# Firearms and Shooting > Reloading and Ballistics >  Inaccurate Cartridges

## Marty Henry

So yesterday thanks to kiwi greg I had a bit of schooling on the 22 terminator and its lineage.
Delving further I encountered a whole raft of cartridges described as being known for their superb accuracy. This got me thinking has anyone heard of one described as being superbly innacurate? 
I know most of the influencing factors are bullet construction and design, rifling twist rate, barrel construction, bore tolerance, condition and concentricity, action type and rigidity etc and of course the "nut behind the butt" 
I know we all have personal favourites and pet hates, mention 270 or 243 here and see what happens but all that aside assuming all of these thing are sorted are there really any cartridges that would have trouble hitting a flock of barns at 10 paces?

----------


## rossi.45

i cant say i have heard of a inherently inaccurate cartridge,   especially if you bring the times they were developed in as a factor, a .45/70 isnt going to compete with a 6mm PPC etc  . . .  would think the quality of the 3 Bs are more important, Barrel, Bullet & Bedding for most applications . . . . something to think about today as i drive . . cheers

----------


## 7mm300wby

Never seen a half Moa .303

----------


## Tim Dicko

> Never seen a half Moa .303


someone on the forum will be thinking, that sounds like a challenge.....

----------


## stevodog

What's the better groove barrel to go for in the 303?.... I see some nice spotters come up for sale for not much.

----------


## stevodog

Sporters

----------


## Walker

A new Fulton regulated No4 was good for .75moa with MkVII issue ball back in the fifties. One could probably have got better with hand loading

----------


## Marty Henry

> Never seen a half Moa .303


 A P14 will do it with target ammo. Mk 7 service was fit for purpose and produced at astronomical rates.
In this case the bad reputation is mostly due to the state of the rifles being used.

----------


## Marty Henry

2 groove rifles are not necessarily less accurate than the 5 groove ones but they seem to do better with flat base bullets

----------


## Mathias

22 Magnum comes to mind. Not known for good accuracy, compared to it's little brother anyway.

----------


## hthomas

I have a Marlin 25NM in .22WM and it with Hornady ammo shots half moa with ease even with me behind the trigger.

----------


## Micky Duck

same/similar bore diametre...the 7.62x39mm doesnt spring to mind as being a tack driver....doesnt need to be for its intended purpose. which leads thought process onto individual rounds DESIGNED to tumble etc....

----------


## 300CALMAN

Nah my NEA 7.62x39 shoots just as well as equivalent 5.56 rifles.

It has a lot to do with the rifles designed to shoot the cartridge.

----------


## timattalon

I must admit that I cannot think of any off the top of my head. I would put the 7.62x39 down as a likely contender, not because of calibre, but because a very large portion of the ammunition made for this calibre is MilSurp and is not as consistant with good quality sporting ammo. Put decent ammo through and mostly, they improve a lot, but the popularity is around the price of the cheaper ammo and the fact that with that accuracy drop it is still effective and practical at the range most use it for means you dont gain enough to justify decent ammo. 

It performs well at closer ranges up to about 150 metres so ideal for close bush work. at that range a 7inch group at 100m will still be on the money on a deer or pig at 150m. So dropping it to a 1 or half inch group at 100m would be pointless unless you are shooting at smaller harder to hit targets in which case most would go for a smaller cheaper calibre like a 22.

----------


## Maca49

223 if ya tell me you own a 1:8 that shoots any ammo accurately, with proof I'd buy it!! :O O:  fussy as, no I don't want to hand load!!

----------


## 7mmwsm

I have a NEA which I converted to 7.62x39. Best factory ammo I've found (for accuracy) is cheap chinese copper wash fmj. Shoots better than an inch whenever I can. 
Annoys the hell out of the semi "anti's" when them and their super dooper rigs get out shot by it.

----------


## Beavis

IMO any cartridge can be shoe horned to be accurate. As mentioned, it is/was POS rifles and ammunition that give cartridges a bad rep. I would put money on it that any bottle neck centre fire rifle cartridge would consistenly shoot MOA or better if all else was equal.

