My point is that Im assuming if I invest in higher quality equipment, I can always skimp on primers, etc. for a cost of accuracy, just as you said. I think* I can't go the other way around and expect cheap machinery to turn quality primary materials into quality. There is no conflict in my statements.
My accuracy goals, if I'm going for accuracy, for 556 are slightly sub 1 moa out to 600 yards, so, basically hitting head sized objects out to there reliably. Beyond that, I'm not shooting 5.56 (my original question).
You seem to be talking about other calibers, which is not what I am asking about. If you want to talk about 300wm, 50bmg or lapua or even 6.5cm this is not the discussion.
My accuracy goals, if I'm going for accuracy, for 556 are slightly sub 1 moa out to 600 yards, so, basically hitting head sized objects out to there reliably. Beyond that, I'm not shooting 5.56 (my original question).
You seem to be talking about other calibers, which is not what I am asking about. If you want to talk about 300wm, 50bmg or lapua or even 6.5cm this is not the discussion.
Sub MOA in 5.56 out to 600 yards is reliably doable, but depends on rifle, shooting setup, and of course the ammo, plus the shooter. I can get well under sub-MOA in 223 using a quality single stage press, higher end dies, digital scale/dispenser, sorted brass, high quality bullets, powder the rifle seemed to like, and methodical reloading processes. That process is slow. A less tedious and cheaper setup MAY deliver what you are looking for, but impossible to say with certainty.