300 Win Mag Question

[dross]

Have any of you worked up some reduced power loads that come closer to 308 velocities? Are they consistently accurate?

 

[Aszerigan]

What weight bullet? What distance are you shooting? What's your barrel length?

 

[dross]

What weight bullet? What distance are you shooting? What's your barrel length?

Do you think I'm asking you something different than I wrote?

I'm curious if anyone has worked up some reduced loads for the 300 win mag.

How would I possibly know what weight bullet they used, what distance they shot, or the barrel length of their rifle?

 

[Aszerigan]

I was asking about your specs. I was trying to research some data for you on reduced power loads like you were asking. There's no way to answer your question without a little information first. Data for a 20" barrel is not the same as for a 26" barrel. Likewise for 125gn bullets and 190gn bullets.

Just trying to answer your question, but need to pair down a few variables first.

And yes, I know exactly what you're asking.

 

[dross]

I was asking about your specs. I was trying to research some data for you on reduced power loads like you were asking. There's no way to answer your question without a little information first. Data for a 20" barrel is not the same as for a 26" barrel. Likewise for 125gn bullets and 190gn bullets.

Just trying to answer your question, but need to pair down a few variables first.

And yes, I know exactly what you're asking.

Sorry, I had just popped over from the politics forum when I answered you - I was still in battle mode.

What I'm really after is more general, though I appreciate your impulse to do some work on my behalf. I'm thinking of buying a 300 win mag.

I like the capability it gives me, but I won't need that much power for general shooting or deer hunting. But if I decided to shoot at an elk at long range, well, nothing else will do quite so well.

I just thought, "Hey, if I could basically load it like it was a 308, with that level of accuracy, and do 90 percent of my shooting with that load, I could still pop in a full power round if I ever needed it."

It occurs to me that I would then have the world's best all-around rifle.

So what I'm really, really interested to know is if anyone has experience with reduced loads and if they produced outstanding accuracy.

 

[bulldog]

Good question. I have a 300wsm, and reload,but have never worked up any reduced loads. Just like you I think it would make it a more awesome weapon.

 

[Aszerigan]

Ok, taking into account a .300 Win Mag case volume to achieve a .308 Win velocity, Below are a few recipes. Comparing apples to apples, I'm going to stay in the 150gn bullet range.

Average max velocity of .308 Win w/ 150gn bullet is about 2875fps.

For a 300 Win mag in a 24" barrel to achieve this velocity, you could use:

62gns H-380 = 2903fps
71.0gns H4831 = @ 2800 fps
66.0gns H4350 = @ 2800fps
55.0gnd H4895 = @ 2775fps

These are 3-5% below min loads, but I know these powders well enough to know they would be stable to use. I would tend to stay with the higher volume powders as they will give you more consistent ignition in such a large case. Also, using a LR primer instead of a LRM primer will cut the velocity by a few fps. These are probably much more pleasant to shoot.

For the 300WSM, following the same recipe:

Hybrid 100V - 61.0gns = @2850fps
H380 - 58gns = @2850fps
H4895 - 49.0gns = @2775fps

Hope this helps.

 

[rimfire_crazed]

+1 for using higher volume powders. The key to "oustanding accuracy" in a reduced loading is using as much case volume as possible. I've found that moving to LRM primers can tighten things up when using powder charges in the 40-50% capacity range, but YMMV.


All of that being said, It's a terribly inefficient way to burn powder. You will still have almost as much recoil and attendant muzzle blast. 71 grains of 4831 is STILL 71 gr's of powder going boom.

As much as Lee gets a bad rap, they did a LOT of development and pressure testing with reduced .30 cal loads with Varget and 4895, and the math is just as valid on the .300 win mag.

 

[Aszerigan]

71 grains of 4831 is STILL 71 gr's of powder going boom.

Yep, and it's one big boom too. .

 

[rimfire_crazed]

Yep, and it's one big boom too. .

At those levels of recoil vs. expected ballistic performance, it wouldn't add up to me. By the #'s, you're only saving about 5lbs of recoil energy.

