Moman
Well-Known Member
Mark, can you post the length of one of the 180 E-Tips? Just the bullet.
Bullet choices for 300 RUM
- Thread starter Moman
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Nosler - Bullets, Ammunition, Rifles, Brass, and Reloading Data.
This will give you what you are looking for.
Steve
This will give you what you are looking for.
Steve
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
Jon, I feel da luv man
My niave optimism is based on Steve's testing http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/gs-bullet-antelope-hunting-47760/
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/gs-bullet-range-report-46880/
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/drops-matched-advertised-bcs-47318/
It looks like Gerard has tweeked the bullets a little. There's a good pic of the old vs new.
Did you ever test any of Noel's bullets?
Edit: The 210 Berger with an MV of 3150 @ 5000' elevation gets to about 1140 yds with 1800 fps vel - the GS 177 gets to about 1560 yds with 1600 fps V, which is it's expansion velocity. At 1500 yds it's velocity is 1660 fps with a KE of 1080 and an momentum of 42. It beats the Berger in in wind drift by about 12% through out.
3500 should be easy to get with the GS 177 in the RUM with H1000 and possibly 3550. With RL 17, I think I can get close to 3600, mabe a touch more.
Last edited:
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Jon, I feel da luv man
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/gs-bullet-antelope-hunting-47760/
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/gs-bullet-range-report-46880/
http://www.longrangehunting.com/forums/f19/drops-matched-advertised-bcs-47318/
It looks like Gerard has tweeked the bullets a little. There's a good pic of the old vs new.
Did you ever test any of Noel's bullets?
Mark,
It's good to know that I am the source or your naive optimism. Want some candy little boy.
When weather gets more conducive to shooting I will try to run them out farther. I don't know that I have the equipment to get a whole lot farther. I ran the E-tips last year, and they did great out to 1000yrds, but when out shooting rocks I could not for the life of me hit anything at 1200yrds. I chalked it up to: Loads not good enough, rifle not good enough, shooting ability not good enough. I will try it again with the GS bullets but I am not sure if it will be any better.
Out to 500yrds is one thing, to a thousand is another, out to 1500 is really tough, and beyond that is exceptional.
Steve
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
Steve, I totally agree with you on this fact and that's why I couched the 1500 yd range as "potential"
While we are chatting about the GS bullets, how do you find them for fouling a barrel? Better, worse, the same? Is the moly easy to clean?
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Without having a bore scope, I think my barrel cleans the same. I let it go too long this fall and accuracy fell off. Cleaned and all is well. I had let it go because I don't like to head out on a hunting trip with a spotless barrel, and everything was running perfect. Then accuracy fell off just before the trip. I got lazy.
Steve
ps
I have never understood the moly debate. Is there some special cleaning that needs to be done when using moly coated bullets?
Steve
ps
I have never understood the moly debate. Is there some special cleaning that needs to be done when using moly coated bullets?
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
I have zero experience with moly bullets. I have a friend shooting them and he claims he gets 100 fps better velocity out of his 270 WSM. He does the moly coating himself. It seemed to be a craze for a while but I see very few shooters using moly bullets and manufacturers are making less of them.
Lilja has a good article on it. He addresses the issues of fouling and barrel life, but not velocity.
Lilja Precision Rifle Barrels - FAQ
It doesn't sound like moly helps barrel life and if you stay on top of cleaning it doesn't hurt it either. Is another 100 fps worth the cost and effort of coating your bullets? I might experiment with the 180 E-Tips someday, but if I end up shooting the GS HV's there will be no point. The GS moly is a whole different animal. It's not supposed to foul like other molys and supposed to clean up with just regular cleaning. So i was just wondering what your experience was.
Lilja has a good article on it. He addresses the issues of fouling and barrel life, but not velocity.
Lilja Precision Rifle Barrels - FAQ
It doesn't sound like moly helps barrel life and if you stay on top of cleaning it doesn't hurt it either. Is another 100 fps worth the cost and effort of coating your bullets? I might experiment with the 180 E-Tips someday, but if I end up shooting the GS HV's there will be no point. The GS moly is a whole different animal. It's not supposed to foul like other molys and supposed to clean up with just regular cleaning. So i was just wondering what your experience was.
Long Time Long Ranger
Well-Known Member
Rockymt, again thanks for posting your info. The 110 grain 264 was also on my list for my 264 Gibbs, 264 win mag and 264 STW.
