrest shooter.

RE: inherent accuracy
 

Some cartridges have more accuracy POTENTIAL than others. A good example is that when the .308 cartridge first came out, military armorers were chambering Garand amtch rifles in .308 which could significantly outperform their best efforts with the same rifles chambered in 30-06.

In a $500 hunting rifle, it is unlikely you will ever see the difference between 2 such cartridges or any others for that matter.