7mm Showdown | Part 1| Laying the Foundation | Little Crow Gunworks 

Thank you for that Matt. We wanted to set a new standard for how these comparisons are done. As a teacher, you know that most raw information without context is at best, incomplete and at worst, meaningless or counterproductive. In reality, you have to make compromises no matter what bullet you choose. The CX has the least compromises for a hunting bullet. People don't realize that you have to choose bullets for your specific application. There is no best choice for ALL applications. In the woods, you shouldn't be using a 175 ELDX. It's the wrong choice. I agree, 2 holes is always best and yes and ELDX will explode at close range and high velocity, I've done it. The 7 PRC and a CX is point and shoot out to 300yds. Favor 6 inches into the wind if you're shooting 300yds in high wind (15mph+). But otherwise, don't even worry about it. Aim for the vitals and let'er rip. Get out and practice when you can. If that elk hunt comes someday, you'll be ready. Thanks again for the support.

Absolutely! The only down fall to lead free bullets I really see is when I shoot steel, it doesn't leave a black mark that I can easily see. That is actually the only reason I don't use them.

@@mikedrescher3891 White paint.

Thank you for that Ben. That was my point. My goal is to push you along that curve whether you're ready or not. I think that's what everyone wants when they watch YT videos. But they're not getting it most of the time. They get the same regurgitated paper numbers that are unfounded and have no meaning without context. Yeah we decided that we can still make our points with saami chambers. Then the average Joe knows what's possible. Good luck with the 94 project. See ya on the next one.

Joe, I don't want this to be a public love fest, but you are the ideal student. Despite being around 20 years my senior, you don't question everything I say. You be quiet, focus and LISTEN. Then, you make sure you grasped what I said, you go process and apply it without questioning it and hey, it works. If you weren't an eager and willing student, I would have stopped helping you a long time ago. So, you deserve just as much credit as I do. "When the student is ready, the teacher appears." I have encountered many different people that immediately start disputing what I say, and I say to myself: "They're not ready." and I just shut up and let them go flounder about. Thank you for the kind words and for appreciating and applying my process.

Yes. The slower burning the powder, the more relevant the barrel length is.

Thanks Jared! Excellent feedback!

Well David, you win the unofficial "Comment Contest". First with the Mt. Stupid comment, which had me cackling like a madman and now this. I never thought I would reach a point in my life where a stranger would draw a parallel between me and Jordan Peterson on any metric. For me personally, there isn't a better compliment you could give me. I'm honored, thank you.

Well, i have spent a lot of time energy and money focusing on the wrong aspects of shooting. Frustrated to the point of wanting to give up by my inability to develope the perfect load for my 280ai. Chasing high BC's low SD's and (what i was told) must have 1/2 inch groups. This information makes a lot of sense. I am changing my focus at the reloading bench, and at the range. After all hunting is my focus not punching paper. Thanks-

Thanks you for the insight David. I did the same thing. The method I developed usually results in what you have been chasing (high velocity, 1/2" or better and ES under 15 for 3 shots) and I intend to share it with all of you. But it took me thousands of shots fired in load development to figure out what works. The hard truth is that, although the perfect load DOES HELP hit probability, if you can't read wind to within a couple miles per hour and get a good range...all that precision gets lost in the wash. When you see all the useless talking points/drop chart comparison videos, they don't tell you that. Yes the High BC drifts less, but that doesn't mean you get to suck at wind reading and still hit stuff. You still have to put in the work.

But Jordan Peterson is a idiot. He is a genius to less than smart people.

Great question. I will cover it in the terminal video.

Thanks Otto! The fact that you're 77 and still searching for new information is very inspiring to me. We have a client that comes in often, he's retired. At some point he says "Man, I learn something new every time I come in here." Partitions STILL kill stuff just fine. They don't exit on those big critters, but it kills just fine. Thanks for joining the adventure!

The BC doesn't matter if the bullet won't do kill the animal reliably. Yeah, the extreme accuracy and many other variables get swallowed up by the fact that you can't read wind perfectly.

Thank you for that, we appreciate the continued support. We decided it was time to contribute to the good info on the internet.

Wow. I'll take that compliment. It seems like a lot of folks are finding value in it. I just need to stay on my game. Thanks for joining us.

I'm glad it was worth your time. Yeah the ES and the Group size/precision is very eye opening. The wind and distance error swallows up your painstaking load development. Happy to help. Thanks for watching!

Happy to hear it, glad you're coming along.

Thank you! Keep that open mind, you'll get more out of it.

Jeez, you don't waste any time! Thanks for the support!

You're welcome Chris. Those two columns are what's missing from everyone else's videos on long range shooting. We all know that ES, small groups and BC is important. But take the time to quantify it, so people actually understand what's important and what's not for their application. Thanks for watching.

HA, I knew this one would blow peoples hair back. Certainly goes against all the drivel you hear everywhere else. I appreciate that people appreciate it! Thanks for joining us.

Thanks mate, glad you're enjoying the ride.

Thanks man. We're gonna try anyways! Ha

Thanks Jack! That's good, that's all you're gonna get from me. I'm a terrible actor. Thanks for watching.

