Here are two "MUC" loads, as my pal Hotcore calls them:

.308 Winchester

175 grain Sierra Matchking
45.0 grains of Varget (work up to this charge, it's max)
Important: CCI BR primer

30-06 Sprg.

165 grain Sierra Gameking
57.5 grains of H4350 (I'm currently using 57.5 grains of IMR 4350 and liking that better)
CCI 200 primer

If you have a .308 or a 30-06 which won't shoot either of these loads into MOA groups you probably have a vegetarian dog to boot!

Guys! You folks who shoot .308's know that the Federal Gold Medal match ammo works extremely well in these rifles. That's ONE recipe, for MANY rifles. So does the Black Hills stuff, nothing but rave reviews from everyone I hear from. One recipe, many rifles.

I can't help the feller with the .338, I've never owned such an animal...

Hotcore, my loading method is an improvement, I believe, of the Audette method in that it allows for more meaningful results, and the data obtained is more useful. Thanks for the compliments, though. I do appreciate that.

And please try either of the above loads in one of your rifles so chambered, and let me know how it goes. And be honest, dammit!

I'm not saying that these would end up being the *ultimate* loads for any rifle, but I am saying that if your rifle won't shoot these recipes well you've got an oddball on your hands.

Thanks for the interest,

Dan Newberry
green 788

I forgot to point something out, which should provide a good example of how things get misunderstood and misreported. Hotcore misquotes me (see the threads above) by inserting "ALL" in place of my words "just about." Here is the text, with bold type emphasis of the words in question:

green 788: "All rifles are different, that's true, but there are a few known recipes that will work well in just about any rifle so chambered...."

Hotcore: "I see a lot of "Experienced Reloaders" in this thread and they already know that there is no such thing as a Magical, Mythical, Mysterious Universal Charge(MUC Load) that works in "ALL" rifles of the same caliber."

I agree that no recipe exists which would work in every single rifle out there, and that's not what I've said. My point is (and those of you with rifles chambered in .308 and 30-06 should be able to confirm the above mentioned recipes for yourselves) that loads do exist which perform well in the vast majority of rifles chambered for them.

If this weren't the case, our military snipers would be in a world of trouble.

My load development method is constructed to allow the handloader to develop what I call the OCW (optimal charge weight) for the recipe he wants to use. So long as there is powder compatibility for the bullet and cartridge in question, there will exist a zone about .5 to 1 grain in duration, near the maximum charge level, which will be the *best* amount of that powder to use in that application. The OCW load development method is designed to find the *middle* of this zone, instead of merely settling for a charge weight that's on the edge of the zone. This allows for a more tolerant load, which isn't as sensitive to brass case variations, minor powder lot inconsistencies, weather--any factor that would bring about a pressure drop or increase in the load. For the .270 win with 130 grain bullets, 55 grains of IMR 4350 is the OCW. With the same 130 grains bullets and H4831, 60 grains is the OCW. These amounts of powder have been established as excellent performers in the 270 win for years, so I can't claim credit for having "discovered" them. However, my load development method does allow the handloader to locate charge weights in their own recipes that will perform well in the majority of rifles so chambered. If you come up with a load that only shoots well in your rifle, you don't have an OCW load.

Of course if your rifle has unconventional tolerances of the chamber and/or barrel, you may not be able to take advantage of these loads--but the vast majority of 270 shooter will enjoy good results. The rifle that won't shoot such a load well is the "vegetarian dog."

One last thing while on the subject of 270's. If you own a 270, go to Walmart and buy an 11 dollar box of Winchester Super X Power Point 130 grain ammo. Take it to the range and shoot a group. From my informal data gathering at this point, odds are about 80% or better that this factory load will perform MOA or better in your rifle. Try it and you'll see.

Now how could Winchester have done that?

Dan Newberry
green 788

Hot Core,

And here I thought you had forgotten all about the lessons about the .338 Win Mag I tried to teach you! LOL
John, for .338 mag, IMO, the 4350 is a bit fast for the bigger bullets. However, it does work for some guys (just not me). If it were me, I would start with H4831SC or RL22 and go from there. You will get a full case, excellent velocities, and I have yet to find a near max load of H4831 in a .338 Win with CCI 250 Primers that wasn't very accurate. Both of my .338's shoot under an inch (nobody would believe how well under) with loads from the Hornady book with Hornady Spire points, Swift Aframes, and Nosler Partitions. In fact, all three bullets (I use 225's) shoot to within 1" of the same POI.
Ah darn, now green788 will question the veracity of my claims and have to start another thread! - Let us know how they come out, as usual- start low and work up. - Sheister

On the contrary, Sheister, you're proving a point I was trying to make earlier when you say:

"Both of my .338's shoot under an inch (nobody would believe how well under) with loads from the Hornady book with Hornady Spire points, Swift Aframes, and Nosler Partitions."

