Bullet choices for 300 RUM

[RockyMtnMT]

Pretty tough to beat the Swift bullets if your new rifle likes them. The only problem is they don't get any bigger than 180g in the .308 cal. bc's are not as favorable. The E-tip will give you darn good bc's and the speed of the lighter bullet.

Yes you can set your ballistics program for moa or inches.

Steve

 

[MontanaRifleman]

It would be interesting to see what kind of numbers they would have in a 200 grain pill.

I talked with John at Nosler today and he said there has been talk of a heavier 308 cal E-Tip, but no decision. They are comig out with 100 gr 25 cal bullet which is interesting. I'll be giving it a try if it has a good BC.

And elcholic (Rich) is making some LR 308 hunitng bullets. I believe they are in the testing phase. You might drop him a PM.

Mark

 

[Jon A]

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.

Over the years I've seen numerous reports of some Leupolds being 1/4" and some being 1/4 MOA and some being something in between; I had an IOR marked 1/2 MOA that measured .45 IPHY; a few years ago there was some confusion here among Nightforce owners who thought the clicks were 1/4" but were really 1/4 MOA; I believe USO will make them either way; there are numerous examples of scopes that have one thing marked on the turrets but say another thing in the user's manual....

As you can see, it's sometimes confusing figuring out what your scope should be, but even if you do that manufacturers all have tolerances so just because your scope is supposed to have a certain value of click doesn't mean it's perfectly accurate.

That's why I tell people to measure. You never really know until you do. It's not hard. Knowing exactly what you have is well worth the peace of mind.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

The way I see it, it's going to be tough to tell until you are out beyond 1500yrds. There are so many other little factors, accurate muzzle velocity probably being the biggest. Starting mv will change the bc. Barrel twist, and so on. I suppose it makes it pretty easy for the scope manufacture to be close. As long as the scope is consistently repeatable. In my world anyway. I have not reached out beyond the 1000yrd mark in any significant way.

So back to the GS HV's. So far... since they changed the design of the bullet, the reported bc's have put me in the middle of the target, (give or take) out to the 1000 yrd mark.

On my antelope trip they hit a little low. On my deer and elk trip they hit a little high. Two different rifles ran a little high. Temp may be the culprit here.

I will say again that the old bullets did not get me there, the new ones do. So I am able to tell the difference with the equipment that I have out the relatively short distance of a 1000yrds.

Steve

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Steve, I did a little test with my setup to test the verticle alignment of my NF scope and the accuracy of the click adjustments. I got a scrap piece of plywood about 1' wide and 4' long. I marked a line down it and a perpedicular cross line for POA at the center (actually a couple inches low) I set it up at 100 yds, and zeroed to the POA which grouped about 2" high. Then clicked up 20 MOA, fired a 3 shot group, then clicked down 40 MOA and fired another 3 shot group, then clicked back to the POA and shot another group. It worked very well and the center to center measurements confirmed exact MOA adjustments. That would be a spendy experiment in your 30-338 Imp with the GS bullets but you could mount the scope on another rifle and test it with a cheaper load.

Mark

 

[Jon A]

For this test, you don't need to fire a shot. In fact, that only introduces more possible sources of error (are you holding the rifle the same way, is the ammo consistent, how good a group did you shoot, etc). All you're trying to do is measure the value of a click, for this all you need to do is look.

You don't even need to leave your living room. A simple collimator with a grid like the Leupold will pay for itself easily in wasted ammo when you find a scope that's off with it. I do this and many other checks to every scope I buy before even firing a shot.

 

[RockyMtnMT]

Steve, I did a little test with my setup to test the verticle alignment of my NF scope and the accuracy of the click adjustments. I got a scrap piece of plywood about 1' wide and 4' long. I marked a line down it and a perpedicular cross line for POA at the center (actually a couple inches low) I set it up at 100 yds, and zeroed to the POA which grouped about 2" high. Then clicked up 20 MOA, fired a 3 shot group, then clicked down 40 MOA and fired another 3 shot group, then clicked back to the POA and shot another group. It worked very well and the center to center measurements confirmed exact MOA adjustments. That would be a spendy experiment in your 30-338 Imp with the GS bullets but you could mount the scope on another rifle and test it with a cheaper load.

Mark

I am not sure that it is worth the trouble for me. If the advertised bc's are getting me on target, I'm good. If I am running a little high or low, then a slight adjustment in the program should get me on. As long as my drop chart matches my impacts, what diff does it make?