Thanks man!

That might be the most true statement in long range shooting. Thanks for the feedback!

Ah Thank You, Thank You (Takes a bow)

Yes, absolutely agree! The context of these videos and where you want to take them. Hunters are to receive a great eye opening education. Your first graph you showed, put the heat to the meat. I hope people watch these videos wanting to gain some knowledge. Blessings your way my friends.

My pleasure! Just wait...the hole gets deeper.

Honestly, I think desktop will be ideal for most of this series. Provided that it doesn't work on your tv. TV would be even better otherwise some things will be hard to read. Thanks for the support.

Right on man! You bookended our whole series with those two cartridges! You are correct, they are in different categories I would say. Thanks for coming along!

Thank you! Glad we could help out.

With a 308 at those ranges, I would say no, it doesn't matter. You don't need to worry about violent expansion due to excess velocity. I would suggest 150gr+ bonded as the first choice and 165gr+ cup and core as the second choice. You don't need copper for deer at 150yds. Thanks for watching.

Thanks Glenn. I did not mention why I'm using the G7 BC. When a projectile has a long (very low drag) nose and a boattail, G7 is the correct Drag Model to use. G1 would be incorrect because it is a poor representation of that projectile shape. The G1 is a great representation of the Interlock, but I wanted to use the same Drag Model for all three so you could see the difference without doing any math. Because those old legacy bullets are well represented by the G1 standard, that practice has been grandfathered in now with bullet manufacturers because the G1 number is a number that most people know and are familiar with, but when a bullet has a boattail and longer nose profile, the G1 isn't the best number to use. Manufacturers still use it though because it makes it easier for the consumer to see that their bullet has a higher BC than X competitor. But it's actually a poor representation of efficient bullets.

Patience Grasshoppa. Coming soon!

I hope so. I'd be shocked if you didn't.

You guys keep picking it up and I'll keep laying it down!

Thank you for the positive feedback. I listened to the Hornady Podcast too. The truth is they're right. But... nobody shoots at an animal 30 times. If you take the time to understand how "Normal (Bell Curve) Distributions" work, because that's what they're talking about, the picture becomes more clear. Yes 30 shots will give you a very clear picture of the extreme outer limits of the rifles performance. But there isn't a great way to test that. I would say that taking 30 consecutive shots in one outing is a terrible way of testing it. Rifle heat, mirage off the barrel and shooter fatigue are way more of a contributing factor to that group size than the rifle is. So while I agree with them, it's almost a worthless test, for anyone but them. Because they have a big mechanized test platform and shoot indoors. Keep in mind, they sell bullets ok. And are promoting 30 shot tests for accuracy? Come on now. What I CAN tell you is that you can spot "trends" with as little as 1 shot of a given load. I'm going to show you my load development method in this series. It is statistically irrelevant, completely. But it works. I have a pile of rifles that I can take out and shoot 5 shot groups that are under 6 inches at 1,000 yds. I didn't need to shoot 30 shots with any of them to find those loads.