----------


## 300CALMAN

> I have a NEA which I converted to 7.62x39. Best factory ammo I've found (for accuracy) is cheap chinese copper wash fmj. Shoots better than an inch whenever I can. 
> Annoys the hell out of the semi "anti's" when them and their super dooper rigs get out shot by it.


likewise i get 1 to 1.5 inch, Barnaul shoots even better at just below an inch. This is a 14.5 inch barrel with a 1-6x scope. Hardly a target rig. Well made free floating barres with correct chamber dimensions make the world of difference.

----------


## Micky Duck

probably told you lads this one before....
we fired a round of chinasport x39mm and found a section of case attached to the neck of fired case it was about 3mmx2mm and the only place it could have been was inside the neck of loaded round...... thats the last time that stuff been fired by us
now the yellow box stuff....thats a different story.

----------


## 223nut

12guage with solids...

----------


## 300_BLK

7-08 or 222

----------


## shooternz

Now you are on dangerous ground

----------


## 300_BLK

> Now you are on dangerous ground


 :Wink:

----------


## Tentman

Another thing to consider, the reloading components available to us seem to have gotten better over the years.  I loaded for the same 7x57 for at nearly 30 years, in fairly small quantities, never touched the rifle/scope or its bedding etc.  When I first started shooting it in 1985 the best I could do with it was 30mm at 100M.  When I gave it away in 2014 it was shooting 19mm groups consistently.  I don't think my shooting improved one iota as I got older, the reverse in fact.

----------


## Micky Duck

> Another thing to consider, the reloading components available to us seem to have gotten better over the years.  I loaded for the same 7x57 for at nearly 30 years, in fairly small quantities, never touched the rifle/scope or its bedding etc.  When I first started shooting it in 1985 the best I could do with it was 30mm at 100M.  When I gave it away in 2014 it was shooting 19mm groups consistently.  I don't think my shooting improved one iota as I got older, the reverse in fact.


aint that the truth!!!!!!

----------


## Steve123

Any cartridge made by PMC seems to be crap in my opinion, Tried the 308, 223 and 7.62x39 and all shot saucer sized(at least) groups. Put some hornady traing then some American Eagle through the T3 straight after and got 1/2 moa groups so the rifles good.

----------


## Cartman

> Never seen a half Moa .303


I have it was a ruger no1

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

----------


## Cartman

> 12guage with solids...


They have dedicated slug guns in the states that will have 3 touching at 100

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

----------


## Micky Duck

Steve123.......back in the day before I got reloading gear thats what we fed my poohseventy with. the longest shot on big game I have sussessfully taken was with PMC with the soft lead bit taken off as my mag used to mash them under recoil. first shot at chammy was aimed at spine and trimmed her toenails,giving me "kentucky windage" 2nd shot was all that was needed.....work that out on drop chart and its 350-400yards..... also pmc is plurry good brass.

----------


## Sideshow

If you look at the history of some of these cartridges you will find mention time and again how in general it was the rifle and ammunition makers that let them down. It still happens today. Take the 7x57 ammo that is made in the states. They download them because the ammo company's are afraid that they might be used in an old gun that might then blow up, which in turn gets them into litigation because dumb ass didn't check to see that his firearm was up to the task. :Omg: 
But this is aside from the original question that was asked.
I'm sure that if you take any cartridge and built with care a rifle especially for that cartridge you would see results that would make you happier than using a worn out gun with pitted barrel and poor bedding, shit trigger and poor shooting technique.
Take the 303 Bren gun this was found to be too accurate :Wtfsmilie:  yep that's right. For what it was designed for! As a cover/suppressing fire weapon which is ment to spray bullets around, this weapon would give good to astonishing groups. This was used to good effect against snipers in the Italy campaign by NZ troops. 
Again back to the question which is not asking to compare one cartridge against another :Thumbsup:  but is a cartridge accurate!
If it hits what your aiming at then you can't really complain ah  :Thumbsup:

----------


## MSL

Pretty much any calibre I try to shoot would qualify

----------


## tiroatedson

Had a remmy 7615 pump gun in .223 for a while, it shot like shit...  As has being said more of a rifle issue than a calibre issue..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------


## FatLabrador

> 223 if ya tell me you own a 1:8 that shoots any ammo accurately, with proof I'd buy it!! fussy as, no I don't want to hand load!!


