sharkathmi
New member
Originally Posted By: 2muchgunIf you look at a 222 Rem case, it looks a whole lot like a scaled down 30-06 case.
Wow. I am so beat down tired, I could write a lot on this subject, but want to go to bed more. Forgive me if this sounds like I'm rambling, because I am.
In a nutshell, yes case design plays a part. So does the platform in which the bullet is launched. So does bullet/load combination. So does recoil. So does the shooter. Get them all right, or darn near, and you have what people will deem an inherently accurate cartridge. At least in the minds of the public.
It is quite possible to get extreme accuracy from "lesser" case designs, given the other factors are up to snuff.
IMO, most of the cartridges deemed "inherently accurate" are ones in which the factory actually got it right in terms of these factors. In other words, they loaded the right rounds in the right gun, with the right twist, and enough people were able to shoot it well. The 222 being toward the bottom end, and the 35 Colonel being toward the upper, in terms of size. Both are very accurate cartridges in the minds of the general shooting public, and with good reason. They do not require handloading or custom rifles to obtain their status' as such.
The 375 H&H is a [beeep] fine shooting cartridge, but you won't hear too much about it from the masses, and is therefore not in the the discussion of "inherently accurate cartridges" too often.
There are other cartridges out there that may be just as accurate, but if the factory never got it right, you won't hear it from the masses, even though the experienced handloader may know otherwise.
In other words, "inherent accurcy" is a subjective term, IMO. Lots of people will tell you a 222 is inherently accurate. Even though they've never spent any time behind one. The factory got it right, it was chambered in capable rifle designs, lots of people can shoot it well, therefore, it MUST be a great case design.
I suppose you could call anything on the 308 case "inherently accurate". They all shoot. I'm sure that the fact that they do so with a wide range of powder/bullet combinations only contributes more to their "inherently accurate" status. BUT you must remember, the research has been done, the platforms have been good, they have little recoil, and they are available/used by the masses.
Some cartridges seem to produce a bit better accuracy by changing shoulder angles also. 30° being a popular spec/dimension. Other cartidges have been developed on how consistent they are in terms of extreme spread and standard deviation. Funny part is, unless you are a part of the precision shooting community, you will hear less about these cartridges than the ones the general shooting public have experience with, or have at least heard about.
Is case design a factor of accuracy? Absolutely. But I think it is given too much credit. Many other factors play significant roles. How many of them are "inherent" is debatable.........
JMO........
I'm no genius, and far from a firearms expert, but the information shared by 2mg is understandable and makes sense. I've got books that date back 30 or 40 years that state the 222 is an "inherently accurate" cartridge. Perhps its just a term used, but I like 2mg's view of the matter.
Carry on.
Wow. I am so beat down tired, I could write a lot on this subject, but want to go to bed more. Forgive me if this sounds like I'm rambling, because I am.
In a nutshell, yes case design plays a part. So does the platform in which the bullet is launched. So does bullet/load combination. So does recoil. So does the shooter. Get them all right, or darn near, and you have what people will deem an inherently accurate cartridge. At least in the minds of the public.
It is quite possible to get extreme accuracy from "lesser" case designs, given the other factors are up to snuff.
IMO, most of the cartridges deemed "inherently accurate" are ones in which the factory actually got it right in terms of these factors. In other words, they loaded the right rounds in the right gun, with the right twist, and enough people were able to shoot it well. The 222 being toward the bottom end, and the 35 Colonel being toward the upper, in terms of size. Both are very accurate cartridges in the minds of the general shooting public, and with good reason. They do not require handloading or custom rifles to obtain their status' as such.
The 375 H&H is a [beeep] fine shooting cartridge, but you won't hear too much about it from the masses, and is therefore not in the the discussion of "inherently accurate cartridges" too often.
There are other cartridges out there that may be just as accurate, but if the factory never got it right, you won't hear it from the masses, even though the experienced handloader may know otherwise.
In other words, "inherent accurcy" is a subjective term, IMO. Lots of people will tell you a 222 is inherently accurate. Even though they've never spent any time behind one. The factory got it right, it was chambered in capable rifle designs, lots of people can shoot it well, therefore, it MUST be a great case design.
I suppose you could call anything on the 308 case "inherently accurate". They all shoot. I'm sure that the fact that they do so with a wide range of powder/bullet combinations only contributes more to their "inherently accurate" status. BUT you must remember, the research has been done, the platforms have been good, they have little recoil, and they are available/used by the masses.
Some cartridges seem to produce a bit better accuracy by changing shoulder angles also. 30° being a popular spec/dimension. Other cartidges have been developed on how consistent they are in terms of extreme spread and standard deviation. Funny part is, unless you are a part of the precision shooting community, you will hear less about these cartridges than the ones the general shooting public have experience with, or have at least heard about.
Is case design a factor of accuracy? Absolutely. But I think it is given too much credit. Many other factors play significant roles. How many of them are "inherent" is debatable.........
JMO........
I'm no genius, and far from a firearms expert, but the information shared by 2mg is understandable and makes sense. I've got books that date back 30 or 40 years that state the 222 is an "inherently accurate" cartridge. Perhps its just a term used, but I like 2mg's view of the matter.
Carry on.
Last edited:
