Bigbulls,

When we talk about "similar bullet weight for a given caliber" are we not talking about equal sd? I only ask this because it seems we are splitting hairs here.

Yes if they were perfectly equal then the SD would be the same but no one makes perfectly equal SD bullets for differeing bore sizes. At least I don't know of any.

Just comparing a mid weight bullet to a mid weight bullet and answering a numbers post with a numbers post.

I have chronographed several hi energy and light magnum loads and not one has lived up the velocity listed by the manufacturer.The same can be said for many loads listed in the reloading manuals.I trust the velocities that my chronograph provides over any published velocities.

I am trying to understand how I am manipulating the numbers. I simple stated that 30 cal bullet BC are as good asthe other calibers and then Ilisted 3 - 30 caliber bullets along with their BC. Actually, I cannot help but notice that your original statement "any given bullet weight" has now evolved to "similar bullet weights for their bore size". Using 7 mm bullets with higher SD to demonstrate that the 7MM has better BC is not "apples to apples". The only 30 and 7mm with the same SD is the 140 vs 165 bullets and the Barnes at .505 BC is a good bullet for the 30 caliber. When the SD is actually equal I am not aware of anything else in a 7MM that is that good.
With regard to the MatchKing bullet I was only comparing hunting bullets and I believe that is a target bullet. If target bullets are on the table Lost River Ballistics offers a 220graintarget bullet with a BC of .930but againI think most in this forum are interested inhunting bullets not ballistic freaks.

Lastly I was very clearI my post that the7mm is more powerful except for the HighEnergy powders, so comparing standard 06 loadsto 7mm loads as above does not really compare the best of the 06.

For more info go here.
http://www.gun-tests.com/performance/jul96price.html

Yes I have seen that before. See the link from your link with the one exception to the rule. I just so happened to be the 180 grain 30-06 loads!

http://www.gun-tests.com/newspics/pdfs/1-1-Exception.pdf

The links actually states to use this 06 load in lieu of going up to 300 win mag.

deleted

One of the first statements made in the article linked by schoolboy was;

According to the link posted by schoolboy the greatest velocity reached with the 180gr bullet out of the high energy 30-06 load was 2831fps.
The greatest velocity reached with a 180gr bullet out of the hi energy 300winmag load was 3080fps.
In other words the 300win mag still produced 249fps more than the 30-06 using 180gr bullets.

Also mentioned in the article was that many of the hi energy loads including both 30-06 loads,showedsub standard accuracy in the rifles that they were tested in.

I am not sure why you are putting a comparison of the 300 Win Mag High Energy loads vs 30-06 High Energy load.The article SchoolBoy linked was recommending the 30-06 in lieu of the STANDARD Wing Mag load. I think it is obvious to all that the case capacity and pressure limit of the Win Mag will clearly outperform the 06 with equal energy content powders are used. That was kind of the point of the "Exception to the Rule" section of the article. I cant belive you missed that.

Again most of the cartridges do not benifit significantly from the High Energy Powders and that was why the article gave the loads an overall thumbs down, but the article was very clear in stating that the 06 did benefit, so much infact that the article highlighted the 06 as the "Exception to the Rule" so I cannot understand why you try to state otherwise. Regarding the accuracy of the loads they only varied by 11 FPS which is respectable, the loads where grouping around 2" which is also respectable. As you know results will vary with different rifles.

Now, below is a cut and paste right from the article:

The sole case where there was a substantial difference in trajectory at 400 yards was between .30-06 180-grain loads. The High Energy Nosler Partition load dropped 42.68 inches at 400 yards, while the Federal Premium Nosler Partition load dropped 50.01 inches and the Speer Nitrex load fell 48.32 inches.

And on that note I rest my case!!!!!!!

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".