longcruise
70 Cal.
Paul, (and mike and Fisher), well, i think all three of you make an assumption that shooting 100 to 120 grains of 2f under my RB will be physically punishing. Response to felt recoil is a very personal thing. All shooters have a different perception of it. One guy I shoot with won't go over 45 grains for non hunting loads and stays at 80 grains for deer and elk. He gets fine results just as you guys described with your 80 grain loads. But, the reason he loads as he does is recoil. He's no sissy. Played college football and is a physical guy but to him the recoil is highly objectionable. Point being that it's a subjective thing.
I don't get the accuracy vs charge argument. When we hunt, we need adequate accuracy and adequate power. For some guns/shooters that is a compromise of some type and others may find their best accuracy does not go with the level of power they think is adequate. IMO, it's about being "adequate" on both scores.
In fact, if my best accuracy load is 120 grains of 2f, then according to accuracy first believers, that should be my hunting load. OTOH, with the rifle and barrel I'll shoot this year, 80 grains of 3f will allow me to hold a 13 shot 6 inch offhand group at 50 yards. Even though it might improve a bit with a lighter or heavier charge, that is adequate hunting accuracy and adequate power level (chronos 1627 fps). But, since recoil does not bother me and since 100 grains will chrono 1853 fps, then going there might just be a good choice for me even though it may be looked down upon by some.
As far as chrono testing goes, I have done way more than any bp shooter needs to, including multiple brands, granulations, and lot#s. What I've found is indeed eye opening, but does not, IMO, shed much light on the killing power of these various loads and velocities.
As far as penetration tests go, while the idea is intrigueing, no artificial test medias are going to give an accurate picture of how a ball will penetrate in game. They may show some sort of relative penetration levels and while interesting, those same relative levels of penetration can change from media to media including the body of a game animal.
My only "test" media has been the deer and elk killed by myself and hunting partners with loads varying from 60 grains up to 120 on deer and 80 to 120 on elk. Within the same distances for the shot, the penetration differences were not worth mentioning. All of the above loads provided killing shots with penetration ranging from pass through to ball caught under the hide on the far side. All lethal!
So, as you can see, my opinion of what works does not vary much from what you guys think and as far as I'm concerned, the penetration testing is done and behind me. At the same time, since my 120 grain load kills them dead with adequate penetration as does my partners 80 grain load, what's the point of praising the ligher load over the heavier?
If recoil did effect me as it does those guys shooting 450 conicals over 150 grains of whiz bang, I'd sure not go there, but since it does not effect me then I sometimes do go there. It's just a matter of choice, just like my old indian friend told me.
I don't get the accuracy vs charge argument. When we hunt, we need adequate accuracy and adequate power. For some guns/shooters that is a compromise of some type and others may find their best accuracy does not go with the level of power they think is adequate. IMO, it's about being "adequate" on both scores.
In fact, if my best accuracy load is 120 grains of 2f, then according to accuracy first believers, that should be my hunting load. OTOH, with the rifle and barrel I'll shoot this year, 80 grains of 3f will allow me to hold a 13 shot 6 inch offhand group at 50 yards. Even though it might improve a bit with a lighter or heavier charge, that is adequate hunting accuracy and adequate power level (chronos 1627 fps). But, since recoil does not bother me and since 100 grains will chrono 1853 fps, then going there might just be a good choice for me even though it may be looked down upon by some.
As far as chrono testing goes, I have done way more than any bp shooter needs to, including multiple brands, granulations, and lot#s. What I've found is indeed eye opening, but does not, IMO, shed much light on the killing power of these various loads and velocities.
As far as penetration tests go, while the idea is intrigueing, no artificial test medias are going to give an accurate picture of how a ball will penetrate in game. They may show some sort of relative penetration levels and while interesting, those same relative levels of penetration can change from media to media including the body of a game animal.
My only "test" media has been the deer and elk killed by myself and hunting partners with loads varying from 60 grains up to 120 on deer and 80 to 120 on elk. Within the same distances for the shot, the penetration differences were not worth mentioning. All of the above loads provided killing shots with penetration ranging from pass through to ball caught under the hide on the far side. All lethal!
So, as you can see, my opinion of what works does not vary much from what you guys think and as far as I'm concerned, the penetration testing is done and behind me. At the same time, since my 120 grain load kills them dead with adequate penetration as does my partners 80 grain load, what's the point of praising the ligher load over the heavier?
If recoil did effect me as it does those guys shooting 450 conicals over 150 grains of whiz bang, I'd sure not go there, but since it does not effect me then I sometimes do go there. It's just a matter of choice, just like my old indian friend told me.
