Factory ammo velocity claims...

M

mistahmojoryan

Regular
Rating - 100%
56   0   0
Location
Regina
I bought a couple of boxes of for 7mm Rem Mag (150gr)and 300 Win Mag (165gr) recently and I've been comparing the claimed velocity versus other ammo makers. Here's how it breaks down:

7mm Rem Mag 150gr/175gr:

Fusion- 3050/2760
Rem PSP- 3110/2860
Fed SP- 3110/2860

300 Win Mag 150gr/180gr:

Fusion- 3200/2960
Rem PSP- 3290/2960
Fed SP- 3280/2960

So in 7mm Rem Mag, the Fusion loads are stated as 60fps (150gr) and 100fps (175gr) slower than Remington and Federal. In 300 Win Mag, the Fusion loads are stated as 90fps slower (150gr) and even (180gr).

It got me wondering why a relatively new bonded core bullet would come out with (basically) reduced load. :confused: I tested the Fusion and Remington PSP and the flat base CoreLokts flew significantly flatter out to 300yds than the Fusion boat tails. I've also heard that the Remington and Federal claims are inflated (Hornady states velocities more on par with the Fusion loads). So I'm not sure what to believe out of all this.

Are any of these companies more accurate in their claims than others? Anyone actually chronograph factory loads to see how far off they are?

I think the perfectionist in me is going to force me into getting a chronograph and start reloading. :D
 
Last edited:
Actual measured velocities can vary from catalogue ones for a variety of reasons not related to puffed up marketing.
So many shooters have chronographs now that the factories cannot inflate their claims. By all means get an chronograph.
 
mistahmojoryan said:
Anyone actually chronograph factory loads to see how far off they are?

I think the perfectionist in me is going to force me into getting a chronograph and start reloading. :D
Click to expand...


Yup, get a chronograph. Ammo catalogs are full of crap. Velocities are lower in real life then what is printed in the catalogs.
 
Agreed - velocities are almost always lower in real life than in the advertising. Especially a new caliber. This was really true of the WSM's and the WSSM's when they first came out.

Next, if you want, you can get into the whole discussion about elevation (above sea level) and projectile velocity. :D (Duck - here comes a new thread)
 
Proutfoo said:
am I wrong in assuming that velocity can also vary with barrel length? :confused:
Click to expand...


Yup it can, and that's when things get interesting. PMC did say (at one time) what gun was used when velocities where recorded.

Most ammo companies use test barrels, not and actual handgun/rifle/shotgun when doing velocity test so what they got and what you will get will be two different things.

It has been my experience that rifle ammo was close to the books.

.22 rimfire ammo and handgun ammo never did what the books said it would.

Sticker
 
factorys sometimes rate ammo like 30 30 in a 24 inch barrel so it looks impressive. how many marlin or wins have barrels longer than 20 inches. short mags are often rated in 24 inch barrels but most s/mag guns come with 22 or 23 inch barrels. high numbers look impressive on the box but don't always crono out to be accurate.
 
stewarch said:
<snip>Next, if you want, you can get into the whole discussion about elevation (above sea level) and projectile velocity. :D (Duck - here comes a new thread)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I actually gave that quite a bit of thought years ago. :redface: I figured since my range results weren't agreeing with any factory ballistic claims that it must have something to do with being in Saskatchewan. :eek: ;)
 
I can't speak to the 300wm, but the 7mmRM is typically loaded rather light in factory ammo. You can get quite a bit more out of them if you handload, and still be within pressure specs.
 
The only ones that I have found to be accurate in their claimed velocities are the Weatherby factory loads. The other manufacturers have been off by up to 200 fps. This data was determined by firing across a chrony. It seems that the factories padded their velocity claims to get the customer's eye as to what their offering can do. Hand loading can usually meet or exceed the factory claims safely.
 
Rimfire ammo is right on the money, too for the most part (my guns, my chrono. Yours might be different)

Other than that, I don't shoot much factory ammo, so I can't say too much. 30-30's in my 336 are 300fps slower than advertised; 7.62x39 (everything I've tried) is bang on, as is 223 and 22-250 win white box.
 
Gee the 7mm rem mag is not as torquey as everyone figures.
Yet lots of folks claim it's a better cartridge than the venerable 30'06.
And even the 7mm rem mag is typically found in the same length barrel the factories claim is used.
By the looks of things if you had a 24 inch barrelled 30'06 it would be so close to the 7mm rem mag who would know the difference.
As for the 30-30 figure 50fps per inch of barrel and loose 4 inches of barrel that works out to be 200fps, kinda makes you wonder why it works as good as it does.
Perhaps we as hunter/shooters are a bit to fixated by the numbers, and perhaps we should be a bit more interested in shot placement and practice.
 
Lefty #### said:
<snip>
Perhaps we as hunter/shooters are a bit to fixated by the numbers, and perhaps we should be a bit more interested in shot placement and practice.
Click to expand...

It was my interest in practicing and becoming a better marksman that got me interested in "the numbers" in the first place! :p

Seriously, I don't care much what "the numbers" are; practicing and bench shooting tell me most of what I need to know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom