The standard 308WIN precision bullet for Tikka T3

P

Paddycakes

Inactive
Hey all, second thread on the boards. I posted asking about a hunting round I am building up and received some great responses. Now to the meat of it I suppose...

Sierra Match 168gr HPBT on Norma brass.

In advance, I do not shy away from leg work. However, I have found that in any venture the closer one starts to a desired result the sooner one attains it, even if the race is from the outskirts of a circle towards an unknown center as opposed to a line from start to finish. Point in case, when I know I truly want to do something I get the right stuff for it right away. I learned that lesson as a musician after spending years and thousands of dollars on equipment that was not top of the line, only to have to buy the good stuff down the road to get the sound I truly wanted. It is that way for me with loading bullets. Instead of buying a starter kit, I went ahead with the Redding T7 turret press and Redding Competition Bushing Die set, as well as the Type S bushing Full Size die, the Redding 3BR powder measure, and a host of other necessary mid to upper shelf items which I enjoy immensely for their quality of build and versatility and precision of use.

The rifle for which I am loading is a Tikka T3 lite in 308WIN, with an 11-1 twist 22 and 5/8" inch barrel. I am guessing that many of you may own a Tikka T3 of some sort as they are becoming more and more popular. I am hoping that some of you own the very rifle I do, and that a few of that some really enjoy loading 168gr HPBTs for accuracy shooting in the 300 to 500 yard range. To those few I digress...

Here are the powder choices: Hodgdon Benchmark, Hodgdon H4895, Hodgdon H335, Varget, IMR 4895, IMR 4064, and Ramshot TAC.

The bullet is the standard Sierra 168gr HPBT and the brass is Norma.

I'd like to know what combos work well for you. I would love very much to build up a few round sets around your favorite data and see if anything sticks to my particular rifle.

In the words of John Cleese from rat race (and I don't at all mean to seem demanding)...

"GO"
 
Well you asked some good very specific questions . As well as preferring comments from those that load for the same rifle .

This is going to narrow the amount of hit you'll likely get . It's to bad cus there is a bunch of good advice here that you may not get .

I'd love to help you but don't have that rifle or shoot the 168gr smk . I do shoot A LOT of 175gr smk with a few of those powders . I also use Redding bushing dies .

Instead of leaving you with nothing . I'll ask a question and maybe it will open up the parameters of the thread .

Did you buy the rifle to be a target rifle or are you just looking for a good match load for your hunting rifle ?

Would you be willing to use other projectiles ?

I'm addressing the thread like this because I don't use the rifle or bullet you are asking about . I don't want to be one of those guys. You know , the ones that will tell you how wrong everything is or what would be better rather then just answering your questions .
 
Last edited:
The fallacy with asking for load data is that you could receive 20 entirely different load data answers from 20 different responders and you might as well be back to square one again and begin with data from loading manuals. This one should be a good test however. One gun's treasure recipe could be an identical gun's piece of junk (that obviously you know). You are starting with a goo"d bullet and powder selection and I would just go from there without trying for that magic formula to immediately appear. It's all part of the game to develop loads on your own. No doubt responders will be more than willing to pass along what has worked well for them. If you can find some factory premium .308s like the Federal Gold Medal match, use those for a comparison standard to meet or beat during load development. Suggest starting with your 168s and 4064 powder.
 
Last edited:
Metal God, I'd appreciate any information. As I said I'll be doing plenty of legwork, but my mind is the type that vacuums information and pares through it based on all sorts of different culling methods, like "well I see what he's saying in this post, but elsewhere I see his information is soundly refuted by many other knowledgable sources" - I like to keep those thoughts generally to myself though, to each his own and all. The more the merrier! I bought the rifle as an all-rounder. I've put a couple hundred rounds through it, everything ranging from Perfecta 155gr FMJs to Federal 180gr interlock to Noslers and Hornady match and gameslayers. It will not be a designated benched precision rifle, nor will it be a designated backwoods brushwacker. It is my first (of two for now) of many bolt action rifles and I love it dearly. I gave it a poor mans sage green paint job, filled the synthetic stock with heavy foam, put a harris bipod and a limbsaver on her, popped a rail and the Nikon M308 BDC scope on top. She's just the one that I don't want to put on a nicer stock because we've had so much fun as she came, though I think I may stick with Tikka for most other new rifle purchases in the future, and would love to build off of this type of system. She's my baby and I want to kill deer and perhaps an elk with her, as well as well as hangin' with the felluhs in the local long(er) range club. I want to take her to the rock show and the opera. I asked specifically about the 168gr HPBT because I have a box of em on the shelf, and the 11-1 barrel is kind of a specific I'd like to stick to, but have no fear I'll start somewhere and end up somewhere else just like everyone else.

Frankly I just get so excited reading people wax on about the rounds they have had success with - its inspiring!
 
I do have a Tikka T3 Tactical however I haven't reloaded for it as of yet only because I am still working my way through the several thousand rounds of Hornady TAP in the 168 flavor.

But I have ran several different match grade factory loads through it and found that my T3 does a little better with the 155 over the 168's and up. A good friend of mine also has a T3 tactical but a few years newer and it too shoots lights out with the 168 A-Max. Mine also preferred the A-Max over the SMK's. But when I finally run out of my factory stuff I'll probably continue to use the 168 A-Max for the better longer range performance, unless I am hunting then I will use the SST. Not that the A-Max won't work, in fact it does just fine on deer sized game but it is designed as a match target round and not a hunting round, same goes with SMK.

Not sure if that helps any on bullet selection or not.
 
I like to load for accuracy so I'm rarely at max loads . This helps because most of my more accurate 308 loads for my target rifle also shoot well in my Ruger American which is a very light sporter barrel rifle .

You have some good equipment there . I like my Redding dies and you will as well . I don't have anything to add there for now .

Like I said I don't shoot 168s but do shoot a lot of 150 , 175 , 178 and 190 . FWIW your twist is 1-11 ( one full rotation for every eleven inches of barrel length ) Not 11 full rotations for every 1 inch of barrel length ;) . Your 1-11 will shoot the heavier bullets just fine , up to at least 190gr likely heavier . So don't shy away from the heavier long range projectiles .

I get good results using Winchester LR primers . I have started using some Federal Match primers . I have not shot enough to give a review but they have produced some of the lowest ES/SD I have ever recorded .

Powders - IMR 4064 and 4895 are my go to . RL-15 is closing the gap . I've had good results with IMR 8208 xbr . I've never used Varget but some say it's the greatest thing ever . All of those powders should give GREAT results with the 168gr SMK .

Always work up your loads but FWIW The 168gr Federal gold metal match uses 43.5gr of IMR 4064 . There has been talk that they went to RL-15 but I bought a new box early last year and pulled the powder . It was not RL-15 and looked very much like IMR 4064 .

Here is the pulled powder & IMR 4064 side by side .
9BkbIZ.jpg
 
I load for three 308 Winchesters, 2 Remington's and a Savage. One of Remington's is a 1:10 twist, the other rifles are 1:11.2. Working up loads using the 168 SMK I tried only two powders, IMR4064 and Varget, not because I did not have any other powders but because there was no reason to search any farther for accurate loads. While each rifle liked different amounts of powder I was able to get sub MOA (5 shot) from each. I have since switched bullets to the Hornady 178 grain Match bullet in order to shoot at longer distances.
 
I've loaded over 11,500 rounds of .308 over the last 5 years. including lots of 150, 168 and 175 grain Sierra SMKs and recently 155, 168 and 175 grain Sierra Tipped Match Kings. I've also loaded Hornady Match and AMAX, Berger Match and OTM, and Nosler Custom Competition bullets in the same bullet weight range. I've even reloaded 180, 190 and 200 grain bullets for my .308s.

I've tried H4895, Varget, Reloader 15, IMR 4064, N150 and N140 powders.

I have loaded for three Savage bolt actions, actually two different Savage actions but one had to be rebarreled after 6300 rounds down the tube. It was rebarreled with a target barrel so technically it is a different rifle and I have kept the data separate.

Since I started using it, N140 has performed best of all of the others by a impressive margin. In fact, the top 25 loads of the new barrel and the other Savage include only N140 loads. The old original barrel Savage didn't get to shoot N140 until late in its life, but even then 19 of the top 25 loads were with N140, the rest were with H4895.

One of the Savages seems to favor heavier bullets. The new barreled one shoots and it rebarreled version tend to favor lighter bullets more than the heavier ones.
Savage 10 FCP-K - Top 25 loads average 0.289 for 109 groups.
Savage 10 FP new barrel - Top 25 loads average 0.270 for 119 groups
Savage 10 FP orig. barrel - Top 25 loads averaged 0.438 for 154 groups.

Now to answer your question, here are some results showing powder-bullet combination performance in order of average accuracy.

