Accuracy versus velocity

[Bill28]

I would not worry about velocity as long as the energy threshold goal is met. I am an Elk hunter and I prefer to harvest my animals at a maximum range of 500 yards and I regularly practice out to this range and further. The energy minimum at 500 yards for me must meet or exceed 1500 ft. lbs. of energy. This has not been an issue since I have moved to the 28 Nosler.

Like my 28 Nosler as well for elk and moose, it was "too " much for deer

 

[LRNut]

I think you are evaluating this a bit wrong trying to fit it within 10". Just compare the wind drift and similar wind read errors. Fairly large wind read errors too, like I said, if you suck at reading wind.

No I am not wrong; you don't shoot a one hole group at 1200 yards, and animals don't have unlimited vital areas. Ever read Bryan Litz's books? I am essentially applying his concept of WEZ models.

If you don't like a 10 inch vital area, make it 12; it won't matter. The .4 MOA rifle allows more wind error than the faster one that shoots .8. It is pure math.

I consider absolute drift, but only in rifles that shoot .5 MOA or better at 500 yards, because if it isn't accurate, your allowable wind error goes to zero pretty fast.

 

[LRNut]

2 MOA at 550 yards is just over 11", not 6".
If someone is only gaining 300fps and willingly losing 1.5moa of accuracy, I would be very concerned.
The person who is willing to shoot an animal with that mentality will likely be tracking many wounded animals. Or putting animals through unnecessary pain until death. Or worse, both.

He said the bullet would still hit within 6" at 500, which is true, assuming a PERFECT wind call. But I am not sure the vital area of a deer is a 12 inch circle...what do others say?

 

[Buck Fever]

No I am not wrong; you don't shoot a one hole group at 1200 yards, and animals don't have unlimited vital areas. Ever read Bryan Litz's books? I am essentially applying his concept of WEZ models.

If you don't like a 10 inch vital area, make it 12; it won't matter. The .4 MOA rifle allows more wind error than the faster one that shoots .8. It is pure math.

I consider absolute drift, but only in rifles that shoot .5 MOA or better at 500 yards, because if it isn't accurate, your allowable wind error goes to zero pretty fast.

Respectfully, at 100 yards mechanical accuracy dominates wind and at extreme range wind dominates mechanical accuracy so if your wind read sucks, at some point your wind call error with a slow cartridge will exceed the mechanical accuracy error of a faster but less accurate cartridge.

Vital zone has nothing to do with it.

Forget about hunting and think about the topic "accuracy versus velocity".

 

[LRNut]

Respectfully, at 100 yards mechanical accuracy dominates wind and at extreme range wind dominates mechanical accuracy so if your wind read sucks, at some point your wind call error with a slow cartridge will exceed the mechanical accuracy error of a faster but less accurate cartridge.

Vital zone has nothing to do with it.

Forget about hunting and think about the topic "accuracy versus velocity".

"Vital zone has nothing to do with it."

Really? You are trying to hit a target...your bullets group into an ever expanding circle...and then wind blows them. How can vital area not matter?

Look, I am laying out math. If you can refute what I am saying, point out errors, or bring to my attention something I don't know, please do.

Show me the math proof of this:

"Respectfully, at 100 yards mechanical accuracy dominates wind and at extreme range wind dominates mechanical accuracy so if your wind read sucks, at some point your wind call error with a slow cartridge will exceed the mechanical accuracy error of a faster but less accurate cartridge."

I mean, what you said could be true, but only if the accuracy of the faster cartridge is...wait, why don't I just calculate it: .44 MOA. In other words, 200 fps offsets .04 MOA of accuracy.

Like many others have said, accuracy wins.

 

[mwkelso]

He said the bullet would still hit within 6" at 500, which is true, assuming a PERFECT wind call. But I am not sure the vital area of a deer is a 12 inch circle...what do others say?

6" radius, sure. Diameter, no. And yes, assuming a perfect wind call as well as perfect center placement of the reticle, assuming that the zero is perfect.
I think 12" in width might be acceptable. Height, I don't think so. I could be wrong though.
Nonetheless, I would never be willing to attempt that shot knowing that I have that great of a field of error.

 

[Wolf76]

2 MOA at 550 yards is just over 11", not 6".
If someone is only gaining 300fps and willingly losing 1.5moa of accuracy, I would be very concerned.
The person who is willing to shoot an animal with that mentality will likely be tracking many wounded animals. Or putting animals through unnecessary pain until death. Or worse, both.

Since you're only shooting 1 time, the point of impact deviation is half of the group size. It isn't 11" in every direction.

 

[mwkelso]

Since you're only shooting 1 time, the point of impact deviation is half of the group size. It isn't 11" in every direction.

Huh. No kidding?
I read your post again, my bad for not seeing it the first time. I was probably just befuddled by the 2moa example that I missed it. But I also see that you used that as a very skewed example. I'm sure you wouldn't actually hunt with a rifle shooting that poorly?

 

[LRNut]

Huh. No kidding?
I read your post again, my bad for not seeing it the first time. I was probably just befuddled by the 2moa example that I missed it. But I also see that you used that as a very skewed example. I'm sure you wouldn't actually hunt with a rifle shooting that poorly?