@@LittleCrowGunworks I should apologize for being long-winded but I get inspired by content like this. First off, I think it is great that you answer nearly every post and question if they are in earnest. A good laugh is welcome but we are seriously interested in all of this, which is, I think, a sign of being ethical. And I like the way you say it. Paraphrased, being ethical does mean ensuring hit probability. We want to hit the animal and bring it down as quickly and successfully as possible. I have watched those specific podcasts more than once (your groups are too small ep 50, groups are still too small ep 52, the one on mean radius, the recent one on load development where they also get rid of a lot of "noise" in load development. For example, getting too close to the lands does not bring the improvement you think it would) more than once. I would pick up more details with each watching. Jayden Quinlan, their lead ballistician, speaks precisely to this. Group the rifle for the job. If doing some kind of PRS, you may need to group at 30 shots, at least. All in all, going past 50 is a point of diminishing returns. And yes, they burned a barrel at 500 rounds and all that did was gain another 1 percent or so of reliability. So, going back to 50 rounds or less, determine with a high enough round count, what your cone of dispersion is. That will also help determine the effect range of that gun for certain jobs. And, after some time, they have learned to rely on 20 rounds. A box of ammo. Buy 2, zero with one box and finish the rest of that box with technique or velocity averaging. if you are grouping for hunting, then 1 more box is needed. After zeroed and the rifle is cool again, shoot 3 rounds and stop. And if you clean your rifle after each use, it must be cleaned this time, in order to repeat the conditions of operation. The rifle must be completely cool again, as if you had pulled it out of the cabinet and went off into the woods. Shoot another 3 shots. Repeat this 7 times and you have your basic 20 round dispersion. With a percentage as high as we are seeing here in you lesson, that is the likely cone of fire for that rifle. IOW, group the rifle for the job. But also, at least 20 rounds for an idea of what it will do. I watched a guy new to PRS video himself in a match and it was probably about 10 to 20 rounds at that stage. FWIW, another person has claimed to do 5 cold bore shots. Though I agree with him it is more likely cold shooter. He did one cold bore shot for 5 days. Put together, it was the same dispersion as if he did all 5 shots at one sitting. If all else is good, then this is the order I have learned for source of error: Highest error is the shooter. Next highest is variances in ammo. Last is the rifle and gear. If things are torqued right and you have some kind of bedding better than plastic, you have the chance to have a rifle be at least 1 MOA. You can hit an IPSC at 1,000 yards. If I was to even get to shoot 1k, it would only be at an IPSC and not a game animal. I saw first your video on importance of bullet construction, so I came in bass-ackwards. It really has got me to consider changing my 7 PRC from the PH 175 gr ELD-X to the the CX Outfitter for the reasons you mentioned. The mushroom is good but more importantly is the penetration, especially on big game. (In Texas, the toughest I am going to find is Mule Deer and barbary sheep like the Aoudad.) I liked your statement in another reply here that with something like the 7 PRC in the 160 gr copper, your windage, being an average day, could hold left or right edge of target zone, adjusting only elevation for distance. That reminds me of how Cleckner, author of Long Range Shooting Handbook, relayed his experience as a sniper team leader in the Ranger 1/75. His targets were IPSC size. He would hold left or right edge of target into the wind for a hit. I hunt on public land, so, I prefer to have a high point to see my kill box. Especially when using a bullet that can make an exit. That way, my backstop is the other side of the creek bed in the middle of two hills. Which means careful selection. If I cannot make an ethical shot that is also safe for me and others, then I cannot take the shot. As for the CX Outfitter, I saw another video of a guy with cheesy click-bait titles try out that round in his .270. He claimed that the copper bullet is producing 4 to 6 inch dispersion on some rifles, not in others. I have not heard of that and that doesn't make sense. Though I have seen others also shoot the Hornady 7 PRC PH 175 gr and getting an inch or two and pronouncing it 2 MOA ammo. Also, recent claims and even some chrono showing the ELD-X being 150 to 200 fps slower than the box. I have always thought of the box value as an estimate or best case scenario. Real world use will be slower. Mainly because the factory has to make an average, as they will not know which specific rifle this goes into. For example, mine is in a chassis and the magazine is the AICS for .300 WM. The bullet has a smidgeon of room in there. Of course, the rifle is a standard long action and not a magnum long action. And this was creating a scandal. But the guy with the .270 was also finding that the MV was, on average, 109 fps slower than the box. I bet it is like that with all ammo companies. And if seriously pursuing precision, such as one would in competition or tinkering hunter, you are going to handload and tune your system with seating depth, etcetera. I think a book length reply is enough for now. 😀

Thank you for the lengthy comment. I don't mind. Naturally I can't address everything you said in the comment. But the important thing is that you are thinking about this critically and you are getting the correct tool for the job. That is the right way to think about this. These are just tools, that's all. They each specialize in something different and none of them are perfect. For us, killing an elk out to 600yds with a 7mm, there isn't a better tool than the 160gr CX. Change the parameters, and it might change our choice for that new job. I do think people spend too much time on the wrong things. Load development is one of them. But there are way more things that people don't spend nearly enough time on. Practice being the biggest one. Working all the bugs out of their equipment would be second. Getting a good 10 shot zero and figuring out how much error is in your scope would be another thing. People get so hyper focused on the performance metrics that they lose sight of the things that have WAY MORE effect on whether or not they will actually hit the target. Thanks for coming along.

Ah you'll be fine. Well you bought a Borden so you can't blame the gun! LOL. When in doubt, re-watch!

@@LittleCrowGunworks I DO HAVE YOUR CASE TRIMMER AND A COUPLE OF OTHER PRODUCTS. TRY TO BUY FROM SMALL USA MA AND PA COMPANIES IF POSSIBLE. ANSWERED ALL MY QUESTIONS WHEN CALLING ABOUT PRODUCTS. HOW LONG BETWEEN EACH EPISODE DO YOU THINK IT WILL BE?

We appreciate that John. I'm going to try to keep a 2 week or less cadence going forward. Once the weather is nice, I can get out and test more consistently, the videos will likely be weekly.

I'm glad what I'm saying is landing. I'm never sure how it really went until I start to hear back from folks.

Thank you for the positive feedback Jeff. That's the truth of it, trying to get your load below 3/4 MOA has very diminishing returns for hunting applications. I agree that larger bore diameter will kill elk faster, but most people don't shoot heavy recoiling rifles very often or very well. A precise shot with a 7mm is better than a poor shot with a 338. Thanks for watching.

The problem is, this isn't common knowledge, as made very evident by the comments. NOBODY is putting out content like this.

Thank you for watching. Almost all of my contempt is directed towards other channels/publications that are making a living by lying to you guys.

That's what we want to hear. That was one of our goals with this video series; share information that you're not getting anywhere else. You won't go wrong with either bullet. Thanks for watching.

Hey you're welcome. Thanks for coming along sir!

Thank you for the positive feedback!

I'll show you how to determine length. With the right tools, it's pretty easy. Thanks for watching.

No video needed. It's basically a way of widening the top of the pressure curve and reducing the peak, because the bullet is jumping so far before it hits that hard stop and swages into the rifling. Overall it's not a good thing. Long jumps usually aren't great for accuracy.

