Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenmil
So here is the paragraph in question. You should be able to tell us why you think this is false information. Keep in mind he says most, not all.
Quote:
“Most pre 9/11 ammunition produced very poor performance on game. The combination of low muzzle velocities, non aerodynamic bullet designs and the trend towards 22” barrels all took a toll on performance. At close ranges this ammunition performed adequately but at ranges beyond 100 yards, kills could be very slow. At 200 yards, lean bodied animals would often show no sign of a bullet strike whatsoever and escape to cover. Many hunters would have been fooled by what seemed like a complete miss when using this ammunition of the past.”
|
Very interesting indeed
It is no secret that I am not a 270 fan but that is predjudially based , nothing more .
I have no idea what the difference Post 9/11 made but people have been raving about the 270 since its inception and I have never heard complaints about poor ammo quality or low velocities - none that were substantiated anyway
Cat