Like I said, this is why accuracy matters more than speed. A rifle that shoots 1 MOA at 500 has a lot more error for wind estimation than a 2 MOA, no matter how fast the latter shoots.

For the life of me, it is stunning how many shooters seem to think every bullet follows the same trajectory path. For example, they may zero at 300 yards, stating that their bullet is never more than 4" inches (assuming the highest point of the trajectory) above their line of sight, forgetting that half those bullets will be above that 4" inch line (how much depends on the rifle's accuracy and the shooter steadiness). Add to that the high probability you will not be in a perfectly steady shooting position (wobbling high perhaps) and you have a recipe for missing high.

 

[mwkelso]

Like I said, this is why accuracy matters more than speed. A rifle that shoots 1 MOA at 500 has a lot more error for wind estimation than a 2 MOA, no matter how fast the latter shoots.

For the life of me, it is stunning how many shooters seem to think every bullet follows the same trajectory path. For example, they may zero at 300 yards, stating that their bullet is never more than 4" inches (assuming the highest point of the trajectory) above their line of sight, forgetting that half those bullets will be above that 4" inch line (how much depends on the rifle's accuracy and the shooter steadiness). Add to that the high probability you will not be in a perfectly steady shooting position (wobbling high perhaps) and you have a recipe for missing high.

Couldn't agree more. I've made the mistake you just described and will never do it again.

 

[lancetkenyon]

I did not read the entire thread.

Accuracy above all else. But what is acceptable accuracy? For 400 yards max, 1 MOA should be fine. But for 1000 yards, you better be in that .5MOA range.

And that distance is where velocity helps come in to play.

I would say it depends on the cartridge and bullet choice. 200fps can make a difference even @ 400 yards.
I am in the "bigger case" game. If I want to run a 6.5mm 140 @ 2950, I know I don't want to try and squeeze that out of a 28" 6.5CM or .260 Rem, so I plan on a 20-24" 6.5SS, 6.5-.284, etc. That way, anything over 2950 is an added bonus, in a lighter rifle. But, I also look at max yardage for the areas I hunt. I usually want 800-1000+ reach.

So if you are only shooting 400 yards, I don't think even a light 6.5CM pushing a 130 @ 2700 will be any worse off than at 2900 if it is accurate.

 

[joed]

The idea that accuracy and velocity are competing objectives is a False Premise. With modern powders, the high node often appears near max.

Over and over, I see people make statements about ceasing load development because groups opened up above a certain velocity or powder charge. People who do this are often leaving quite a bit of performance on the table because they stopped testing well short of max, never reaching the high node (where groups tighten again). The high node with modern powders is often MORE consistent than the node below it. ES and SD numbers from a chronograph will often reflect this.

Treating accuracy and velocity as competing objectives is likely to rob the shooter of higher velocity, flatter trajectory, reduced wind drift, and possibly improved terminal performance, in addition to greater consistency. This is true, regardless of the range to target. A shorter range to target only makes these factors less observable.

Accuracy and Velocity are NOT trade-offs. They are COMPLEMENTARY to one another. Is it possible that a given rifle, with a given component combination will be more accurate at a lower node? Of course it is! But, if BOTH the lower node and the high node are not tested, it is not possible to know. People who accept the idea that accuracy and velocity are competing objectives WILL NEVER KNOW!

Thank you! I have been reloading for close to 50 years and can't believe how many people think velocity/accuracy compete with each other. That's not the case at all. I've found there are a few accuracy nodes during working up a load. The most accurate one generally comes very close to the max load. It's a rare exception if the most accuracy happens at low velocity.

When I hear of someone that is loading just above the minimum load I figure they do not know much about ballistics. On one of the sites I frequent there was someone that was bragging about a load he used for a .22-250 that moved a 55 gr bullet at 3100 fps. Two posters told him they shoot that bullet from a .223 at a higher velocity. I figured that .22-250 load had to keyhole and wondered how anyone could have picked that load and determined it produced the best accuracy.

 

[Savage 12BVSS]

Thank you! I have been reloading for close to 50 years and can't believe how many people think velocity/accuracy compete with each other. That's not the case at all. I've found there are a few accuracy nodes during working up a load. The most accurate one generally comes very close to the max load. It's a rare exception if the most accuracy happens at low velocity.

That is correct, I'm amazed how many loaders think this a one or the other choice. At higher velocity nodes you get the opportunity for both, not one or the other. Its pretty ingrained thinking that makes one feel they can only have accuracy with lower powder charges and slower velocity. Glad I haven't let that thinking prevent me from coming up with high velocity and yet very accurate loads for 3 of my cartridges. I don't stop looking till I find at least 1/2 MOA or better for any of my loads. My 260 which is my only cartridge that I would consider a mid level load has only been tested with one powder, this coming summer I have two other powder's to try. I think it will end up still shooting in the two's but up at higher velocities

 

[RH300UM]

To the OP on this post.
For me they both go together.
I've always been chasing both.
I strive for both with every personal rifle I develop a load for. I want the most that I can get out of both areas.
Horsepower(velocity) is my quest. Accuracy is the constant. With this comes challenges and concerns that are identified and overcome.
Drawers full of reamer designs that failed,$$$ spent on chasing the combination.
I constantly strive to get both. 1000's of rounds sent down range to get what I want. 60 rounds just today.
Bottom line I want both. I'll keep chasing both!