Long range target shooting caliber

OldRoper- There are a lot of guys using the 308 in F Class open, Not sure where you are going with that one. I just had my last match of the year here ( NRA Sanctioned ) about 3 weeks ago. 38 people from Montana,Canada,Minn,Wisconsin and ND, I believe there was somewhere in the area of a dozen using 308's. Other calibers are far more used,but still lots of 308s out there. On a windy day at 1000 yards I am going to be taking my 308 over my 6BR for sure. Heavier bullet and still very accurate at 1000 yards.
 
4runnerman, Since F-class open doesn't list rifles used and looking at rifles used at Raton this past Aug and what's winning and the F-Class open team sure didn't use the 308. You would thing the team would use the 308?

I'm not the one making the claims that the 308 is the most accurate etc. Seems like every time F-Class open record is set it's with something other than a 308 and why is that?

I think the F-Class is a good match as you have choices and if I was going to get back into match shooting I would consider that but I sure won't shoot the 308.

kraigwy, was pretty honest when he said, "I shot my best score with 308" and my combat rifle is Vietnam M-14.
 
4runnerman, I'm extremely fond of the .308 Win's accuracy at the longer ranges. Folks have shot test groups at 600 yards with .308's equalling what current F class wins and records are since the 1960's.

But given a choice of what to shoot in an F class match, the 6.5 calibers are easier to shoot accurate off ones shoulder due to their lighter recoil. Same reason they've taken over what 30 caliber magnums used to do in prone long range matches. Those 26 caliber 140 grain bullets buck the wind better than the same weight bullets shot from .308's. So their shootability is equal, but the .308's down range accuracy suffers from those subtle cross winds constantly changing speeds and directions. The 24 and 26 caliber rounds started out scoring the .308's back in the late 90's at high power matches through 600 yards when very accurate bullets were available for them.

While the 30 caliber big cartridges are popular in long range benchrest matches in free-recoiling rigs virtually untouched by humans, they've been out-scored by 26 caliber ones when fired off the shoulder.
 
Last edited:
4 Runnerman, I said "long range sniper round." L.E. snipers very rarely shoot long range. Most dont even train long range. I used to be a L.E. sniper. I technically still am because I am still certified, but I have not actually gone on any call outs since I got hurt a couple years ago. You would be amazed how poorly the vast majority of L.E."marksman observers" shoot at short range. Lord help them at long range.
 
Yes to all. The 308 is not the choice of calibers to shoot, I was pointing out that there are still a lot of people shooting them in Matches. In fact Brian one of the guys I shoot with won 1st place in the Grand Master 1000 yard shoot this year with his custom build 308. Yes also to the 6 and 6.5 being the king of the ring right now too. I recently heard the 100 yard world record has been broke now with a 223. True or not I have not checked.
 
The .284 is definitely the new long range king for the moment. I would love some more info on the .223 setting the 100 yard world record. The record was already tiny. Depending on which sanctioning body you use, there are 6 PPC groups listed as small as 1.1mm.
 
Reynolds I will ask him again. He is very active in the Bench rest scene. Don't take this for gold,but I think he said .067 for a group 5 shot. Or ,67. I remember it was 67 something.
 
I'll have to give a big +1 to 4runnerman here. I think many of you are misunderstanding him. I doubt he's saying it's the right caliber for all jobs. He's saying it a a great round, and since the OP already has the 308, he doesn't need another caliber to reach his goal of under 1000. I'm sure if the OP had the same question, but he said he had a . 260, 4runnerman wouldn't recommend he get a 308 but give the same advice of staying with what he has.

308 is powerful/accurate enough for all target and hunting <1000yds. 300 win mag for <1500 and 338lm for most everything else.

However, If you want a new rifle just for the heck of it and this is an excuse, then it's a good excuse :) get yourself a 300winmag and you can confidently shoot it to a mile knowing that if it's not hitting it's because of you and not the round.
 
Reynolds-

Mike Stinnett Breaks 'Unbreakable Record' with .0077″ Group ...
bulletin.accurateshooter.com/.../mike-stinnett-breaks-the-unbreakable-recor...
Aug 2, 2013 - Mike shot a .0077″ five-shot group at 100 yards in a registered ... This will be a new NBRSA record (and all-time world record) if approved.

Set shooting a 30 cal. Not a 308:D. 30 PPC
 
Last edited:
That makes more sense. Thanks for the info. I was doubting the .223.
.30 PPC makes sense, but I was really thinking the .30BR would be the one to eventually knock off the 6 PPC.
 
