The Hornady data came from their tech services folks - I also think they were being conservative at 2000fps but when the SST bullets were first released the recommended minimum velocity was 2200fps. So at least Hornady didn't over-optimize performance. It's surprising to me how many shoot at extreme ranges with bullets that don't have the terminal ballistics to perform properly at the low impact velocities remaining at ranges beyond. I highly recommend the Terminal Ballistics Research website at
www.ballisticstudies.com - they draw their conclusions from actual kill data involving various live animals mostly taken in game herd control hunts as compared to testing in ballistics gel or recovering bullets from previously killed cow carcasses.
It's damned difficult to produce a bullet that will perform at impact velocities from 2800fps down to 1100fps on any kind of game. Someone made the comment about partitions mushrooming at about any speed but that's really an overgeneralization - each separate bullet weight of each caliber produced has differing impact physics due to the variables of bullet construction, impact velocity, and target mass & medium. When I first started referring to the website, I was surprised that in 6.5 caliber partitions, the125gr out performs 140gr in just about all hunting applications from small to large game because in most non-magnum 6.5 calibers there's not enough velocity at impact to deform the 140's front section enough to create good expansion. Until I read that, I just assumed that the heavier bullet was better in my 6.5x55 because I normally hunted where the range never exceeded 250 yards or so. My point is that just because we have a super-aerodynamic bullet that can consistently hit game at longer ranges doesn't necessarily mean that it will kill it. Someone pull my power-plug - it's past my bed time and I'm beginning to ramble . . .
