JollyD
Member
Prodigal son here. Only a few posts months ago then life happened. Any way:
I just bought a TRG-S (close to mint) in 300 win mag in black. When in Alaska I had the same rifle except in 338 Win Mag with stainless barrel. I loved that rifle, would shoot hole for hole with Accubond 215 (I think they quit making them) and as a friend of my father would say "I love a 338 'cause you can eat right up to the hole." And I found that to be true even with a shoulder shot there was minimal blood meat. When I left Alaska for Virginia I sold it...and as most Sako sales I have regretted it ever sense. But now happy again with the new (to me) 300 WM.
I know as a rule 300 WM are loaded hotter with lighter bullets (TRG-S is 300 WM 1:11" twist) and I have heard horror stories of guys who shoot deer with 300 WM and light bullets and they look like a varmint kill. so did some looking on line and came across the article from rifle shooter magazine. Worth reading if it hasn't been posted before. A study of 8 big game bullets with 180 grain in 300 WM.
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammo/ballistics-test-best-300-win-mag-loads-market/
Any way make sense if shooting whitetail with 300 WM a more structurally stable/sound bullet is better. So I bought some 165 Hornady Interbond as they scored pretty high in the test. Using the Hornady Ballistic Calculator and the newer Berger Bullet to twist calculator, except for Nosler Partition in either 180 or 200 the 165 on paper was best (also cheaper than the Partitions) When I go back Up-Top I will work up the Partition 200 grn loads. But for now I am gonna work up loads for the 165 and scale them down a bit.
OK, I'm getting to the point:
While on the Midway site I saw they had some 125 Accubond on sale cheap like $16 a 50 so I bought a couple boxes thinking they would be kinder on the shoulder putting in some trigger time on the new gun. I had to save some money, couldn't afford another Swarovski at the time so got a good deal on the Burris Veracity 2 x10x42. A first focal plane scope with their fancy ballistic reticle. That said I started looking at IMR load data for 4350 and 4831, Hornady's Ballistic Calculator, and the ballistic program for the Burris scope. Now this is just on paper as I don't have bullets yet:
Found, again on paper, that if you load the 125 AB to 3100 and the 165 IB at 3000, comparing the ballistic data from the two programs the vertical drop rate is almost identical, at least in regards to hunting. The greatest discrepancy was .71" going from 100-500 yards.
So theoretically if you load as described above you should be able to sight the rifle in on 165 for deer hunting and if you wanted use the 125 for trigger time or on Coyote. Now finally the question:
What is the percentage of the time that this works in reality?
I apologize or being so verbose and/or asking a question that has been asked a 100 times.
Thanks in advance for your patience and responses,
Joel
I just bought a TRG-S (close to mint) in 300 win mag in black. When in Alaska I had the same rifle except in 338 Win Mag with stainless barrel. I loved that rifle, would shoot hole for hole with Accubond 215 (I think they quit making them) and as a friend of my father would say "I love a 338 'cause you can eat right up to the hole." And I found that to be true even with a shoulder shot there was minimal blood meat. When I left Alaska for Virginia I sold it...and as most Sako sales I have regretted it ever sense. But now happy again with the new (to me) 300 WM.
I know as a rule 300 WM are loaded hotter with lighter bullets (TRG-S is 300 WM 1:11" twist) and I have heard horror stories of guys who shoot deer with 300 WM and light bullets and they look like a varmint kill. so did some looking on line and came across the article from rifle shooter magazine. Worth reading if it hasn't been posted before. A study of 8 big game bullets with 180 grain in 300 WM.
http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammo/ballistics-test-best-300-win-mag-loads-market/
Any way make sense if shooting whitetail with 300 WM a more structurally stable/sound bullet is better. So I bought some 165 Hornady Interbond as they scored pretty high in the test. Using the Hornady Ballistic Calculator and the newer Berger Bullet to twist calculator, except for Nosler Partition in either 180 or 200 the 165 on paper was best (also cheaper than the Partitions) When I go back Up-Top I will work up the Partition 200 grn loads. But for now I am gonna work up loads for the 165 and scale them down a bit.
OK, I'm getting to the point:
While on the Midway site I saw they had some 125 Accubond on sale cheap like $16 a 50 so I bought a couple boxes thinking they would be kinder on the shoulder putting in some trigger time on the new gun. I had to save some money, couldn't afford another Swarovski at the time so got a good deal on the Burris Veracity 2 x10x42. A first focal plane scope with their fancy ballistic reticle. That said I started looking at IMR load data for 4350 and 4831, Hornady's Ballistic Calculator, and the ballistic program for the Burris scope. Now this is just on paper as I don't have bullets yet:
Found, again on paper, that if you load the 125 AB to 3100 and the 165 IB at 3000, comparing the ballistic data from the two programs the vertical drop rate is almost identical, at least in regards to hunting. The greatest discrepancy was .71" going from 100-500 yards.
So theoretically if you load as described above you should be able to sight the rifle in on 165 for deer hunting and if you wanted use the 125 for trigger time or on Coyote. Now finally the question:
What is the percentage of the time that this works in reality?
I apologize or being so verbose and/or asking a question that has been asked a 100 times.
Thanks in advance for your patience and responses,
Joel