Last edited:
How do you even MEASURE a group size of 1.1mm (ETA or 0.0077") centre-to centre? They must be picking over those targets with a bloody microscope trying to tell where the various hole edges end.

I don't doubt the performance or the veracity of the records - it's just... have we got to the point (at least at short range) where random statistical variation and unpredictable gusts dominate over skill and technology and it isn't even worth trying to do any better? Granted, there will always be people who won't rest until they can routinely make ragged five-round holes at a thousand yards, but 1.1mm at a hundred is fast entering the realm of diminishing returns, and I wonder if it's actually possible to improve or even match that sort of performance without a good dose of luck.

In retrospect, perhaps the day I made a 600 yard dead-centre bull with my scoped-but-otherwise-unmodified Lithgow .303 on the last shot of the match was the day I should have walked away from target rifle forever. I had achieved perfection, and it was never going to get any better than that. But it's a drug, of course - one dose of THAT achievement and you're hooked forever... :D
 
I dont know either. Thats the point I was making earlier. The prior world record looks like a single hole. Not a ragged hole, but a single hole.
 
That .0077" 5-shot 100-yard records a bit smaller than the NBRSA .009" 5-shot record fired 40 years ago. So the odds are slim that double-zero groups happen, but still possible once in a very great while.

In contrast is the NBRSA 80-shot aggregate of eight 10-shot groups at 100 yards being barely under .200". The largest single group was about .300 inch and the smallest larger than those record 5-shot ones.

Yes, pathdoc, one will only match that sort of 5-shot performance with a good dose of luck. That's the common denominator of all records in the shooting sports. But it's helped by good equipment well managed by good marksmen. Such groups are measured by finding the "leaded edge" of the furthest outside bullet holes made in special target paper. They're easy to see as the powder fouling left on the bullets makes them quite visible through magnifying lenses. Then using a caliper with a magnifying glass and caliber circles on them aligned over the two furthest holes. The caliper's calibrated such that the circle centers are used to get the readings from. Here's a link to one:

http://www.neiljones.com/html/target_measuring.html
 
Last edited:
Okay, so they've got peculiar tricks up their sleeves that extend all the way to the target; that (the measurement method) makes sense.

As to the skill (vs the luck), I wasn't doubting for one minute that there's a very special level of skill at arms required to shoot for these sorts of records - all the way up from construction of the rifles/ammo to the actual pulling of the trigger. Frankly, I stand in awe of anyone who can even get close. I know I couldn't.

The eighty shot aggregate seems perhaps a better (or at least more exacting) test of the consistency of one's system (including the human element), even if the precision of the achievement is necessarily less (but for how much longer, one wonders, before technological advances bring that down to the ragged edge of measurability too?). Why eighty, I wonder and not a hundred?
 
Pathdoc, arsenals used to shoot 10 or more dozen shots of 30 caliber match ammo into one group at 600 yards. That is probably the best test of accuracy of ammo I'm aware of. Doesn't matter how big or small it is, but the probablility of it being repeated again within 99% of being the same size is darned near 99%. 80 shots in a single group drops that probability down closer to 90%.

It's always been my contention that if you measure the accuracy of shooting stuff with two groups and they're not within 10% of the same size, not enough shots were put in each group to be significantly meaningful; about 90% or more representative of where all shots fired will go.
 
Bart- While all you say is true I do not know any one that shoots that many rounds to find a load. There , as you say Is more data in more shots,but what a waste of ammo and barrel life. One guy I shoot against ( Brian ) shoot's a score of 200 at 600 yards all the time. These are only 20 round strings, But he does it over and over,Week after week match after match. What would he gain by shooting 80 rounds that he already doesn't know from say 600 rounds a year all in the same size group 20 rounds at a time?.

I love shooting and consider myself very good at it,but once you have found your load,you have found your load. Shooting it more and more does not prove anything. I also am sure that even the best shooters in the world will now and then have a shot that they wish they would not have taken. That shot could be because of to many other variables to worry about if it was your load.
 
Last edited:
Same bullet, with more or different powder can equal more speed. More speed equals more energy and flatter trajectory. Those are simple facts. Thats the reason that the magnums were made. Shooting a deer at 100yds with a 308 and a 300 mag will equal out. Shooting an elk at 600yds is going to be a bit different. Especially if you don't have a rangefinder or adjustable turrets.

I learned to hunt without rangefinders. I can still judge within 50 yards out to about 700. Just another skill hunters had to learn. With my rifle sighted in at 200 yds, putting the crosshairs on the target at 100 and 300 will get the job done using the 300WM. Anything past 300 and I have to start aiming a bit high. I found mil dot to be very helpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top