With a Savage 10 FCP-K, 1:10 twist, the average of all group shot with loads having specific powder bullet combinations are as follows:
Powder Bullet Combination ------- Average ----- Best Load --- # Grps
VV N140 & Sierra TMK 175 gr ------ 0.294 -------- 0.274 ---------26
VV N140 & Sierra TMK 168 gr ------ 0.317 -------- 0.236 ---------61
VV N140 & Sierra TMK 155 gr ------ 0.330 -------- 0.281 ---------32
VV N140 & Berger FB Target 150 gr - 0.427 -------- 0.290 ---------35
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 190 gr ------ 0.460 -------- 0.398 ---------30
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 175 gr ------ 0.465 -------- 0.326 ---------100
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 150 gr ------ 0.475 -------- 0.434 ---------41
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 200 gr ------ 0.480 -------- 0.472 ---------6
VV N140 & Nosler CC 155 gr ------- 0.499 -------- 0.383 --------- 31
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 168 gr ------- 0.509 -------- 0.320 ---------107
VV N140 & Nosler CC 175 gr ------- 0.544 -------- 0.421 --------- 37
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 155 gr ------- 0.552 -------- 0.474 --------- 18

With the new barreled Sierra 10 FP the powder-bullet combinations performed as follows ( it is fairly new so the group counts are lower and I had found TMKs and have concentrated on the 168s as you can see):
Powder Bullet Combination ------- Average ----- Best Load --- # Grps
VV N140 & Sierra TMK 168 gr -------- 0.318 -------- 0.204 ---------221
VV N140 & Sierra TMK 155 gr -------- 0.318 -------- 0.229 ---------30
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 150 gr -------- 0.407 -------- 0.295 ---------24
VV N140 & Berger FB Target 150 gr - 0.450 -------- 0.370 ---------30
VV N140 & Berger Target 155 gr----- 0.452 -------- 0.352 ---------19
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 190 gr ------- 0.455 -------- 0.442 ---------12
VV N140 & Berger full bore 155.5 gr -0.462 -------- 0.327 ---------8
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 168 gr ------- 0.476 -------- 0.372 ---------38
VV N140 & Nosler CC 168 gr -------- 0.477 -------- 0.346 ----------25
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 200 gr ------- 0.479 -------- 0.476----------6
VV N140 & Nosler CC 155 gr -------- 0.499 -------- 0.417 ----------24
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 155 gr ------- 0.501 -------- 0.342 ---------30
VV N140 & Sierra TMK 175 gr ------- 0.507 -------- 0.495 ---------8
VV N140 & Nosler CC 175 gr -------- 0.530 -------- 0.416 ---------28
VV N140 & Sierra SMK 175 gr ------- 0.547 -------- 0.407 ---------19

I hope this helps.
 
Impressive but an excessive amount of data could be more confusing than helpful. From your data, where do you suggest that he begin his loading development? Obviously he cannot be trying each combination.
 
Rimfire, I might be developing a man crush. I appreciate your extensive information greatly, in fact - if you don't mind - I'm going to copy/paste your data into a file for reference as I continue to expand my catalog of bullets and powders. I am looking specifically for a grains-o-powder/bullet combo as far as information goes to answer this query specifically, but your chart (I am certain) will be of great use to me in the future. So far - and this I find interesting - I have had more luck with factory loads in the 180gr bullet territory, whereas I see others have had better luck in the lower grain territory, 155 and below. Same twist different story. Condor what I plan on doing is building loads around (starting below and working up to or above) peoples' favorite loads, and I plan on doing ALOT of it so the more information the merrier!
 
Right on. Keep in mind Metal god's revelation of Federal's Gold Metal Match loads with 43.5 gr 4064 and the Sierra 168 gr HPBT bullet. Lyman handbook 49th edition indicates 42.5 gr as the midpoint between min and max for that bullet/powder combination, so the Gold Metal load is one grain above the midpoint. I would be very interested in working up to that load. You have, I believe, the bullet and powder.
 
I have the Tikka T3 Lite with same 11 twist. Mine shoots 165s sos so. 168s a little better and shines with 178 Amax and almost any 180 grain bullet. Especially the 180 grain Barnes TTSX. I use about 10 different powders and the IMR 4064 , Varget and H 4350 have all done me well. All mine like the proposed loads that show around 2650 to 2700 fps. The Barnes bullets like a little more jump than the Noslers and Sierras do. I seat most at 2.810 but back the Barnes up to 2.765. My best groups in all bullets have come from the new Enduron IMR 4451. Also works great helping copper fouling. Good luck. They are dandy rifles. Got to love that slick bolt. Just a FYI, the seating length is the longest my magazine will hold and I have loaded some longer and closer to the lands but mag length has given me more accuracy.
 
Paddycakes,

I'd be happy to share individual loads with you but I don't think it will really help find your magic loads.