​@@LittleCrowGunworksbecause of pressure blow by before the bullet seals the bore?

I can't say for sure. But I can say that in my own experience, as I seat any bullet further in any cartridge, Weatherby or not (increase jump) my velocity goes down. Until I get to the point where I'm compressing the powder, then the velocity starts going back up rapidly.

@LittleCrowGunworks if im correct the compressed load has a faster burn rate causing the higher velocity but because of the jump it has that soft peak, however the highest pressure happens when the bullet engages the rifling. If i am correct than compressed loads should not be set out against the lands.

I think you have a great grasp of what's happening there. Compressed loads can be set against the lands if the initial burn rate is slow enough. I think where everyone likes to load things is around 20 to 50 thou jump. Which is usually conducive to smaller groups, but it is "worst case scenario" for pressure issues.

Thank you for that. It is a bit of extra work to get these things done. But people seem to be appreciating it.

Thank you for the positive feedback! You're doing great. Stick with the N560. There is no way on God's Green Earth you will get enough N570 in that case to hit peak pressure. It's not all burning either, not even close. Stick with N560, that's the sweet spot.

​@@LittleCrowGunworksor get a 30in barrel 😂

LOL, that won't even do it. Even if you fill the case to the top of the case mouth, so it's spilling out and smash a bullet on it, you will only be at 50k psi, only 93% of it will burn in a 30" barrel and you will lose 160fps from what you're getting now in your shorter barrel. It's WAY too slow for a 7 Rem Mag case size. N570 is even a little slow for the 28 Nosler, which has 16 grains more water capacity. Stick with 560. It's the perfect powder for the 7 Rem Mag. There isn't a better option.

@LittleCrowGunworks i like my hodgdon powders but i guess the same problem would arise with 7828ssc, im on the rd so i don't have access to my software.

Nope. N560 and IMR 7828SSC are kissing cousins. That would be my other recommendation. But you will get identical velocity at peak pressure with N560 and 7828ssc. You won't gain anything. If anything, you will lose some temp stability by going with 7828 because it's 70yr old technology and doesn't have the same temp stability that N560 has. Not that any of that will matter inside 600yds, because it won't.

Thank you for the kind words. We're hoping the rest of the industry takes note and gets their act together when they compare things. Do it thoroughly or don't waste peoples time.

I think your intuition is correct. However, the barrel length becomes ridiculously impractical. In the off the cuff example I used in the video between the 308 Winchester and the 300 Ultra Mag. I just punched that into the Gordon's program and the results were just crazy. So, I was able to simulate 3000 ftlbs with 44.10grs of X powder in a 26" barrel and a 180gr bullet. Which resulted in 35.6 Effective Efficiency Rate and 68.07 ftlbs per grain of powder. Which is outstanding efficiency compared to most things. In order to reach the same efficiency rate and ftlbs per grain with the 300 Ultra Mag, I needed 94 grs of X powder, which pushed a 225gr ELDM at 3578 fps and 6393 ftlbs!!! But the simulation required a 72 inch barrel to get there!!!! Now whether that would actually play out in reality, I don't know. I assume the friction wouldn't scale in a linear fashion due to jacket deterioration. Maybe with a solid bullet it would be ok. In theory, you're correct. But in practical reality, overbore = inefficiency. If your loss is linear in shorter barrels then you are using a burn rate that is too fast for the cartridge, the load density is low and you should have picked a smaller cartridge. That's a universal truth. If velocity loss per inch of barrel is linear, either the powder is too fast or the cartridge is too big for the barrel length or some combination of both.

@@LittleCrowGunworks thx a lot, I’ll marinate on the burn rate advice. Great to hear that you use GRT. That’s what I am using as well and so far the simulations have been quite accurate vs. Reality. Real shame that Gordon is no longer with us. Just got my Garmin Xero today, so I‘ll soon test GRT against one real oddball. Lehigh Xtreme Cavitator 85 grain in a .308 Win 😁

It's very useful with the number of bullet and powder combinations out there. The published data just can't keep up. I have mentioned this to others, but, not one of my finished handloads for ANY rifle is published anywhere. Gordon's is a great way to at least find a place to start and see what powders will burn 100% before the bullet exits the muzzle. I agree, I have found it to be incredibly accurate when the inputs are good. Actual measured case capacity and cartridge overall length are critical to getting accurate estimates. Yeah, it's too bad about Gordon. At least his bride is willing to keep it alive for awhile. Those oddball bullets are hard to get accurate estimates on. You basically have to find something similar, then change the bullet dimensions to match what you're using. Then play with the Initial Pressure and Bullet Resistance, until the predictions match actual. Then you should have something worth using for predictions going forward.

I'm glad you appreciate it. The truth is there aren't any magnums that are forgiving to use short barrels. I will show why in the load development video. "Underbore/efficient" cartridges like a 308 Winchester are the most forgiving for short barrels. Unfortunately there are no free rides. But I'll lay out what I mean soon. Thanks for watching.

You're welcome. Thank you for your time!

