cayugad
The 80 grain load does look pretty good actually.
Yes, I think agree - I was strapped for time so I was not able to set up the chrono - next trip I will. I really just hate to back down in powder because I want the most velocity I can get and in the same token I do not want to overdo the pressure nor do I want inaccurate loads - so I guess sometimes you just got to easy up a bit. The last 4 shots of the day I was shooting at a snow bank on top of a gravel pile. Little twigs/plants would be sticking out of the snow so I would line them and shoot - the bank was just over 100 yards and my impact marks were right there - I really like shooting "Killable" better than paper.
So your saying the 300 grain are better then the 250 grain
I have them both and I have shot them both - but the paper ballistics of the 300 grain far overshawdow the 250. No doubt about it the 250 shoots well and I really believe it will take deer but I really like the ballistics of the 300 even if the published BC is 10/15% high it is still really good. I THINK speer re-designed the nose of the 300 when they went from .451 to .452 to achieve better ballistics.
reasonable elk load with 80 grains wouldn't it.
No doubt in the short ranges and I am thinking it will be even out to my self imposed max of 150 yardswith open sights and all the other conditions being equal (the worst part of that of all the elk I have shot I think maybe one or two were at ranges greater than a 100) - but until I get a chance to see the velocity readings and of the bullet performance on an animal I really, in my mind, will not know for sure. I am actually think the velocity might surprise me - I am hoping to get those reading after a round or two of trap on Sunday.