What determines firearm accuracy

[Blakenzy]

Ever hear that so and so firearm type is great because it possesses "inherent accuracy"?

Well, I don't know about dictating how accurate a particular firearm may be because of its name or class. The more I learn of shooting, I realize there is no such thing as "inherent" accuracy, or lack thereof. In the end saying that such and such firearm or cartridge is "inherently accurate" -or not- is lying to yourself, because possessing something inherently means it possesses a quality that cannot be given or stripped away from it. Firearms are not monolithic blocks of homogeneous substance. They are the sum of their parts. They are not stand alone machines either, and are influenced by human interaction, and environment (external ballistics).

Accuracy is the sum of infinite minutia that reaches its total when the bullet contacts paper. It involves every little last part of the firearm, the cartridge and even human and environmental factors, to a lesser or greater extent.

Take a 10/22 for example. Stock out of the box, the top accuracy to be expected is pretty much "meh". But that doesn't mean that its potential is limited to being "inherently inaccurate". After adding and changing the Volquartsen shop into it, it may become a "tack driver". Of course, in the process you may end up with enough parts to almost build a second rifle. Then, let's see how accurate that Accuracy International if it gets a nick in the muzzle crown. It won't retain its accuracy just because it is a well made brand name super tight bolt gun.

In the end, isn't accuracy a matter of how much money and resources you are wiling to put into a gun? Of course, this is much easier to do with a firearm model that has left the factory with great parts already in place, or with ample aftermarket support of quality parts, but I believe that great accuracy can be achieved with almost any contraption that launches bullets (even with the ruskie stuff everyone looks down on).

 

[The Sarge]

I determine accuracy by the amount of venison/turkey in my freezer

 

[deadin]

At the risk of being "hooted down", I will make the statement that no gun is "accurate" but some are "precise". A precision gun is one that will place the shots in the same place (within the degree of precision) time after time given the same exterior conditions (and precision ammunition). Accuracy is up to the shooter to provide or allow for these exterior conditions.
You can give the precise gun to a poor shooter and he won't shoot one hole groups. Give a poor gun to a good shooter and he will shoot it to its degree of precision.

The above is akin to the Magazine/Clip argument.

 

[redneck2]

There's a reason that 6PPC dominates short range (100-300 yard) bench rest. Calibers that are relatively mild (.223, .308) seem to have a tendency to be more accurate and easier to tune than radical ones.

That said, if you're just talking normal factory guns, it's more of a function of the tolerances in any individual firearm (excluding operator error) than caliber or case dimensions.

 

[youngda9]

Certain cartridgen (6ppc, 308, etc) are Inhrently more accurate than others. This is the truth. You can get equivalent guns and they will shoot better or worse depending on the cartrige they are chambered in. This is why you don't see any 30-30 target rifles.

 

[Lee Roder]

Luck plays an important role.

 

[Caliper_Mi]

Well, a rifle is going to shoot better than a smoothbore, so I am pretty sure we can say that rifling adds inherent accuracy.

I get your main point though that just because of some name or design a rifle won't shoot better because each rifle is a case unto itself and things get more complicated as a rifle gets older (milsurps are a great example of this). But, there are certain design characteristics that do lend themselves to accuracy, everything else being equal, and will make the gun shoot better. That said, I am interested in the finer points what those things are outside of the basics.

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

Depends on how you look at it.
You can spend an excessive amount of money trying to achieve sub-quarter Minute of Angle accuracy.
Or
Take a rifle and hit a 8" bull target 9 out of 10 times at 100 yards shooting in the standing position.
You can pay attention to all the fine underpinnings of a rifle. Show off the european scope but that rifle is not accurate to you if you are not adept in basic riflemanship.
Accurace is a very general question.
For a rifle.
Internet accuracy? 1/10 of an inch at 100 yards is the standard.
Brick and mortar observation from others? You don't see MOA every day.
I typically shoot 6-8-10 inches standing. 6 on a good day. 12 on a bad day.

 

[russ69]

You can't overly simplify a complex subject. The benchrest guys are the reference standard for accuracy. They will tell you everything is important. This is true, as all things contribute to accuracy. If you have to name specific things the most often quoted is bullet, barrel and trigger. Generally I don't agree with what you are trying to say. What was it you were trying to say?