JWP745, I have seen quite a few long range hits with the 300 SMK out of my 338-378's, 338 Lapuas and 338-300 ultramags. When punching through the lungs you get many pass throughs where there is an exit hole with great blood loss even at half mile targets particularly with deer/caribou size animals and smaller. I have seen instances where the jacket began to seperate with no exit wounds on shoulder hits with large big game such as elk at all ranges. 99% of my hunting is inside a half mile although I have been known to stretch it out there on occasion when necessary. Typically I am not out there trying to see how far I can kill one but get within my comfort range when at all possible.
Mtbullet, I have seen the fun begin with the 7mm rem mag and 168 bergers way to many times. This year two experiences with them from my friends. Bull one was a 340 class 6x6 shot through the chest at inside a 100 yards. After chasing the bull down a ways shot again through the chest inside a hundred yards. Repeat same four more times. The bull was finally put out of his misery with a shot to the head after being chased and shot at for over 600 yards. Bull two, was shot at a little over 400 yards through the chest. The bull hunched up then took off. He got another shot into the bull as it crossed a little opening in the timber that he also thinks went through the chest and he is a good shot and hunter. That 360 class bull was never found. Just to many bad situations each year using this set up. I am not biased, not paid by anyone for sponsorships and really don't care what a guy uses, but this is a continuing problem with your set up. I have also known of many bulls taken with the same rig. One of my good friends and his son's took three nice 6x6 bulls with the 168 Bergers out of 7mm STW's last year and swear by them. Percentages of bad experiences are just to great for me though.
JWP745, I have seen quite a few long range hits with the 300 SMK out of my 338-378's, 338 Lapuas and 338-300 ultramags. When punching through the lungs you get many pass throughs where there is an exit hole with great blood loss even at half mile targets particularly with deer/caribou size animals and smaller. I have seen instances where the jacket began to seperate with no exit wounds on shoulder hits with large big game such as elk at all ranges. 99% of my hunting is inside a half mile although I have been known to stretch it out there on occasion when necessary. Typically I am not out there trying to see how far I can kill one but get within my comfort range when at all possible.
Mtbullet, I have seen the fun begin with the 7mm rem mag and 168 bergers way to many times. This year two experiences with them from my friends. Bull one was a 340 class 6x6 shot through the chest at inside a 100 yards. After chasing the bull down a ways shot again through the chest inside a hundred yards. Repeat same four more times. The bull was finally put out of his misery with a shot to the head after being chased and shot at for over 600 yards. Bull two, was shot at a little over 400 yards through the chest. The bull hunched up then took off. He got another shot into the bull as it crossed a little opening in the timber that he also thinks went through the chest and he is a good shot and hunter. That 360 class bull was never found. Just to many bad situations each year using this set up. I am not biased, not paid by anyone for sponsorships and really don't care what a guy uses, but this is a continuing problem with your set up. I have also known of many bulls taken with the same rig. One of my good friends and his son's took three nice 6x6 bulls with the 168 Bergers out of 7mm STW's last year and swear by them. Percentages of bad experiences are just to great for me though.
Last edited:
Jon A
Well-Known Member
At least you included the operative word.My niave optimism is based on Steve's testing
Seriously, a drop test at 960 yds with a LapuaImp to measure BC is like measuring the width of a human hair with a yardstick. The BC could be a full .100 off and there'd only be a little over three inches difference in trajectory. Depending upon what scope was used the clicks could easily be off that much or more (how were they calibrated?) along with such a small change getting lost in the noise of the rifle's accuracy or atmospheric condition measurements. At .308 velocities measurements at such a range mean a little more; RUM or LapuaImp velocities will cover for the BC of the bullet at such short ranges to a large extent. If you want to use drop, at 1500 you're around 20" drop difference for a .1 BC difference so it's starting to get noticeable. Of course you still need to make sure the scope's clicks are calibrated exactly, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's a bad bullet or its BC is as low as the 173's--hopefully it's not. I'm just saying that such bold claims that "nothing else can touch it," etc, would take some serious data to back up which you don't have. The claims sound like they're straight from Gerard's advertising copy which have historically been prone to large exaggeration--and when they go against the basic laws of ballistics...well, you've heard the phrase "If something sounds too good to be true...."
I didn't test any of Noel's bullets. That's my fault, I just got busy doing other things then after a bunch of shooting concluded my barrel was pretty much shot out so even if they did stabilize I wouldn't be able to correctly assess their accuracy.
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Jon,
Given the equipment that I have to use, we could be off .1 either direction, correct? All I can say is that they have done well so far. I agree with the speed that I am shooting it is hard to tell for sure. I guess for me that is a good thing. I will try and see if I can get some loaded in a slow 30 cal. All that I have at my disposal is factory rifles. Some that shoot quite well though. I don't have any high dollar scopes, but I do have Leupold and Nikon scopes that are repeatable. I'll do what I can with what I have. The only other thing that I will add is that I do not plan to shoot hundreds of rounds in order to compile sufficient data to be spot on. I'm not going to burn up barrels to get bc data.
