Are you using the same components, barrel length, etc., like Hornady's? Also, have you verified your velocity with another chronograph? That's quite a bit of difference.
Scratching my head.... SET ME STRAIGHT
- Thread starter PRCLITE
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
brushandbay
Well-Known Member
Doesn't say on the box what barrel length they used. Using their loaded ammo so components can't be different. I can load ammo and get it a bit faster in the nosler. Sold the 300 wm so didn't mess with it. All three have been 26" barrels. Like I stated I used two different chrono's. Caldwell first and figured it might be wrong so used a magneto speed snd they were pretty close. Drop tests checked out too. Have a place to shoot out to a 1k so it nice to be able to to do that.
Well I guess I've got a fast barrel and I'll leave it at that! Thanks everyone for the info.
Ranger Rick
Well-Known Member
You're welcome, and thanks for doing your homework
According to my Hornady 10th ed., they use 25" 1:10" for the .300 WM. That's interesting that there is such a big difference. I guess it is a good thing, though, as long as there is no pressure.
Highlander44
Well-Known Member
If it's working, it working. If you want to get into the weeds, one thing that may be affecting the velocity that seems like it's higher than it should, is dial up. There is a chance your scope isn't dialing exactly a 1/4 MOA per click. Would be interesting if you get a chrono to see what the true velocity is
Didn't read every single post word for word so maybe what I'm gonna suggest already was . I believe some barrels are just faster than others . I saw someone mentioned maybe a tighter chamber and if that is the case and maybe just maybe the barrel is a faster barrel , that could be adding up. If the bc is not what is advertised and the other contributing factors are tight or fast it very well could be you found the pot of gold at the end of the 
I did run it through my chrono as I posted yesterday and I will argue that the chrono is actually not true velocity but more of a starting point and that field verified hits on target at multiple distances is actual true velocity. As far as my scope turrets being off, they definitely are not. I verified my turrets before even starting to mess with my drop charts. If there is a Nightforce ATACR set of turrets out there that weren't dead nuts it's the first I've heard. Not that NF is best scope above all else but they've earned their reputation over and over.
That's kind of what I'm chalking it up to at this point. I would say that I will run it out until the barrel burns up. Hopefully when I have to rebarrel I'll get another fast one!Didn't read every single post word for word so maybe what I'm gonna suggest already was . I believe some barrels are just faster than others . I saw someone mentioned maybe a tighter chamber and if that is the case and maybe just maybe the barrel is a faster barrel , that could be adding up. If the bc is not what is advertised and the other contributing factors are tight or fast it very well could be you found the pot of gold at the end of the
dougduey
Well-Known Member
I'll throw another possibility in the ring. Had this from personal experience when I took a long range shooting class and used my 6.5-284 Norma. Hand loads with the 140 VLD Berger at 2997 fps. It was t until we started shooting steel at 800-1070 yards that we found I was consistently high. My instructor made adjustments into his Kestrel and from there, I started getting hits. I can't remember exactly what the Kestrel adjusted to, but my instructor said it was either an increase in BC or almost close to 200 fps in velocity. Since I knew my hand loads had single digit ES, I ruled that out.
Then my instructor said I want to test your scope. He pulled out a tall target and shot a group (at 100 yards) then dialed up 20 moa and shot another group. We found that I was 1.5" higher than it should be at 20 moa. He did the math and it was a 6% error in elevation tracking. I made that adjustment in my ballistics software and it was dead on from there. I ended up calling Zeiss and sent my V6 in because I was t happy. A few weeks later they sent me a new scope. I was also shooting my 7 STW that day. It has a NF NXS on it. It was dead on to 1070 yards, so no tracking issues.
Moral to the story for me was to start doing a tall target test on all of my scopes. I would have never known I had any issue unless I had shot past 700 yards.
I'm willing to bet it's your scope and you're not getting the velocity the drop data is telling you. But, I could be wrong.
Like everyone else, I'd like to know the outcome.
Then my instructor said I want to test your scope. He pulled out a tall target and shot a group (at 100 yards) then dialed up 20 moa and shot another group. We found that I was 1.5" higher than it should be at 20 moa. He did the math and it was a 6% error in elevation tracking. I made that adjustment in my ballistics software and it was dead on from there. I ended up calling Zeiss and sent my V6 in because I was t happy. A few weeks later they sent me a new scope. I was also shooting my 7 STW that day. It has a NF NXS on it. It was dead on to 1070 yards, so no tracking issues.
Moral to the story for me was to start doing a tall target test on all of my scopes. I would have never known I had any issue unless I had shot past 700 yards.
I'm willing to bet it's your scope and you're not getting the velocity the drop data is telling you. But, I could be wrong.
Like everyone else, I'd like to know the outcome.
I would completely agree with you if I hadn't already done a tall target test before I started on my drop chart.
dougduey
Well-Known Member
Well then, I stand corrected!!! Glad I didn't put a wager on my prediction.
Who knows, you may have a really fast barrel. I've found that Nosler ammo tends to be hotter than the velocity listed on the box, so Hornady ammo may be that way too. Good for you if you've got a flamethrower 6.5 PRC. Not a bad problem to have.
Now I'm really curious. You're going to have to run those rounds over a chrono or you're going to have a bunch of unhappy guys on this thread. We have enquiring minds and want to know.
I've learned so much over the years on this site from posts like yours.
No problems, your logic is spot on. I did actually run it through a chrono a day after I posted and came up with a number in between the box and my chart which was an average of 3086fps
