I just bought a .308 dpms lr and want to start reloading for it. What powders do I want to start with. What powders are pretty much proven to perform well in it this rifle. I will be shooting 125gr upto 180gr bullets. I'm looking for that tack driving accuracy with reasonable expectations,that's the fun,but I need a good place to start. Any suggestions.
.308 powder choices
- Thread starter Hog head
- Start date
William T. Watts
New member
Either IMR4895 or IMR4064 work well in the military or commercial rifles in .308 or 30/06. William
Last edited:
condor bravo
New member
4895 and 4064 are almost twin brothers and you won't go wrong with either. Loading .30-06s for the Garand, should I run out of one I just go to the other without even changing the powder measurer setting.
All my research prior to getting my .308 pointed to Varget, IMR4064 and RL15. I was able to get a pound of IMR4064 and Varget and both showed good results with 168 SMK but the 4064 was better. When I moved to 175 SMK and 178 Hornady Match Varget was by far the better of the two. I have not tried RL15 yet as I was impressed by the Varget enough I bought 8 pounds of it.
Machineguntony
New member
I reload 308 with almost any large rifle powder and they all work just fine.
I use Ramshot Tac in 308. Works fine.
IMR 4064 is fine too.
I use AA2200 in 308. It works fine, but it is not my favorite in 308. The pressure is too low for a 308, so it will may cause some cycling issues in your auto loader. AA2200 works better in .223.
I use H335 in 308. It is excellent in an autofeeder.
Last night I loaded the last of my Varget. It has always worked fine.
Ramshot, in the 8 pounds jugs, is my favorite because it is the cheapest per load, but it is somewhat hard to find because all the gosh darn hoarders buy it all as soon as it becomes available. Also, Ramshot TAC has the coolest packaging, so I can understand why we all hoard it.
I've come to the conclusion that being selective about powder is like obsessing over the latest and greatest Ping and Titleist golf clubs. After buying these "high tech clubs", my friends then go out and shoot a 110, which is their usual score. LOL.
Just load it and shoot it, I always say.
I use Ramshot Tac in 308. Works fine.
IMR 4064 is fine too.
I use AA2200 in 308. It works fine, but it is not my favorite in 308. The pressure is too low for a 308, so it will may cause some cycling issues in your auto loader. AA2200 works better in .223.
I use H335 in 308. It is excellent in an autofeeder.
Last night I loaded the last of my Varget. It has always worked fine.
Ramshot, in the 8 pounds jugs, is my favorite because it is the cheapest per load, but it is somewhat hard to find because all the gosh darn hoarders buy it all as soon as it becomes available. Also, Ramshot TAC has the coolest packaging, so I can understand why we all hoard it.
I've come to the conclusion that being selective about powder is like obsessing over the latest and greatest Ping and Titleist golf clubs. After buying these "high tech clubs", my friends then go out and shoot a 110, which is their usual score. LOL.
Just load it and shoot it, I always say.
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
Have tried and gotten good results with W748, BLC-2, IMR 4064, IMR 4895, H4895, Varget, H380, Reloader 15.
Most 308s seem to like a medium burn speed powder.
Bullet style has made more of a difference than the powder selection, within limits, in my rifle. Mine doesn't much care for Sierra Palma Match 155s, but responds well to the Sierra Match King 155. Anything else I have tried from 150 to 180 grain bullets, flat based or boat tail has done well.
Most 308s seem to like a medium burn speed powder.
Bullet style has made more of a difference than the powder selection, within limits, in my rifle. Mine doesn't much care for Sierra Palma Match 155s, but responds well to the Sierra Match King 155. Anything else I have tried from 150 to 180 grain bullets, flat based or boat tail has done well.
Doesn't much care for Sierra Palma Match 155s, but responds well to the Sierra Match King 155?
I don't think that's a bullet problem. Both shoot equally accurate in the same test barrel at Sierra's plant.
How many test groups did you shoot with each?
How many shots per test group did you shoot?
Were you hand holding the rifle against your shoulder with it resting on something atop a bench?
I don't think that's a bullet problem. Both shoot equally accurate in the same test barrel at Sierra's plant.
How many test groups did you shoot with each?
How many shots per test group did you shoot?
Were you hand holding the rifle against your shoulder with it resting on something atop a bench?
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
Doesn't much care for Sierra Palma Match 155s, but responds well to the Sierra Match King 155?
"I don't think that's a bullet problem. Both shoot equally accurate in the same test barrel at Sierra's plant."
Well, if my rifle was using Sierra's test barrel, then I would suppose that I would get similar groups.
I found it was exactly a bullet problem in my rifle. The profile of the Palma Match is significantly different than the Match King. In fact, the Palma Match 155 is as long as their 175 grain MKs. The bearing surface is quite short and has a secant ogive vs the tangent ogive on the 155 Match King.
"How many test groups did you shoot with each?"
Shot 5 test groups with 10 shots per group.
Lengths were varied from the factory recommended 2.780 out to 2.820. Absolutely no difference in the groups.
"Were you hand holding the rifle against your shoulder with it resting on something atop a bench?"
The rifle was fired off a bipod with a rear bag.
I believe the Palma Match 155s require a short jump to the rifling, which is not possible in my rifle as it has a long leade, and be able to load from the magazine. Here is my test target. The small diamonds are the Palma Match, the center diamond is 175 grain Match Kings, all fired off the same bipod.
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e323/dnanncarr/100_3004.jpg
"I don't think that's a bullet problem. Both shoot equally accurate in the same test barrel at Sierra's plant."
