ORIGINAL: Scott Gags
ORIGINAL: stubblejumper
That was kind of the point of the "Exception to the Rule" section of the article. I cant belive you missed that.
Actually I did read that one paragraph.It simply stated that the hi energy loads would give"a tiny edge over factory fodderin kinetic energy transfer and penetration".The word "tiny" is the actual word used in the article.It stated that for tough game like elk this could be worthwhile,It also stated "of course the rounds must shoot accurately in your rifle,or the extra pop is useless".The section about accuracy also stated that the accuracy of these two hi energy30-06 loads did not meet the accuracy standard that the authors had set.Apparently they don't considergroupsin excess of2" at100 yards "respectable",and for that matter neither do I.You speak of 400 yard trajectories,but at 400 yards that 2+" grouptranslatesmost probably to an8" to 9"or evenlarger group,and that is off of a benchrest.Using field positions that group size will grow even larger which will result in not all bullets strikingthe vital zone of abig game animal.That being the case,I will repeat the words used in the article "the extra pop is useless".
Tiny difference huh, lets look at the numbers shall we:
Federal High Energy Nosler Partition 180 Gr 3,203 LBS/KE
Federal Premium Nosler Partion 180 Grain2,743 LBS/KE
Yes, according to my calculations that is 460 LBS/ KE more. Are you really going try to say that is a "tiny" difference. It equates to 17% more KE and they are using the same bullet so no excuses there. For the record I did not bring up this article and don't really think much of its accuracy, for instance it says "We had the most samples in the .30-06 180-grain loadings, and we found significant muzzle velocity differences between Federal High Energy and standard loads."
How can the same article come back and say the KE increase is "tiny" when the KE formula uses Speed/Squared in the formula. I always read articles and evalute the rational used, and its accuracy rather that accepting it as gospel. The KE comparison above shows a 17% increase but you call it tiny because thats what the article told you. I am thinking most anyone would agree with me that 17% is not "tiny" gain in killing power.
Regardingaccuracy, as I said eariler the velocity differences of the 06 HE loads are respectable, and that leads me to lean toward the gun not liking that load. If they used more than one gun to test it might carry a little weight with me, but a load from one gun is not enough for me to determine that a load is accurate or not across the board.
In addition only 3 of the 7180 Grain loads meet the accuracy requirements of the article. The HE loads average group is only 1/8" larger, andwith only comparison using the same bullet, the HE 180 Nosler Loads are actually more accurate than the Premium 180 Nosler loads. Like I said I try to evaluate what I read rather than take it as gospel.All the above just tells me the "one gun" is very possibly the problem and notthe many poor performing rounds.