1) Multiply the bore area in thousandths of an inch by the approximate powder capacity of the case with a bullet seated, then divide by 266.6. This results in the ideal bullet weight, but in some instance there are additional adjustments:
a) If the case has a neck shorter than the bullet, multiply the result by .85.
b) If the cartridge was developed before 1900, multiply the result by 1.14.
c) Any bottle-necked cartridge over .35 caliber, subtract 50 grains.
Some examples:
.17 Remington--30 grains .223 Remington--43 grains .250 Savage--87 grains 6.5x55--125 grains (This result is with a, the pre-1900 adjustment) 7x57--140 grains (also a) .270 Winchester--140 grains .30-06--173 grains .300 Winchester Magnum--200 grains (with b,the short-neck adjustment) .338 Winchester Magnum--262 grains .375 H&H--302 grains (with c, the -50 adjustment) .416 Remington Magnum--408 grains (also with c) .458 Winchester Magnum--463 grains
If anybody varies from these absolute numbers, they won't get into the Happy Hunting Grounds without being whacked 100 times with a hard-cover copy of P.O. Ackley's book.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
1) Multiply the bore area in thousandths of an inch by the approximate powder capacity of the case with a bullet seated, then divide by 266.6. This results in the ideal bullet weight, but in some instance there are additional adjustments:
a) If the case has a neck shorter than the bullet, multiply the result by .85.
b) If the cartridge was developed before 1900, multiply the result by 1.14.
c) Any bottle-necked cartridge over .35 caliber, subtract 50 grains.
Some examples:
.17 Remington--30 grains .223 Remington--43 grains .250 Savage--87 grains 6.5x55--125 grains (This result is with a, the pre-1900 adjustment) 7x57--140 grains (also a)pll .270 Winchester--140 grains .30-06--173 grains .300 Winchester Magnum--200 grains (with b,the short-neck adjustment) .338 Winchester Magnum--262 grains .375 H&H--302 grains (with c, the -50 adjustment) .416 Remington Magnum--408 grains (also with c) .458 Winchester Magnum--463 grains
If anybody varies from these absolute numbers, they won't get into the Happy Hunting Grounds without being whacked 100 times with a hard-cover copy of P.O. Ackley's book.
Good grief........
I'd rather be a free man in my grave, than living as a puppet or a slave....
The optimum bullet weight is generally whatever is on sale at Walmart just before the start of the local popular hunting season. The market has determined the answer by its collective experience.
"Optimum bullet WEIGHT" is the one for each cartridge that gives the flattest trajectory,OR, the LONGEST MPBR. Obviously, this will be different unless you compare apples to apples, for example, if we take the 300 Win Mag and we compare all bullet weights in the Accubond range, the bullet that gives us the longest MPBR is the 200gr bullet, in the 30-06, it's the 165gr bullet. It will be different for each cartridge, and it will be different with different makes of bullets too, because of BC differences alone.
There could be but I could care less. In 1953 I started loading 130 grain bullets I my 270 Winchester case and have killed pronghorn, mule deer and elk with my old rifle. Dident see any reason to change. In the early 60s I started using 165 grain bullets in my 308 Norma Mag and shot pronghorn, mule deer, and elk with the mag rifle but I dident need the mag for pronghorn and deer. Over the years most all of my shots were within 300 yards. I have also used other cartridges for big game. There is one thing I do know . I shot my rifles at 100, 200, and 300 yards so I knew where the bullets would hit a each range. I do the same with my varmint rifles..
For my .300 Weatherby, I think the optimum weight is 180 grains. Here's why:
1. Point blank trajectory past 300 yards on big game.
2. Good wind deflection ability.
3. With Partitions, kills anything up to 1000 pounds like the hammer of Thor.
4. 180 grain partitions almost always leave exit holes.
5. Less recoil and flatter trajectory than 200 grains.
I am skeptical about range finders because you may not have time to use them. I prefer to "guesstimate" what portion of the game's chest height is subtended by the distance from the center of the reticle to where it becomes thicker, assuming I keep the scope at 4X. For elk this means (a) if the chest is more than this, shoot. (b) If the chest is less than this, stalk closer.
Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.
Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.
1) Multiply the bore area in thousandths of an inch by the approximate powder capacity of the case with a bullet seated, then divide by 266.6. This results in the ideal bullet weight, but in some instance there are additional adjustments:
a) If the case has a neck shorter than the bullet, multiply the result by .85.
b) If the cartridge was developed before 1900, multiply the result by 1.14.
c) Any bottle-necked cartridge over .35 caliber, subtract 50 grains.
Some examples:
.17 Remington--30 grains .223 Remington--43 grains .250 Savage--87 grains 6.5x55--125 grains (This result is with a, the pre-1900 adjustment) 7x57--140 grains (also a) .270 Winchester--140 grains .30-06--173 grains .300 Winchester Magnum--200 grains (with b,the short-neck adjustment) .338 Winchester Magnum--262 grains .375 H&H--302 grains (with c, the -50 adjustment) .416 Remington Magnum--408 grains (also with c) .458 Winchester Magnum--463 grains
If anybody varies from these absolute numbers, they won't get into the Happy Hunting Grounds without being whacked 100 times with a hard-cover copy of P.O. Ackley's book.
Interesting that this formula gives about 235 grains for the .300 Weatherby (no short neck adjustment). On the other hand, 300 grains for the .375 and 450 grains for the .458 are very close to the formula and are the weights I arrived at by other means. For .223, I prefer a heavier weight, around 69 grains.
Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.
Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.
I forgot to include the Weatherby exception, which is to subtract half the retail price of each piece of brass, in U.S. pennies, from the weight of the bullet.
Also forgot to include the "absence of sense of humor" adjustment. Are you one of the guys who angrily called Wolfe Publishing when they tried to contact the made-up addresses parts and components for B-29 rifles?
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
John, after I read that article I had two rifles built around the B29. It is everything you claimed and more! Why just this morning before sunrise I shot the moon. It died.
Thanks!
Dan
I am..........disturbed.
Concerning the difference between man and the jackass: some observers hold that there isn't any. But this wrongs the jackass. -Twain
Last night I had some time to kill so I pulled out an old book off the shelf: Any Shot You Want. The chapter Cartridge and Bullet Selection..Light Prey Animals..A Word About Bullets, "Expansion is great, velocity is great, and weight retention is devoutly to be wished. But penetration is the key." TEW
The thing I thought was funny the very next subchapter written by Craig Boddington, Rifles and Cartridges for Medium/Heavy Prey: Reference SD thoughout his chapter going on the say, "Bullet weight is a simple choice too. Don' get wrapped up in a bit of extra velocity possible with a lighter bullet...But when in doubt, keep sectional density in mind."
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/AP39Jhm.jpg)
