accurate basic cartridges

[bheadboy]

it seems to me the longer i read this forum, that along with my personal experience, the 30-06, 308, 7x57 cases are the most accurat basic commercial facory rounds around.

the 30-06,280,270 25-06, 308-7-08 260, 243, 7x57, 6mm, etc. and others, interesting

lots of variation, AI, etc,

just a thought.
BOb

 

[K22]

There are certain case designs that are inherently accurate such as the 222, 308, and 6mmbr. That's not to say that every rifle in these calibers is a "tack driver", only that the design of the case capacity / bore diameter lends itself to accuracy.

While factory ammo has impoved considerably since I first started hunting and shooting in the 60's, when it comes to factory ammunition, the problem is consistency no matter which caliber is involved. For the once a year deer hunter this is not an issue. For the long range varmint hunter / target shooter this can be a problem although I've seen some of the premium factory ammo (Federal) shoot as good as my tuned handloads.

Consistency can be a problem with reloads also - powder / primer / bullet lot variation but a precision shooter can minimize this but buying in bulk -i.e the same lot number so they can better control consistency.

 

[357Mag]

Bhead -

Howdy !

At great risk of getting kicked off the forums here..... there's a lot of room out there for a variety
of case capacities/calibres. A " BR"-sized case won't be ideal for every calibre it can be necked up/down to fit.

As a generality..... as calibres go up, the tendency is for case capacities per-calibre to also go up;
on average ( progressively increasing calibres compared to smaller calibres ).

The predominant "accuracy bullet weights " for each calibre, will also progressively increase.

P.O. Ackley's books talk about " ideal case capacity " and " ideal bore capacity " ( amongst other things ). Always a good "read".

.35 Remington is probably "ideal case capacity", for a .35 calibre case.
Best powders for use in .35 Rem exactly bracket the well established powder burn rate span used
for " benchrest " cartridges of multiple calibres.

If you can get your hands on any stuff written by Homer Powley, I highly recommend you review his work.


With regards,
357Mag

 

[BoydAllen]

To the thread starter:
The 7x57 does not belong on the list, and as far as I am concerned, neither does the 30-06. If you are talking about shooting at the range, at the typical 100 yd. distance, I would say that a well built and tuned .222 would kick the butt of any of the ones that you mentioned. Of course, this whole discussion needs some clarification as to intended use. A .222 would not be of much use for dangerous game or at 1,000 yd. Of the ones that you mentioned, for its bore size, the .308 certainly belongs on the list. By caliber, Sticking to what you can buy loaded ammunition for, I would go with the .222, the 6 BR, the .250-3000 the 6.5 x 47, the 7mmWSM, and the .308. A lot of what makes a caliber shoot are related to the quality of the bullets that are available, and the standard chamber dimensions. Some calibers would do better if their standard chambers were of a better design. Generally designs that are short and fat, for their capacity, and which have sharper shoulder angles, tend to do better.

 

[JRS]

Depending upon their intended use, and the gun in which each is chambered, you can add the 220 swift, 243 Winchester, 6.5x55 and 375 H&H.

 

[D-mon]

You guys forgot the king 6 ppc !

Nic

 

[jonbearman]

Dont forget the pipsqueaks like the hornet and the 17 rem and .218 bee which is my favorite. I disagree about the 7mm mauser as it is a fine cartridge and the .219 donaldson wasp.

 

[mikeinct]

Wow, not one mention of the old 22-250 Rem...Geez...That was the first rifle I started reloading for...Compared to my old borrowed 03 springfield ...That gun could shoot..Even back in 1976 Factory loads were very consistent..It took me a few tries to equal those loads..I still use a 22-250 ...I must be getting old....Mike in Ct

 

[bheadboy]

i' havin fun listening to you fellows, great,
consider this, if not for the 30-06 there would not be 300sav, 308, 7-08 260, 243, all the br's, 35 rem, 270, 280, 250 -3000, 22-250, and all of their vareiations, and the 06 still stands well at 1000 as i have read here

and yes i forgot the 222,222m,221,223,204 etc.

on the 7x57, 6mm,and variations there of,

not all rifles are built for br, f class etc. but all seek to be accurate, some succeed and some loose, the intended use varies



Bob

 

[Savage99]

New cartridges are the way to sell new rifles.

Profits are good and the gun companies need more.

Before your time gun writers were saying that we needed the 22-250 as it was more accurate than the Swift.

Now that the 22-250 is old hat they are pushing the Swift again.

 

[Laurie]

i' havin fun listening to you fellows, great,
consider this, if not for the 30-06 there would not be 300sav, 308, 7-08 260, 243, all the br's, 35 rem, 270, 280, 250 -3000, 22-250, and all of their vareiations, and the 06 still stands well at 1000 as i have read here

and yes i forgot the 222,222m,221,223,204 etc.

on the 7x57, 6mm,and variations there of,

not all rifles are built for br, f class etc. but all seek to be accurate, some succeed and some loose, the intended use varies



Bob

Pardon!

If you look at the history books Bob, you'll see that the .30-03 (2nd go at a smokeless .30 rifle cartridge by the USA and forerunner of the '06) directly copied the Mauser 0.473" case-head design, extractor rim and groove etc.

You are quite correct in what you say, but it's not the .30-06 that ultimately led to all those designs, it's the 7.9X57mm, 7X57mm and 7.65X53mm Mauser cartridges two of which date from the late 1880s, one (the 7X57mm) from 1892.