I am shooting two 1:10 twist .308 Savages.
They both have 24 inch barrels but one has a 2 inch muzzle brake and the other doesn't. The best loads for each with the same powder and bullet are different. One thing is for certain, my best loads are all in the middle of the load tables - velocity is a great seller for factory ammo, but it doesn't give you the best accuracy in most rifles - at least all the rifles that I shoot - regardless of caliber.

Your Tikka comes in a barrel that is either a medium (570) 22.44 inches or medium MT (510mm) 20.08 inches. The difference in barrel length will change the barrel's dynamic and probably change the loads that work the best. They surely won't be the same as the loads the yield the best results in my Savages with 24 inch barrels. You'll need to first identify what barrel length you have before you try to use anyone elses pet loads.

I could give you load data for either rifle but it almost certainly won't match your particular rifle's potentially best loads. If you still want load data, PM me.

My advice is to pick the powder and bullet that you want to optimize and find the velocity range that your rifle likes. Find out what weight bullets your rifle prefers with a particular powder (it might vary with powders since powder burn rates are different and short barrels like slightly faster burn rates).

Then experiment with seating depth until you get the best, consistent results. Use the average group size, not the best group to figure out what is the most consistent. The median value and standard deviation for a load will give you the best idea of what really works best.
(Hint: An Excel spreadsheet is a great tool to figure average, median and standard deviation values out from the same data entries.)
The Savage magazine allows at least 2.920 OAL so I can seat the bullets just about as far out as I need to.

The Tikka's magazine depth may be shorter and might restrict how far out you can seat your bullets. Seating depth can change velocity and accuracy results, depending upon your rifle.
 
Last edited:
Rimfire5,

Thanks for putting up all the data.

Two questions:

How many shots per group were you firing? (Looking for the standard error.)

What method did you use for the pressure wave determination? Chris Long's Excel calculator assumes one speed of sound in steel that seems to be a good sort of generalization, but misses with some barrels. I can see the reflected waves on a Pressure Trace output. I also can measure it on the oscilloscope with a piezo transducer glued to the muzzle, but that's a bother to set up and remove.


Paddycakes,

Take a look at Dan Newberry's OCW site for ideas on how to work on load development. If you are willing to sink the money in, for $75 the On Target software maker has a program called TDS or Target Data System. It has you print targets from its library, then scan them after firing. It scores them for you and then can combine a number of targets and evaluate the differences to give you either an OCW or an Audette ladder result.
 
Last edited:
A Tikka T3 Lite is a hunting rifle, not a target rifle. Ain't the same thing and there's really no comparison.
Match 168gr HPBT(including A-Max) bullets, of any brand, are not for hunting anything but paper and varmints. So if you're working up a deer/bear/moose/elk load you need a different bullet.
"...the pulled powder & IMR 4064 side by side..." The only thing you can tell about a powder by looking at it is the colour and shape of the grains.
 
I started my .308 Win reloading a few months back, with 168 gr Nosler Custom Competition bullets, Fed 210 primers and IMR-4064, and stopped at 42.5 gr of IMR-4064. I have also tried some IMR-8208XBR, Ramshot TAC, and Varget along with Hornady and Sierra bullets, but haven't really found anything better than my chosen IMR-4064 load. To be fair, the others are decent, but I just feel the IMR-4064 load with either the Nosler or Sierra 168 gr Match bullet is my choice for my Savage Model10T, as well as my son's Savage 12FV.
 
...the pulled powder & IMR 4064 side by side..." The only thing you can tell about a powder by looking at it is the colour and shape of the grains.
Click to expand...

Well that and the fact based on a few credible sources here at TFL that Fed GMM did use IMR 4064 and did switch to RL-15 for awhile . The scuttle butt is the RL-15 had pressure issues in high heat environments . I use both powders and what I pulled is not RL-15 and would seem to indicate they went back to IMR 4064 .

The pulled powder is on the left and is not as dark as the 4064 . My thought on that is I had that powder pulled and out looking at it then kept in a jar then pulled out again exposed for a week . then put away again . I did not take that pic for months after pulling the powder . I believe it discolored a tad in that time . I since have thrown it out .
 
Some of that comes from information on Federal's development of the Mk 316 m.0 sniper ammo. M118LR uses Reloader 15 (see the brag about this on Alliant's site together with their description of Reloader 15; since ATK owns Alliant and operates the Lake City plant on contract, they should know). That M118LR was dropped for the M24 rifle system due to pressure increases in desert temperatures is generally known. That Federal, despite also being owned by ATK, developed the Mk 316 load with IMR4064 is stated in one of ATK's power point presentations I found converted to PDF format on line.

That Federal also uses IMR4064 in GMM .308 ammo is the reason they knew they would like it for Mk. 316. I pulled down a box sometime around 15 or 20 years ago of the 168 grain SMK GMM ammo and got the same 43.5 grain charge weight. Further, Federal rates it at 2650 fps from a SAAMI test barrel. When I put the load into QuickLOAD using Federal case water capacity and the same 24" SAAMI standard barrel length, the velocity prediction was 2648 fps. So if that powder in the GMM isn't 4064, it is something closer to it than any other powder I'm familiar with.

In .30 Caliber, IMR4064 has lower gain in velocity per grain than any of the 4895's. This is why it shows less sensitivity to small charge weight errors than many other powders. That indifference to small charge weight errors is why it also has better temperature immunity. Varget is even better in these regards, but so much better that you can't always use enough to get to the best tuned velocity with it. This, I believe, is why you find some guns do best with Varget, but others just won't tune in with it.

Federal has done a very good job of making GMM that shoots well across a variety of chamber dimensions. Some attempts on this board to get handloads that do as well, even using the exact same components, have not all gone well. Federal really seems to have figured this ammo out, and it is why I use their ammunition as an accuracy reference point to compare my handload efforts against. I can better it in my guns, but I'm having to dot some "i's" and cross some "t's" to do it that Federal seems to get away without fussing with. General thinking is that this has to do with their brass being new each time, a factor that the military marksmanship units have found to be an advantage in general.
 
Thanks Unclenick :

I knew there were some specifics to this I just could not recall what they were . For me It's just one of those thing you've read about from reputable sources , done a few test to confirm and now have reason to believe it's true . I may not have remembered the specifics but do understand the conclusion of the research .

Your articulation sure sounds better then my " hey trust me I read it on the internet " :D
 
Last edited:
Unclenick,

At the risk of hijacking this thread:

Groups sizes:
I generally shoot 5 round groups at 100 yards using an F-class bipod and rear bag for my measurements.
Sometimes I use 3 round groups when I am trying to find loads with a new rifle or new powder that would warrant focusing upon in detail but those results are just to get close to loads that might be worth really focusing on.

Wave Front analysis:
I have analyzed 8 different rifles with barrel steel (18916 fps), carbon steel (19107 fps), stainless steel (20,000 fps), and 416R stainless steel (21,000 fps). Each of the barrels have 'manufacturer spec barrel lengths' but that could be off by at least 0.1 inches or more based upon how they were cut on an assembly line.
The reflection speeds listed for the types of steel are averages based upon materials manuals and a particular batch of steel can have somewhat different reflection speeds.

One rifle has a muzzle brake and one rifle has a flash hider (both aluminum alloy) that complicates the reflection calculation. The reflection speeds of aluminum alloys vary greatly and they don't tell you the alloy that they use.

Given all that variation, it turns out that you can still find the 'exit time' for an individual rifle barrel by experimentation.

I start with a powder-bullet combination (having found a good range of powder loads for a particular rifle also considering trim length and OAL). Then I use QuickLoad to estimate the exit time for the nominal barrel length.
That gets me in the ball park, so I can bracket loads and vary OAL and trim length so I can get close to the estimated exit time and then get results to find the 'exit time' that works for the rifle barrel.

I have 3 rifles that fit the model and are about 0.005 of 0.006 msec off the calculated exit times. One other rifle is within 0.001 msec. The muzzle brake barrel is off by about 0.023 msec which I attribute to picking the wrong alloy for the muzzle brake material.

Overall, my results have improved immensely using the wave front analysis.
With the 10 FP new barrel, 24 of the top 25 loads are tuned to the wave front, some are off the wave front by a few thousandths of a msec but they are still better than the loads that were off by 30 thousandths (before I stumbled upon the wave front approach).

With the 10 FCP-K with the muzzle brake, 21 of the top 25 loads are tuned to the wave front, but the best loads are the ones that are about 0.023 msec off the estimated wave front calculation.

I also got really good results with my Les Baer .223 (another really accurate rifle).

So far, I have found that the wave front tuning can provide about 0.1 to 0.15 inch improvement in group size at 100 yards once you find the real exit time that the barrel likes. The accuracy around the 'real exit time' is still relatively close to the 'best'. The accuracy begins to visibly degrade as you get about 0.030 msec off the exit time that works best.

The wave front analysis seems to apply when you start with a really accurate rifle. The data is a lot harder if not impossible to correlate when the rifle you are shooting inserts variations that are equal or greater than the contributions that might be gainedfrom tuning the wave front.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top