Hornady (and many other bullet and powder manufacturers) has identified some excellent load recipes that they have noted work well in a number of rifles. My load development method merely seeks to find other such loads.

Thanks for the post and participation in the thread,

Dan Newberry
green 788

Hey John Y, Do I smell a Sheister MUC Load?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sheister:
Hot Core, And here I thought you had forgotten all about the lessons about the .338 Win Mag I tried to teach you! LOL

---

Hey Sheister, If you saw me posting "favorably" about a 338 - I deny it. If it was only 0.020" wider, then you would have something!(Does that bring back memories or what?)

(Must have been a MUS Glitch - Magical, mythical, mystical Universal Software Glitch in a previous post of mine.)

Glad to see you were able to help John Y.

Hotcore, do you have a .308 which will not shoot Federal Gold Medal Match 168 grain ammo into sub MOA groups? Just wondering...

For the record, USMC snipers don't shoot specially tuned ammo. The round is the M118LR, which is a .308 using the Sierra 175 grain Matchking bullet and a healthy charge of RL15 powder. There's quite a bit of information regarding this load at www.snipershide.com and at www.snipersparadise.com

Dan Newberry
green 788

Dan, youll make a topic out of anything.. It must be the waiting for hunting season. And Im with Dutch on this one. Internet forums are proof that people love to bullshit, take whats usefull and be carefull to not get any of the rest on ya.

"Dan, you'll make a topic out of anything..."

Why, thank you very much, Westernhunter! Yes, it does seem to be leading in replies, for the last few days anyway... Thanks for the contribution! Hey, at least I never started nor participated in the infamous Matchking/hunting bullet thread!

So who besides Hotcore has a .308 that won't shoot sub MOA groups with Federal Gold Medal ammo?

And while we're at it, who owns a dog that doesn't like bacon?

green 788

HotCore, wait until I get my .375 H&H stock done and the load work up begins- this should really be fun if my shoulder survives it! I've heard that RL15 is THE powder for this round- what do you think?

Good to see you haven't forgotten my smiling face (feel lucky you can't see it! ) LOL- Sheister

Hotcore you're wide open on all four sides full of holes to boot! It's against my kind nature to exploit your vulnerability on these issues, but dammit, you're like an ankle biting Chihuahua! You just keep asking for it!

The U.S. military doesn't use handloaded ammunition! Not even the military snipers. Do a web search of "M118LR" and you'll learn some things. If you were enlisted USMC, I appreciate your service. Information regarding the M118LR round, and other long range precision ammunition used by the Army and Marines can be found in books in abundance, not only on the web.

One day when you're bored with an extra twenty dollars in your pocket, pick up a box of the Federal Match ammo previously mentioned. You'll find that to be only one one of many universal load recipes that will shoot well in any decently constructed .308 win rifle.

You call me a rookie, but it sounds like you've been operating under a lot of false assumptions for the entirety of your "years of experience."
And I'm not meaning to impugn or belittle your experience, I'm sure you know a lot about a lot of things. Many things I might learn from you outside of this pissing contest that *you* (!) started! ... Naw, I ain't really mad, I take that back.

But if you really haven't tried production match ammo, and your impressions of what the Marine Corp snipers are using has been gleaned only from barracks drivel, hold your tongue until you're sure of yourself. I say that not to tick you off or embarrass you (you probably don't embarrass easily anyway) but to help you interact with the rest of us in a more cordial manner.

Okay! Rant over! As you were!

Dan Newberry
green 788

Sheister

Re 15 is the fist powder to try if the goal is the best combination of accuracy and velocity.

For accuracy only, IMR 4064 and Win 760 are usually good.

If you use spitzer bullets, then 4350 will take you into some heavily compressed loads.

