168gr 300WM?

[splean]

Hey guys,

So over the weekend I was at the range trying out different loads for my Savage model 110 in 300WM. I have been reloading now for a couple of years and feel I have the mechanical/procedural aspect down pretty well. Lately I've been wrapping my head around the physics based theories of reloading (MV, BC, drag, etc). So I arrived at the range with twenty rounds of each load. The plan was to fire four five-round groups starting with the heaviest round first. The loads were as follows:

1. 64.7 IMR4350 208A-MAX
2. 70.4 RL22 190SMK
3. 72.3 RL22 175SMK
4. 75.3 RL22 168SMK

Before this weekend I never really fired the rifle as I put it together from various parts I got in trades and this was my first real attempt to see what it was capable of. A previous trip to the range and info I got from a few data books led me to believe the 208A-MAX would win out.
The 208's printed about 1.5MOA consistantly. The 190's printed about .75MOA. The 175's printed about .75-1MOA. The 168's printed .5-.75MOA. So after comparing the different targets it was abvious I got things wrong. That's alright I failed physics in school anyway. So my question is this then, will a 168gr SMK in 300WM make a good long distance round? I know there is some debate as to whether the 168SMK in .308 is a good 1k round or not. Is this true for the 300WM as well? I guess a proper test would be to use a chronometer and ballistics program to see if it stays supersonic at 1k? The 168SMK was only slightly better than the 190SMK. Will the 190SMK win out at longer distances due to its weight? What are your thoughts? Thanks in advance for your help.

PS-The rifle has a stock 22in barrel. I don't know what twist....

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: 168gr 300WM?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: splean</div><div class="ubbcode-body">..to see if it stays supersonic at 1k? The 168SMK was only slightly better than the 190SMK. Will the 190SMK win out at longer distances due to its weight? What are your thoughts? ... </div></div>
The 190 SMK is a great bullet, and is what I shoot out of my 300WM in competition. The 168 is a good bullet, but it has a lower BC, and will have more wind drift at distance. I assume you tested these at 100 yards. The 208 needs to be tested at 200 yards or further to see what the true accuracy will do. It takes at least 100-20 yards to "settle down", since it's a heavy and long bullet. But once you find a sweet spot for the 208, it is the best bullet for long range. any of the bullets you have selected will make it to 1K easy. Try testing the loads at 200 or 300 yards, then decide. Also, run a ladder test on each bullet, instead of just picking 1 powder charge to try.
Also, those are pretty light loads for each bullet. Give it more powder!

 

[splean]

Re: 168gr 300WM?

Thanks Chad, that's some good advice. I didn't know about the 208 needing to "settle down". I tested all the ammo at 100yards. I was hoping to find a bullet weight that was clearly better than the others and then work up a load from there. I'll have to give them another try at longer distances and work on the ladder test. Thanks again.

 

[Mag 300]

Re: 168gr 300WM?

Agree with Chad , I tried 168's once and the 190 and 210's out performed them , but then I started at 300 with a ladder for the powder.
I and my rifle seem to loke the 190's and there a lot better in the wind in my opinion.
also I agree go a little hotter on the loads it helps
Bill

 

[REELDOC]

Re: 168gr 300WM?

Don't hesitate to try 210SMK's also. Albeit expensive, they've performed well for me.

 

[Rob01]

Re: 168gr 300WM?

Use RL22 with the 208s. 4350 is too fast