What exactly is "inherent" accuracy in regards to a cartridge?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Inherent accuracy is kind of like how many moas you can from teh rifle but more like knockout power compared to how much kickback the rifle gots.

Inherent is innate, meaning that it comes from the design of the cartridge. For the most part I don't believe it matters but it makes sense. There has to be an ideal combination of airspace, shoulder angle etc that produces the most consistent powder burn.


By and large it's a factor of quality, ie 7.62x39 is "inherently" less accurate than 6mmBR. In reality it's the crappy ammo and rifles that limit 30 Russian, not the dimensions of the case. A while back I believe krochus (spelling?) built a savage or Stevens in 7.62x39 and hand loaded for great results.

The inherent accuracy of the internet is like the 9 vs 45 debate. If you ask a guy at Sierra bullets or hornady you might get a better answer.

HB
 
In terms of rifles, the general consensus among benchrest shooters is that, within reason, short fat cartridges will generally produce better groups than long skinny cartridges with the same powder volume, assuming both ammo and rifle are built to the same tolerances. Short, fat, powder columns produce more consistent pressure curves.

AH HAH! THIS is what I've been driving at!

In my researching in the last few days on this subject, I've been unable to find anything which actually hints at an actual intrinsic characteristic of this (or any other) cartridge that explains WHY it would be "inherently more accurate".

At best, I'd run across some sort of comment like "it's believed that (fill in the blank) contributes to the inherent accuracy, but nobody knows for sure". In otherwords, hypothetical anecdotal claims with no theories or support behind them at all.

I can understand controlling pressure curves can contribute to terminal accuracy.

Now, the obvious question I have is "has anybody actually done any comparative studies of the pressure curves of sort, fat powder columns and other cartridge configurations?"

And the next question after that would be "has anybody developed a theory which explains the observed phenomena between pressure curves and accuracy?"
 
AH HAH! THIS is what I've been driving at!

In my researching in the last few days on this subject, I've been unable to find anything which actually hints at an actual intrinsic characteristic of this (or any other) cartridge that explains WHY it would be "inherently more accurate".

At best, I'd run across some sort of comment like "it's believed that (fill in the blank) contributes to the inherent accuracy, but nobody knows for sure". In otherwords, hypothetical anecdotal claims with no theories or support behind them at all.

I can understand controlling pressure curves can contribute to terminal accuracy.

Now, the obvious question I have is "has anybody actually done any comparative studies of the pressure curves of sort, fat powder columns and other cartridge configurations?"

And the next question after that would be "has anybody developed a theory which explains the observed phenomena between pressure curves and accuracy?"

Hmmmm

Ok, so in understanding the way these different factors affect the accuracy, I'm trying to place myself inside the casing of a loaded cartridge and envision what is going on as the powder ignites.

In a longer case that has more empty space in it, the expanding gasses are going to have to fill that space to the point that pressure being exerted on the back of the bullet begins to unseat the bullet and push it through the barrel. So when I think of how the pressure could be graphed, I see a J curve at the beginning of the pressure build that will continue to increase in slope until the critical pressure is hit to move the bullet. So we would have a slightly longer build of pressure, but the pressure spike would be higher than in a shorter cased cartridge.

In the shorter case, the case has less or perhaps no empty space in it, so the pressure increase to the point of moving the bullet will happen much faster, but with less of a pressure spike, though probably a higher overall pressure, and then allow the remaining burning powder to exert a more steady push on the bullet as it travels down the barrel and exits the muzzle.

So if I have this correct, and the real difference is timing of pressure maxes and how that force exerts pressure on the bullet, would that generate more stabilization of the bullet in conjunction with the riffling of the barrel?

So I look at it as if I have a cardboard tube, like from a roll of paper or something, and I put a tennis ball in the end, the longer case concept would be like I pulled the palm of my hand back and then slammed it into the tennis ball. The ball will exit the other end of the tube, but may not come out very stable or straight because I did not apply even pressure to it. I just pounded it through. As opposed to placing the palm of my hand on the ball, and then giving it a quick shove, the ball will likely exit in a more stable way. Both scenarios involve pressure or force spikes to get the ball moving, but in the palm slap example, the building of force takes longer, but applies force in a less even way, thus destabilizing the ball. In the palm push example, there is again a spike in force, but it happens earlier in relation to when my hand starts moving, and is a more steady and even push, thus allowing more stability.

