Why Register?Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.
Welcome to Field & Stream!
Question by gman1. Uploaded on July 15, 2011
There is no substitute for putting rounds downrange and proving actual zero. DEP addressed this in one of the latest Gun Nuts episodes, observing that some guns for whatever reason do not consult with ballistics tables for their POI.
No other way to truly know that I know of than to figure out what ammo you are going to use, make sure your gun digest it and shoots it acceptably, and then shoot at 100 and 300 to absolutely prove it hits the mark and groups consistently. Without doing that before going in the woods after critters, I'd say at best you would be running on luck.
with out knowing the drop of that round at 300 its hard to say
According to my ballistics tables, if your rifle is sighted in for 2 1/2 inches high at 100 yards, your POI at 300 yards would be 5 1/2 inches low.
So I would think that 3 inches high at 100 yards would be close enough up to 300 yrds with an eight inch kill zone.
I am assuming that you do not have a 300 yard range to determine this exactly with your rifle and ammunition.
sgaredneck...I get your point, but this question instantly piqued my interest because I certainly don't have a range where I can shoot 300 yards. It's hard to find 100 yard ranges around here. Obviously actually putting rounds down range at 300 yard targets is the best way, but for many of us I am guessing that simply isn't an option.
According to Barnes, the .308, 180gr TSX BT, has a Ballistic Coefficient (BC) of .453 so you can use that info along with the expected muzzle velocity in almost any exterior ballistics program to get the expected downrand trajectory.
From the Barnes website:
Bullet Weight: 180 gr Case Trim Length: 2.610" Bullet Style: TSX BT, B.C. 0.453
Primer: Federal GM215M
Barrel Length: 24"
Case: Winchester Twist Rate: 1:10"
IMR 4831, @ 65.0gr 2784fps, @ 71.0gr 2995fps
RL 22, @ 67.0gr 2803fps, @ 73.0gr 3009fps
At a muzzle velocity of 2900 fps, 4000 feet above sea level, 55 Degrees F, you would need to sight 4 inches high at 100 yards for a 300 yard zero.
Looks like 3 inches high at 100 yards will put you about 3 inches low at 300 using that handloads calculator in Crooked_Sticks post with a 1.5 inch height for the scope.
So the bullet would neither rise nor fall more than 3 inches out to 300 yards. Point blank range.
99, that's what it looks like when entering the data into that ballistic calculator.
Using the one at Hornady gives the same results with a 260 yard zero with a 2900fps muzzle velocity.
50 yards = 1.3 inches high
100 yards = 3.0
200 yards = 2.8
300 yards = -3.0
400 yards = -15.4
500 yards = -35.3
that's right about what i get when actually shooting at 300 yds with the same round out of my .300 win mag.
What's interesting is the Federal Premium Barnes 130 grain TSX factory load.
They show a muzzle velocity of 3500 fps with that lighter bullet! At a BC of .340 and a 320 yard zero:
50 yards = 1.2 inches high
100 yards = 3.0
200 yards = 4.2
300 yards = 1.2
400 yards = -6.8
500 yards = -21.3
I'm not an elk hunter but that flatter shooting 130gr TSX would catch my interest if I planned on going after the critters!
I don't understand this thread. The post was asking about the .300 win mag, then someone started discussing the .308 which is not even in the same league. And I'm almost certain that you can't buy a 130 grain bullet for a .300 win mag so what the heck are you guys talking about?
Jay, the .300 Winchester Magnum uses .308 diameter bullets.
Here's a link to Federal's page with the 130 grain TSX load:
I'll be damned, that is one smoking hot load. Thanks for the clarification PigHunter. I thought crooked_creek got side tracked when he mentioned the .308; didn't dawn on me he was discussing actual bullet size.
My pleasure. It is a smoking load for sure! Like I said, I'm not an Elk hunter and am wondering how well that bullet would perform on such a large animal. Neither do I have experience with the .300 Win Mag. There's no doubt the solid nature of the all copper bullet would tend to keep it together upon impact even at those velocities. I've done some minor web search and can't find any performance reviews on that loading.
Sounds lik Clays M.o.P.P. ( For newbies Minute of Pie Plate works well enough to score a hit there!
If you haven't shot the rifle at 300 yards you have no business shooting at animals at 300 yards.
A 130 grain bullet is inappropriate for long range shooting and inappropriate for elk no matter how pumped up you are over how fast your muzzle velocity is. A 130 grain .30 cal bullet loses energy fast and gets tossed all around by the wind. A slower, heavier bullet will hit harder and penetrate deeper at any range.
Shane, it really depends upon the bullet construction. Apparently Elk have been killed with 130 grain bullets travelling much slower out of the 270.
Jack O'Connor wrote of his taking grizzly, zebra, kudu, sable, and elk: "If there is any difference on such animals between the 130 grain and 150 grain .270 bullets and the 180 grain .30-06 bullet, I have yet to detect it."
Here's what Petzel said one time: "I have yet to see any real difference in killing power between the 130-, 140-, and 150-grain .270 loads. There are big differences, however, in bullet make and type."
According to Federal, the 130 grain TSX load referenced is still travelling over 2600 fps at 300 yards with over 2000 ft-lbs of energy. That is more than adequate for reliable expansion.
a 130 gr from a .300 win mag would be plenty to take elk.
There is a difference between a 130 grain .277 bullet and a 130 grain .308 bullet. A thing called Sectional Density. The .277 of the same weight has a higher SD. High SD means better penetration.
Any elk guide service will recommend a heavy for caliber bullet like a 180, 190, or 200 grain in .30 caliber, or even a 225 or 250 in a .338. They pass on the 150 grainers. Those are deer bullets. So why does a 130 .308 suddenly sound like a good idea? Just because the cartridge pushing it has the word Magnum doesn't overcome a light for caliber bullet.
Shane, I admitted to have never hunted Elk. And thus, I'm tickled pink to communicate with someone like you who is so knowledgeable about sectionional densities and such technical stuff. How many Elk have you killed? What can you tell us about the performances of the caliber/bullets you used, range of shot, etc.? Can hardly wait for your answer...
I'm not so sure that I would use a 130 grain 7mm or .308 caliber on elk. Most of those short, light bullets have a low B.C. and don't keep a good head of steam at longer ranges. Low Sectional Density also. But a fast 150 grainer is about minumum for me, JMHO...
As a follow-up I sent an email to Barnes about the 130 grain load. Here was my question:
"Federal Premium has a .300 Winchester Magnum loading of your 130 grain TSX. Would this bullet be adequate for Elk? Have you tested it on Elk?"
Here is the answer back from Barnes:
"I believe that is their Hyper Velocity load. They were tested on large plains game in Africa and are capable of taking an elk within a reasonable distance (to about 400yds)."
Fieldandstream.com is part of the Field & Stream Network, a division of Bonnier Corporation.
Copyright © 2012 Bonnier Corp. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.