Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick284
Read the small print!
Weatherby’s are quoted as from a 26” barrel, with copious free bore included.
And chronograph’s have at least 1.0% to 2% instrumental error from one to another. Let’s see, 3300fps x 0.02= 66 FPS
It’s a number, plain and simple, how one number compares to the next, or even the next 20 is what’s gonna matter.
You can therorize, pontificate, and beat your finger tips raw calculating all the numbers out there. At the end of it all under field conditions, with adrenaline coursing through your veins, is it gonna matter that much?
The OP was about a very extreme situation, which I think was driven by some serious mis quoting of misunderstood results, and is far from typical.
|
Not sure I understand why you are suggesting "read the fine print"? I don't recall mentioning my barrel lengths in my post, which, BTW, both are, in fact, 26".
My point was simple, I haven't seen the variation in inconsistency using factory rounds anywhere near what the OP experienced - that's all, that's it.
Although I'm not an expert, I do understand, and do expect, some small variation in load velocities from round to round and I also don't expect to see velocities as published "on the box" to be repeatable to all rifles as the same box of ammo produces different results in different rifles. I know at least that much - but that wasn't my point.
