If It Flies... My experience with Nosler Partitions is limited to a few rifles, and in all but one I never got very good accuracy. In my 06, which grouped .70 MOA with Sierra Game Kings at 100 yards, the best I could do with Nosler Partitions was a group over 2 inches. In my heavy barrelled 6mm however, 95 grain NP bullets outperformed any other bullets I tried. It puts 5 of the Partitions in a slightly oval hole. So, my very limited anecdotal evidence suggests inconsistent accuracy in the Nosler Partitions.
<br>
<br>The tone of the LR threads bothers me. I'm fascinated with the technology and skill of LR hunting, and put off by its proponents. It comes over to me like somone with a thin skin claiming inffallability. There have been some shots from opponents, true, but everytime I try to just read to learn from LR experience, I feel like these guys are patronizing me. LR hunters seem to claim that their experience cannot be questioned, but the experience of anyone else is invalid. I'm also annoyed every time a LR evangelist says their opponents are claiming such shooting can't be done. That is shifting the ground of argument. I don't think anyone is saying an elk can't be killed cleanly at 2000 plus yards. Some are questioning the ethics, and some of the same are suspicious about the consistency claimed, especially with the bullets used. But no one is saying it can't be done. It is superb shooting.
<br>
<br>Regarding bullets, if you read this entire thread, you have to come to one conclusion: That MK bullets perform better at ranges over 1000 yards than they do at usual hunting ranges, say under 300 yards. That conclusion is inescapable if you accept the manufacturer's analysis of its own bullet, based on feedback from many hunters, and you also accept the anecdotal evidence of the LR hunters. I don't think either source is lying. The bullets fail often enough that they got a bad rep among hunters. They have so far worked well for the LR hunters. A more likely explanation of this discrepancy in observed bullet performance is that the LR guys have so far beat the odds. I believe that the LR guys are waging a wonderful battle against simple physics, animal behaviour, and statistical probability, and have beat the odds so far if they have never lost an animal hit.
<br>
<br>On bullet "failure" if a bullet performs 90% of the time to its max capability in terms of penetration and expansion, and the hunter places shots so well that he only needs that full capability for perhaps one animal in 20, then you can have a long, consistent string of quick kills. But the time is coming when the need for full performance on an animal converges with the one bullet in ten that delivers less. The hunter shooting such a bullet is on a collision course with reality unless he is very lucky, which I hope for him.
<br>
<br>Just curious: how about this for a test? If we had one excellent marksman, a long range man, shoot the same rifle at two targets, one at say 1500 yards, the other at 100 yards. The targets could be the typical 8 or 10 inch plate to represent vitals, or we could make it more realistic and mark out a deer vital area on a life sized target and cover it with real deer hair. The shooter could have a spotter by his side with bigeyes and any other equipment. I would be willing to bet even money shot for shot, that he will hit the closer target and miss the farther one, if I could find a taker to bet he will hit the 1500 target and miss the 100 yard one. The more shots fired the better. The only catch is that the shooter has to be neutral and do his best to hit each shot.
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