Thanx, Russ

 

[ThePunisher'sArmory]

Well to answer your title I think the shooter determines firearm accuracy. Ive seen people that own $1000 10/22s get outshot by someone with a pos gun who know "how too shoot". Of course I do agree with The Sarge up there. That was a good answer.

 

[Isher]

Being there, no

Matter what the caliber, seems to have a

Great deal to do with putting meat on the table.

At least in my experience.

isher

 

[Whitman31]

What determines firearm accuracy

Consistency...

 

[navyretired 1]

You can't buy one hole shooting although lots try.
First they buy the best scope for the new best gun money can buy the best it shoots is Minute of 5Gal can., experts say thats the best caliber must be scope, another $800 scope.
Second shoot with another best scope gun shoots Minute of 5Gal can. Experts say bad barrel, Back to manufacturer with letter saying how bad.
Third shoot, new barrel Minute of 5 Gal Can. Experts say inherinitly inaccurate, sells rifle.
My new rifle bought for a song from min of 5 GAL SHOOTER.
Cleaned and JB'ed barrel, adjusted trigger, glass bedded action removed barrel pressure points, Loaded some test ammo different loads/bullets.
Fourth shoot, experts said I was crazy that gun is a waste it's inherinitly inaccurete. Ten targets, the gun likes Berger bullets, Varget powder shoots best group 1/4" Minute of angle, needs power pampering more load developement and thought. Original owner wants to buy it back because I finally broke the barrel in, told him there was too much money in it(his). Besides he's got a custom action with a zipity-do-da barrel that was frozen to -350 degrees for three years and has all it's molicules point at target coming in tomorrow and he has to save his money.
If this keeps up I'm gonna have me a Zipity-do-da barrel with frost byte cheep.
The experts say I'm an inheritinly lucky shooter with all junk used equipment and will eventually loose cause my luck will run out on that junk used stuff.
Inheritinly accurate HUH! Bench rest shooter experts HUH!

 

[heron]

It's a combination of things. I have a $300 Savage MK I FVT, (.22LR) and when I got it, I started experimenting with different ammunition. The high-velocity rounds kept walking away from the bull, and the faster they came out of the barrel, the farther off target they got. CCI Stingers went way off.

Under those conditions, I (the shooter) was more accurate than the combination of gun and ammunition.

Then I tried some subsonic match-grade ammo. Suddenly, every round was going exactly where I pointed it. Under these new conditions, the combination of gun and ammo is more accurate than I am.

I bought a 5000-rd case of CCI Green Tag. I have yet to live up to its capability.

 

[General Geoff]

Consistency...

Technically speaking, that is not true. Consistency begets precision.


Group size measures precision. Deviation from the bullseye measures accuracy. Just sayin'

 

[M2 Carbine]

In the end, isn't accuracy a matter of how much money and resources you are wiling to put into a gun?

No.
A very expensive gun is just a stick in the hands of a poor shooter and a good shot can usually do well with a cheap gun.

There's very few guns, no matter the price, that aren't more accurate than most of the people shooting them.

 

[Justin]

Of course a firearm can be inherently accurate. It's ridiculous to argue otherwise, and while someone who's a very good shooter may be able to wring every last drop of accuracy out of an average firearm, it doesn't change the fact that if you give them a better gun they'll be able to shoot more accurately, faster, etc.

Just because a gun possesses an inherent level of accuracy, however, doesn't mean that it's going to do the shooting for you.

 

[nitetrane98]

The OP did refer to firearm "type" as being more inherently accurate. I think that most would agree that a bolt gun is "inherently more accurate" than a semi. Not to say that you couldn't make a semi as accurate, but if you were starting from scratch to make the most accurate gun the easiest way would be with a bolt gun.

I think the idea of inherent accuracy comes into play more with caliber and projectile shape. There are far too many variables involved with a rifle to infer inherent accuracy. If you take a barrel and immobilize it and fire five shots, let it cool between shots if you like, where those bullets strike the target will be, theoretically, the best group that can be expected of that barrel. If you put that barreled action into a stock, with any given trigger, scope, etc you are introducing variables that may or may not effect accuracy. If you actually shoot a group smaller than that of the immobilzed barrel it can only be because you tecnically introduced error into the shot, in other words lucked out.