Thanks for watching. No obscure wildcats on this series, but thanks for coming along.

Thanks for watching

Ha, at least now you know where you are! Thanks for joining the adventure.

You are correct.

All good stuff man! If you've been running a Tiger for 2 years I'm sure you have a good idea what you're doing. We agree on the advantages of copper. There are no perfect projectiles, but for us, copper has the least amount of compromises. Thanks for joining us.

As long as you can get the copper to shoot definitely agree. We can only use straight walls in my state for deer season and no 350 legend bullet and even the 450 bushmaster will exit 80% of the time unlikely to see an exit 25% of the time. Considering a 150g maker Trex for the 350 legend seeing how that works. The deer we shoot are on the run and full of adrenaline they can go a ways after shot. It’s Just how our state is set up for hunting them and it won’t change.

I get it man. That straightwall thing needs to go away. We have that same stupidity in the southern half of our state. Thankfully I hunt in the northern half. You have to do the best you can under those circumstances.

Oh baby. Thanks for the video idea. Ha. I would say you are correct, the 25-06 is pretty overbore. The 270 is nearly perfect proportion between bore and capacity. The 280AI is perfect and the 30-06 is slightly underbore.

I used the 175 Interlock because it is the same weight as the 175 ELDX. Using 150gr and under, dumpy bullets isn't relevant for the discussion. Nobody with any sense is shooting a 150gr Core Lokt at 600yds for any reason, unless it's on a bet and beer is involved. There are a million examples I could have used. The 3 I chose adequately made the point. As indicated by the comments.

@@LittleCrowGunworks as said, I agree with your position and yes the InterIock made sense. What I was trying to say is that there is still a sizable population of hunters with their Partitions and other classics that would do well thinking about BC, even at 300 yards. For example I ran the numbers for a friend with a 20“ 300 WM on a 190 grain ABLR vs. the 180 grain .35 G1 BC factory load he currently uses. At 200 yards the ABLR is over 600 ft-lb ahead

Oh ok. Now I get what you're saying. Yes it matters at all ranges.

Thank you for the support!

It's up! Check it out!

Then you are a welcome guest.

Thank you for the support! Cut through the BS! Thanks for following along.

Good question. It really comes down to the details as you mentioned. Brand of brass, seating depth, etc. The two cartridges will have extremely similar max velocities.

"Most Accurate" is relative. There is no hard/fast rules about what barrel material is more accurate. Both materials are capable of incredible precision. Both thin barrels and thick barrels, made of carbon or steel are capable of incredible precision. What a thick steel barrel buys you over a thin steel barrel is more shots before the precision falls apart. Carbon barrels in my experience, will "tolerate" less shots than an equal diameter steel barrel before precision decays. With a carbon barrel, you are paying more. What you are paying for is a lightweight barrel that shoots well, for more consecutive shots than a steel barrel of the same weight. But if it's a hunting rifle, why do you care about consecutive shots? Past about 3 shots... it's not relevant.

@@LittleCrowGunworks thanks for your reply. Accurate was probably a poor choice of words. You caught my drift though. Thank you for the info.

To answer your question more directly. For a hunting rifle we recommend a Proof Sendero 26" or a 26" Steel Barrel with a "Bull Sporter" profile, which is .700 at the muzzle with 6 groove spiral fluting. That is the sweet spot for steel. Any thinner and it can get erratic quickly and any thicker gets too heavy for most guys liking. The trend now is toward really short barrels. Why, I will never understand. The argument about a long barrel getting hung up on stuff while hunting is complete BS. If you like to tip-toe through the timber, and try to sneak up on an animal, get a short barrel. If you are prepared for up to 600yd shots, you won't be in the woods. So the barrel length is irrelevant. I'm 6'4" and strap my rifle to the side of my pack when mountain hunting. It has a 30" barrel plus a 3.5 inch muzzle brake. It sticks up over my head at least a foot. So that's 7 and a half feet, lumbering up the mountain and I never get hung up on anything because I'm hunting fairly open country. If I could get everyone into a 28" barrel plus a muzzle brake, that would make me happy. But I'll settle for a 26. That 28" allows you to get nearly everything you can out of any cartridge and it's lighter than; and the same length as a 22" barrel with a suppressor. But Proof doesn't make a 28" anymore, which puts you into steel. That extra 6 inches of barrel allows you to use slower powders than is optimal in the 22" barrel. So the real world velocity difference is 200 - 250fps if you're handloading. You saw how just adding velocity to a system can drastically increase hit probability, even if nothing else improves.

@@LittleCrowGunworks incredible food for thought. I just had 24" in my head as it's what I am always used to having on my hunting rifle. The 26" does make sense, and you are correct the extra length almost never has been noticed as cumbersome when packing a rifle. Thanks again. I look forward to the 7mm series and what it reveals.

Thanks for coming along.

