Which is the most inherently accurate round ?

M

MusclesMcGee

Moderator
I was at the range tonight and rented a Kahr K40. It was my first experience with the .40 caliber, and I have to say, I was HORRIBLY inaccurate with this gun/round. 10 inch groups at 10yrds. I don't blame it on the Kahr, I liked its weight and balance, and the sights were easy to line up. The recoil wasn't that terrible either. Much less than my .45. So, is this a fault of the round ? The design of the bullet ? Here's my experience with different calibers and what I have found to be most accurate from first to last.

1. .22 (well duh ! :rolleyes: )

2. .38 special (can hit quarters at 25 yards)

3. .45

4. 9 mm

5 .357 magnum (FAST recoil)

6. .40

7. (yet to be determined) I am curious about the .380, .32, .44, and 10mm.
 
In formal competition the .22 seems to be the most accurate at closer ranges such as under 50 yards to maybe 100. Right on it's heels is the .38 special and .45 ACP. I've seen groups that make you cry with both guns. Ragged holes with both at 50 yards can be found.
A real performer at closer range is the .32 S&W Long. That has been a target gun in the past and very accurate. S&W made a nice revolver for it we called the K-32.
The 9mm, .38 Super, and .40 S&W are not designed for serious competative target use and they don't do well in bullseye type shooting where intense accuracy is needed. They do work in such things as bowling pins, metal targets etc., for some folks. There is some wiggle room with the above, but that is pretty close. At LONG range the .44 Mag is capable of incredible work. See the works of Elmer Kieth on that.
 
PlusPinc is right -- of course...

And... there have been some VERY accurate pocket pistols in .32 ACP also. My first .32 Walther from the 60s was a tack driver!

The .22 is my favorite for accuracy and with the Quick-Shock at nearly 2,000 fps it is a serious round. In pocket pistol the 9x18 Makarov is hard to beat! And then of course just as per above; my old S&W (wouldn't own a new one if it were free) snubbie in .38 Special shot like a rifle and was fun to shoot at cans 100 yards away.



------------------
Talk is cheap; Free Speech is NOT.
 
"Inherent" accuracy is a tricky thing to measure. When we shoot, the cartridge, the firearm, and the shooter all play a role in determining how tight the group will be. We also have to look at individual loads to see how much work has been done to maximize their accuracy.

For instance, the .22 LR has a lot contributing to its reputation for accuracy. First of all, it's a quiet, low-recoiling round that's easy to shoot. Second, it's typically fired in fixed-barreled firearms that have an inherent accuracy advantage over recoil operated pistols with moving barrels. Third, it has a hundred years of production and target shooting history, so manufacturers have had both an incentive and an opportunity to refine it.

Neither the 9mmP, the .45 ACP or the .40 S&W were designed for target shooting. The first two were introduced as military rounds and the third as a police round.

For many years, though, NRA bullseye shooters who are required to shoot .45s have been working on the accuracy of the .45 ACP. As a result, the .45 has a great reputation as a target round which the 9mmP doesn't share.

A few years ago, though, the rules of service pistol competition changed to recognize the adoption of the Beretta M9 by the US military. The US Army Marksmanship Unit (USAMU) had its armorers work on accurizing the M9 and now their shooters have 9mmP pistols that shoot as well, if not better, than the accurized M1911A1 pistols in .45 ACP they used to use.

The .38 Super is another cartridge that's had a reputation for poor accuracy. That was due to the erratic headspacing of the original Colt design. When IPSC shooters began flocking to the .38 Super for its capacity advantage in 1911-style pistols, the gunsmiths went to work and now there are .38 Super raceguns that group as well as bullseye guns. Ruby Fox, a 2650 shooter, Olympic medalist and multi-time women's champion at Camp Perry shoots a .38 Super in the Centerfire matches and does very well with it.

I think the .40 S&W has a lot of potential, too, even though most .40s aren't particularly accurate. We won't know until someone has the time and the incentive to work with it.
 
IMCO, the 38 Special, followed by the 22LR, 45ACP, 38 Super, 41AE, 9x21.....

------------------
"All my ammo is factory ammo"
 
Good answers.

Now what about bullet design ? Are there certain types of bullets that stabilize better than others ? Why do my .45 fmj tear the paper rather than make a perfect hole like .38 Special fmj or 9 mm fmj ?

Why is the sky blue ?....Sorry, I know I'm posing a lot of strange questions, but I'm getting tired of reading the political crap that doesn't belong on this board ... :rolleyes:
 
.38 spl 158 gr. swaged SWC is more accurate at longer ranges (50 yds.+) than full wadcutters, although wadcutters tend to be a little more accurate under 50 yds.



------------------
"I don't believe in individualism, Peter. I don't believe that any one man is any one thing which everybody else can't be. I believe that we are all equal and interchangeable."--Ellsworth Toohey
 
i agree with matt, and another guy above, there are too many variables, however i can say that the 40 is inherently un accurate, or maybe i should say less accurate than the 10mm, and the 357sig, and .... even the 9mm. i think that some guns are just built better than others, and can shoot better, sort of like the chosen ones. the 40's in accuracy is best demonstrated in rifles that come just the same in 9mm. and 45.
 
"Clean" bullet holes in paper are mostly a product of bullet nose, speed, and the paper.

The sharp corner of a full wadcutter or a semi-wadcutter works well at almost any speed. With long-fiber paper (like most copier papers), you can sometimes still get some tearing--beyond the bullet hole--even with WCs and SWCs.

