I'd be all over that .40 cal MR-X if it hit the market. The ballistics are unbelievable for a mz and it absolutely screams out of that barrel! Plus .40 cal is a very versatile caliber. I have the .45 and I thought that was pretty versatile for a muzzy but if that .40 hit the streets I'd have one. The paramount is obviously superior but also much more expensive to purchase and even shoot. I love the design but not a fan of the variflame. The fact that you have to pre prime your primers is annoying. Not a deal breaker but annoying. Point is if I could get the ballistics of the .40 in the MR-X platform? Heaven...
The .40 is more versatile than a .45?
Imo yes. Energy wise, it holds more energy at longer ranges, the cs density is obviously better, velocity is higher equaling flatter trajectory. You could power it down for coyotes and wouldn't be too much overkill, or you could take a bear with it. All of that adds up to a more versatile caliber in a rifle than a .45. I won't hesitate to put a 285 grainer in a yote, but the hole on the other side is going to be laughable. I should be able to attest to that fact soon as I plan to do some testing on coyotes with it. But to answer your question yes the .40 is not only more versatile but it's superior. Again all of this is subjective besides the numbers. (Velocity, energy, down range performance, bc etc.)
.
To each their own. I was going to bring up the legality factor, but I'm speaking on a purely science based test not variables such as that.Personally .40 cal bullets shot at 2,500fps in normal magnums and 2,750fps in super magnums, is very intriguing. CVA and power belt bullets have been getting knocked around good lately. And maybe for good reason. Personally though, I haven't had a bad experience with either. But cut out CVA and power belt bullets. Wouldn't you think a higher velocity and energy projectile, having a better bc and cs, would therefore be more versatile? What I mean by this I guess I should explain more thorough.
Agreed. Until we actually see some of there barrels evaluated independently and tried with other bullets, it’s just speculation. I used to be a CVA fan, i own an Accura LR, a Kodiak and two Prospector pistols, and really love the MR-X in design and in theory but too many reports of dissatisfaction are keeping me from trusting them any more… for now. If i wanted a .40, and i am interested in it, it would be no contest, a Knight Peregrine.
I will attest to the .45 cal on yotes. I have shot one at around 45 yards with my CVA Optima v2 with a traditions Bleed 140 Grn (might have been 170 grn) saboted bullet with 100 grn white hot. DRT almost turned him inside out. Hahaha little much at that range but he is done running deer for sure.
Sounds like you're havin fun
I think this thread turned into a CVA evaluation as opposed to a caliber evaluation as I intended with my comments... Note to self, CVA has no love here... Not saying they should or shouldn't but this is an absolute bash fest of CVA and power belt bullets. Two companies I've actually personally been successful with. But no two rifles/barrels are exactly the same harmonics everything comes into play so varying results can be expected. I stand by my statement in regards to caliber versatility. Say the .40 cal was a TC Omega or a Remington ML. Would we be having the same counter points? I think not. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but personally I think there's just a general dislike when it comes to CVA these days. I understand why. But to say they can't produce an accurate functionable muzzy is a far stretch. And even if say said .40 cal paramount or eventually Accura's is restricted to one bullet design, (elr's) I don't see the issue. If it works why not use it??? All rifles are designed with a certain projectile in mind... That's how twist rates are determined, bore diamater etc. And "independent evaluation", what about all the satisfied paramount customers, shooting ethically out to 4-500 yards? Shots hitting as far as 700 is what I've seen, one hit at 1,000 yards is the furthest I've seen yet. (By ethical I am using the 1,000fpe threshold standard held for deer and even bear) Again I think it's just a CVA bash as opposed to a caliber assessment. Just my opinion though. What's not my opinion are the ballistics which I feel as though people are ignoring. In regards to legality where I am I am not restricted in caliber so the versatility of the caliber may be more so to me than others. Which is why I stated it was my opinion it was more versatile but fact that it has superior ballistics. To each their own though, hey I have no affiliation with CVA. Heck bash them all you want. But a spades a spade. There have been some serious shots taken with those paramount .40 cals. And super magnum rated? Sign me in. But again it's from CVA. So it will catch a lot of flack regardless. When some other manufacturers start producing high power .40 cal inlines, I predict it will become vastly more popular and will make it's bones then.
Me and a friend went out the other night. He had a new 6.5CM to try out and I took the CVA V2 for it had a illum reticle scope. We had a dead rabbit carcass on a gut pile and coyote call. He took a few shoots out to 200 yards and was unsuccessful then we have this dumb one come in and I smoked him with Bleed Hollow point. Not a fur friendly as they say. We just added him to the gut pile. My friend was totally impressed on this performance. hahaha
Yes - we would be having the same discussion of “versatility.”
WTH just money I'm in and I will shoot SWBP and piss off a bunch of people. Hahahah You are the best. I needed a laugh today. Seriously I have been watching this 40 cal debate and would like to shoot it at prairie dogs and such just another gun that I most likely don't need but I don't hear much about the results with it hunting as of yet
You can’t have too many muzzys! Hell, there isn’t one made that will do everything anyway!
