- Joined
- Dec 11, 2005
- Messages
- 901
- Reaction score
- 0
Have you all noticed how different the velocities are that the different reviewers have found? I have looked at the BH209 brochure, HP muzzleloading , Big 6x6s review, Randy Wakemans review and made a comparison.
Knight/Barnes 250 with 100 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6=1783
Blackhorn209= 1924
HP Mz= 1991
R Wakeman=1841-1856
Knight/Barnes 290 with 100 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6= 1739
Blackhorn209= 1865
HP Mz= 1931
R Wakeman= 1722-1741
Knight/Barnes 250 with 120 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6= 1982
Blackhorn209= 2124
HP Mz= 2053
Knight/Barnes 290 with 120 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6= 1931
Blackhorn209= 2066
HP Mz= 1979
Im not sure why there is such a difference. It seems as if Chuck and Randys numbers are closer to being the same and the manufacturer and Tobys were considerably higher velocities. Would the manufacturer "cherry pick" by shooting it several times in differing temps and such to derive at a higher velocity and then use it as their data? I found no velocities from Randy with the 120 gr volume equivalent charges. I thought this was interesting to say the least.
Knight/Barnes 250 with 100 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6=1783
Blackhorn209= 1924
HP Mz= 1991
R Wakeman=1841-1856
Knight/Barnes 290 with 100 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6= 1739
Blackhorn209= 1865
HP Mz= 1931
R Wakeman= 1722-1741
Knight/Barnes 250 with 120 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6= 1982
Blackhorn209= 2124
HP Mz= 2053
Knight/Barnes 290 with 120 gr volume equivalent
Big6x6= 1931
Blackhorn209= 2066
HP Mz= 1979
Im not sure why there is such a difference. It seems as if Chuck and Randys numbers are closer to being the same and the manufacturer and Tobys were considerably higher velocities. Would the manufacturer "cherry pick" by shooting it several times in differing temps and such to derive at a higher velocity and then use it as their data? I found no velocities from Randy with the 120 gr volume equivalent charges. I thought this was interesting to say the least.