handload

[barrytodd1]

best 1000 yd hand load for 308 with 1/12 twist

 

[jwrowland77]

Case: Win
Powder: 2000-MR
Primer: CCI BR2
Bullet: Hornday 178gr BTHP Match

OAL: 3.000"

I'm not going to give powder charge on here.

This was for my 26" Rem 700 1:12 twist. Avg MV was 2750fps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mmorris]

Do you reload now?

 

[ArchAngelCD]

best 1000 yd hand load for 308 with 1/12 twist

Welcome to the forum. It would have been nice if you said hello first and then actual ask a question instead of making a demand.

It us impossible to tell you what will be most accurate in your gun at 100 yards let alone at 1000 yards. I would truly like to help you but it's no joke every rifle is different. I have an old surplus 30-06 that shoots sub MOA with a load where as another newer 30-06 won't group 2 MOA with the same exact load.

 

[Bart B.]

Here's the loads that I and dozens of other top ranked competitors have used to shoot the best scores at 1000 yards. All with 1:12 twist barrels, 22, 24 and 26 inch ones. They'll do well in your rifle if it's a good one.

* Good cases sorted into 2 grain spreads of weight. New cases should do well. Full length size and set fired case shoulders back .002". FL die with a bushing .002" smaller than loaded round neck diameter. Seat bullets so they're close to the lands.

* Good primer; Tulammo LR is as good as they get these days. CCI BR are sometimes good.

* Sierra match bullets (Berger's may well equal them)
...168 grain with 44 grains of IMR4064 or 41 to 43 grains for ranges up to 300 yards.
...175 or 180 grain with 42 grains of IMR4895 or 43 grains of IMR4064.
...185 or 190 grain with 42 grains of IMR4064 or 44 grains of IMR4320 (24 & 26 inch barrels only).
...200 grain with 48 grains of IMR4350 (26 inch or longer barrels).

Busts the myth that all rifles are different. And proves OCW or OBT load workup is not needed. I've shot them and seen them produce winning scores and setting records across all sorts of rifles and barrels. They were what I used wearing out several barrels in M1 Garands as well as Win 70's.

I'm convinced that most people think all rifles are different and need a unique load is because they test with one or two few-shot groups and pick the smallest ones to load. I never worked up any of these loads; just got them from others who used them very successfully.

Shoot at least 20 shots per test group so you'll have statistically significant results to see how you did. Remember that 25% of the accuracy is the load, 25% the rifle and 50% the shooter holding the rifle.

How long is your barrel? What rifle has it?

 

[WestKentucky]

With the given info about the best we can do is guess. What platform of rifle, barrel length, etc. brag about the gun to tell us the specs and upgrades. Barrel twist rate is important to know.

So my answer to your question is going to be your favorite powder in your favorite volume under your favorite bullet with good primers and cases with good neck tension.

 

[Phlier]

Welcome to the forum. It would have been nice if you said hello first and then actual ask a question instead of making a demand.

It us impossible to tell you what will be most accurate in your gun at 100 yards let alone at 1000 yards. I would truly like to help you but it's no joke every rifle is different. I have an old surplus 30-06 that shoots sub MOA with a load where as another newer 30-06 won't group 2 MOA with the same exact load.

Well, it does show he posted via TapaTalk, and if he's like me, he hates trying to tap out forum posts via phone. Probably just a hurried post he made while mobile.

With the given info about the best we can do is guess. What platform of rifle, barrel length, etc. brag about the gun to tell us the specs and upgrades. Barrel twist rate is important to know.

So my answer to your question is going to be your favorite powder in your favorite volume under your favorite bullet with good primers and cases with good neck tension.

He did at least give his barrel twist

 

[Grumulkin]

They'll do well in your rifle if it's a good one.

A good qualification.

Good primer; Tulammo LR is as good as they get these days. CCI BR are sometimes good.

I hadn't thought of Tulammo primers as particularly good. I'll have to try some if I ever see them on the shelf of a gun store. CCI BR4 primers are what I use in my 223s and 204 Ruger.

Busts the myth that all rifles are different.

Though I agree with you, you'll probably have problems busting that myth. It's kind of like the "flier" myth that helps one rationalize not so good precision. There has to be a reason that certain powders for certain cartridges come up again and again.

 

[Bart B.]

I don't think I have a problem busting that "flier" myth once non-believers finally realize they're rolling several pairs of dice with every shot fired. Each pair represents a variable in rifle, ammo and shooter; a 7 on a pair is the zero point in a variable, a 2 and 12 represent maximum variance in both directions on a line across a clock face. Some variables are more horizontally (9 to 3 o'clock max) and others vertically (6 to 12 o'clock max). We don't roll 7's all the time nor box cars or snake eyes either with each pair.

The reason certain powders are often listed as "best" is because they produce more gentle bullet entry into the rifling and uniform pressure curves during barrel time. That produces minimum bullet deformation, uniform barrel whipping amounts and muzzle velocities.

 

[Walkalong]

While some rifles are finicky, the ammo companies are able to load "match" ammo that works in a lot of guns. Of course not all guns will shoot "match" ammo well, either because for some reason they just don't like it, or they just aren't capable of shooting that well.

So, we can suggest loads that stand a good chance of shooting well for someone. Naturally, someone (Joe Blow, Sierra, etc, etc) had to work those loads up at one time.

I also bought some Wolf, and more recently, Tula LR primers, as they were being touted as being very good, but have not tried them yet.

I am shooting 168s and RL-15 in .308 and am happy with it. I am not a serious long range shooter. I have only used it in a couple of 300 yard (reduced target) F Class matches, and for playing at the range. I am running the 168s in the neighborhood of 2725 to 2750 FPS.

