Cant decide which caliber
02-13-2013, 07:00 PM
#21
Typical Buck
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 797
Here's the real BC of the 165 gr boat tail made by Speer. http://www.speer-bullets.com/ballist...ail.aspx?id=93 So unlike most you debate with on this site I know exactly what I'm talking about. It has been .520 since I first loaded it over 25 years ago. Funny thing is it's just been in the last decade all the next best thing bullets finally started to catch on. But mines tried and tested. You said you haven't even tried your super 180 gr flash gordon bullet yet. Go preach to someone else.
02-13-2013, 07:24 PM
#22
Fork Horn
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: from Kentucky now live in Montana
Posts: 323
I am just going to throw this out there, I do not know but if you handload and you all ready have a 270win Why not go for a 270 Weatherby it will take down any thing in North America.
Or you could start hand loading and save some money, by having them both in a 270.
Or you could start hand loading and save some money, by having them both in a 270.
02-14-2013, 03:51 AM
#23
Spike
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 91
I have gone to the 300 wsm as my go to rifle for deer and Elk when the weather is so bad a 500 yard shot is unlikely. I have had excellent results with a lighter weight short action rifle.
I still have a .340 weatherby for those days when I feel nothing else will do.
the 300 is more than enough rifle for 99% of the hunting I do. I would feel a lot better with the 340 if I was around a bunch of Brown Bears.
Ballistics the 300 is about right for me and for any shot I would take.
the 270 is a great caliber but is a bit light for a longer shot for heavy skinned game. I am sure plenty of guys have used them and I am sure there are guys who had good results. there are just better choices available to me for the areas I hunt and the conditions I hunt in. I own and shot a .270 Weatherby just not all the time.
the 338 -180 gr, trick is not a game I am willing to play. A 180 gr. 338 bullet lacks the sectional density to do the work I require from a mid bore rifle.
I still have a .340 weatherby for those days when I feel nothing else will do.
the 300 is more than enough rifle for 99% of the hunting I do. I would feel a lot better with the 340 if I was around a bunch of Brown Bears.
Ballistics the 300 is about right for me and for any shot I would take.
the 270 is a great caliber but is a bit light for a longer shot for heavy skinned game. I am sure plenty of guys have used them and I am sure there are guys who had good results. there are just better choices available to me for the areas I hunt and the conditions I hunt in. I own and shot a .270 Weatherby just not all the time.
the 338 -180 gr, trick is not a game I am willing to play. A 180 gr. 338 bullet lacks the sectional density to do the work I require from a mid bore rifle.
02-14-2013, 04:31 AM
#24
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081
frank, I been aound rifles alot of years, and I will say this 3340 is way, way fast for a 338 winny with a 180, my hodgdon #26 which lists loads as max that are way over max these days list the max velocity for a 175 at 3187, not sayin it ain't possible but not likely with a factory barrel.
and all published bc's do is give ya a starting point, they are not etched in stone, in all my years testing BC's only one was spot on, it was a 6.5 139 gr lapua scenar, which btw wasn't worth a darn for hunting.
I have very little experience with the 338 winny, I did set up a guys rifle for a longe range deer hunting load, it was 75 gr of re22 behind a 250 gr at 2775 fps, now I have alot of experience with the 7mm STW, its a full house custom with a 26" lilja 9 twist barrel, and burning 95 gr of wc872 will run a 160 downrange at 3340, so what your saying is a 24" barreled 338 winny runs a 180 at the same speed while having at least 10 grains less capacity?
RR
and all published bc's do is give ya a starting point, they are not etched in stone, in all my years testing BC's only one was spot on, it was a 6.5 139 gr lapua scenar, which btw wasn't worth a darn for hunting.
I have very little experience with the 338 winny, I did set up a guys rifle for a longe range deer hunting load, it was 75 gr of re22 behind a 250 gr at 2775 fps, now I have alot of experience with the 7mm STW, its a full house custom with a 26" lilja 9 twist barrel, and burning 95 gr of wc872 will run a 160 downrange at 3340, so what your saying is a 24" barreled 338 winny runs a 180 at the same speed while having at least 10 grains less capacity?
RR
Here is how the Barnes 185gr. XLC does on the ballistics calculator with a B.C. of .437 and a listed muzzle velocity of 3303(as listed in the Barnes loading manual).