The most accurate load I have seen when tested across a very wide number of 375s and also over a large number of years in 78 grains of Win 760 and 300 Hornady Round Nose. The 300 Sierra is also a good one. Velocity across Oehlers is usually around the 2450 mark. Re 15 will usually go up to around 73 grains for about 2600 with 300s. Accuracy is usually good.

But 78 grains of 760 with 300 Hornady is my first test load on any 375. If it will not shoot the odds are high that there is a problem with the rifle, scope or mounts.

Mike

Hot Core,

No, I won't have the stock done in time to hunt with it this year. Actually, it is being built for my next Africa trip- hopefully in a couple years for Cape Buffalo.

Mike,

Thanks for the load info. I'll print it out later when I have a bit of time, have to run to work now.

Mike375 - "78 grains of WW-760" Yes

Are you guys saying that one load recipe will work well in the majority of rifles so chambered?

"Heresy! Full of beans!" says Hotcore.

But you're of course right, nonetheless...

Thanks for the posts,

Dan

Dan

A couple of others I have which have worked on a few guns are:

52 grains of Win 748, 130 grain Speer Hollow point in the 308.

115 grains of IMR 4350 with 500 grain Hornady in the Mark V 460 Wbys.

A couple of Amercians on the forum with 460s have also found the 115 grains of IMR 4350 to be the go in the 460s.

The most accurate thing I have seen in terms of its average accuracy over a very wide range of loads as compared to its peak accuracy is teh 358 STA chambered with JGS reamer, 1 in 14 twist, .357 groove diamter and RCBS dies.

A mate of mine first had one made and took it to Africa. It was a Rem 700 with what we call a Number 5 barrel. They are .72" diamter at muzzle on 26 inch barrel. The thing was so acurate with everything, including Barnes X, we decided to see if it was a fluke. So I got a Number barrel made as well. At the time I had 4 Rem 700 based switch barrel each style rifles and my actions and my mates actions had been faced off so as to have interchangeable barrels.

So I put his barrel on the becnh gun as well as mine. Same results. A 375 shooter at our range bwecame interested and you guessed it, a 3rd barrel was done. Same results.

Since I have gone this far I will complete the story.

The bench style guns use aluminium stocks that look like the old rem 700 40 X stocks but are skeletonised in the forend and but. The actions were does as glue ins.

After mine has been tested in the aluminium stock I unglued the action and bedded the barreled action to one of the Rem 700 synthetic stocks, we call then rubber stocks, that come with the R700 Stainless. After testing I then bedded it to the wooden stock that came with a 416 Remington I had. After that one, it was bedded to a McMillan fiberglass stock.

The best accuracy came from the Rem 700 Synthetic stock. Subsequent testing of other calibers leads me to believe, at least for high recoil calibers with match grade barrels fitted, that the rubber stocks maybe the best for accuracy.

Since that was all done I know of a few other 358 STAs that were done with the same barrel, that is the .357 and 1 in 14 and with the same reamer and all have shown that same trait of top accuracy over an extremely wide range of loads.

Why did we go .357" Because the barrel maker has felt for a long time that slightly undersize barrels are better. This bloke would be the australian vesion of your Pac-Nor and he isalso a competitive benchrst shooter. Actually most of his barrel are made for what we call Big Bore target shooting which is shooting out to about 900 yards with military 308s which have 144 grain Boat tails. For these he uses barrels of .3065"

Lastly, to complete the testing the bench gun was tried with a Number 5 barrels in 338 Winchester, 340 Wby (without Wby freebore and both 1 in 10 and 1 in 12 twist) and the 375 H&H.

The "best" accuracy from all of them was much the same. However, when measured across a wide range of loads, the 358 STAs won and won by so much it was daylight between the 358 STA and the others.

Mike

[ 09-25-2002, 20:39: Message edited by: Mike375 ]

Thanks for the info, Mike. Interesting report...

Dan

You didn't comment on the Federal Match ammo.
You also ignored the fact that some folks earlier in this thread are reporting on load recipes that work well in different rifles.

So, are they rookies too?

Just wondering!

And for the record, to see what distinguishes my load development method from Audette's look here:

http://www.serveroptions.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=005945

My post in that thread explains the differences, which are quite significant.

Everyone who doesn't agree with Hotcore is a rookie!

You're not one of those internet "trolls" I keep hearing about are you?

Just wondering!

