My discussion was meant to be applied to hunting were terminal performance is the most important factor.
Target shooting at distance has a different set of concerns and terminal ballistics takes back seat to external ballistics.
It seems you have chosen based on economics and your situation. What monolithic bullets have you tested? I have a number of folks who have moved to CEB for the competition bullet choose in both 6.5 and 30 calibers.
That said all the top shooters at the 2 mile challenge were all using monoliths.
Cost is the biggest reason those shooting targets at the 600-1200 range use cup/core. Monolith designs have proven as accurate at distance and bullet constancy is better.
Accuracy required is determined by the task at hand- your x ring is 2" when hunting deer or pig and 1/4" when shooting 22 targets.
A perfectly placed shoot with a bullet design that does not make it to the vitals is a failure regardless of the bullets external ballistics ability.
The bottom line the bullet should be choose for intended task, there is no magic one does it all well.
Politics have limited hunters options but not those target shooters. What will come out of this is even more innovation in bullet design and construction which will trickle into target shooting.
Your two mile challenge example is more or less what I'm talking about - a market where the monolithic bullet offers some distinct advantages. For example the lower density and longer length for a given weight can be a big plus in terms of ogive and tail design and overall BC and transonic stability.
In that application shooters are also using rifles with rifling twist, chamber, leade and cartridge capacity that can all be adapted for the longer bullet.
Making a monolithic solid that is easily revered engineered into existing rifles can be a bit more problematic.
The irony is that old black powder cartridges originally designed for low velocities and comparatively low pressure but comparatively large powder capacity behind longer, heavier bullets can probably make the transition well.
For example Federal's new 150 gr copper .30-30 round is .26" longer than a traditional 150 gr RN nose like Hornady's 150 gr RN, but the case has enough capacity to accept the deeper seating depth (with a suitable powder) and still deliver the same 2300 FPS.
At that velocity the 1-10" twist in the Marlin 336, Savage 99 etc will stabilize it. The 1-12" twist in the Model 94, Model 64, etc will stabilize it under most conditions. However once the ambient temp gets down around 10-15 degrees F stability will be marginal so it's not a great choice in a cold climate.
Not al cartridges and barrel combinations will manage the transition that well.
And then there is still the $50.00-$55.00 per box of 20 for the Gederal Trophy copper load versus the $10-$15 per box of 20 for a traditional 150 gr jacketed round nose factory load in .30-30.
People comment on the bullet being the cheapest part of the hunt. But then again those same folks spend tens of thousands of dollars on a car or pickup and then complain about the price of gas being $3.50 per gallon rather than $2.50 per gallon. It's the same thing.