Muzzle -2.5 Infinity 3303 4481 87.29 0.000 0.0 NaN 1850
100 0.6 -2 3073 3879 81.21 0.094 0.6 2 1490
200 0.0 0 2854 3346 75.43 0.196 2.4 5 1194
300 -4.9 6 2646 2876 69.93 0.305 5.7 7 951
400 -14.7 14 2448 2461 64.69 0.423 10.5 10 753
500 -30.4 23 2259 2096 59.70 0.550 16.9 13 592
Alright Blackelk now giving you that your B.C is .520, I reran your numbers through my ballistics calculator with a B.C. of 520 and a MV of 3180fps, this is what I got.
Muzzle -2.5 Infinity 3180 3705 74.96 0.000 0.0 NaN 1313
100 0.7 -3 2991 3277 70.50 0.097 0.5 2 1093
200 0.0 0 2810 2892 66.23 0.201 2.1 4 906
300 -5.1 7 2636 2545 62.13 0.311 4.9 6 748
400 -15.2 15 2469 2233 58.20 0.429 9.0 9 615
500 -31.1 24 2309 1953 54.42 0.554 14.6 11 503
Not much difference but you will see that the 338 is flatter, the 338 will be .6" high at 100 vs. .7" high on the 300 win mag. 4.9" low at 300 for the 338 vs. 5.1" low at 300 yards with the 300 and 30.4" low at 500yards with the 338 versus 31.1" at 500 yards with the 300 win mag, and the 338 win mag has more down range energy, 2096ftlbs vs.1953ftlbs. Like I said though not enough to make a difference, the only way to notice would be from shooting off a bench with ideal conditions, a animal will deffinitely not know the difference. I am done with the cartridge nit picking, shoot what you like and I will shoot what I like. I am not on here to down grade anyones round but to say that at 500 yards the 300 win mag is supierior to the 338 is just B.S.!!! Its all in what is loaded in it. The 338 Win mag can do what a 300 Win mag can do at 500 yards, with the right load, and a 2" shorter barrel I might add.
Last edited by fritz1; 02-14-2013 at 05:09 AM.
02-14-2013, 05:35 AM
#25
Typical Buck
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 797
That is pretty close to the same ballistics on the 300 WM I get too Fritz. But You missed the part where the elevation was 10,000 ft where most elk are hunted at, that turns a lot of standard cartridges into magnum class ballistics due to the lack of air density. That matters not in this conversation at this point.
Both are fine cartridges no argument there. The only point on the 338 win mag is that running speeds on a 180 gr bullet at 3340fps most reloading manuals say a 338 RUM pushes them at. There's a lot more case capacity in a 338 RUM. I have a lady friend that has won the 2200 yard match at Whittington Center using the 338 RUM. I believe she was using 250 gr Berger bullets though. It really don't matter what a person chooses to use as the tool as long as they crafty with it. If you reload of course your going to make rounds superior than factory ammo. If your 338 WM was a reload and my 300WM was a factory load. I would have to say you would have the advantage and vise versa. Compared to what most hunters use in the field coming off walmart shelves, what we are talking is whole other world of ballistics. I concede and move on.
Both are fine cartridges no argument there. The only point on the 338 win mag is that running speeds on a 180 gr bullet at 3340fps most reloading manuals say a 338 RUM pushes them at. There's a lot more case capacity in a 338 RUM. I have a lady friend that has won the 2200 yard match at Whittington Center using the 338 RUM. I believe she was using 250 gr Berger bullets though. It really don't matter what a person chooses to use as the tool as long as they crafty with it. If you reload of course your going to make rounds superior than factory ammo. If your 338 WM was a reload and my 300WM was a factory load. I would have to say you would have the advantage and vise versa. Compared to what most hunters use in the field coming off walmart shelves, what we are talking is whole other world of ballistics. I concede and move on.
02-14-2013, 01:49 PM
#26
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081
try it with a 190 accubond at 3100 with a BC of .64
RR
Not sure whats going on hodgdon lists the 185 barnes tsx with win 760, max load is 70 gr. at 3002 fps at a peak pressure of 52,000 cup, thats 7.5 gr under the max barnes lists in the manual according to frank, something is not right there, whether a typo or what I don't know but would work up with caution, I've saw differences in max loads, ya see them alot but thats a big difference. be careful.
RR
RR
Not sure whats going on hodgdon lists the 185 barnes tsx with win 760, max load is 70 gr. at 3002 fps at a peak pressure of 52,000 cup, thats 7.5 gr under the max barnes lists in the manual according to frank, something is not right there, whether a typo or what I don't know but would work up with caution, I've saw differences in max loads, ya see them alot but thats a big difference. be careful.
