The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

**44 AMP** · April 30, 2025, 02:28 PM

I chose the "other" answer, because the number of rounds I chronograph is zero.

I did use a chronograph for several years, and what it taught me was that, for what I do, the numbers aren't very important. What matters to me is what the rounds do, down range.

As a friend of mine is fond of saying, "if it doesn't help me put an elk in my freezer using my .300 Savage model 99, its not useful to me".

what my chronograph taught me was that the actual speed (and the other variables) differs with each different gun, either by a little, or sometimes, a lot, from the published data. And, that unless your goal is maximum achievable uniformity, small differences are rarely significant.

April 30, 2025, 02:28 PM	#3
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 30,449	I chose the "other" answer, because the number of rounds I chronograph is zero. I did use a chronograph for several years, and what it taught me was that, for what I do, the numbers aren't very important. What matters to me is what the rounds do, down range. As a friend of mine is fond of saying, "if it doesn't help me put an elk in my freezer using my .300 Savage model 99, its not useful to me". what my chronograph taught me was that the actual speed (and the other variables) differs with each different gun, either by a little, or sometimes, a lot, from the published data. And, that unless your goal is maximum achievable uniformity, small differences are rarely significant. __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.