Is that the one 4 sale  :Psmiley:

----------


## veitnamcam

Much is made recently of the inherent accuracy of having a short fat powder column. wsm saum br etc
Yet many get great results out of 30-06/6.5 etc

I have no experience to quantify the differences but am interested where this thread will head.

----------


## Micky Duck

the .30/06 is no slouch either....buggered if I would want to be out in the boonies anywhere under say 800yards if someone was peering through a scope ontop of one,even if its over a hundred years old....same goes for the .45/90 and the like.
they could all shoot out to distance its just our expectations and technogatgetry have got so much better/ahead.

----------


## Sideshow

Oh oh oh meme meme I know the answer to this riddle :ORLY:  BLANKS :XD:  there as inaccurate as@¥#~ it must be true I saw it on that Bruce Willis movie  :Thumbsup:

----------


## Marty Henry

So it seems that inaccuracy lies in the eyes of the shooter?

----------


## Carlsen Highway

If they made it to production they usually shot good enough for either commercial or government use. A natural selection weeding the poor shooters out so to speak. One is hardly likely to invest money in production of a cartridge that proves inaccurate in testing. 

But in my own experience the .22 Magnum, and the Snider .577. The .22 Magnum's I have met have trouble getting under one inch at 50 metres, and the Sniders I have shot have difficulty getting under one foot at 25... (How accurate are .22 shorts?)

.303's have a bad name; the Lee Enfield rifles were designed to shoot the equivilent of three inch groups at 100 yards, but the cartridge itself will do anything you like in a good rifle. The rifle target clubs all up through till the '60's were all shot with .303's. 
The .30/30 has also a poor reputation because of the open sighted lever actions, but the .30/30 can be a phenomenal shooter in single shots and bolt actions.

----------


## 308

Could it also be related to how flat shooting a calibre is?

eg a fast calibre such as a 220 Swift will require less adjustment for drop within its given range than other calibres with a more rainbow-shaped trajectory so may start to be referred to as more inherently accurate when really that is just semantics

----------


## 7mm300wby

There certainly seems to be calibres that can achieve greater accuracy than others e.g 22 / 6mm BR and 6.5x47

----------


## Growlybear

All the hunting rifles I have owned, regardless of calibre, have shot M.O.C (minute of critter.) :Wink:

----------


## Marty Henry

Minute of critter/ deer thats a great definition of the minimum needed to get the job done at any one time.

----------


## Marty Henry

Minute of critter/ deer thats a great definition of the minimum needed to get the job done at any one time.

----------


## Danger Mouse

> If they made it to production they usually shot good enough for either commercial or government use. A natural selection weeding the poor shooters out so to speak. One is hardly likely to invest money in production of a cartridge that proves inaccurate in testing. 
> 
> But in my own experience the .22 Magnum, and the Snider .577. The .22 Magnum's I have met have trouble getting under one inch at 50 metres, and the Sniders I have shot have difficulty getting under one foot at 25... (How accurate are .22 shorts?)
> 
> .303's have a bad name; the Lee Enfield rifles were designed to shoot the equivilent of three inch groups at 100 yards, but the cartridge itself will do anything you like in a good rifle. The rifle target clubs all up through till the '60's were all shot with .303's. 
> The .30/30 has also a poor reputation because of the open sighted lever actions, but the .30/30 can be a phenomenal shooter in single shots and bolt actions.



Agreed. most 303s are just flogged out.

I have a previously unfired no4 that i use in service rifle. 1.5 - 2 inch with iron sights at 100m.

----------


## Danger Mouse

> If they made it to production they usually shot good enough for either commercial or government use. A natural selection weeding the poor shooters out so to speak. One is hardly likely to invest money in production of a cartridge that proves inaccurate in testing. 
> 
> But in my own experience the .22 Magnum, and the Snider .577. The .22 Magnum's I have met have trouble getting under one inch at 50 metres, and the Sniders I have shot have difficulty getting under one foot at 25... (How accurate are .22 shorts?)
> 
> .303's have a bad name; the Lee Enfield rifles were designed to shoot the equivilent of three inch groups at 100 yards, but the cartridge itself will do anything you like in a good rifle. The rifle target clubs all up through till the '60's were all shot with .303's. 
> The .30/30 has also a poor reputation because of the open sighted lever actions, but the .30/30 can be a phenomenal shooter in single shots and bolt actions.



