Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee
No real reason other than what others thought
I spent some time prior to posting the thread on comparing the payload in KE to the amount of powder burnt to a given distance.
Here is what I found (subject to audit).. Its all very general as I divided the initial charge weight by the KE delivered to the longest range indicated at a barrel length of 26 in. Minimum 2100 ft lbs at 300 yds
Here they are:
1) .300 Win Mag (32.4) 6) 9.3x62 (37.7) 10) .308 Win (46.08
2) .338 Fed (33.9) 7) .338 win Mag (38.7)
3) .338-06 (34..4) 8) 375 H&H (38.4)
4) .35 Whelen (34.5 9 ). 30-06 (44.4)
Missed lots of ctdgs so it's meaningles as all get-out but it helped pass another Covid day.
|
I am both interested and confused by your method. Keep in mind that I really don’t know much about this stuff... :
Dividing KE at a fixed distance by the initial charge weight and comparing different cartridges this way looks like an interesting way to quantify efficiency.
The higher the quotient of KE / powder weight, the more efficient the cartridge is with respect to creating KE from powder burn. (Assuming that the combustion of powder x and powder y release equivalent energy- which I believe is probably false).
For one of my rifles 6.5cm with 24” barrel, 41.0 grains delivers 1752 ft-lbs at 300 yds. 1752/41 = 42.7. My best 30.06 load gets me 2130/57 = 37.3. So relatively poor compared to the 6.5cm.
According to your math, the number one performer in terms of efficiency is the .300 Win at 32.4.
Wouldn’t the lower values mean that the cartridge is inefficient at creating KE through powder burn? In other words, wouldn’t the 308 be your most efficient, followed by 30.06? With the .300 Win being least efficient?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk