Had a chance to load up and test the new 169SMK in my Mk 11 Mod 0. Overall, I like the 308 but found the 175SMK to be lacking consistency beyond 700m (that’s after I factor me as an average shooter out of the equation). I developed a few quick loads using Sierra’s new 169 Matchking and tested them yesterday in the desert. In short, they seem to be markedly better ballistically than the legacy 175 Matchking. On Feb 7th, shot three different loads side by side with my standard 175SMK load (load details below) at 100m and 600m to compare elevation and wind holdover requirements for each bullet at 600m from a 100m zero. Then today (Feb 15th) I shot an evolved version of one of the test loads at steel from 300m to 700m.
The Bullet
The 169 SMK’s advertised G1 BC is .527, which is an improvement of 31 basis points from the 175 SMK’s G1 BC of .496 at 308 Winchester velocities. The bullet itself has a much longer, more streamlined profile compared to its elder siblings, the 175 and 168. Sierra clearly designed this projectile to compete with some of the more modern, higher BC bullets in the 165-185 weight class like the Hornady 178 AMAX/ELDM and 185 Berger Juggernaut. Specifically, they intend for this bullet to enable the 308 Winchester to be consistently effective out to 1,000 yards (915 meters).
Here it is compared to the 175 along with relevant info. 169smk is on the left and 175 smk is on the right in both images.
Load Development
I used Varget and chose three charge weights, 42.8, 43.1 and 43.4. Primer was a Remington 9-1/2 Standard LRP and cases were 1x fired and full-length sized Lake City LR 07. All rounds were loaded to a cartridge base-to-ogive of 2.110, which put the OAL at 2.850, quite a bit longer than the 175 SMK which I load to a COAL of 2.800.
The extra length shouldn’t be an issue for most bolt guns but will be cutting it really close for semi-autos depending on what mag you run. Here is the loaded round in selected short action magazines...From left to right: KAC Steel, Magpul AICS, Accuracy International AICS, Accuracy International AX d/s, Magpul P-MAG for SR25/AR10s
Testing - Feb 7th, 2021
Loaded 15 test rounds each consisting of the 169SMK at 42.8g, 43.1g and 43.4g Varget. Though they are brand new, I figured them to be insensitive to jump like the legacy SMKs. I set the CBO for all test samples at 2.110” +- .002. Every round was measured to confirm seating depth was within those limits.
Testing at 100 meters yielded similar or slightly better group sizes compared to the 175 so the rifle likes the bullet. Here is the OCW w/notations.
* The cold bore shot with the 175SMK was 2637 fps, which was 36 fps higher than the next fastest round, skewing the SD/ES numbers for that load. Excluding that shot, the SD would have been 15, ES 54 which is more typical.
At 600m, the 169 was .5 mils flatter and required .2-.3 mils less wind compensation vs the 175. I elected to load up 40 more rounds at 43.1g Varget for additional testing (see below).
More Testing - Feb 15th, 2021
Shot the same above 43.1g load at multiple targets in 100m increments out to 500m then from there, 50m increments to 700m. Conditions were largely the same as last week, the 169 required between .2mils left and .3 mils left wind hold at 650-700m.
At 700m, I initially went with 6.2 mils, which resulted in the two low impacts on the target, one at 5:30 near the bottom edge and another at 8:00 left edge. I adjusted up another .2 mils and shot another 5 rounds, which can be seen in/around the water line (yes, my water lines are a bit thick and not entirely straight - going to make/use a card board template to paint them for next time).
Here are the Mk11's drop charts for the 169 and 175 side by side: Data was taken at the same shooting location.
Assessment
I'm very happy with this new bullet and next time will take it to 850 meters side by side with the 175SMK for the sake of comparison and will update this thread when the drop data is available. 850 is prob the max I would take the Mk11 so will be a good glimps of what its capable of at those greater ranges. Going forward, I will be switching over from the 175g for my Mk11 as well as M40A5 (I'll post a separate load development and testing thread on that rifle in the near future).
Hope this helps someone (esp. those with SR25s chambered in .308 Winchester).
The Bullet
The 169 SMK’s advertised G1 BC is .527, which is an improvement of 31 basis points from the 175 SMK’s G1 BC of .496 at 308 Winchester velocities. The bullet itself has a much longer, more streamlined profile compared to its elder siblings, the 175 and 168. Sierra clearly designed this projectile to compete with some of the more modern, higher BC bullets in the 165-185 weight class like the Hornady 178 AMAX/ELDM and 185 Berger Juggernaut. Specifically, they intend for this bullet to enable the 308 Winchester to be consistently effective out to 1,000 yards (915 meters).
Here it is compared to the 175 along with relevant info. 169smk is on the left and 175 smk is on the right in both images.
Load Development
I used Varget and chose three charge weights, 42.8, 43.1 and 43.4. Primer was a Remington 9-1/2 Standard LRP and cases were 1x fired and full-length sized Lake City LR 07. All rounds were loaded to a cartridge base-to-ogive of 2.110, which put the OAL at 2.850, quite a bit longer than the 175 SMK which I load to a COAL of 2.800.
The extra length shouldn’t be an issue for most bolt guns but will be cutting it really close for semi-autos depending on what mag you run. Here is the loaded round in selected short action magazines...From left to right: KAC Steel, Magpul AICS, Accuracy International AICS, Accuracy International AX d/s, Magpul P-MAG for SR25/AR10s
Testing - Feb 7th, 2021
Loaded 15 test rounds each consisting of the 169SMK at 42.8g, 43.1g and 43.4g Varget. Though they are brand new, I figured them to be insensitive to jump like the legacy SMKs. I set the CBO for all test samples at 2.110” +- .002. Every round was measured to confirm seating depth was within those limits.
Testing at 100 meters yielded similar or slightly better group sizes compared to the 175 so the rifle likes the bullet. Here is the OCW w/notations.
* The cold bore shot with the 175SMK was 2637 fps, which was 36 fps higher than the next fastest round, skewing the SD/ES numbers for that load. Excluding that shot, the SD would have been 15, ES 54 which is more typical.
At 600m, the 169 was .5 mils flatter and required .2-.3 mils less wind compensation vs the 175. I elected to load up 40 more rounds at 43.1g Varget for additional testing (see below).
More Testing - Feb 15th, 2021
Shot the same above 43.1g load at multiple targets in 100m increments out to 500m then from there, 50m increments to 700m. Conditions were largely the same as last week, the 169 required between .2mils left and .3 mils left wind hold at 650-700m.
At 700m, I initially went with 6.2 mils, which resulted in the two low impacts on the target, one at 5:30 near the bottom edge and another at 8:00 left edge. I adjusted up another .2 mils and shot another 5 rounds, which can be seen in/around the water line (yes, my water lines are a bit thick and not entirely straight - going to make/use a card board template to paint them for next time).
Here are the Mk11's drop charts for the 169 and 175 side by side: Data was taken at the same shooting location.
| Distance (meters) | Elevation (mils) - 169 Sierra Matchking (2.7.21) Temp: 54*F Hum: 30.1% DA: 4300 ft | Elevation (mils) - 175 Sierra Matchking (1.24.21) Temp: 58*F Hum: 34.9% DA: 4500 ft |
| 300 | 1.4 | 1.7 |
| 400 | 2.7 | 2.8 |
| 500 | 3.5 | 4.0 |
| 550 | 4.5 | 5.0 |
| 600 | 5.2 | 5.8 |
| 650 | 5.8 | 6.5 |
| 700 | 6.4 | 7.3 |
Assessment
I'm very happy with this new bullet and next time will take it to 850 meters side by side with the 175SMK for the sake of comparison and will update this thread when the drop data is available. 850 is prob the max I would take the Mk11 so will be a good glimps of what its capable of at those greater ranges. Going forward, I will be switching over from the 175g for my Mk11 as well as M40A5 (I'll post a separate load development and testing thread on that rifle in the near future).
Hope this helps someone (esp. those with SR25s chambered in .308 Winchester).
Last edited:
