some chrono readings and eating a little crow.

[Lloyd Smale]

Ive got 3 new guns ive been working up loads with and found a good accurate load and took the chrono out to check them. A 300 ultra 26 inch barreled bdl. A 24 inch barreled 300 H&H classic and an abolt 22 inch 300 wsm. Ive allways been one that preached the short mag <deleted> was well, just that <deleted> but the chrono doesnt lie. the 300 h&h and the wsm were loaded with 4350 to the point i got pressure signs and then backed off one grain of powder. I wont list the load as its at least with the h&h well over listed data. Both were loaded with 150 hornady sst tipped bullets. Average for 5 shots put the H&H at 3125 and the wsm at 3185 so i got 60 more fps out of a 2 inch shorter barrel. Got to be something to the short mag <deleted>. the ultra was loaded with 97 grains of re25 and a 168 tssx. Never had any pressure signs but that load shot so good i stopped there. It went 3425 for an average so dont let anyone fool you into thinking its a waste of powder. You arent getting to that level with any of the smaller 300s and id save that 250-300 fps with a 18 grain heavier bullet is a big step up in horse power. Ill add too that theres probably a bit more to be had if I wanted to take the time

 

[hardluk1]

Have you tried rl22 powder. I guy a ran into at a now closed 1000 yard range was working up to some max loads with a 165gr Amax and was recording them just over 3900fps and still showing no signs of pressure. He did have a 27" kreiger barrel so in extra inch and a better grade of brarrel. Good enough for 2 1/2" at 400 yards too.

 

[stubbicatt]

97 grains of powder.... I cannot imagine. 45 grains or thereabouts is about my recoil ceiling for individual tolerance. It seems to me that at 97 grains retina separation would be likely to occur.

Have fun!

 

[jmr40]

The 300 WSM is the real deal. It will never be as classy as the H&H, and it won't match the really big 300's, but it comes within 50-100 fps of the 300 WM with some other added benefits. I've never tried 150's in any of the 300's but I'm getting about 3125 with 165's from my 300 WSM and I'm still 2.5 gr under a max load with Reloder 17. I could push it to over 3200 fps. A 150 is projected to hit 3340 fps with a max load of Reloder 17.

http://www.alliantpowder.com/reload...wderlist.aspx&type=1&powderid=25&cartridge=83

I see the 300 WSM as a 300WM in a 308 size package with hot 30-06 recoil. You do give up about 50 fps compared to the WM, but can do it with about 15% less powder. The powder difference along with slight loss of velocity brings recoil down to the point where it basically splits the difference between 30-06 and 300 WM. I've also found the WSM's to be more accurate.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

Im sure re17 would net me a bit more then 4350 but it just doesnt shoot as well in my gun. keep in mind too im only dealing with a 22 inch barrel on this one.

 

[shootr]

That's impressive - and the real world testing I find very helpful. Thx for posting!

 

[Boxhead]

I would be very surprised that, when loaded to same measured pressures in equal length barrels, the velocity difference would be any greater than what the variability in chamber cut, bore dimensions and the like would allow. Actually more than very surprised. From a bit that I have read it does appear that Hodgdon's Superformance may be one of the "magical" powders for the Wizzum.

 

[stubbicatt]

Where are you guys finding RL 17?

 

[joed]

I like to see these real world numbers. The H&H is terribly under loaded now days because of some of the older rifles out there. But the velocity you got doesn't seem that high for a 150 gr bullet. Mine out of a 24" barrel Classic does that speed with a 168 gr bullet and using load manual data.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

JOED i have no doubt i could probably run 165s to the same velocitys using a tad slower powder. I was just trying to get a comparison between the short mag and the H&H. I loaded both till i started getting stick extraction and backed off two grains with 4350 using the same bullet. Many times a larger capacity mag round isnt all that effecient with lighter bullets. Kind of like comparing the 308 and o6. the 308 will usually run with the o6 using 150s but step up to 165 or heavier bullets and the larger powder capacity of the 06 is an advantage. I guess the point i was trying to make more then anything is that for years i laughed at all the guys with there short mags thinking they had a round equal to the 300 win. I have to eat a bit of crow as i believe the 300 wsm is probably capable of running right with a 300 win with some creative loading.

 

[joed]

Loyd, I know what you mean. But, I bet you would not have been surprised with the results if you'd have tried 180 gr bullets. From what I've seen the short cartridges see to suffer with the heavy bullets.

All I've ever used in mine is IMR4350 though I have RL17, RL19 and RL22.

 

[jmorris]

97 grains of powder.... I cannot imagine. 45 grains or thereabouts is about my recoil ceiling for individual tolerance. It seems to me that at 97 grains retina separation would be likely to occur.

Some of my 50 BMG loads use over 250g of powder and the rifle has less recoil than some 30-06 loads out of a 742.

In short, there is more to it than just powder charge.

 

[Casefull]

Thanks for sharing your data. I am working up a load for my kimber Montana wsm.

 

[Lloyd Smale]

joed i dont really have a need for 180s out of the short mag. I load my ultra and wby 300s with 180s and my 300 win and wsm get fed 165s. I use them mostly for long range deer hunting so i dont need the heavier bullet for penetration and kind of like the hit like lightning strikes a 165 gives on deer way out there. As to recoil the ultra is a 26 inch gun with a bit of weight to it and i dont think it kicks much more then the little 22 inch wsm does.

 

[joed]

Lloyd, that's a unique concept having more than 1 .300 mag. Can't fault you on that one at all. I'd probably do the same if I had a few guns in the same caliber.