I've also on occasion had premium bullets that grouped as well as MKs at 100 yds. fail to hold up as well in terms of accuracy as MKs at 200 yds. and beyond.



But in every case, I found that changing powders and/or primers cleaned up the premium bullet groups downrange. For example, my .338 Win. Mag. produces the same sort of half-inch or less groups at 100 yds. with 250 gr. Nosler Partitions whether I load the cases with IMR 4350, IMR 4831, H4831, or Reloader 19. However downrange, Reloader 19 clearly demonstrates its accuracy advantage, because the 200 and 300 yd. groups with that powder are better than half the size of groups produced with any other propellant, plus the velocity is slighter greater by some 40 fps.



I never get all giddy over any load I shoot at 100 yds. until that load shows its true nature downrange. I always develop loads "downrange", simply because too many half-truths that you can't trust manifest themselves at 100 yds.



In the case of my matched pair of .300 Win. Mag. rifles, 180 gr. Nosler Partitions absolutely group as well as MKs at any distance.



In any event, compromising bullet construction for paper accuracy is an unacceptable deal that can really come back and bite you in the backside. It's a deal I refuse to make ever again.......



AD

Those MKs that penetrated like pencil holes, as well as the MKs that penetrated just inside of the entry point resulted in deer (Coues and mule deer) that ran (up to 200 yds.) and had to be followed up and shot again. Bullet placement was not the issue in any case, as these shots were all either through the lungs or into the shoulder. In any event, said performance was absolutely unacceptable. Based on my rather extensive use of Nosler Partitions, those same shots with that bullet would have resulted in animals that either dropped on the spot, or expire within a few yards, and no blown-up capes. I wouldn't even consider using MKs on elk, bears, or African animals of any size.

Sure, bullet placement counts for most of the ballgame, but bullet construction is of absolutely critical importance as well, as just about every professional hunting guide in the world will confirm under no uncertain terms. If MKs are such great hunting bullets (as well as tin-foil grade 'regular' hunting bullets), then why were true premium bullets (beginning with the Nosler Part.) developed in the first place?

A better question is this: Why would anyone choose MKs for any sort of BG hunting? What's the perceived advantage anyway?

AD

Sure, anything you say. I know, the premium bullet makers put some sort of addictive substance in their bullets that make us buy them for more money even though they don't kill any better. You answered your own postulate when you said that one must know the limitations. Right, as in don't shoot an elk with a matchking in the shoulder at close range? Wait for a lung shot or better yet, wait until the range opnes up to 300 yards because if you hit the shoulder the bullet will blow up. With a premium, bullet placement is still important but with far less limitations. But, I have a feeling that if premium were to walk on water, your answer would be "yeah, that's becasue they can't swim." jorge

Jorge,



I don't believe that Sierra's recommendation not to use the MKs for game means the current ones being used by advocates of the bullet have a problem being used on the game.



In fact I believe if the MKs being used by the advocates were known by Sierra to be the best bullets in the world for game then they would still recommend against their use. Such a recommendation allows Sierra to make MKs without any consideration to their performance on game.



Mike

What this thread continues to prove to me is the number of people out there the refuse to let the facts get in the way of the truth. When even the bullet maker recommends against their product for hunting, yet people continue to use them is testament as to why people continue to elect the likes of Fat Ted, Hillary, etc. Hey, there's been a couple of documented cases where elephant have been taken with a 22 rimfire, so by the same logic, it is an adequate elephant rifle. Key word here being logic which apparently escapes some here. jorge