Hi all. I don't choose to comment too often as I am a bit of a quiet sort, but I reached this very same decision point a few years ago.
As we are all aware firearm are tools. We use the right tool for the job. Based on the initial question that started the post, the quandary is what will provide more transferred energy down range accurately, in a reasonable, effective manner at a reasonable cost. Of course there are many answers to this question. I can only provide what I found. 300RUM is an excellent choice, however you will have to deal with increased recoil and decreased barrel life for a minimal gain. As well, brass will be more expensive as will the increased powder volume per round. I personally chose the 300WM. The bullet choice was another matter. I started with 200 grain Accubonds, which are a reliable bullet, and took several animals at extended ranges. However I was never quite confident due to their rapid velocity depletion in transit. I recently switched to the 210 Accubond LR. I don't want to take away from the berger or any other bullet as they are all top notch. For my purposes, living in northern Canada, having to drop the muzzle on a charging Grizzly at 10 yards is more likely than possible. I did not want to use a bullet that might disintegrate at close range.
In researching the ABLR I found that the bearing surface was less than most low drag bullets on the market. It is in fact less than the 190 ABLR. This means less friction in the barrel. I will admit, I was skeptical at first. However due to the new, if slightly lower, published BC and the heavy base on a bonded bullet I thought it deserved a try. I was not disappointed. After a standard load work up I found a high accuracy node at 2962fps, with a deviation of 12fps, which accomplished sub .5moa 3 round groups consistently. This equates to a retained velocity of 1815fps and retained energy of 1536fp at 1000 yards at my elevation. This is out of a 24" barrel with a slim line radial brake. With a little bit of math I was able to deduce that a similar load in a 300RUM would have cost approximately 25% more. As well, with the lower bullet to barrel contact surface, the copper fouling in my rifle is greatly reduced as will be the barrel wear. I should note that I am shooting a custom rifle based on a Remington 700 action. However, in this day and age I am not sure that this is necessary. My wife recently purchased a Browning X-bolt Hells Canyon in 7RM. You know, the ugly gun. It shoots lights out with a similar style of load. I have also recently used a 300WM in a tikka that was bedded into a Bell & Carlson stock with an aftermarket brake. No other work at all. Similar story, .5 MOA with a similar style load.
So I guess my suggestion to you is this. You should be able to do everything you want to do with a good, or slightly modified, out of the box rifle. Broaden your scope of bullet choices, there are offerings out there that will preform beyond your goal with only a loss of only 5 to 10 grains. There is more to a bullet than just the weight it carries. If you have any other questions feel free to ask.
As we are all aware firearm are tools. We use the right tool for the job. Based on the initial question that started the post, the quandary is what will provide more transferred energy down range accurately, in a reasonable, effective manner at a reasonable cost. Of course there are many answers to this question. I can only provide what I found. 300RUM is an excellent choice, however you will have to deal with increased recoil and decreased barrel life for a minimal gain. As well, brass will be more expensive as will the increased powder volume per round. I personally chose the 300WM. The bullet choice was another matter. I started with 200 grain Accubonds, which are a reliable bullet, and took several animals at extended ranges. However I was never quite confident due to their rapid velocity depletion in transit. I recently switched to the 210 Accubond LR. I don't want to take away from the berger or any other bullet as they are all top notch. For my purposes, living in northern Canada, having to drop the muzzle on a charging Grizzly at 10 yards is more likely than possible. I did not want to use a bullet that might disintegrate at close range.
In researching the ABLR I found that the bearing surface was less than most low drag bullets on the market. It is in fact less than the 190 ABLR. This means less friction in the barrel. I will admit, I was skeptical at first. However due to the new, if slightly lower, published BC and the heavy base on a bonded bullet I thought it deserved a try. I was not disappointed. After a standard load work up I found a high accuracy node at 2962fps, with a deviation of 12fps, which accomplished sub .5moa 3 round groups consistently. This equates to a retained velocity of 1815fps and retained energy of 1536fp at 1000 yards at my elevation. This is out of a 24" barrel with a slim line radial brake. With a little bit of math I was able to deduce that a similar load in a 300RUM would have cost approximately 25% more. As well, with the lower bullet to barrel contact surface, the copper fouling in my rifle is greatly reduced as will be the barrel wear. I should note that I am shooting a custom rifle based on a Remington 700 action. However, in this day and age I am not sure that this is necessary. My wife recently purchased a Browning X-bolt Hells Canyon in 7RM. You know, the ugly gun. It shoots lights out with a similar style of load. I have also recently used a 300WM in a tikka that was bedded into a Bell & Carlson stock with an aftermarket brake. No other work at all. Similar story, .5 MOA with a similar style load.
So I guess my suggestion to you is this. You should be able to do everything you want to do with a good, or slightly modified, out of the box rifle. Broaden your scope of bullet choices, there are offerings out there that will preform beyond your goal with only a loss of only 5 to 10 grains. There is more to a bullet than just the weight it carries. If you have any other questions feel free to ask.
