Is "Pet Load" a valid concept?

[sage5907]

I have found that it's a lot easier to develop a pet rifle load for "target shooting" than it is for hunting. For example, I have quit buying Berger bullets for hunting because they come apart on impact but they shoot small target groups. I don't prefer Sierra GameKing bullets for hunting because they are soft but they shoot small target groups. Speer bullets usually shoot small target groups and hold together well for hunting but there are better hunting bullets. I prefer Nosler bullets for hunting but Berger, Sierra and Speer will usually shoot smaller groups. So, when I develop a pet load for hunting I find a load where my target bullets have the same point of impact at 200 meters as my hunting bullets. In my 280 Reminton a 140 grain Partition with 54 grains of IMR 4831 has the same point of impact at 200 meters as a 150 grain GameKing with 54 grains of IMR 4831.

 

[BJung]

I have found that it's a lot easier to develop a pet rifle load for "target shooting" than it is for hunting. For example, I have quit buying Berger bullets for hunting because they come apart on impact but they shoot small target groups. I don't prefer Sierra GameKing bullets for hunting because they are soft but tWhey shoot small target groups. Speer bullets usually shoot small target groups and hold together well for hunting but there are better hunting bullets. I prefer Nosler bullets for hunting but Berger, Sierra and Speer will usually shoot smaller groups. So, when I develop a pet load for hunting I find a load where my target bullets have the same point of impact at 200 meters as my hunting bullets. In my 280 Reminton a 140 grain Partition with 54 grains of IMR 4831 has the same point of impact at 200 meters as a 150 grain GameKing with 54 grains of IMR 4831.

Would it be valid to claim that Sierra and Bergers expand with less retained kinetic energy and therefore work for game at a longer distance and Noslers would be used at closer ranges?

 

[AJC1]

Would it be valid to claim that Sierra and Bergers expand with less retained kinetic energy and therefore work for game at a longer distance and Noslers would be used at closer ranges?

That's like a regular Speer btsp vs a grand slam.

 

[sage5907]

That's like a regular Speer btsp vs a grand slam.

I have a good opinion on this because I have taken several large whitetail bucks with both bullets. I have used a Speer 30-06 165 grain boattail and it is a very accurate hunting bullet both at close range and long range. It is a standard cup & core bullet that expands rapidly and the lead is a harder alloy. My longest kill was at 367 yards measured by a laser rangefinder and the buck fell when the bullet hit. The 30 caliber 165 grain Grand Slam is a HotCor bonded type bullet that is stronger built than the boattail and it doesn't expand as fast so on large animals it gives deeper penetration. Penetration is not as great at long range because of the decreased velocity. I prefer the boattail for long range hunting because it would expand faster. The one advantage of the Grand Slam is that the tip doesn't deform with recoil and handling.

 

[sage5907]

Would it be valid to claim that Sierra and Bergers expand with less retained kinetic energy and therefore work for game at a longer distance and Noslers would be used at closer ranges?

The Nosler Partition and AccuBond are good hunting bullets and they expand well on both close range and long range. As a general observation I have not found them to be as accurate when shooting groups as are the cup & core bullets made by Sierra, Speer and Berger. It's hard to beat a Sierra GameKing for shooting targets at long range. Both the Sierra GameKing and Nosler Partition have soft lead cores and the points damage easily when they slide forward in the magazine of a rifle with heavy recoil.

 

[BJung]

So maybe a Sierra would be a more effective bullet if assembled at a lower velocity node?

 

[BJung]

Where do you rank Hornady? Between Speer and Sierra? And what of Barnes?

 

[Mauser fan]

So basis of this question..........there are many rifles sold with MOA guarantees, all predicated on use of some form of factory ammo. I think at least a few of them specify which ammo specifically.

Factory ammo is all going to be loaded to SAMMI specs, so is not custom to any gun. Shoot that and there has been no rifle specific load workup at all, yet that ammo can achieve good results. Some guns shoot .5 MOA or better with it. There are guys who claim that good rifles should shoot at least 1 MOA or better with factory ammo. If it won't do that, something is wrong with the gun.

So all that being the case, is the whole load development process misguided? Why not simply cut to the chase and develop a single load that everyone can use and be done with it? A load that duplicates factory ammo. Same case, primer, powder (or similar), bullet, bullet seating depth, etc. In short, a pet load. Something to duplicate and replace factory level ammo and be done with it?

In short yes it is a valid concept. At least that is what many hand-loaders, people who re-load the little spent cases believe myself included. That said. At the end of the day all the factory ammo or hand loaded ammo and the 500 dollar rifles or 10,000 dollar rifles or what ever firearm you are using will only perform to the ability of the user aka the nut behind the trigger.

You also have to remember the idea or concept behind the idea of pet loads has been around for over a century now. What else do you think the scribes of the times have to write about when there isn't anything to write about? Besides that is how wildcat cartridges become factory offerings.

 

[Nature Boy]

A fella named Ken Waters wrote a pretty substantial tome on the subject