RR
That 190 is the new long range Accubond isnt it?
RR, do they have a listing for the 185XLC, in the hodgon book that you have? Because Barnes lists the 185 XBT as a max of 3112 with 72.5 gr of 760. The 185XLC is moly coated bullet and it has a different load listed for that bullet and the minmum load is 72.5 of 760 at 3096fps and with a max load of 77.5 of 760 at 3303 fps.
I have Hodgons load data also, there loads are about the same as Hornady, they both list weak loadings compared to the Nosler and Barnes manuals from what I have seen, which both Nosler and Barnes corespond pretty close so I dont believe it to be a typo. I dont trust the Speer manual, when I first got my 338, I loaded up some 225gr. Grand Slams and started a little hotter than the minimum load listed, I went to the range first shot seemed alright but by the third I had to beat the bolt open with the palm of my hand. I quit shooting and went home and started comparing data. Speer has the minumum load hotter than the max load listed in Hornady's book. I do know this to be a misprint. It is a older Speer book and dont know if the new one rectified the problem or not. It is the only loading in there that I have seen this on, most of there loads are quite mild compared to Nosler and Barnes. I pretty much use Nosler data now but I do have a handloads USA book for most of the guns I have so now I compare data before starting a new load. I have never seen any discrepancies in Nosler or Barnes manuals.
Last edited by fritz1; 02-14-2013 at 01:51 PM.
02-14-2013, 02:08 PM
#27
Spike
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 91
Fritz, 3340fps for a 180 from a .338 win mag is very optimistic. I just looked up both the 338 and 340 wby and max for the wby is 3240 fps. the 338 win is about 150 fps slower than the wby.
Check your data because that is way above book.
The 300 IMHO is a lot better choice for a 180-200 gr. Bullet
the 338 is a better choice for 200-250 gr. loads
the more reliable factor in play here is Sectional Density which is not as easily manipulated as B.C. and will give you more of a snapshot of what is going to happen when your bullet gets where it is going.
Check your data because that is way above book.
The 300 IMHO is a lot better choice for a 180-200 gr. Bullet
the 338 is a better choice for 200-250 gr. loads
the more reliable factor in play here is Sectional Density which is not as easily manipulated as B.C. and will give you more of a snapshot of what is going to happen when your bullet gets where it is going.
02-14-2013, 02:23 PM
#28
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081
the data stated above was on hodgdons website, what your saying would make sense....but, on barnes website they list IMR 4831 max load of 73.5 gr at 3046 fps this is for the 185 xlc, hodgdon lists IMR 4831 for the tsx 185.. 75 gr for 3031, so how if its the super slippery coating , can it just work with one powder, win. 760, and the rest of the data is real close to what other makers have? the numbers ain't jivin, I don't give a darn about what the mv's are, but don't wanna see anyone get hurt
RR
RR
It isnt with just one powder, every powder listed for this bullet in ther book is pushing over 3200fps. The slowest powder listed is Vit N150 and it is shooting 3200fps with a max load. H414 is listed at 3293, H380 is 3283, XMR4350 is 3286, RL15 is 3260, IMR4064 is 3284, Norma 204 is 3270.
I dont know if they are correct but all powders listed are pretty close. Like I said before I dont like Barnes bullets so I will probably never find out but I will be chronoing some 180 Accubonds as soon as the snow melts. I will work them up with caution because this has sparked my interest. I will let you know the real numbers.
Last edited by fritz1; 02-14-2013 at 02:25 PM.
02-14-2013, 02:50 PM
#29
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081
Fritz, 3340fps for a 180 from a .338 win mag is very optimistic. I just looked up both the 338 and 340 wby and max for the wby is 3240 fps. the 338 win is about 150 fps slower than the wby.
Check your data because that is way above book.
The 300 IMHO is a lot better choice for a 180-200 gr. Bullet
the 338 is a better choice for 200-250 gr. loads
the more reliable factor in play here is Sectional Density which is not as easily manipulated as B.C. and will give you more of a snapshot of what is going to happen when your bullet gets where it is going.
Check your data because that is way above book.
The 300 IMHO is a lot better choice for a 180-200 gr. Bullet
the 338 is a better choice for 200-250 gr. loads
the more reliable factor in play here is Sectional Density which is not as easily manipulated as B.C. and will give you more of a snapshot of what is going to happen when your bullet gets where it is going.
02-14-2013, 02:52 PM
#30
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Idaho
Posts: 1,081