 

[Orcon]

Shoot at least 20 shots per test group so you'll have statistically significant results to see how you did.

You keep saying this. Why stop at 20? Why not 40 or 100 or more? Hell, if you put enough lead down range in a single session you're bound to find that every rifle is about 8 MOA. Load up in groups of three, pick the ones that show promise and load up 6 of each to verify and then load up 20 and fire for group.

Sometimes it's not cost effective and sometimes near impossible to find components that the competition guys use. What's wrong with working up a load with components more readily available and usually less expensive?

 

[Walkalong]

Why not 100? Because it isn't needed, and as you say, runs up the cost. There is no shortcut to making sure you and your gun are shooting up to a level that will be competitive. Benchrest folks tend to shoot aggregates to see how they and their gun are doing. That is 5, 5 shot groups, or 25 rounds. If you shoot a couple of aggregates and are where you want to be, you're good to go. The cost of competing at a high level is such that the cost of a few aggregates getting ready for matches is a small percentage of the overall cost.

We like to throw out the tiny groups and brag, I do it myself, but if you and your gun can't shoot well over many rounds, you'll lose every time. Think about how many rounds you will shoot in a weekend competition and how much a couple of errant shots will hurt you in the standings, and it will give you a better understanding of why you need to know that you and your rifle can "shoot small" for many rounds.

The one on the left (5 rounds) is cool, and good for bragging, but the one on the right (25 total rounds over five groups) is a much bigger accomplishment.

 

[Bart B.]

... if you put enough lead down range in a single session you're bound to find that every rifle is about 8 MOA.

Really?

Then all of us should stop testing our reloads. What's amazing to me is how all the rifles are 8 MOA ones. There must be a consortium in the industry to make them all that way. Who's going to convince the ammo component makers to quit testing them? That should lower their cost and hopefully retail prices, too.

Too bad the arsenals tested 30-06 and 7.62 NATO match ammo with 270-shot groups at 600 yards. Would liked to see one 4 feet (8 MOA) extreme spread. Then center it over a 600 yard target with a 1 foot 10-ring. A waste of time.

 

[Orcon]

The hyperbole was for effect. The point being, the more shots taken the larger the group size will invariably be. You keep promoting this idea of picking an arbitrary charge, load up 20 and shoot it and if it doesn't work that's on the shooter. How is that a productive approach to finding an accurate load?

 

[Bart B.]

How credible is one group to represent real accuracy level?

Single group size times max/min multiplier equals approximate size limits of 19 out of 20 groups fired with different numbers of shots per group.

Shots/.......Multipliers
Group.......Max......Min
3............ 2.45.... .40
5............ 1.53.... .67
10.......... 1.27..... .81
20.......... 1.12..... .89
30.......... 1.09..... .92
50.......... 1.06..... .95

Examples:

If first 5-shot group is 1 inch extreme spread, 19 out of 20 will be from 1.53 inch to .67 inch.

If first 3-shot group is 1 inch, 19 of 20 will be from 2.45 inch and .40 inch.

 

[rduckwor]

" I also bought some Wolf, and more recently, Tula LR primers, as they were being touted as being very good, but have not tried them yet."

I bought the last 10K of Wolf LRP and SRP I could find now that dear leader has cut off the supply.

PRIMER TEST 6/5/2015 82 deg/72%
WOLF CCI REM
2648 2629 2626
2632 2634 2639
2637 2635 2644
2630 2641 2641

SD 8.06 4.98 7.94
MEAN 2636 2633.6 2637.5
ES 18 12 18

A little test I ran with 44.4 Varget/Lapua/SMK 175. Don't attribute too much to the difference in SD and ES.

I like them but will have to go back to CCI once they're gone.

The test was a .308, but they helped me do this at 1K with a 6.5CM.


RMD

 

[Walkalong]

* Sierra match bullets (Berger's may well equal them)
...175 or 180 grain with 42 grains of IMR4895 or 43 grains of IMR4064.
...185 or 190 grain with 42 grains of IMR4064 or 44 grains of IMR4320 (24 & 26 inch barrels only).

By the way Bart, what are they shooting with 168 Gr match bullets? Thanks

 

[Bart B.]

Walkalong, I updated that earlier post with data for 168's.

If my memory is good, I think Gary Anderson used a mild charge of IMR3031 under Sierra's then new 168 Int'l bullets leaving 2200 fps from a 1:12 twist .308 Win barrel to win the gold medal in the 1958 Tokyo Olympics' 300 meter free rifle match.

Military teams pulled bullets from 7.62 M80 ammo made at LC with 42 grains of IMR4475 then stuffed Sierra 168's in them. Shot much more accurate than any M118 ammo and better than most commercial match stuff in M1 and M14 rebuilt rifles. M80 ammo with ball powder under 168's was a mild disaster accuracy wise.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Very good information Bart, thank you.

Good shooting there Walkalong. I don't think I ever saw those plaques.

 

[Bart B.]

JWRowland,

Will the load you posted with 2000MR ball powder shoot 20 of those Hornady 178's inside 7 inches at 1000 yards? If so, it's the first time I know of for any ball powder doing that well.

Why keep the charge weight a secret?

Meanwhile......

One thing I've observed over the years is people testing reloads with one or two few-shot groups have a very wide range of load specifics and typically judge accuracy by the smallest groups shot. People winning matches and setting records shooting several 10 to 20 shot strings have a very narrow range of load specifics and typically judge accuracy by the largest groups shot.