This type of question has been coming up often here of late. Hornady recommends a minimum 1:8 twist barrel. They aren't making that recommendation just to hear themselves think out loud. There is a reason for it. Here's the reason: when the gyroscopic stability coefficient (Sg) starts getting down into the mid 1.3s down to about 1.1 or so, the bullet may fly with sufficient stability that one might not ever notice obvious signs of gyroscopic instability such as oblong holes in the target, keyholing, or even tumbling at longer distances. However, that does
not mean the bullet's trajectory is unaffected by the insufficient twist rate. Within that sub-optimal Sg range, the predominant effect is loss of intrinsic BC rather than more obvious signs of gyroscopic instability. In other words, the bullet will behave as though the BC is much lower than it actually is, thereby increasing wind deflection. As the Sg value goes even lower, groups may start to open up noticeably, and generate oblong holes in the target, or even keyholes.
Does that matter to everyone? Obviously not. For those that just wish to shoot with reasonable precision and are not overly concerned with BC, such sub-optimal twist rate scenarios of ~1.25-1.3 Sg and higher may work just fine and may never even be noticed. For those that use a specific bullet with the intent of getting the very most out of the advertised BC, maybe this approach doesn't work so well. If one wishes to try a specific bullet in a sub-optimal twist barrel setup, have at it. As long as the predicted Sg values fall somewhere in the range of let's say maybe about 1.20 to 1.49, the bullet will likely fly reasonably well (FWIW - I'm making a total SWAG with these Sg values, but that range is probably not too far off the mark). I once had a .223 Rem rifle with a validated 10-twist barrel that would shoot 77 gr Sierra Matchking commercial ammunition just fine, even though on paper it really shouldn't have worked very well. One simply has to run a prediction at an online stability calculator such as JBM (
https://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmstab-5.1.cgi). If the predicted Sg is greater than about 1.2 or so, then it's probably worth a try. At that point the best thing to do is load/shoot the bullet and see how it behaves in the specific rifle setup. Then you'll know.
To the OP, the 73 ELDM is only about 7% longer than the 69 TMK. They may not behave all that differently from a 9-twist barrel. Further, several posters herein have claimed success running the 73 ELDMs out of 9-twist barrels. As long as you are not overly concerned with some loss of intrinsic BC for your specific application, that should be sufficient evidence to give them a try in your rifle. I'd suggest buying one box to load and test, which should be more than enough for that purpose, but won't break the bank if they don't shoot as well as you'd like. Please let us know how they work out for you.