At rifle speeds, they all make a clean hole. .30 calibers actually make a hole close to .270 or so in actual diameter, 'cause of flex in the paper.

I share your disappointment in the .40 S&W's accuracy, or lack thereof. I've never had such dismal results as yours--worst was 8 inches at 25 yards, sandbagged & five-round groups. Can almost always get 4 inches or under and am learning to be "satisfied" with 3.25" or under, delighted with 2 inches.

IME, the accuracy pecking order is:

.22 RF with decent ammo. Not because of recoil, but because of better barrels.

.45 ACP--Easy to get no worse than 2-inch groups with just about any bullet & halfway decent gun.

.38 Special--many "defense" loads open up the groups, but still a very close third place with most loads.

Everything else IME depends so much on the specific gun (not just make & model, but the specimen itself--great variability) and the load, that generalizations beg to be disproven.
 
- .22LR
- target wadcutter .38SPL loads
- 10mm... this round has been very accurate for me, especially out of my S&W 610 and Bren Ten.
- 9mm out of my SIG P210 or HK P7M8 :D

- 40S&W isn't very accurate in my experience

------------------
Mik

<A HREF="http://"http://marina.fortunecity.com/harbour/347/10mm.html"" TARGET=_blank>my 10mm page</A>
 
Depending on whether you're shooting steel sheep or just trying to cut the same hole in paper, I've never seen anything more accurate than a Thompson Center Contender in .17 cal.

This high speed baby cuts paper like a railgun, but can't knock down steel like the other common cals.

I've had .45s and .38s and .357's, 9mm, .22s and all but I love my .44 special loaded with SWC 200gr lead loaded to 985 fps. Out of a 2 inch bbl, I'm dead on nats ass out to 20yds. Super clean cuts on paper and the steel just sings when I hit it! WHANGGGGGGG!

Tack driver inside 20yds.

She's my "smart gun". Anywhere I point her. She hits! Now that's a smart gun!
 
Its not so much the caliber - its the bullet itself that determines the accuracy.
The .45 is squat and fat and unaerodymic - yet with a good bullet design, and a good barrel - all loaded right... it can shoot very acccurate.
Rounds with built in accuaracy are the rounds that are a little longer, and a little more streamlined.
Its a simple matter of physics.
 
My most accurate other than 22's are the 38's, and the larger calibers, 44spl, 44mag--you've got to see em to believe it....these larger caliber's have an advantage in the size of hole they cut, but they cut one large hole...lol...fubsy.
 
On another note

I was thumbing through a book called "Depraved English" (a dictionary for antiquated, vulgar English terms) and the word "Fubsy" was in there !

Just a hint, its Scottish in origin.
 
> Now what about bullet design ? Are there certain types of bullets that stabilize better than others ?

That's another tricky question. A bullet's design has to take into account what happens inside the gun (internal ballistics) and what happens outside the gun (external ballistics).

Ideally, a bullet will be perfectly centered in the bore as it travels down the barrel. It will also deform some as it's forced into the lands and grooves of the rifling by the propellant gases. Imperfections in the base of the bullet will result in uneven gas pressure which will tip the bullet to some degree as it leaves the muzzle. (Instability caused by tipping at the muzzle is also why it's very important for the barrel to be properly crowned).

In flight, the most stable configuration is one with the center of mass up front, like a badminton birdie or a dart (or a .38 Special hollow-base wadcutter). But since handgun bullets are spin-stabilized and used over short distances, weight distribution usually isn't much of a factor. Similarly, drag doesn't play a large enough role to give much advantage to handgun bullets with highly aerodynamic shapes.

Then there's the whole subsonic/supersonic/transsonic problem but I think I've already demonstrated my ignorance of physics enough for one day. ;)
 
> .32 S&W Long Wadcutter. It is the choice of centerfire pistol competitors.

There's more than accuracy behind the choice of the .32 Long by ISSF Centerfire shooters:

1) It's a small, weak round that can fit and function in blowback pistols very similar to those used for .22 rimfire target shooting.

2) Its light recoil makes shot-to-shot recovery in sustained fire strings easy.

Also note that the ISSF Centerfire matches are shot at a maximum range of 25 meters. Those who shoot at longer ranges have trouble with the slow, light .32 bullets on windy days.
 
I'll go along with the top three.
.22RF
.38 spl.
.45 acp

But it also depends on the load used and the gun. I have seen guns in all three calibers that were absolute tack drivers. I've also seen guns in all three calibers that couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. Then again, with careful load selection or handloading, any of these calibers is easily capable of better than average accuracy in standard production firearms. I think more so than alot of other handgun calibers.

I also agree with your appraisal of the .40 S&W. I had one once that about drove my nuts trying to get to shoot well. I finally gave up and sold it.

JMHO.

------------------
Politically, Fashionably and Aerodynamically Incorrect!
 
I have a 38 Super racegun that shoots 1"
groups at 25 yards using handloads (125g @
1450fps)
I have a 40S&W SVI pistol that shoots 1 1/2" groups at 25 yards using handloads (200g @ 900fps)
I have a Glock 23 that shoots 2 1/2" groups at 25 years using Blaser 165, Winchester 180 White Box or 180 handloads.
You must fit the ammo to the pistol. High pressure rounds will give more variance than low pressure rounds.
 
Ummm, could it be that all of this fantastic accuracy with the .22 is more a result of the fact that we can shoot 10X as many rounds for the same amount of money?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top