I think bottom line is, the ability to shoot a gun accurately and the gun's actual ability to group are two different things. The sweet trigger, scopes and stocks might help you approach the potential of the gun but if it's not inherently accurate the best you can do is luck.

 

[eye5600]

I'd be curious to read an expert discussion of why some cartridges are "more accurate" than others. It's pretty obvious that the best manufacturing QC will produce better ammo. If weight, shape, balance, and powder vary from round to round, it's not going to be accurate. I've read that this works in favor of .17 (manufacturers know it's target ammo and take pains) and against .22WMR (not usually a target round). I would guess the difference is like the difference between a 10 and an X, i.e. only really important on the range.

If you take a family of rounds, like the range from .32 up to .327 Magnum, are you going in the direction of accuracy, or away from it?

Different topic: Yeah, I've noted that "accurate" in the gun context means the same as "precise" in the science lab. If you're an HS science teacher, I can understand that it grates every time you hear it. Lots of similar things bother me (like "organic" food). But life is easier if you accept what you can't change. Still, we can chuckle when someone displays a target with tidy cloverleaf on the 5 ring to show how accurate his rifle is.

 

[M2 Carbine]

Still, we can chuckle when someone displays a target with tidy cloverleaf on the 5 ring to show how accurate his rifle is.

"chuckle" why?
If the gun is shooting a tiny cloverleaf, the gun shooter and ammunition are shooting accurately. The sights just need to be adjusted.
The reason the "tiny cloverleaf" is in the 5 ring is because the sights or scope has not been adjusted to bring the bullet hits to the center of the target.

I do this quite a lot when testing different loads. It wouldn't be unusual to have several groups in several different places on the target.
Generally I have the gun sighted in for a particular ammo, so a different ammo seldom groups in the same place. All that's important is that all the (test) bullets make a tiny group anywhere. Then if wanted the sights can be adjusted to bring that particular load to center.




.

 

[General Geoff]

"chuckle" why?

Because tight groups measure precision, not accuracy

 

[frogomatic]

In my experience (building rifles, and shooting semi-competatively) there are 3 primary factors that contribute to a weapons accuracy/precision. the most important factor is the shooter, proper breathing, proper squeeze on the trigger, proper support of the weapon itself, ect... Withing the firearm itself, there are 2 things that are most important to precision shooting, and they are both equally important. First is the chamber & throat, a high quality chamber with tight headspacing and a proper throating for the bullet you want to fire. Second is the crown, the crown is the last thing the bullet touches on it's way out the barrel, so you can imagine what kind of an effect it will have on the flight path of the bullet. A poorly cut or damaged crown will greatly reduce the accuracy of the weapon.

 

[4sooth]

I'm going with us sfc RET-- I used to work with guys who could all hit a knat at 500 yards in a rainstorm at night while falling down drunk. However at the range standing, offhand in good weather NONE off them could ever stay in better than 12-18 inches. This was with various Louisiana State Deer Rifles and factory ammo. A state deer rifle? (glad you asked)! This was a Remington Mod. 742 chambered in .308, 30-06, or .270 with a Tasco 3-9 power scope with the high see-through mounts (for that fast follow-up shot)!

Most of these rifles would shoot 2-3 inches at 100 yds off the bench with factory ammo. Plenty accurate for any shots these guys would ever be likely to take.

 

[BCCL]

Another vote for "consistency"...I view accuracy in a gun, in it's ability to consistently shoot to the same place every time, then it's on me to adjust my aim, or adjust the sights to match accordingly, or in some cases when there may be a correctable problem, the gun itself..i.e. a damaged crown...etc.

 

[JohnBT]

"Still, we can chuckle when someone displays a target with tidy cloverleaf on the 5 ring to show how accurate his rifle is."

You can chuckle until you learn the reason why. And there is a reason why and it's not the one you're laughing at.

The scope is adjusted to aim at the center dot of the target, but the shots are meant to miss the bullseye/center dot because once you put one, two or three shots through that tiny dot, well, it isn't there anymore to use as an aiming point. No aiming point, no group.

Get it now?

John