Agreed. most 303s are just flogged out.

I have a previously unfired no4 that i use in service rifle. 1.5 - 2 inch with iron sights at 100m.

----------


## R93

As mentioned the old Bren was accurate. 
When I first joined most of the Brens were converted to 7.62

There were still some in. 303
I remember one of our bigger fellas who was a gunner that could single shot the thing into tiny wee groups and instead of shooting at the target at 300 he would shoot the pole in order to piss off the fellas in the butts. 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

----------


## Micky Duck

yip you sure wouldnt want to try to match that with an AK47,uzi or a steyr ....and they call it progress

----------


## R93

> yip you sure wouldnt want to try to match that with an AK47,uzi or a steyr ....and they call it progress


With K100 or SS109 and different than issue optics the Steyr would do it piece of piss. 
About the only thing I liked about them was their accuracy. 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

----------


## Micky Duck

the bren would have been fitted with iron sights was it not???????
my Father still has a trophy in cabinet from his compulersy military service days
Dad and his mate cleaned up the whole battalion between them, his mate was first with the bren and 2nd with rifle and Dad the other way around.....

----------


## Mathias

> Much is made recently of the inherent accuracy of having a short fat powder column. wsm saum br etc
> Yet many get great results out of 30-06/6.5 etc
> 
> I have no experience to quantify the differences but am interested where this thread will head.


VC, I'm pretty sure this short fat column primarily promotes efficiency with the powder burn and this leads to being able to finely tuning the accuracy with smaller increments of powder. Some of our bench resters may be able to confirm this  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## wsm junkie

> With K100 or SS109 and different than issue optics the Steyr would do it piece of piss. 
> About the only thing I liked about them was their accuracy. 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk


I just couldn't get used to that trigger! Guess thats why I opted to carry the C9 :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## R93

> I just couldn't get used to that trigger! Guess thats why I opted to carry the C9


An Allen key with some graphite powder along with a bit of tinkering made it semi respectable. But yeah in general they were shit. 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

----------


## Carlsen Highway

> Agreed. most 303s are just flogged out.
> 
> I have a previously unfired no4 that i use in service rifle. 1.5 - 2 inch with iron sights at 100m.



I had a Longbranch No.4 that would do the same. These days I have a 30/30 Winchester carbine with standard factory sights that will go under that with ease, as well as a Winchester 73 in .44/40 that will shoot 1.5 inch groups with black powder and open sights. The '73 took a lot of experimentation with both the loads and the sights to get there; the .30/30 was born that way.

----------


## R93

> the bren would have been fitted with iron sights was it not???????
> my Father still has a trophy in cabinet from his compulersy military service days
> Dad and his mate cleaned up the whole battalion between them, his mate was first with the bren and 2nd with rifle and Dad the other way around.....


Yeah it was just off set irons.
 But the same fella was a freak and Army shooting team gunner. When we were training for comps I seen him hit a fig 14 (huns head) 6 out of 10rnds with a gpmg at 500yrds.
Couldn't shoot a rifle for shit tho  

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

----------


## GravelBen

> 22 Magnum comes to mind. Not known for good accuracy, compared to it's little brother anyway.


It has that reputation but I don't know if its actually justified or not.

I've only had one of them (Savage 93G), it generally shot around 1-1.5" at 100yds depending what I fed it. Less variety of ammo options than 22LR if you get a fussy one I suppose.

----------


## Cordite

> same/similar bore diametre...the 7.62x39mm doesnt spring to mind as being a tack driver....doesnt need to be for its intended purpose. which leads thought process onto individual rounds DESIGNED to tumble etc....


 @Micky Duck

All spitzers tumble - because their point of balance is towards their base.  The Mk 7 ball merely had exaggerated rearward point of balance.  A rearward point of balance also renders spitzers (translated "pointys") more accurate.

With regard to accuracy, more accurate cartridges, etc, that is a long discussion.  

