1,000 yards with 168 grn. 308

[BCIII]

I've only been shooting rifles for about three years. Blowing through hundreds of rounds of ammo in a couple of hours was fun and all, but it got boring pretty quick. I decided precision shooting is more fun. First bolt gun is a Rem 700 SPS, 20" bbl @ 1:10, all stock which i got two years ago. I was shooting with Nikon glass until last year when i got a Nightforce NXS 3.5-15x56, changed my whole experience. Using my own loads, I started working my way down range.
I got the rifle dialed and can shoot 18" steel at 1,000 yards on a 10% slope uphill. I haven't tried the smaller plates yet but figure I will soon enough.

I was at the range talking to a guy who was shooting long. We got to talking loads, etc.
Told him I was shooting 1,000 with 168s and he was really surprised, seemed like he thought I was FOS. He said he thought 168s wouldn't shoot 1,000. The guy seemed really knowledgeable, so it made me think; maybe my ignorance is why it works!

I am not well educated in ballistics. I use drop calculators (G7 & Spot On) to sight in the scope and all have been exceptionally close with only minor refinements to get on target with the help of a spotter.

So, am I achieving something that I should not be able to achieve? Or, is the guy I was talking to mistaken in his information?

I've moved on to a custom built .260 for precision/LR shooting, but i still love my .308.

 

[M40_A1]

... maybe my ignorance is why it works!

Exactly what I've been saying.

I was shooting SMK 168s before the 175s came out. No one told me they weren't supposed to work at 1000 yards, so the bullets didn't know either. My very first 1000 yard matches got me scores in the 180s. My highest was 194-6X. The furthest I had shot before that in competition was 500 meters, so I was very pleased with the results, considering I was using a .308 when nearly everyone else was shooting 300WM. I even got a report from the butts saying, "Hey, your bullets were keyholing, just so you know, but it didn't seem to affect your scores." So, just so YOU know, your 168 gr. bullets are most likely keyholing at 1000 yards too.

Would I choose 168s today, with 175s available? Not for long range, I wouldn't.

 

[gstaylorg]

It's a potential safety issue when you're down in the pits and the bullets are keyholing completely sideways all over the target or into the berm because the new guy didn't know any better and showed up to his first 1000 yd match with factory ammo loaded with 168 SMKs. Can they get there? Of course they can, even going sideways.

The higher your elevation and the faster you're pushing them, the better off you'll be with the 168 SMKs at ranges past 700 yd or so. However, there's really no reason to do that in the first place. Much better bullets for long range are available, starting with the 175 SMK and moving on up in BC for some of the more recent offerings. If your chamber is short, try the Berger 168 Hybrid or 175 Tactical bullet. The Berger 155.5 Fullbore or 155 Hybrid, or Lapua 155 Scenar would be other possibilities if you can push them in the 2900 + fps range. With lots of good choices available, there just really no reason to use 168s out that far.

 

[Bunnypunter]

We shoot at higher altitudes here in Utah which definitely helps stretch the 168 Amax's out. We were making consistent hits on a 12'x12' plate at 1180 yards with 5-10mph crosswinds. Will they shoot? Heck ya! My last 5 shot group at 1000 yrds were all under 8". Not bad for the old 308. I prefer my 6.5CM for distance work now but the 308 will do just fine if you do your part.

 

[Sterling Shooter]

The often misinterpreted issue is about M852, which was loaded with a 168, not getting to 1000 yards from a 22 inch M14. This non combat round was associated with Service Rifle Competition and worked well in that role for 200 to 600 yard events but was often seen key holing at 1000, thus, prompting the use of M118SB at 1000. This did not work out, since that round was not truly match grade, facilitating the development of M118LR.

 

[rduckwor]

Remember than you are talking hits on steel at 1K. Operative word: "hits". While this represents accuracy in a gross manner, you might be very surprised if you applied those 168's to a paper target at that distance. 168's will suffer thru a transonic shift and become less stable to totally unstable between 800 -1000 yards depending upon DA. Go shoot some paper at 1K and see what you find.

