CFA,

I had read that you replaced your .465, hadn’t seen this original thread up ‘till now tho, so I figured it probably wouldn’t be too painful to revisit this. Sounds like you got hold of a real beauty! I hope you have many years of enjoyment using it.

I did my experiments with old and new Kynoch pre-chrono days for me and haven’t repeated them since, but here’s what I saw. I tested a July 1930 lot that was very accurate in my rifle (when they went bang, 40% of the time), sub 2 inch at 50 yards. A later 1967 lot with non-corrosive primers seemed hotter (near worthless anecdote), impacting higher on the target and crossing, still a useful composite group tho. New Kynoch from the late 90’s do not easily fit in my chambers, when I noticed this (tried with barrels off) I quit using them. 2002 and later Kynoch production fits perfectly and is much more accurate, and does seem a lot like the 1967 stuff in terms of elevation. So far, and this has been my only consistent frustration, only cordite loads bring my two barrels to the same elevation using softs. While I’ve been able to work up a few very usable loads with woodleigh softs and modern powders (composite groups under 5” at 100 yards), they all exhibit the 8 o’clock/2 o’clock, right/left pattern. New factory Kynoch make the same type pattern, so I’m starting to believe Woodleigh softs make the difference and not the powder. Neither barrel exhibit any throat erosion btw, the speed difference between the two is negligible.

The net of this long winded ramble is that I personally think the story the barrels tell should be overridden by good velocity data. I’ve noticed the Woodleigh 465 bullets are very different when compared to all the older Kynoch bullets I’ve looked at, and I find it easy to believe they just may not shoot exactly the same at the desirable velocities and pressures of the original loads (and I’m sure you know all this btw). I would be super interested to know what your rifle does with whatever RL -15 load that gets it to ~2100 or a shade under.

I’ve read a lot of opinions, many by people I respect, that you’ve gotta have 2150fps for really good effect on heavy game. I don’t pretend to know what difference it really makes, but I do know what I’ve personally seen. I shot a big Tanzanian bull in the backside with a Woodleigh solid, driven by 98.5 grains of IMR 4831 doing an average of 2020 checked just before the trip, and it went thru him lengthwise after smashing his hip. This was the only solid recovered, bulging in the skin of his neck. I’ll take that.