Military rifles are designed for reliability-- with dirt included.  That includes loose chamber tolerances, whether .303 or 7.62x39.  Hard to feed cartridges perfectly concentric with the bore when you have a loose-fit chamber, and as such bullets engage rifling off-axis, a major, major, major source of inaccuracy.  A .303 No 4 _could_ have been made with exacting tolerances to shoot half-MOA (with a new barrel) but look in all respects like a stock rifle, but you'd not trust your life to it.  And you would experience problems with out-of-spec ammo.

----------


## Ryan_Songhurst

> the .30/06 is no slouch either....buggered if I would want to be out in the boonies anywhere under say 800yards if someone was peering through a scope ontop of one,even if its over a hundred years old....same goes for the .45/90 and the like.
> they could all shoot out to distance its just our expectations and technogatgetry have got so much better/ahead.


I had a Remington 03-A3 sporter that was an absolute tack driver even with open sights, heavy as the day is long though! 
I asked a gunsmith to tap the action for me so I could fit a scope and he refused, reckons they were made from some of the hardest steel out and smiths hate tapping them as it wrecks their gear. Real nice rifle it was.

----------


## Sideshow

> 22 Magnum comes to mind. Not known for good accuracy, compared to it's little brother anyway.


Still down to rifle and shooter.

These two thought they where safe out at over 100meters not :XD: 
Rifle was this! CZ  :Thumbsup:  

When my brother saw the shots he brought it on the spot :Grin: 
You just need to know your cartridge and know your rifle.
Every rifle is different.......our should I say every barrel once the bedding and trigger is taken care of :Wink:

----------


## Sideshow

Looks like that top photo was taken from where the shot was :XD: 

Here's a closer look :Have A Nice Day: 
http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...tml#post633782

----------


## 6x47

Apparently much .22 Mag ammo has shite quality projectiles that will never allow top performance.

Regarding the maggies, I'd be more excited if you'd said they were levelled at 150yds. I shot two this morning with a PCP air rifle at 85 and 87yds resp

----------


## Sideshow

> Apparently much .22 Mag ammo has shite quality projectiles that will never allow top performance.
> 
> Regarding the maggies, I'd be more excited if you'd said they were levelled at 150yds. I shot two this morning with a PCP air rifle at 85 and 87yds resp


Actually taken at 175. Which is around 160 meters :Have A Nice Day: http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...tml#post633782

----------


## 300CALMAN

Cant say I have seen too many 9mm or 45acp carbines that were super accurate although I guess it goes back to the ammo. 

Someone will contradict me  :Thumbsup:

----------


## Cordite

> Much is made recently of the inherent accuracy of having a short fat powder column. wsm saum br etc
> Yet many get great results out of 30-06/6.5 etc
> 
> I have no experience to quantify the differences but am interested where this thread will head.


 @veitnamcam,

The 30/06, despite of any long-powder-column disadvantage if such exists, will have one advantage from its long case length:  A LONGER cartridge will more readily line up with the bore axis, which in turn helps its bullet engage with the rifling on-axis.

A bullet which is perfectly balanced on the rifling axis is less like a corkscrewing aerobat before its spin eventually stabilises it at some point of its corkscrew.  This is why some large groups often describe circles (with the centre less densely holed, rather than a uniform peppering of holes covering the entire area of a circle).

----------


## Cordite

> Cant say I have seen too many 9mm or 45acp carbines that were super accurate although I guess it goes back to the ammo. 
> 
> Someone will contradict me


  @300CALMAN,

From memory, the Sterling L2A3 9mm SMG (WW2 Patchett SMG derivative) fired from an open bolt.  And it was required to be able to hit within a 10 cm circle at 200 metres, obviously in semi-auto mode.  That is <2 MOA.  This is not super accuracy, but it is superlative accuracy in a 9mm SMG.  About as much as anyone should ever hope to get out of the 9x19mm.  Someone please correct me.

----------


## veitnamcam

> @veitnamcam,
> 
> The 30/06, despite of any long-powder-column disadvantage if such exists, will have one advantage from its long case length:  A LONGER cartridge will more readily line up with the bore axis, which in turn helps its bullet engage with the rifling on-axis.
> 
> A bullet which is perfectly balanced on the rifling axis is less like a corkscrewing aerobat before its spin eventually stabilises it at some point of its corkscrew.  This is why some large groups often describe circles (with the centre less densely holed, rather than a uniform peppering of holes covering the entire area of a circle).


