NEMTHunter
Well-Known Member
Keep us posted on how it does for you. And what you get out of the .300 win for speed.
-
If you are being asked to change your password, and unsure how to do it, follow these instructions. Click here
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Keep us posted on how it does for you. And what you get out of the .300 win for speed.
Saracen
Well-Known Member
Will do. The weather has been pretty s*** here in the UK lately, plus I've been busy, so limited testing so far.
In my rifle using new RWS ; heavy, thick brass, just how I like it , it's NOT overpressure with 68.5 grains of RL26, at 3.71' and 3.65" OAL ( four rounds at each length). That's with Federal 215 primers, fired through a 1 in 8 twist Lothar Walther barrel.
As soon as I get some time, and decent weather, I'll do some proper grouping, and dig out the chronograph too.
NEMTHunter
Well-Known Member
I Have Run 65 grains of RL26 in my 30-06 behind the 215 Berger. No pressure problems. You should be good for a lot more powder!
The .300 win and RL26 should work out good. H100 will to.
The .300 win and RL26 should work out good. H100 will to.
Saracen
Well-Known Member
I can't be bothered to persevere with the 230 SMK!
Using the the Berger 230 OTM with the same RWS brass, Federal 215 Mag Primers, 67.5 grains of RL26, compared to the 230 SMK, both loaded to the same ogive ( left my reloading die set the same), the SMK's were blatantly all over the place at 900 yards compared to the Berger, and I've yet to experiment with the load for the OTM bullets!
Also, at 900 yards at 61 degrees Fahrenheit, I needed 0.2 more miliradian clicks with the SMK's, so theories about the shorter bearing surface of the SMK's, don't hold water in regard to better velocity.
I look at this way, a sub 6" group at 900 yards with no load development isn't bad, and the groups were consistent, whereas the SMK isn't worth persevering with, only to waste barrel life.
NEMTHunter
Well-Known Member
The SMK will be slower for the same powder charge. The short bearing surface creates less pressure than the longer bearing surface so to bring the pressure up to the same the 230SMK will need more powder. This has been my experience testing between the 230SMK and the 230 OTM. I wonder if your barrel is a true 1:8 twist? My gun likes the 230SMKs better than the 230 OTMs. Not sure why that is.
I am sorry to hear the 230SMK are not working for you. Like I said my gun likes them better.
How far off the lands were you running the 230SMK?
I agree 6" @ 900 is nothing to complain about! I would be happy.
I am sorry to hear the 230SMK are not working for you. Like I said my gun likes them better.
How far off the lands were you running the 230SMK?
I agree 6" @ 900 is nothing to complain about! I would be happy.
Saracen
Well-Known Member
Hi. My g
I've checked it, and it's definitely a 1 in 8 twist Lothar Walther barrel. I think barrel life and the cosy of consumables weigh heavily in avoiding an extended test, as the OTM bullets are that good without having fully developed the load.
I may test some heavy hunting bullets, like 220 Nosler Partition's at some point. Any advice on a heavy hunting bullet that would be worth a try in my rifle, would be most welcome.
Cheers.
Hi. My loads are 15 thousandths of an inch off with both.
I've checked it, and it's definitely a 1 in 8 twist Lothar Walther barrel. I think barrel life and the cosy of consumables weigh heavily in avoiding an extended test, as the OTM bullets are that good without having fully developed the load.
I may test some heavy hunting bullets, like 220 Nosler Partition's at some point. Any advice on a heavy hunting bullet that would be worth a try in my rifle, would be most welcome.
Cheers.