 

[BCIII]

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[Pinecone]

It's a potential safety issue when you're down in the pits and the bullets are keyholing completely sideways all over the target or into the berm because the new guy didn't know any better and showed up to his first 1000 yd match with factory ammo loaded with 168 SMKs.

Why?

Just because the bullet turns sideways doesn't mean it travels sideways.

 

[Pinecone]

We shoot at higher altitudes here in Utah which definitely helps stretch the 168 Amax's out.

168 grain A-Max is an entirely different animal than 168 grain Sierra Match Kings.

It is not the 168 grains that is causing the problem. It is the shape (angle) of the boat tail on the SMKs.

 

[gstaylorg]

Do you really need to ask why bullets going sideways when hitting the top of the berm or the target frame or anything else might be a safety issue to someone in the pits? Most of the ranges I've shot on have at least one small building directly behind the berm for target storage, etc. Even though they're usually not directly behind a target, they're close enough that ricochets are certainly possible. It's simply not worth the risk. If someone is shooting 168 SMKs and it becomes clear their bullets are keyholing, they are asked to stop shooting. It's happened several times in matches I've participated in at Range 117 at Camp Pendleton, and it's the right thing to do.

 

[shoot4fun]

My experience with the 308/168 combo at 100 yards was not so good. To be fair, all the things I could stack against it were in play though. I was shooting Federal GMM ammo with 168 SMK (of course), a 20" barrel with 1 in 12 twist, higher humidity, lower altitude, and paper target. We were using a good ballistic app and it gave valid data at shorter yardage but when it came to 1000 yards it did not match up. After some trial and error we finally got on target. Velocity of FGMM is a little lower than I would normally want and the shorter barrel didn't make that any better. Three shots covered 12" and all three were full profile holes showing "key holing". Over the years I have found the 168 match bullets to be very accurate and really don't doubt at all that they can safely perform at the 1000 yard line; just not as well as heavier bullets.

 

[BCIII]

For clarification, I am using 168 grn A-Max bullets.

 

[swamp donkey]

Everyone seems to 'poo pooh' ALL 168's as the 168 smk are renown for being bad going through the transonic barrier, it's to do with the overly sharp boat tail, but it doesn't mean ALL 168's are bad, just tarred with the same shitty brush :/


Regards

Pete

 

[rduckwor]

Everyone seems to 'poo pooh' ALL 168's as the 168 smk are renown for being bad going through the transonic barrier, it's to do with the overly sharp boat tail, but it doesn't mean ALL 168's are bad, just tarred with the same shitty brush :/


Regards

Pete

This is very true and an important point I missed in my response.

Not all 168 are SMK's.

Thank Pete.

 

[11BB4]

Not out of the ordinary at all my friend. The Ballistic Trajectory of 168grn BTHP's are funky. Thier MV can vary so greatly. But 168BTHP's will always have a special place in my chamber. I find that 175+grn BTHP or Ballistic (Polymer) Tips are slightly more predictable than the 168's. But kudos to you brother, good job. If you don't mind me asking, what Ballistic Calculator were you using, statistically how much was it tracking? Take care, and good shooting.

 

[BCIII]

Not out of the ordinary at all my friend. The Ballistic Trajectory of 168grn BTHP's are funky. Thier MV can vary so greatly. But 168BTHP's will always have a special place in my chamber. I find that 175+grn BTHP or Ballistic (Polymer) Tips are slightly more predictable than the 168's. But kudos to you brother, good job. If you don't mind me asking, what Ballistic Calculator were you using, statistically how much was it tracking? Take care, and good shooting.

Thanks. I used G Seven. gseven - Ballistic Program. I found this to be a bit more accurate than Nikon's Spot On (the difference was fairly minor).
I had been making minor adjustments from 600 yards and out after setting elevation per the program. At 1,000 yds, I was about 24" short on the first shot. Unfortunately, my inputs into the program for muzzle velocity and bullet were based on my SMK loads and I input an even 2,600 fps. At the time, I hadn't chrono'd my A-MAX loads.