Yes but would be mitigated by close chamber dimensions.

I was hoping someone may have burnt a couple of barrels in a target rig with a long case and gone to a short and fat case in a apples with apples comparison.

Sent from my SM-G390Y using Tapatalk

----------


## northdude

cant really say ive come across an inaccurate cartridge come across a few inaccurate rifles tho some could be fixed some couldn't ive come across fussy cartridges that in factory loads were crap but a little experimenting with hand loads sorted them 22 hornet springs to mind

----------


## Cordite

> Yes but would be mitigated by close chamber dimensions.
> 
> I was hoping someone may have burnt a couple of barrels in a target rig with a long case and gone to a short and fat case in a apples with apples comparison.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G390Y using Tapatalk


@vietnamcam

Apples for apples, I was thinking of long vs short cartridges, both in military loose chambers.  With the exact same tolerances employed, the longer cartridge will of course be more likely to sit on-axis.  But how big that effect is for accuracy... who knows.  

To help cartridges sit concentric with the rifling bore, some advocate putting a thin O-ring round the base of the cartridge, a couple mm ahead of the rim on rimmed cartridges or extractor groove on non-rimmed cartridges, to help keep the case body centered in the chamber.  Helps ensure the bullet engages concentric with the bore.   Of course this is also nifty if you reuse cases and that first shot fireforms the brass for your chamber, and only neck sizing from then on.  To be completely obsessive, you'd also mark 12 o'clock on the rear face of the cartridge, in case the chamber is assymmetric, and from then always chamber it 12 o'clock up.

----------


## 300CALMAN

> @300CALMAN,
> 
> From memory, the Sterling L2A3 9mm SMG (WW2 Patchett SMG derivative) fired from an open bolt.  And it was required to be able to hit within a 10 cm circle at 200 metres, obviously in semi-auto mode.  That is <2 MOA.  This is not super accuracy, but it is superlative accuracy in a 9mm SMG.  About as much as anyone should ever hope to get out of the 9x19mm.  Someone please correct me.


Interesting, I thought it was a square foot at 100 yards, I have heard some comments to the effect that some 9mm pistols were considered quite accurate. Like the Luger, unfortunately it was apparently made with tight tolerances and struggled with eastern front conditions.

----------


## Cordite

> Interesting, I thought it was a square foot at 100 yards, I have heard some comments to the effect that some 9mm pistols were considered quite accurate. Like the Luger, unfortunately it was apparently made with tight tolerances and struggled with eastern front conditions.


 @300CALMAN, you are correct of course.  Wikipedia states the requirement as "...sufficiently accurate to allow five consecutive shots (fired in semi-automatic mode) to be placed inside a one-foot-square target at a distance of 100 yd (91 m)."  Still impressive for an open-bolt firer.  Wonder how good an MP5 would do?

----------


## R93

> @300CALMAN, you are correct of course.  Wikipedia states the requirement as "...sufficiently accurate to allow five consecutive shots (fired in semi-automatic mode) to be placed inside a one-foot-square target at a distance of 100 yd (91 m)."  Still impressive for an open-bolt firer.  Wonder how good an MP5 would do?


The K and baby Ks I played with were very accurate. Especially the SD versions. 

The fellas that carried them for their role were scary fast and accurate with them. 

Roller locking and fluted chambers iirc. 
The L2 sterling smg was a pig of a thing. 
I prefered the Aussie version of smg. 



Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

----------


## 300CALMAN

> The K and baby Ks I played with were very accurate. Especially the SD versions. 
> 
> The fellas that carried them for their role were scary fast and accurate with them. 
> 
> Roller locking and fluted chambers iirc. 
> The L2 sterling smg was a pig of a thing. 
> I prefered the Aussie version of smg. 
> 
> 
> ...


Never fired any of the above mentioned SMGs but had a play with them. Maybe it's because i a lefty but I thought the Sten handled better then the Stirling. MP5s are a work of art with more than a passing resemblance to a STG44.

----------


## Cordite

> Never fired any of the above mentioned SMGs but had a play with them. Maybe it's because i a lefty but I thought the Sten handled better then the Stirling. MP5s are a work of art with more than a passing resemblance to a STG44.


