Custom 300 Win Mag optic and reload?

[Jim Watson]

I consider this to be a target rifle for use with artificial support. The untapered barrel is heavy and throws the balance way forward of what a sling shooter would use. I do not see where expansion or penetration are of any interest.

So, very little counts but BC, and the project is to determine which available high BC bullet is the most accurate on target from that individual rifle. The thousand yard guys like Berger Hybrids, but there are others to try.

If you have a bench rest set up overlooking a distant meadow full of game, ignore me.


If shooting 1000 metres, you will need a tapered scope base to add 20 MOA of elevation or more. Unless you plan on using reticle features for aiming at distance.

 

[taylorce1]

Since I really doubt the OP is going to be taking game at distance (anyone who can already do that isn't asking for advice on an internet forum) I expect the impact velocities will be inside of 400 meters, meriting a TSX bullet.

I don't know what forums you've been hanging out on but people who can shoot are always asking about bullet performance. Especially with one they haven't tried before.

It is a heavy rifle, not one built for long packs unless necessary. I have heard some great reviews around Sierra gameking rounds, I want to find a round that has excellent expansion while allowing me to maintain accuracy.

If he's not planning to use it on game at "range" then why worry about expansion?

And I agree with you that the TSX shines at higher impact velocities. However they added that polymer tip to aid in expansion at lower velocities. It's hard to design a bullet that will hold together at 60 yards impact at 300 Wby velocities as well as give excellent terminal performance at 500 yards at 308 Win velocities. The TSX was designed for both.

I agreed the polymer tip improved expansion but Barnes still doesn't list a minimum impact velocity. From most accounts I can find from people who shoot them is still to keep the impact velocity above 2000 fps for best results.

Cup and core match bullets on the other hand, driven too fast, will simply explode on contact and cause a bad flesh wound. Charles Askins found this out on live animals with his 8mm-06 handloads pushing 150gr bullets over 3000 fps.

Maybe before my time by quite a bit, but when was any 150 grain match 8mm bullets offered by any of the major manufacturers? Plus any light weight cup and core bullet are going to struggle to stay together at close range with a high muzzle velocity. That is why the bonded core bullets have came out and John Nosler developed the Partition. Still I hold to my original post that the TTSX isn't the bullet of first choice out of the .300 WM for long range, even though it will work.

If you go with a new Nosler Accubond LR in 190 grain you get a BC of .640 and, the plain old Nosler Accubond bullets offer better BC in 180 with a .507 and a 165 with a .475 numbers respectively and will work across a wider velocity spread than the TSX or TTSX. You may loose a little bit of weight but if you follow Barnes's suggestions for all of their copper bullets you drop down weight and drive them faster for reliable performance. So even with the weight loss in the heavier LRAB at close range it will wind up weighing similar to the Barnes bullet that retained a higher % of its original weight. CEB's 165 grain solid copper bullet is a flat base that offers a .500 BC at the velocities a .300 WM can push them.

I consider this to be a target rifle for use with artificial support. The untapered barrel is heavy and throws the balance way forward of what a sling shooter would use. I do not see where expansion or penetration are of any interest.

So, very little counts but BC, and the project is to determine which available high BC bullet is the most accurate on target from that individual rifle. The thousand yard guys like Berger Hybrids, but there are others to try.

That was my thought as well when I read the rifle barrel description, and hence my questioning the choice of a Barnes bullet. I never admonished the OP for his choice, just stated that I felt there was better options available to him.

 

[Devildawg3039]

Thank you! All of you input has been a lot to take in but some excellent points. This is the first time that I have used this site but I am a big fan now! I am going to try a few loads in 2 weeks when I get back and will let you know how it goes.

Thank you again!

 

[Jimro]

Maybe before my time by quite a bit, but when was any 150 grain match 8mm bullets offered by any of the major manufacturers? Plus any light weight cup and core bullet are going to struggle to stay together at close range with a high muzzle velocity. That is why the bonded core bullets have came out and John Nosler developed the Partition. Still I hold to my original post that the TTSX isn't the bullet of first choice out of the .300 WM for long range, even though it will work.

If you go with a new Nosler Accubond LR in 190 grain you get a BC of .640 and, the plain old Nosler Accubond bullets offer better BC in 180 with a .507 and a 165 with a .475 numbers respectively and will work across a wider velocity spread than the TSX or TTSX. You may loose a little bit of weight but if you follow Barnes's suggestions for all of their copper bullets you drop down weight and drive them faster for reliable performance. So even with the weight loss in the heavier LRAB at close range it will wind up weighing similar to the Barnes bullet that retained a higher % of its original weight. CEB's 165 grain solid copper bullet is a flat base that offers a .500 BC at the velocities a .300 WM can push them.

If you think that a guy with all of two posts on TFL is a ballistics expert just asking for another ballistic experts opinion on the terminal performance of bullets, we should play poker some time so I can augment my income.

Roy Weatherby was loading stuff faster than Charlie Askins quite a bit earlier. The 150gr bullets Charlie used were just fine in the 8x57 and 32 Special. When Remington introduced the 8mm Rem Mag they also brought bullets to market that would handle the increase in velocity with adequate terminal performance.

