Could you elobrate on what you mean. TKS
You won't be shooting in the .1s and 2.s with the 105 because of mechanical dispersion due to the higher twist rate needed to stabilize the longer bullet. The size of the 6PPC group at 300 yards is based just as much on bullet design and precision in manufacturing of the 6 BR Column as a 1000 yard winning group is based off the design and precision in manufacturing of a very different 105 gn bullet. The short range bullet doesn't have a boat tail to decrease length and reduce variances in center of gravity, the 105gn grain is a secant ogive boat tail that is designed to transition into trans-sonic range and remain stable. They are literally different bullets designed for different purposes. The 6 BR Column doesn't need a verifiable BC because the drop over 300 yards is less than wind drift from a bad read. The BC of the 105gn is critical because vertical dispersion at 1000 yards can be enough to miss the X-Ring.
Of course you wouldn't shoot a PPC at long ranges no matter what bullet and twist you have because it just doesn't have the horsepower. But, it would be interesting to see someone, that had the equipment, intentionally load a long range cartridge and vary the load +- that one or two kernels of powder just to see how much of an effect it would really have. I'm not too sure that with all the variables that are possible in components and external conditions that most shooters would be able to tell the difference. Still, I'd like to see some proof one way or the other.
Firstly, 6PPC 100% has to horsepower to be competitive at 1000 yards. It has the case capacity for the bore - the difference between a 300 yard and 1000 yard gun is the barrel twist and the bullets it runs.
Secondly it's not difficult to determine vertical dispersion due to ES. AB has an entire WEZ program literally dedicated to doing the math on hit probabilities based on tolerances. A short range benchrest load that has a 30SD/130 FPS ES will not paper as good as a 5SD/28ES load at a mile. It
WILL paper better at 300 yards though, because the tuning of the short range load is much more dependent on harmonics (which are waves, that go up
and down), compared to the mile load which is much more based on probabilities.
If I loaded 10 rounds with a Lee dipper and 10 on my V4, when I go 0/5 with those vs 3/5 at 500 yards with my normal loads will you believe me then? You'd probably blame the shooter, because who can't go 5/5 at 500 yards? Well when the target is 3", a surprising number of people can't. Want to know why?
Because there's a wind angle you're ignoring. Errors compound. Vertical dispersion is easy to control for with tune (inside 1k yards) and ES (outside 1k yards). When it comes to minimizing ES by setting charge weight to the kernel, it's because at that point you're playing a probability on vertical error not being as impactful as bad as wind calls - the horizontal from wind is significantly more impactful than vertical from tune or ES, so for ELR shooting control for the vertical as best you can with precise charge weights and loads because wind cannot be controlled for. A mile is 1760 yards, that's a lot further than 1,000 yards.
As long-range shooters, we tend to obsess over every little detail. After all, we’re trying to hit r...
precisionrifleblog.com
It's kind of funny that Hugnot quoted Alex Wheeler. Ask him if he tunes to the absolute smallest vertical error, or if he accepts a larger vertical error because a load with slightly more bucks the wind better. At 1000 yards, he'll give up and inch of vertical for two inches of horizontal. But at 2 miles, than inch of vertical is really a yard of vertical if the ES is wrong.
Some guys have done that. Tuned for best es then used a tuner to bring in the accuracy. You can do it. But I dont know of any that have won big matches or set records doing it. Inside of 1k barrel harmonics far overcome es. If I was to get serious about elr where es would eventually...
www.longrangehunting.com