When I shot the old GS bullets they did not match advertised bc's at relatively the same distances and speeds. It did not take me many shots to see this.
I would love to see you get a box and post your findings. Conformation of what I have done would be great.
Steve
Given the equipment that I have to use, we could be off .1 either direction, correct? All I can say is that they have done well so far. I agree with the speed that I am shooting it is hard to tell for sure. I guess for me that is a good thing.
I will try and see if I can get some loaded in a slow 30 cal. All that I have at my disposal is factory rifles. Some that shoot quite well though. I don't have any high dollar scopes, but I do have Leupold and Nikon scopes that are repeatable. I'll do what I can with what I have. The only other thing that I will add is that I do not plan to shoot hundreds of rounds in order to compile sufficient data to be spot on. I'm not going to burn up barrels to get bc data. When I shot the old GS bullets they did not match advertised bc's at relatively the same distances and speeds. It did not take me many shots to see this.
I would love to see you get a box and post your findings. Conformation of what I have done would be great.
Steve
MontanaRifleman
Well-Known Member
Jon,
I agree, for many of the reasons you state, that drop testing is not the most accurate method of BC verification, but I think it can give us a good estimate. I'll have to disagree that a .1 dif in BC only equates to 3 inches dif in drop at 960 yds. In runnig the numbers of Steve's ballistics, a .1 dif in BC (.52 vs .62) equates to an 11" dif in drop. One drop test is not necessarily conclusive, but consistant results are relaible Not saying we have consistant results yet, but they seem to be working for Steve.
Next, the 177's are totally different animal than the 173's. And the new 177's are an improvement over the old 177's, which even Bryan Litz commented on. Better boattail design, longer narrower nose, front driving band incorprated into the ogive. It's a sweet looking bullet, and I will readily say, much better than anything being currently offered in the 308. So I remain optimistic...
Naively yours,
Mark
I agree, for many of the reasons you state, that drop testing is not the most accurate method of BC verification, but I think it can give us a good estimate. I'll have to disagree that a .1 dif in BC only equates to 3 inches dif in drop at 960 yds. In runnig the numbers of Steve's ballistics, a .1 dif in BC (.52 vs .62) equates to an 11" dif in drop. One drop test is not necessarily conclusive, but consistant results are relaible Not saying we have consistant results yet, but they seem to be working for Steve.
Next, the 177's are totally different animal than the 173's. And the new 177's are an improvement over the old 177's, which even Bryan Litz commented on. Better boattail design, longer narrower nose, front driving band incorprated into the ogive. It's a sweet looking bullet, and I will readily say, much better than anything being currently offered in the 308. So I remain optimistic...
Naively yours,
Mark
Jon A
Well-Known Member
Yikes!, my bad. In my haste to pull a quick number I had the **** thing set to G7 instead of G1. I knew those numbers didn't seem right! Serves me right for being in such a hurry. Anyway, you're right—about 11 inches. At 1500 you're talking over 5 feet, so the point is still unchanged—a relatively small difference at 960 that could be covered by other errors becomes a blatantly large at 1500.
Steve, you don't need any super expensive scope or anything as long as it's repeatable. Just measure the clicks. I suggest everybody do that no matter what scope they have anyway, but it's especially important if you're trying to use it as a tool to measure drop. You can lock the rifle down and go up and down a yardstick or similar at a known distance, or the easiest is to use a collimator. All manufacturers will have an acceptable +/- % range, some larger than others. That doesn't even include scopes that are marked MOA but are really IPHY, and visa versa, etc.
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Jon,
Do you know what scope are marked moa, but are really iphy? Mine is 1/4 per click. The manual says that it is moa. Nikon by the way. My son's scope is marked 1/4", so I set drops based on 1/4" per click. Leupold and Weaver.
Our thread is taking a turn.
Back to bullets, I like the Swift Sciroccos, if you can get them to shoot. My favorite conventional lead core bullet for on game performance.
Figured I should stay on subject a little bit.
Steve
Do you know what scope are marked moa, but are really iphy? Mine is 1/4 per click. The manual says that it is moa. Nikon by the way. My son's scope is marked 1/4", so I set drops based on 1/4" per click. Leupold and Weaver.
Our thread is taking a turn.
Back to bullets, I like the Swift Sciroccos, if you can get them to shoot. My favorite conventional lead core bullet for on game performance.
Figured I should stay on subject a little bit.
Steve