Dan Newberry
green 788

[ 09-26-2002, 02:27: Message edited by: green 788 ]

Somewhere between those who consider their individual experience to be universal truth and those who feel constrained to qualify everything to the point of meaningless absurdity lies what you're looking for. Unless of course it doesn't. In which case you may be hearing universal truth or the whole issue may, in fact, be absurd. The trick seems to lie in knowing the difference. Lots of luck to us all.

Back to the topic; postings.When you ask for opinions ,such as "264 uses " you can get a feel,in this case a fast 270.When you ask for information,it's on and great,e.g.Remington year code.But where I find the biggest problem is product reveiws,they lack model,year,and use.Think of trucks,"they changed the fuel injection in '97,they didn't work the bugs out untill '99 "A posting that I remember because it was so different was one on B&L 3000 'scopes ,he had trouble with a couple of 2x7,switched to 3x9 worked fine,instead of saying Bushnells are crap.As to the One Load,I load for 7 30.06s,yes there are good loads,Not the best in every rifle.If guy says this works well in two rifles ,take notice.Now about those 338 loads........ Straight shooting

"I load for 7 30.06s,yes there are good loads,Not the best in every rifle.If guy says this works well in two rifles ,take notice."

You're right about that, but minor tweaks which can be accomplished by seating depth alone are normally all that is needed to get such a recipe to work as well in one rifle as it does another.

Take a look at the email exchange I had with Paul Box at Sierra on this matter. It's titled "universal load recipes, a Sierra tech's position."

As Paul says in his email reply to me, if a rifle doesn't shoot such a recipe well, it probably has a mechanical problem of one sort or another.

Thanks for the post,

Dan Newberry
green 788

Dan,my two sons and I shoot 30.06s,so for interchangeablity I set out on that "holy grail quest " One Load.I was off work with an injury,careful hobbling,so I had time for the range and loading .The rifles were good factory.As one rifle would tighten up the next would open. About 1.5" at 100m.All 3 rifles would go under that with their own loads,better the rifle more loads.Now into in my hunch, powders have pressure windows for consitant ignition.IMR 4350 and 165gr,start to max covers such a window,were as N-560 and 180gr only at max.

Assuming there were no mechanical problems such as barrel/chamber issues, bedding, or bolt lug engagement irregularities, the 57.5 grain charge of H4350 with the 165's should have done the trick. The email reply I received from Paul Box at Sierra (regarding universal load recipes) is as follows:

Hi Dan,
I agree.There are certain loads in every caliber that will produce a vibration pattern that seems to allow the bullet to leave the muzzle at the same point of that vibration.Usually if a load won't shoot in a rifle that has been known to be a good load in others,there's other problems with the rifle in a barrel being ho-hum,out of round chamber etc.These kind of rifles might shoot something else off the wall so to speak,but likely it'll be an uphill job finding it.Ken Waters made a fair piece of change with this idea in his pet load series.I've given out thousands of loads over the years that have proven to be very accurate in other rifles.You bet it works.
Paul

**************************************************

When I first began work with my Remington 700 30-06, it was not performing well with the 57.5 grain H4350/165 grain load either. Even after glass bedding and free floating the barrel, it seemed to be a 1 to 1.5 MOA rifle at best. But I had forgotten to check the bolt lugs. By blackening the faces of the lugs and chambering then ejecting a cartridge, I found that one of the lugs wasn't bearing at all. A bit of lapping paste took care of this problem, and the rifle went immediately to 1/2 MOA and better with the load mentioned above. This recipe happens to be a Nosler recommended accuracy load as well, so it's been a known performer for sometime now.

For the record, though, I've now switched to IMR 4350 in the 57.5 grain charge, and am finding that groups are much tighter at long (400 yard) range that was the case with the H4350.

Dan Newberry
green 788

Dan,I found that H-4350,being a bit slower,worked very well with 180gr.

Let me set you straight, 3031 isn't a good powder for the .243, I've never had a Bushnell scope fail, but Leupold is better, WLR primers work great!

I think you're right about the burn rate of the 4350 being more uniform over a longer spread (in the 30-06) than other powders. I've also noted what you mention to be the case with the N560, that some loads do thier best at full pressure.

One load for the 30-06 with the 180 grain bullets that keeps popping up all over the place as a good performer (in various rifles) is 56 grains of IMR 4350 behind any decent 180. I haven't tested this load yet, so I can't comment on it other than to say that I'm reading of good results from this recipe from a number of shooters.

Thanks for your time,

Dan Newberry
green 788