Fantastic comment! You just pointed out the problem with the internet. Well, I saw this work for a guy that's a PRS shooter, it's gonna work for me and everyone else. What people don't realize about Scott Saterlee, is that he was working in "Known Territory". He had already shot out god knows how many barrels with his "Swedemoor" and 115gr Nosler RDF's. HE KNOWS what velocity his barrels shoot at. Because he spins the dead one off and spins on an IDENTICAL replacement. So he can do a 10 shot test, find his previous velocity and he's off and running! That doesn't mean it's going to work for every schmuck on the internet. You need to be in explored territory for something like that to work. But they don't tell ya that little piece of information! I'm happy you are in touch with where you are and that you're coming along.

BINGO!

Great equipment helps, great ammo helps, but there is no substitution for experience. Thanks for watching.

Thank ya sir! We're trying to raise the bar.

Thanks for the support!

Thank you for the feedback. In the reloading video, I will go into the case capacity stuff. There is more variation than people think. Brand to brand, when it's measured, etc.

@@LittleCrowGunworks Thanks, and I very much look forward to the series.

Glad to hear it. We're happy to have you.

Oh boy...we're going to touch on terminal performance briefly. But if you watched this entire video, I said why we want an exit wound. Stay tuned!

Yes, exit wound for tracking! But if an animal can be killed DRT as opposed to tracking because a bullet has passed through…… you know where I’m going with this! So the question becomes, “on average, does a cup and core bullet have more potential to kill an animal where it stands/lays with a well placed shot because ALL the energy has been dumped INSIDE the animal as opposed to a mono which leaves energy on the table?

I understand what you're saying, but I'm telling you it doesn't work that way. On a deer, sure, you can hit deer and incapacitate them on the spot with high energy and even a poorly placed shot. On an elk, you can dump all the energy you want in the lungs of an elk. It's going to take that energy like nothing happened, turn around and run away with it. I've seen it. With elk, because of the rough country they live in and how far they can travel when well hit, I will happily lose some energy transfer, to get an exit wound, which is where the blood comes from. Killing elk by "dumping all the energy" in the body cavity is a flawed concept. It doesn't incapacitate them unless you hit them in a couple spots. But the old standby shot of behind the front shoulder heart/double lung shot... they TURN AROUND AND RUN AWAY! Now, granted, they're gonna die. But if it wasn't a mono, you won't get a blood trail. So you better hope they fall soon or that you have snow so you can follow their tracks. Because they can run a half mile or more after that heart/lung shot. Again, I've seen it many times. I'm not saying what I'm saying in these videos because it sounds good. I'm saying it because I've been there/done that and I'm telling you that you HAVE TO make compromises in elk hunting. Wasting a little energy with an exit wound, is just one of them.

Awesome! Can’t wait for the next video. Keep it coming !

Roger that.

That's what I was hoping to hear! Thanks for your time!

That's true. I was thinking maybe half way through when I looked and I had six minutes left in the video. It's good stuff.

I found this channel through your channel RW, thanks for the link. Binge watched the 14 video series with the 22 Nosler lol.

@@gerry6.8that was a rippa series I’ve watched it three times 😂😂

@@rosalindstewart7013 Wow that's awesome. I thought I had it bad, I don't even have a 22 Nosler lol

@@gerry6.8 hahahaha neither do I, just trying to learn as much as I can as I’m totally new to all this, cheers Yogi 🤙✌️

We all know speed is all that matters u being a Weatherby fan boy 😂

LOL. At least you know where you're at!

Say what now?

Thanks for all the kind words! Yeah, the trolls are endless. Thanks for coming along!

LOL...Been there, done that. At least now you know where you're at! Nothing but growth to look forward to! Please comment more, we need more of this stuff to lighten things up. I'm happy you're on board.

Reloading manuals are loose guidelines, nothing more. They are not an indisputable source of 100% fact. I have reloaded for dozens and dozens of rifles, NOT ONE of them uses a load found in any manual anywhere and all of them exceed the velocities published in manuals. Some by 200fps OVER the manual.

@@LittleCrowGunworks If you are using the same components; bullets, powder, cases etc in the same length barrel and getting 200fps above the velocities in a pressure tested manual, you are going WAY over the pressures listed in the manual. It's basic physics. And I HAVE talked to the people who ACTUALLY MEASURED the pressures they got. I would bet a good bit that you haven't measured a single ACTUAL PRESSURE. Refer back to the part you said about not knowing what you! Lots of manuals don't measure pressure (Barnes for example) But lots of them now DO measure pressures. You think you are so smart getting 200fps extra but there's no such thing. You are going over pressure. Might be fine in your rifle but it might blow up someone else's. Moral is don't exceed the loads in a pressure tested manual and you won't exceed normal pressures.

You just made my point. A pressure test barrel used in a lab for a loading manual isn't your barrel and it isn't my barrel. It's an example and that's all it is. Components are different, barrel specs are different, seating depths are different, powders used are different and on and on. You can treat the manuals as a gospel, I don't and neither do many others. It's just a reference guide.

