Every gun is different, and you can't really generalize about a species. The most accurate revolver I have ever owned is a 1995 .45 Colt Vaquero WHEN I can clearly see the sights AND with specific loads. That has nothing to do with the front blade which allows lots of light on either side (good). Rather, the curved top of the frame (back sight) reflects light in some conditions. In the right light, I like the sight picture of a Vaquero.
The picture below is no fluke for a 25 yd group with a basic 255 gr SWC and 2400 (before filing sight for elevation). But, I can't get that kind of accuracy with Unique; not even close. The 7.5" barrel helps, and I'm sure CAS's throat work helped as well.
The worse grouping revolver I ever owned was an OMSBH, no matter what I tried or did, and I worked hard on it. Go figure. Twelve inch groups up close sounds like shooter issue. I'd have a good shot run the revolver though the paces. If it comes out fine, practice, practice. No one shoots handguns well without a long period of effort IMHO, which is part of the appeal. Why do anything easy? Where's the challenge?
The picture below is no fluke for a 25 yd group with a basic 255 gr SWC and 2400 (before filing sight for elevation). But, I can't get that kind of accuracy with Unique; not even close. The 7.5" barrel helps, and I'm sure CAS's throat work helped as well.
The worse grouping revolver I ever owned was an OMSBH, no matter what I tried or did, and I worked hard on it. Go figure. Twelve inch groups up close sounds like shooter issue. I'd have a good shot run the revolver though the paces. If it comes out fine, practice, practice. No one shoots handguns well without a long period of effort IMHO, which is part of the appeal. Why do anything easy? Where's the challenge?