Moreover, the move from the '03 version which used the old .30-40 Krag's 220gn RNFMJ bullet was prompted by another German innovation, the development of the heavy bullet 7.9mm 'I' Mauser to the 7.92mm 'IS' version with a 154gn pointed tip bullet (Spitzgeschoss giving rise to the still used abbreviation of 'spitzer' for a pointed tip bullet design) at the then unheard of MV of 2,880 fps. The US rushed a similar (150gn) design into use and reduced the case neck length in the process to produce the '06 cartridge.

This was on a complete plagiaristic par of course with that icon of 20th century American design, the M1903 Springfield service rifle which used the self-same cartridge and which infringed a good dozen Mauser patents covering its 1892 through 1898 rifle designs and also the ammunition stripper clip which was a direct and illegal copy of the Mauser version - resulting in the US government paying a royalty on each and every '03 produced to the German company for around 20 years including those made while the USA and Germany were at war with each other over 1917-18. The total payments made to Mauserwerke AG exceeded $200,000 which was rather a lot of money at the time.

That's not to denigrate the .30-06, just to say it wasn't the first model in that particular design chain that started in 1888 and continues 125 years later with new introductions still appearing such as the .338 Federal. It was a lucky chance that saw Springfield and Frankford Arsenals copy it as without the support of the world's keenest shooting nation and largest commercial firearms industry, it would probably have lapsed into being a set of obscure and obsolete European cartridges.

 

[bheadboy]

Laurie, and Savage99 as to before my time i began reloading with a tong tool and single mold in 1945 at the age of 11.

as to the 7x -- cases Laurie, in my original post at the top of the page, i have listed the 7x57, and 6mm --unfortunately i did not go into the history as you did however i and others who consider will note they all have the .470+/- case head which the 30-03/06 copied only to strech out the case length etc to gain velocity etc.

The US did copy, and expand on the design, and again just as originally posted, basic accurate foundation for multipul designs.

add the 222 and ppc and so far the door is waiting for the next but look at the years it has taken to get to this point in accurch.

Bob

 

[KevinThomas]

Laurie,

You underplay the German development, but your point is well taken. I seriously doubt that the vast majority of today's shooters have any concept of just how revolutionary the German's adoption of a pointed, high-velocity bullet was in its day. The closest thing I can compare it to in modern warfare is the development of nuclear weapons, or encasing warships in steel armor. Yes, it really did have that much impact. If we take a look at the worlds small arms for infantry combat in the 1900-1905 period, virtually every army in the world used a very heavy for its bore size (high SD) FMJ design, at somewhere right around 2,000 fps. The German's announcement of the 154 gr. spitzer literally caused a mass panic to redesign existing weapons systems around the globe to keep pace. As you mentioned, here in the US we'd just adopted the '03 Springfield in the new .30-'03 round, and immediately reworked it to the .30-'06 configuration we all know and love. Ditto for the Brits, the Russians, etc., etc., etc.. The one exception to this would have been the French, who actually developed the concept prior to Germany's independant development of the same idea, but kept it so secret that today the Germans get credit for pioneering the design.

Love ballistic/weapons history discussions!

 

[Glenn Powell]

You guys are a hoot, America has been stealing German rifle engineering since before the revolution. The Kentucky rifle, which should properly be called the Tennessee rifle, was built and refined by German emigrants. Just look at the German Jeager rifle and a Golden Age American rifle and the only real difference is barrel length, and bore diameter. The style of the carving, the shape of the stock, trigger guard, lock, ect. Germans have arguably always designed and built the finest rifles.

 

[BoydAllen]

Well...it seems that we have digressed from accuracy to history.

Getting back to the former, a couple of other factors affecting accuracy that are generally unrecognized have to do with the standard (SAAMI) throat design associated with a particular cartridge. While some throat specifications that very closely resemble what you would use for a custom target rifle. Others have designs that limit their performance.

There is also the issue of the relation between the standard dimensions for ammo and chambers. Just for fun, the next time that you get a chance, measure the shoulder diameters of fired and sized .22-250 cases. That difference, is because of SAAMI specs that were created when the cartridge moved from wildcat to factory status, probably to make sure that ammunition would fit in chambers that were cut before standardization. I am not saying that the .22-250 is inaccurate, just that it is not as good as it could be, if dies and chambers were a better match, something that can be done with a custom die or chamber reamer.

 

[KevinThomas]

Leave it to Boyd to get us back on track!

Case size is key here, too. I just covered this in another thread, but in any given bore size, the smaller the case (to some reasonable point, I'm sure) the better the accuracy potential. The larger the case, the more difficult it becomes to achieve the same level of accuracy. Following that line, a 300 RUM will be less accurate than a 300 Win Mag, which in turn will be less accurate than a 30-06, which in turn has less inherent accuracy than a 308 Win. There was a series of records from the Remington Custom Shop covering hundreds (thousands?) of their Model 40-Xs built in that establishment over a several year period. All were fired for accuracy before leaving the shop. Mind you, we're talking about the same action, same make of barrels, same gunsmiths over an incredibly large number of rifles, differing only in their chamberings. The trend was very clear, and extended to each and every bore size. This was reproduced in one of the NRA HighPower series that they diud some years back, and it was a fascinating glimpse into inherent accuracy of a wide range of cartridges.

 

[bheadboy]

Kevin, you are very accuate on the 40x in that period. i visited the plant, with Jim Stekle and Mike Walker a number of time, and had to opportunity to watch some of that test firing. i also purchased a 40x in 222m, 222 and 6x47(222m) all with those targets in the box with the rifle.

i can agree with the discussion of the chamber/ die/ brass differences, as all of you, i have had custome bbl/chambers installed on numerous rifles. all out shot the "basic" factory combination dictated by Saami. i have also had factory Rem bbls rechambered with custom reamers and the results were significant.

Bob