​@@LittleCrowGunworks My point is that you don't know what you don't know. Unless you actually MEASURE the pressure you don't know what the pressure in your barrel is. One of the most common Lies that reloaders tell themselves is that modern manuals are loaded down because of Lawyers. The ACTUAL TRUTH is that PZ Transducers became more affordable and after companies actually measured a lot of their loads developed with bolt head lift and case head expansion were WAY overpressure. Quality modern manuals test EVERY load and if you are getting higher velocities with the same components and barrel length you are almost undoubtably doing so at higher to MUCH higher pressures. Oehler research used to have a service where customers could send their hot-rod Wildcat rifles with their favorite loads and they would do an actual pressure test. Ken Oehler told me that that were usually well over 90k PSI and lots of them were well over 100k PSI without any "sticky bolt lift" etc. The same length barrels with the same powder etc. may vary a bit but RARELY will they vary 200fps at the same pressures. Polygonal rifling is an exception. What Ken taught me was that at the same pressures your barrel is usually going to have LOWER velocities than a high quality test barrel that Hodgen, Hornady, Nosler etc use. Ask an average reloader who does it make more sense to trust, A company with actual pressure testing equipment that print the results and shoots hundreds of barrels and hundreds of thousands of pressure tested rounds or a dude on the internet that may have shot a few dozen rifles but doesn't own any pressure test equipment? I'm all for finding a new powder like say RL26 that CAN give 100-150fps and stay within reasonable pressures. But the guys that are loading 4 or 5 grains above the properly tested loads are kidding nobody but themselves that they are doing higher velocities without higher pressures.

I'm not doubting their results. The reason I don't use published load data is because I'm never using the same brass, powder, primers, barrel length, cartridge length, etc that is in the manual. The manuals are all based on saami chambers, throats and cartridge overall lengths. I'm not saying the manuals are loaded down, I'm saying the loads are different enough from what I'm doing that it's not relevant to me. I'm using component combinations and cartridge overall lengths that aren't in print anywhere. I appreciate what you're telling me, but it's not going to change anything I do or don't do.

Oh for sure. I did say EXACTLY THAT in the video if you watch the whole thing.

Well at least you can admit it. Most won't even make it THAT far. It sounds like what you're running works for your applications. I'm glad you're enjoying it. I have no intention of changing my approach. It's in short supply.

Thanks for the support. I thought this video might be too long for people's liking... apparently not. GRT video coming soon.

Exactly. Most of the other channels you watch, they don't tell you that. Why? Because they don't know this stuff. They don't analyze things this way. It's WAY easier to just say "more is better". Know what I mean? You need the highest BC and the lowest ES and one hole groups, etc. No you don't. Not for 99% of people who just want to make an ethical shot and put meat in the freezer. You need good equipment that is consistent, reliable and easy to shoot accurately (designed well). And you need lots and lots of trigger time. That trumps all of the "precision metrics" in the first 600yds. Now that doesn't mean the precision metrics don't matter. The farther you shoot, the more they matter. But as you go farther and farther, different metrics matter more. By the time you get to ELR distances (1500+)... extreme spread and bullet to bullet ballistic coefficient consistency are the most important factors. THEN how high the BC is, THEN 100yd group size. For the 200yd benchrest crowd, group size is everything. Ballistic coefficient and extreme spread are nearly irrelevant. So, it just depends on what you're doing. There's no universal "this is the best". Fit the tool to the job. But in the long range game, experience trumps EVERYTHING, by a large margin. But for THIS JOB... big game out to 600. Yes, get the rifle under 1 MOA, the ES under 50, learn how to use your rangefinder, and burn a barrel out by practicing. Or buy a training rifle, like our 22 Nosler and burn THAT barrel out practicing out to a thousand, if you have access to that or whatever you have. So when your 500yd shot comes on your big game animal, it's a chip shot for you.

LOL, there are so many things like that. Big saws are one of them. Cars are another one. Everybody wants 600hp until it's under their right foot. Then most don't want it anymore.

Great Question. There is a large jump between the Interlock and the CX because because the CX has 68 Points higher BC AND 134 fps more velocity. Those two things combined cause a drastic improvement. Where between the CX and the ELDX, the ELDX has 54 points more BC but is 134fps slower. That loss in velocity, nearly offsets all the gain from the added BC. BC AND Velocity are important. Not just one or the other. But in the first 600yds, velocity is more important than BC, if you're a novice. But the ideal mix, is a blend of higher BC and high velocity. Like the 160gr CX. Randy knows what the hell he's talking about. He can't communicate it as well as I can and he doesn't have the computer programs to prove it. But, that man KNOWS IN HIS BONES, what I have been communicating to you guys. He's lived it. He just can't communicate it the way I can, so he gets frustrated and loses his temper, and that's where he loses people. I actually almost met him probably 7 or 8 years ago. We were renting a cabin when we visited Yellowstone. I could see his roof from the deck. I tried to work out a time with Kathy to visit, but we just couldn't make it work. Randy's optimal meeting times were when we were in the park. The guy is brilliant, he's just old school and the "high speed, low drag" crowd doesn't understand him. But he knows all this stuff I'm telling you guys. The CX has the highest BC per grain of bullet weight. Which means it will have higher hit probability than all the other mono's for a given set of conditions. The X bullets and E-Tips kill stuff just fine. But they will be closer to the Interlock Hit Probability.