Is that what we are saying here? I've not done any research on pressure curves. This is just how my mind's eye is seeing it, but I might be totally wrong.

So then the final stabilization is left up to the riffling to spin the bullet and get it moving nice and trued up, but the case length will always have an impact on the potential of repeatable accuracy, which is in fact precision speaking statistically. The BC of that particular bullet also plays a factor. As stated early in this thread, "inherently accurate" is really describing a combination of factors that makes a particular cartridge more easily fine tuned, that will result in repeatable results. It is however, a very overly simplified term.

I'm a handgunner, so this is new to me. What do you guys think, am I understanding this based on what I said, or am I still missing something. Am I understanding the pressure characteristics of longer vs shorter cases with the same projectile?
 
The topic is complex:

As stated early in this thread, "inherently accurate" is really describing a combination of factors that makes a particular cartridge more easily fine tuned, that will result in repeatable results. It is however, a very overly simplified term.

The above from Kodiak is true and hits the nail on the head. Or hits the X.

Also there is a limit to what shorter, fatter cartridges get you and short and fat are both relative. Shooting at over 500 yards with accuracy involves longer cases, obviously.

I'm gonna post a link to the Hornady Ballistic Resources page in Internal Ballistics which discusses some of the factors here:

http://www.hornady.com/ballistics-resource/internal

To explain what actually happens in the chamber of a rifle or handgun when it is fired, how the case and bullet are affected, we will employ illustrations with exaggerated clearances which would otherwise be difficult to see.

tipoc
 
Smokeless burn rates are determined by several factors, I believe the most significant one being a burn deterrent coating. This at least in part determines the burn rate.

Part of the equation you need to understand is that smokeless powder doesn't explode, it burns. If you pour some out on the ground and try to light it typically it kinda sputters and smokes.

Now, put it in some kind containment. The more it's contained, the hotter it gets. The hotter it gets, the faster it burns, which makes more heat. Which makes it burn faster.

All this happens in micro seconds. But it's important because the more it's contained, the faster it tries to burn. Which builds heat, which builds pressure, which builds more heat. Magnum rifle cartridges are basically a pipe bomb with a little bitty opening. If you don't want your gun to explode, you have to restrict the burn rate so the pressure curve doesn't accelerate too quickly. This is the reason magnum calibers have lots of burn deterrent. Slow burn rate.

Pistol cartridges typically have a big opening, close to bore diameter. If you use a powder with a lot of burn deterrent, the powder never builds enough heat/pressure to overcome the deterrent. You have something that fizzes but never lights off.

When you're looking for accuracy, you want absolute consistency. In a rifle particularly, the more powder the more burn deterrent. The slower the powder, the more apt it is to have variations.

As an example, H-110/W-296 is a ball pistol powder that has evidentially has a lot of deterrent coating. You cannot drop below 3% maximum charge and get consistent ignition. Not enough heat/pressure to get consistent burn

One of the solutions for accuracy in hand loading is a Lee Factory Crimp Die. The crimp itself doesn't do anything for accuracy. But what it may do is provide neck tension to hold the bullet in place longer. What actually is happening is that the ignition of the primer in a non-crimped round may have .enough force to push the bullet forward in to the lands. Now you have an air gap and inconsistent ignition.

Short fat cartridges have a large surface area exposed to the primer. This exposes more powder to the flame, which builds pressure more consistently.
 
Last edited:
Back in the day when cops carried wheel guns, a Model 66 with 158 grain lead round nose in it was often referred to as inherently accurate. Not because one guy could group it,but because thousands could. Reputation and repeatability are the keys.
 
I don't know about

all that but the two most accurate rifles I have ever owned is a 6.5mm Jap Arisaka and a 6.5mm Swedish Mauser, right out of surplus. There seems to be something about the 6.5mm caliber that might be called "inherently accurate".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top