Thread: Inaccurate Cartridges

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

Originally Posted by Maca49

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

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