Thanks Derek. NOBODY compares things like this and analyzes the ballistics this way. They use drop and drift charts based on ammo box velocities. It's nearly useless, for ANYTHING but... comparing drop and drift charts. Thanks for coming along.

Knowing were you REALLY are, is step one to getting better.

Speed has it's place. Get caught up, Part 9 will be a deep dive you won't want to miss.

Wow! Thanks man. We appreciate the loyalty. See ya on the next one!

Thanks! Tell you're friends, ha! You're late to the party, but I'm glad you came.

I appreciate what you're saying. Do you think that I can go 4 for 5 at 2100yds and not know what you just wrote? This is the problem with the internet. I know all this technical stuff. I've read all of the Applied Ballistics books, cover to cover, 4 times, YEARS AGO. And was emailing back and forth with Bryan Litz personally about this stuff over a decade ago, back in the infancy of the company when he still answered emails. I know all this stuff. For 98% of people who will ever shoot an animal, it doesn't matter. It's fun to talk about but it doesn't matter. A single, ACCURATE average G7 from Applied Ballistics is not a spitball guess. And it's actually correct at multiple points, not 1, depending on how accurate the number is. It CAN be 1 if the number is way off. And for the purpose of this video, it wouldn't have changed any of the results by more than a tenth of a percent. You are proving my point about the problem with the internet in general. Unless you're shooting out to transonic and further, that stuff isn't measurable for the average shooter. Now, if you're trying to shoot a 12oz can at every hundred yard line out to 1200yds, and have the skill and equipment to do so, THEN you would benefit from a CDM. But for animal size targets at reasonable ranges, it's irrelevant and adds nothing to the conversation but confusion. I'm not trying to confuse people and bury them in the useless minutiae you're talking about. There are plenty of people doing that already on the internet. I'm telling them what they ACTUALLY NEED to know to make good decisions about their equipment, training and how they spend their time. I appreciate you asking the question, but I'm playing chess with the audience, not checkers. Pouring out every intimate factoid I know about ballistics, just to confuse people, is checkers.

Thank you, I figured it would blow everyone's hair back.

You got it. Get you're rifle at 3/4 moa or less, 50fps es or less and then get your shit together and go practice. There is no replacement for getting the reps in, just like anything else.

Glad it was helpful!

That just means that their marketing is working. It's very effective at convincing people that BC is everything. Thanks for watching.

You're welcome Mark. It had to happen. I've seen too many "half truth" videos with no naughty words and 40 edits in 10 minutes. I prefer lettin'er fly, the whole truth, and 3 edits. One because of the stupid camera. HA!

Ha, I like you're style. Straight talk, no BS. Thanks for the compliment. There's nothing wrong with any of these cartridges. Just pick one that is adequate for the job you're trying to do, and practice enough to be proficient and you'll kill stuff. Thanks for joining us.

@@LittleCrowGunworks Being honest is the only quality I've got. Told the misses when we met that I had a 4 inch gut and a 3 inch pecker and she laughed so hard I got her phone number and a date. I try to be entertaining while I'm at it. Thank you again for the video it really helped put to rest all the back and forth I was stuck in.

I think we'll keep you around. HA

If I had known that I would live this long, I would have taken better care of myself. I have a 7 PRC and I like it. I think it was marketed for people just like me. My other rifles are 308s. Good enough to train our military at distance, good enough for me to get a deer. I find hunting deer with a rifle will be more effective than putting salt on their tail. If a guy already has a 7 RM, then he may not really need a 7 PRC. And the people I have seen so far who have a 7 RM are hand loading for it, anyway, so they can get velocities they want or close enough to it. But if you had not had a magnum caliber already or any of the 7s or wanted better performance in many ways than factory .30-06, 7 PRC is the way to go. Either in a stock with a decent recoil pad or even the Backstop by Backfire. It is basically a two stage recoil pad that handles the different parts of the recoil impulse differently. It will make the 7 PRC feel like a 6.5 CM. You don't have to have a .300 WM. In fact, many is the kid who was successful with a .243. What is important to me is velocity at impact. So, that means more work on the part of a hunter to find the right spot.

The 7 PRC is the "Turn Key" option. Great factory ammo for game and practicing. Many people don't like them, but muzzle brakes are the answer to recoil. Pads will never do what a good muzzle brake can do. There is no deer on Earth, that requires more than a 243 and a 90gr CX out to 500 yards. Use a better bullet, not a bigger cartridge.

Great comment Jay. Being honest with yourself about where you are on that curve is the most important thing you can do in long range shooting or hunting. Second is figuring out how to make the most of it. Which it sounds like you have done. With a personal limit of 300 yards, the speed and BC don't matter. Pick a high quality bullet that will penetrate and won't over expand and send'er home.

Glad to hear it Chuck. Yeah, the BC does matter and it does increase hit probability. But at the ranges that most people shoot, it's WAY less important than people think. And at all ranges it is WAY less important than having a good range and making a good wind call. Range, wind, then everything else.

You're welcome man, I'm enjoying it. The fact that you can admit where you are on the graph, tells me you're going to be ok in the long run. Stick with it and maintain that open mind and you'll get there.

We do too... Thanks for coming along.