So, the varying factors were: BC A-MAX 0.475 vs. SMK 0.462, and muzzle velocity; actual average 2,620 fps. The difference in velocity alone accounts for 8" of drop (at 1,000 yds) and the difference in the bullets accounts for 11" more. 11+8 = 19" difference in input data so actual was approximately 5"-6" off target.

 

[Bunnypunter]

168 grain A-Max is an entirely different animal than 168 grain Sierra Match Kings.

It is not the 168 grains that is causing the problem. It is the shape (angle) of the boat tail on the SMKs.

Must have missed where he stated SMK's in OPS question.

 

[BCIII]

Must have missed where he stated SMK's in OPS question.

Nope. I failed to specify which bullet I was using in the original post.

 

[Niles Coyote]

From personal experience 168's will work... sometimes, and other times not.

When they dont, they will still get there but not with the consistency us LR shooters like.

I am at 961'ASL and on a nice hot day with the right low pressure system over head and a muzzle velocity near 2700fps they will work at my range. Change one of those conditions and you loss some distance or add some altitude (lower pressure) and you gain some distance... I can say with confidence I have not had any issues with them 800 yards and closer year around but that will be different from one range location to the next... but with a bc lower than both 155's and 175 why even bother with them when your picking components.

The reason I used them was was because I didn't know better at the time and had read nothing but love out of war novels and gun rags... found a good buy on 2k of them and thought my poor results at 1k were because of my inexperience at the time. Having never shot over 400 yards at the time, I didn't know better.


All that said if you want a good 168 bullet, Bergers are great for LR, really liking the hybrid classic hunter for an all purpose bullet. The vld is a ballistic twin (talking bc) of the 175 smk and if you run a FDAC, its a perfect match... but you can usually get an extra 50 fps advantage to the 175 smk. Both hybrids are slightly (classic hunter) to significantly better (target hybrid) than the 175 smk.

 

[djskit]

Let's boil down what everybody's said: Will 168's work at 1,000? Often times, yes. Are they optimal? No.

Why shoot 168's at 1,000 when 175s are available?

There's no reason to stick with them when there is a better alternative with essentially the same reloading characteristics. I don't understand the debate here other than stubbornness, habit and limited experience.

 

[gstaylorg]

The important point was that he wasn't using 168 SMKs. I and probably a lot of other people just assumed 168 SMKs, because so many people have had problems with that bullet at 1000 yd. However, there are definitely 168 gr 30 cal bullets that don't have the boat tail issue of the 168 Matchking and work absolutely fine at 1000 yd. As a perfect example, the 168 Hybrid is a better bullet than almost any 175 out there. It has a very good BC, a short bearing surface, and can be pushed very fast for a 168. If you have a chamber with a short freebore, it's a great bullet choice for LR shooting.

 

[Pinecone]

Do you really need to ask why bullets going sideways when hitting the top of the berm or the target frame or anything else might be a safety issue to someone in the pits? Most of the ranges I've shot on have at least one small building directly behind the berm for target storage, etc. Even though they're usually not directly behind a target, they're close enough that ricochets are certainly possible. It's simply not worth the risk. If someone is shooting 168 SMKs and it becomes clear their bullets are keyholing, they are asked to stop shooting. It's happened several times in matches I've participated in at Range 117 at Camp Pendleton, and it's the right thing to do.

Has anyone been hit in the pits with a keyholing round? the rounds are still going through the target, not flying off at odd angles once they start tumbling.

Ricochets happen whether the bullets are keyholing or not.

newton's laws say the bullets will keep going on very close to the normal trajectory.

 

[gstaylorg]

Shoot whatever you like, keyholing or not, I really don't care. But you won't be doing it at the matches where I shoot.