Via the G3, you really see the Sturmgewehr-44 / StGw-44 resemblance there, especially with the older, wooden stocked G3.

StGw-44:

CEAM Modele 1950 (french manufactured gun, derived from StGw44, by emigrated German designer:

And the H&K G3:

----------


## Marty Henry

The G3, sex on a stick!

----------


## Mathias

> The G3, sex on a stick!


Absolutely. A mate had a low mileage G3 20 years ago & still regrets to this day ever selling it.

The MP5 is sexy too. I've put about 120+ rounds through one on full auto & 3 shot burst, very accurate.

----------


## Cordite

> Absolutely. A mate had a low mileage G3 20 years ago & still regrets to this day ever selling it.
> 
> The MP5 is sexy too. I've put about 120+ rounds through one on full auto & 3 shot burst, very accurate.


 @Mathias,

Do you recall what sort of accuracy did you get out of the MP3 on semi-auto?

----------


## Mathias

> @Mathias,
> 
> Do you recall what sort of accuracy did you get out of the MP3 on semi-auto?


Hi Cordite, no I don't recall actually putting many through in semi. I was more interested in 3 shot burst & full auto and I was at an indoor range in Charlotte North Carolina.
This image is of one of my targets set at 20 yards, mostly on auto.

----------


## systolic

> @300CALMAN,
> 
> From memory, the Sterling L2A3 9mm SMG (WW2 Patchett SMG derivative) fired from an open bolt.  And it was required to be able to hit within a 10 cm circle at 200 metres, obviously in semi-auto mode.  That is <2 MOA.  This is not super accuracy, but it is superlative accuracy in a 9mm SMG.  About as much as anyone should ever hope to get out of the 9x19mm.  *Someone please correct me*.



With pleasure.

The Sterling Patchett Mk5 Silenced SMG (L34A1) was, according to Sterling, even more accurate than the standard Mk4.

The silenced Mk5s had to group a maximum of 2.5 x 2.5 inches at 100 feet and  7.5 x 7.5 inches at 100 yards. With standard ammo.

I _really_ doubt that the standard Mk4 guns would have to group about half that at 200 metres.


Source:  The Guns of Dagenham.  Lanchester-Patchett-Sterling.  By Peter Laidler and David Howroyd.   Page 187.

----------


## rambo-6mmrem

No cartridge is inaccurate rifles are
Ie 7.62x39 sks's are pretty inaccurate but other bolt action rifles can be very accurate

----------


## 7mmwsm

Some cartridges are more accurate than others. 17 HMR verses 22 rimfire for example.
I read an article (cant remember where sorry) which told the story of a particular rimfire competition (can't remember the name either) which shooters had been trying to shoot possibles for years and no one had achieved this. Along came the HMR and possibles became a regular occurrence.

----------


## shooternz

The problem with the .22RF is the design has not changed much since 1852 the case has got longer but the basic  design has kept the heeled bullet which
is why it will never be capable of top accuracy no matter how accurate the rifle it is handicapped by the ammo,
the .22 RF Magnum should have fixed  the problem but for some reason it hasn't, I have shot the .22mag bullets in a .22 Hornet and a .222 Rem both
shoot it better than the .22mag so it is not the bullet

----------


## Cordite

> The problem with the .22RF is the design has not changed much since 1852 the case has got longer but the basic  design has kept the heeled bullet which
> is why it will never be capable of top accuracy no matter how accurate the rifle it is handicapped by the ammo,
> the .22 RF Magnum should have fixed  the problem but for some reason it hasn't, I have shot the .22mag bullets in a .22 Hornet and a .222 Rem both
> shoot it better than the .22mag so it is not the bullet


 @shooternz, Well, that does not strictly speaking follow.  Your .22mag bullet was shot through a different set of barrels than its native .22mag barrel.

Maybe someone should start shooting paper patched .22mag reloads.  Let me see, first reloading item required would be a pair of +3.5 dioptre reading glasses from The Warehouse.