At the same time, my 7mm loads are much closer to .280 velocities and I'm accepting the same punishment, so who am I to talk?

 

[gunman41mag]

Sorry, I had just popped over from the politics forum when I answered you - I was still in battle mode.

What I'm really after is more general, though I appreciate your impulse to do some work on my behalf. I'm thinking of buying a 300 win mag.

I like the capability it gives me, but I won't need that much power for general shooting or deer hunting. But if I decided to shoot at an elk at long range, well, nothing else will do quite so well.

I just thought, "Hey, if I could basically load it like it was a 308, with that level of accuracy, and do 90 percent of my shooting with that load, I could still pop in a full power round if I ever needed it."

It occurs to me that I would then have the world's best all-around rifle.

So what I'm really, really interested to know is if anyone has experience with reduced loads and if they produced outstanding accuracy.

If you're going to shoot 308 win. power level 90% of the time buy a 308 win. Cause when you shoot 300 win. mag. you'll have to adjust the scope for the few time you'll be shooting 300 win. mag

 

[booey50]

I would have to look but I have read of using tightgroup in the .300 win mag.
Scratch that this website says trailboss, like 18 grains, don't know how they shoot but still, Cartridge Loads - Hodgdon Reloading Data Center - data.hodgdon.com

 

[Aszerigan]

I would have to look but I have read of using tightgroup in the .300 win mag.
Scratch that this website says trailboss, like 18 grains, don't know how they shoot but still, Cartridge Loads - Hodgdon Reloading Data Center - data.hodgdon.com

You're correct, but that's for shooting very low powered loads. Although they are much more pleasurable to shoot, their bullet dynamics are significantly different. Velocities of 1300-1600fps are comparable to a 10mm handgun.

Trailboss is a fantastic powder for loading slower loads due to its grain construction. The powder structure is much like a donut, light and puffy, so it fills the internal volume of cases better for consistent ignition. I load it in subsonic .223 and .308 all the time. Great stuff.

 

[booey50]

So if he can use trailboss, I do not see a difference in using tightgroupe or unique maybe? Both are "light and fluffy" and can be used to fill the case.

 

[rimfire_crazed]

People used to use unique to fireform cases all the time but i think it would probably be too fast to do any meaningful work in a rifle. There is published data for powders like 2400 and 5744 for reduced recoil loads. Still - he's talking about getting .308 velocities, not handgun velocities. The advice and load data that has been provided above is probably the best possible solution for obtaining .308 Win results in a .300 Win Mag case.

It's still gonna be recoil-y and muzzle blast-y.

 

[Aszerigan]

So if he can use trailboss, I do not see a difference in using tightgroupe or unique maybe? Both are "light and fluffy" and can be used to fill the case.

Oh... not like trail boss. Please see the photos below. They are both 10.0gns of powder, one shown in case (or multiple cases) to show volume, and the other in a pile to show grain structure. That's a .40 S&W case for perspective. The Trailboss is more than twice the grain size as titegroup, so it fills the cases substantially more. Trailboss is much better for light loads.


10.0gns of Titegroup - fills (1) .40 case 75% full

10.0gns of Trailboss - fills (2) .40 cases 100% full

 

[booey50]

thanks for the clear up, I see what you mean...

 

[03A3]

In the late 90's to early 2000's Ken Waters had an article in Handloader Magazine that dealt exclusively with reduced loads for several centerfire rifle cartridges. The 300 Win Mag was one of them, and the loads were equivalent to average .30-06 loads.
The .30-06 loads were equivalent to .300 Savage and so on.
I would bet good money that I saved that issue but I have not been able to find it in quite some time.
This data is not in Ken Waters "Pet Loads" book which I have. And I have done several internet searches to no avail. I have not contacted Handloader Magazine to see if they can come up with a back issue (I don't know what issue it was). I think I have it on an old, damaged laptop (physical damaged/was dropped). Maybe I need a computer tech to retrieve it for me?
If I ever find this data I will post it.
I used the Waters 300 Win Mag data quite a bit. I cannot fathom how I have managed to lose this data and I really wish I had it again.

P.S If anyone does find the old Ken Waters data please let me know.