Trying to get over 3000 fps for 300 WM and 180 grain Accubond

To be honest, I was hoping to get to 3000+ fps to see if I could get there. I am shooting sub MOA groups at 100 yds with the 180 grain Accubonds, using H1000, and was hoping to find a load where I could get both. I am really enjoying working different aspects of reloading, i.e. different powders, neck tension, distance off lands, etc. Like I said in my original post, I am working up a load for elk, here. I will be zereoing at 200 yds and have a range I can shoot out to 600 yds. Time will tell if I will be comfortable shooting that far. I was thinking if I can get the bullet over 3000 fps, at the muzzle, that will carry plenty of energy out to 400-500 yds for an ethical kill. I may be off base, but that was my thinking.
 
To be honest, I was hoping to get to 3000+ fps to see if I could get there. I am shooting sub MOA groups at 100 yds with the 180 grain Accubonds, using H1000, and was hoping to find a load where I could get both. I am really enjoying working different aspects of reloading, i.e. different powders, neck tension, distance off lands, etc. Like I said in my original post, I am working up a load for elk, here. I will be zereoing at 200 yds and have a range I can shoot out to 600 yds. Time will tell if I will be comfortable shooting that far. I was thinking if I can get the bullet over 3000 fps, at the muzzle, that will carry plenty of energy out to 400-500 yds for an ethical kill. I may be off base, but that was my thinking.
I shot an elk at 600 yards this year with my .308 win and a 155 grain TMK. 300 WM has way more zip, so I think you'll be fine either way.
 
I for some reason have had faster velocities with Sierra bullets. I just assumed it was the jacket copper that Sierra used. Don't know for sure, but have proved it with a chrono.
 
Would a better answer be to step down in bullet weight? Either a 165 grain Accubond or a 168 grain Barnes TTSX? How does everyone feel about one of those lighter bullets versus 180 with a little less speed? Am I going down a unnecessary rabbit hole here?
 
FEENIX, the Accubonds got harder to source simply because of Nosler. Competing brands ... thought you might like the pix...

View attachment 624027
I am fully aware of that. The fact is that Nosler made the Acccubonds, not Hornady. Before transitioning to Berger bullets, I was a long-time Nosler user (NP, NAB, NBT, and LRAB). I also used Hornady IB, SST, and A-Max.
 
Last edited:
I have been working on an elk load for my 300 Win Mag. I have chosen to shoot either a Nosler Accubond or Barnes TTSX, both in 180 grain. I have worked with H-1000, but even a compressed load gets me to the low 2900 fps range. I have been thinking of trying RL-19, but havent found powder Min-Max amounts yet. Does anyone have those powder numbers or another powder I could try to get over 3000fps? Thanks for any help. I appreciate it.
RL26 will get you there if you can find it.
 
I've gotten 3050 fps from one 24" bbl 300 Win Mag and 3100 fps from a 26" bbl 300 Win Mag using IMR7977 powder and a Berger 190 VLDH bullet. Both guns have exhibited 1/2 MOA accuracy with that powder & bullet.

Since that powder is no longer availabe I would use H1000.
 
I have a Remington 700 that has a long throated 26 inch barrel. COAL is 3.6 inches and with 7828 velocity is above 3,100 with a 180 Partition. The problem is however with that long length the second bullet gets it's point damaged from the recoil.
It's a great rifle.
 
I have 2 powders that get 3160-3180fps SAFELY in a 26" tube with 180g Accubonds, those being RL25 & 780 Supreme (discontinued). The other, with specific loading techniques, is Retumbo.
H1000 produces between 3030 to 3080 in my 5 300WM rifles, all have 26" tubes.
I even get 2980fps with 210g ABLR in 2 of them and H1000.

Cheers.
 
Top