----------


## Cordite

> With pleasure.
> The Sterling Patchett Mk5 Silenced SMG (L34A1) was, according to Sterling, even more accurate than the standard Mk4.
> The silenced Mk5s had to group a maximum of 2.5 x 2.5 inches at 100 feet and  7.5 x 7.5 inches at 100 yards. With standard ammo.
> I _really_ doubt that the standard Mk4 guns would have to group about half that at 200 metres.
> Source:  The Guns of Dagenham.  Lanchester-Patchett-Sterling.  By Peter Laidler and David Howroyd.   Page 187.


 @systolic, Cheers.

----------


## 300CALMAN

> With pleasure.
> 
> The Sterling Patchett Mk5 Silenced SMG (L34A1) was, according to Sterling, even more accurate than the standard Mk4.
> 
> The silenced Mk5s had to group a maximum of 2.5 x 2.5 inches at 100 feet and  7.5 x 7.5 inches at 100 yards. With standard ammo.
> 
> I _really_ doubt that the standard Mk4 guns would have to group about half that at 200 metres.
> 
> 
> Source:  The Guns of Dagenham.  Lanchester-Patchett-Sterling.  By Peter Laidler and David Howroyd.   Page 187.


Yeah thanks @systolic

----------


## shooternz

> @shooternz, Well, that does not strictly speaking follow.  Your .22mag bullet was shot through a different set of barrels than its native .22mag barrel.
> 
> Maybe someone should start shooting paper patched .22mag reloads.  Let me see, first reloading item required would be a pair of +3.5 dioptre reading glasses from The Warehouse.


That I would like to see, are you up for it, I think I have some cast .22 bullets I could donate to the cause

----------


## Cordite

> That I would like to see, are you up for it, I think I have some cast .22 bullets I could donate to the cause


 @shooternz

Would be an interesting experiment... (-:  I'm currently too occupied trying to perfect my technique for castrating mosquitoes with only a sharp hypodermic needle, and wearing boxing gloves of course.

But seriously, I do wonder if there is untapped accuracy potential in the humble .22LR/Mag with paper patching.  After all, it does eliminate lead/copper fouling.

----------


## ZQLewis

On Topic 
The 22 Hornet has a reputation as being tempremental, thin neck on the case.  They can shoot very well but? 
                                                                        (Anyone shooting Bruno or CZ will disagree)
Savage 22 Hi-Power. Again these day's the rifles are old and limited range of projectiles in 228.

Re 22 mag
   Shop around for ammo. Mine did 9 rounds into 1.5: at 100 mtr with Remington 33 gr or Hornady 30 gr.
or 4" groups with 3 shots of 40 gr CCI.

Zane.

----------


## P38

> Never seen a half Moa .303


Most were 1/4MOD though  ...... Minute Of Deer  :Thumbsup: 

Cheers
Pete

----------


## shooternz

Modern shooters a spoilt back in the 50' 60's and 70's any rifle that could shoot 4 MOA was considered adequate for general hunting, 
there were some accurate .303's built on P14 actions what stuffed them up was shooting cordite loaded military surplus ammo through them
only took a couple of those to start eroding the throat, if you find a new .303 barrel don't shoot military ammo through it ,
My old 2 groove No4 would shoot 1.5 MOA with the right bullet even though it had been shot with surplus ammo,
nothing wrong with the cartridge just the use of the wrong powder

----------


## 6x47

The .303 cartridge isn't inherently inaccurate but the LE action/two-piece stock/bedding system is what lets it down in reality. And the hot-burning powder/corrosive primers certainly weren't great for barrel life. All in all, a very bad combo for longer term accuracy, especially if you weren't fastidious in your cleaning

----------


## 7x64

> On Topic 
> The 22 Hornet has a reputation as being tempremental, thin neck on the case.  They can shoot very well but? 
>                                                                         (Anyone shooting Bruno or CZ will disagree)
> Savage 22 Hi-Power. Again these day's the rifles are old and limited range of projectiles in 228.
> 
> Re 22 mag
>    Shop around for ammo. Mine did 9 rounds into 1.5: at 100 mtr with Remington 33 gr or Hornady 30 gr.
> or 4" groups with 3 shots of 40 gr CCI.
> 
> Zane.


I also nearly gave up on .22 mag until I tried the 30 grain hornady. Keeping an eye out for some more of it.

----------


## northdude

i found the hornady critical defence ammo shot well in mine and the highland ammo was good as well i had a zastava cz99 nice rifle

----------