You admit that a standard cup and core bullet isn't suitable for high velocity at close range. The TTSX is fine with that. As far as longer ranges go, when you make a bullet tougher the more likely it will act as an FMJ becomes. There is no way around this compromise.

If you really wanted a damn good performer, purely from a ballistics perspective, duplicate the Mk248Mod0 load of a 220gr SMK over a max load of H1000 spec'd to 68k psi. That will reach out and slap someone. In fact I've seen a lot of Mk20 SSR's left behind in favor of bolt action 300 Win Mag sniper rifles. The Mk316Mod0 load the SSR's used just didn't keep up with the performance of the bigger magnum.

Slapping something with 220 grains of copper and lead is going to cause some damage. Then again, so is slapping something with a TTSX. However, I don't recommend match bullets for game.

All bullets are a compromise.

Jimro

 

[taylorce1]

If you think that a guy with all of two posts on TFL is a ballistics expert just asking for another ballistic experts opinion on the terminal performance of bullets, we should play poker some time so I can augment my income.

I never implied he was a ballistics expert. However you implied that people who are experienced don't talk about bullets. Bullet talk has been extremely popular on the LR shooting and hunting forums because of the current shortages and with some of the popular LR bullets having the production halted like the 105 grain 6mm A-Max.

Roy Weatherby was loading stuff faster than Charlie Askins quite a bit earlier. The 150gr bullets Charlie used were just fine in the 8x57 and 32 Special. When Remington introduced the 8mm Rem Mag they also brought bullets to market that would handle the increase in velocity with adequate terminal performance.

You admit that a standard cup and core bullet isn't suitable for high velocity at close range. The TTSX is fine with that. As far as longer ranges go, when you make a bullet tougher the more likely it will act as an FMJ becomes. There is no way around this compromise.

I said they would have a tough time holding together, I never said they wouldn't be lethal. Standard cup and core bullets have been killing at high velocity since like you stated Weatherby came out with his magnums. They used these bullets because they were the only things available to most people. It wasn't until John Nosler created the Partition that we had a premium bullet to work with high velocity cartridges.

I'd still like to know what 150 grain "Match" bullets that Charles Askins used?

If you really wanted a damn good performer, purely from a ballistics perspective, duplicate the Mk248Mod0 load of a 220gr SMK over a max load of H1000 spec'd to 68k psi. That will reach out and slap someone. In fact I've seen a lot of Mk20 SSR's left behind in favor of bolt action 300 Win Mag sniper rifles. The Mk316Mod0 load the SSR's used just didn't keep up with the performance of the bigger magnum.

Again I recommended heavier bullets from the start! The OP's rifle is a "HEAVY" .300 Win Mag with a 26" barrel and recoil shouldn't be any problem with the heavy bullets.

Slapping something with 220 grains of copper and lead is going to cause some damage. Then again, so is slapping something with a TTSX. However, I don't recommend match bullets for game.

I didn't really recommend "Match" bullets for hunting. I just stated that there were a lot of guys on the LR hunting and shooting forums using them. Plus Berger markets their bullets as "Match Grade" hunting bullets. They even flat out state that they are not designed to "hold together" but to "come apart" after penetrating a few inches.

The Hunting bullet line is proving to be the most lethal big game hunting bullets available. All of our Hunting bullets are made in the VLD design. The VLD design incorporates a sharp nose that allows the bullet to penetrate 2” to 3” before it starts to expand. After the bullet starts to expand it will shed 40% to 85% of its weight as shrapnel into the surrounding tissue (internal organ). The combination between the shrapnel and the hydrostatic shock produces a massive wound cavity within the vital area (internal organs) that will be 13” to 15” long. This massive wound cavity results in the animal dropping fast since most go into shock after such a tremendous blow. Those animals that don’t go down immediately will soon succumb to blood pressure loss and/or organ failure producing a quick ethical kill. Our bullets don’t poke through like an arrow (high weight retention, deep penetration bullets) but instead dump their energy where it is most effective, inside the animal. Using the Berger VLD will result in an animal that goes down fast so you can enjoy the results of your hunt without having to track the wounded animal after the shot. You owe it to yourself to see how accurate and deadly the Berger Hunting VLD will be on your next hunt. To order a free 30 minute video that provides more detail on the bullets, cartridge and velocity used to take several animals at a variety of ranges call 714-441-7200.

All bullets are a compromise.

However, the bullets I did recommend were bonded core hunting bullets. The Accubond bullets have a larger velocity window and higher BC than the TTSX bullet in the original post. So in my opinion they are less of a compromise with the Accubond having a minimum speed of 1800 fps and the Accubond LR have a 1300 fps minimum speed. There isn't much difference between 2000 and 1800 fps but there is a pretty substantial between 1300 and 2000 fps when it comes to effective range. Especially since the OP asked about expansion at long range.

Actually I think we're making a bigger deal out of this "he said", "he said" argument. As I think we aren't all that far apart on our opinions.