Steve

 

[MontanaRifleman]

Sounds very interesting Jon, do you have a link or pic of this instrument?

 

[MontanaRifleman]

I am not sure that it is worth the trouble for me. If the advertised bc's are getting me on target, I'm good. If I am running a little high or low, then a slight adjustment in the program should get me on. As long as my drop chart matches my impacts, what diff does it make?

Steve

For accuracy it doesn't make any dif. But if your bullets are actually dropping farther than you think, it would mean the BC is off, which in turn affects the down range velocity, energy and mometum. Sooo... although you're hitting the target, your not hitting it with the punch you're calculating. In the case of a GS 177 with an MV of 3600 plus,it's not going to make a big dif @ 1000 yds. But if we're stretching out another few hundred yarsds, that's where it matters.

 

[BountyHunter]

I am not sure that it is worth the trouble for me. If the advertised bc's are getting me on target, I'm good. If I am running a little high or low, then a slight adjustment in the program should get me on. As long as my drop chart matches my impacts, what diff does it make?

Steve

I think that is the point of checking the actual movement vs what is posted on the cap. Your BC could be spot on, your projected drops could be spot on by MOA or even inches, but if your scope is not moving in exact .250 MOA or .250 inches then your input data will be off.

That has been a problem with a lot of scopes and warrants checking over a 36" or so span what your actual click numbers are to move that distance vs what the mftr puts on the cap.

After you get the number of clicks, it is pretty easy to see what each click "actually" works out to move the reticle.

Just another check to verify your "system" is working as you expect.

BH

 

[RockyMtnMT]

I think that is the point of checking the actual movement vs what is posted on the cap. Your BC could be spot on, your projected drops could be spot on by MOA or even inches, but if your scope is not moving in exact .250 MOA or .250 inches then your input data will be off.

That has been a problem with a lot of scopes and warrants checking over a 36" or so span what your actual click numbers are to move that distance vs what the mftr puts on the cap.

After you get the number of clicks, it is pretty easy to see what each click "actually" works out to move the reticle.

Just another check to verify your "system" is working as you expect.

BH

So, in theory, you should be able to do this without firing a shot. Right? Set your measuring stick at a known distance, lock your rifle down, see how far the clicks move on the stick. Then do the math.

Steve

 

[19elkhunter51]

I have not had the time to do any serious load development for my RUM but I have decided on the bullet manufacturer. Barnes. In the group that I hunt with the Barnes bullet has been an excellant choice. Through and through penetration with large exit wounds. The only animal that we have hunted with the Barnes bullet has been elk. Ranges from 30 yards to 637 yards (ranged). This year we finally recovered a bullet from a poor shot. Less than 100 yards almost at the point of the hip. Lost most of that quarter but the recovered bullet weighed 156 grains of what started as a 168 grain TTSX.

My question is why no one is mentioning the Barnes bullet as an option for loads in this thread. I don't have an axe to grind one way or another but just asking.

In my experience with the Nosler bullets I was never able to get them to shoot accurately in five different 30-06 rifles I was reloading for. At that time I quit trying the Noslers and went back to the Sierra Game King that gave me sub moa groups in all five rifles. One of those rifles was my fathers military surplus Springfield that shot a 3/4" group with an issue two land barrel. The SGKs performed as well as anything we have used to date. I think we have succumbed to the hype about using premium bullets.

I am on a quest to make my RUM shoot itty bitty groups like my 06 did. I will follow this thread to gather any and all opinions, thoughts and recipes.

Thank you to all that post in this thread.

 

[Moman]

I agree with the Barnes bullet being a top choice. I have two friends that use them religiously in their 270 win and 270 WSM's and they swear by them. Both used them this year on a cow elk hunt with great results. I have used the 150 gr in my 280 in years past and was able to take a few bucks with them, also with great results. About the only thing that keeps me looking elsewhere is the BC's. Their 180 TTSX has about a .484 and the Nosler E-Tip, if I remember right, was closer to .520. The 200 AB is .588. Maybe we get caught up in chasing numbers but for long range work, it's easy to do. I find myself wanting to choose the bullet that will do it all. Hold together and have a high BC. I definately understand your admiration of the Barnes bullet though and I wouldn't rule them out at all.

 

[Moman]

Hey by the way, thanks for posting something about bullets! LOL