Well, if my rifle was using Sierra's test barrel, then I would suppose that I would get similar groups.
I found it was exactly a bullet problem in my rifle. The profile of the Palma Match is significantly different than the Match King. In fact, the Palma Match 155 is as long as their 175 grain MKs. The bearing surface is quite short and has a secant ogive vs the tangent ogive on the 155 Match King.
"How many test groups did you shoot with each?"
Shot 5 test groups with 10 shots per group.
Lengths were varied from the factory recommended 2.780 out to 2.820. Absolutely no difference in the groups.
"Were you hand holding the rifle against your shoulder with it resting on something atop a bench?"
The rifle was fired off a bipod with a rear bag.
I believe the Palma Match 155s require a short jump to the rifling, which is not possible in my rifle as it has a long leade, and be able to load from the magazine. Here is my test target. The small diamonds are the Palma Match, the center diamond is 175 grain Match Kings, all fired off the same bipod.
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e323/dnanncarr/100_3004.jpg
Last edited:
Your experience matches Berger's. Some barrels would shoot secant ogive bullets at their standard recommended seating position (touching the lands) and some just would not, regardless of the powder charge they were tuned to. Their solution was to tune the seating depth, as described here. Unfortunately, the short bearing surface of the Palma bullet will probably not allow you to do much seating depth tuning.
I've not tried the higher BC new Palma design bullets. What is now the 155 MatchKing was the original Palma bullet design, but the Palma designation was moved to the new higher BC design when they developed it, I think, to compete with Lapua's high BC 155 design. Because of the short bearing surface, though, my expectation would be that it is likely to be more sensitive to cartridge axis runout in the loaded rounds, so you may have to check them on a concentricity gauge and may find the straightest ones shoot best.
Since the short bearing surface doesn't allow much seating depth choice, you may also need a chamber cut with a match reamer like those used on Palma barrels. That or get Sierra to tell you what reamer they use on their test barrels.
I've not tried the higher BC new Palma design bullets. What is now the 155 MatchKing was the original Palma bullet design, but the Palma designation was moved to the new higher BC design when they developed it, I think, to compete with Lapua's high BC 155 design. Because of the short bearing surface, though, my expectation would be that it is likely to be more sensitive to cartridge axis runout in the loaded rounds, so you may have to check them on a concentricity gauge and may find the straightest ones shoot best.
Since the short bearing surface doesn't allow much seating depth choice, you may also need a chamber cut with a match reamer like those used on Palma barrels. That or get Sierra to tell you what reamer they use on their test barrels.
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
You're right on the money, Unclenick. The Remington 700 has a very long lead to the lands and trying to touch them would result in an overall length of 2.970-not going to fit in the magazine box. I have spoken to others who have tried the Palma bullets and they record similar experiences to mine.
The bearing surface is very short on the PM bullets, so I would have to cut off some barrel at the chamber end and have it rechambered for a short lead in order to get the bullet close enough.
I think I will burn this present barrel out before I do such a thing. It shoots very well with everything else I have run in it and the groups are close enough to make me smile. My test target had a 20 mph side wind and I still like what it does for me. The ogive on the 175 grain Match Kings is generous, and even though I am still quite a ways from touching the lands with a 2.820 overall length, those bullets are very forgiving and feed from the magazine.
My preferred hunting bullet is the Hornady BTSP with the tangent ogive which gives me less than 1 MOA, but they work well for whatever reason. Good accuracy and terminal performance too. Have yet to shoot a white tail that took more than one step after being slapped by one after 15 years of hunting. The ogive is a bit longer on the Hornady but its located more towards the center of the bullet while the Palma Match is farther to the rear.
I did check runout of the loaded cases and it was .003 max at the tip.
The bearing surface is very short on the PM bullets, so I would have to cut off some barrel at the chamber end and have it rechambered for a short lead in order to get the bullet close enough.
I think I will burn this present barrel out before I do such a thing. It shoots very well with everything else I have run in it and the groups are close enough to make me smile. My test target had a 20 mph side wind and I still like what it does for me. The ogive on the 175 grain Match Kings is generous, and even though I am still quite a ways from touching the lands with a 2.820 overall length, those bullets are very forgiving and feed from the magazine.
My preferred hunting bullet is the Hornady BTSP with the tangent ogive which gives me less than 1 MOA, but they work well for whatever reason. Good accuracy and terminal performance too. Have yet to shoot a white tail that took more than one step after being slapped by one after 15 years of hunting. The ogive is a bit longer on the Hornady but its located more towards the center of the bullet while the Palma Match is farther to the rear.
I did check runout of the loaded cases and it was .003 max at the tip.
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
100 meters
DAVID NANCARROW
New member
Bart, I thought about stretching the distance out because I know some bullets need more distance before they settle down in flight. I tried 200 yards on one group of 155 PMs and it didn't help. I didn't get the chance to test all of my loads at longer ranges due to time constraints. For the setup on my particular rifle, I am much better off sticking with the 150 or the tangent ogive 155 match kings.
I guess my biggest surprise is how well it groups the 175 and 178 grain match bullets. I had always heard that a 1:12 twist was good for up to 168 and the 1:11.25 or 1:10 twist was better. Mine groups the 175s better than the 168 grain weights, although I have tried only the 168 Match King and Nosler competition bullets in the same grain weight.
I guess my biggest surprise is how well it groups the 175 and 178 grain match bullets. I had always heard that a 1:12 twist was good for up to 168 and the 1:11.25 or 1:10 twist was better. Mine groups the 175s better than the 168 grain weights, although I have tried only the 168 Match King and Nosler competition bullets in the same grain weight.