...the answer is in the table below. So if you have long range skills and believe your ~ 300WM is a 600 yard elk rifle, then your 308 Win is also a 400 yard elk rifle.

I have no dog in this fight as I rarely shoot over 350 yards in the field.

But I have seen this concept and issues related to it discussed many a time, so I thought I would actually look at the data.

Please remember lesson #3

I have often said the same thing but in terms of wind drift, since wind is the biggest challenge at long range (assuming you can practice at long range; if not, then simply having a place to practice is the biggest challenge).

For example, a .300 WM and .308 Win can both shoot the same 180 grain bullets. Both have the same BC, so the wind drift is a function of velocity. IIRC my .308 Win has the same drift at 515 as one of my RUMs at 700; the difference in MV was pretty stunning.

A good point made, and Ive told many a hunter his 300 is a 30-30 at some point when they start telling me a 30-30 wont kill elk, and their big 30s good to 600 to a 1000 yards,, The 30-30 its deadly at 100 to 200 yards on elk, has been my experience, although Ive never shot and elk at 250 to 300 with my 30-30, so don't know the extreme effective range of a 30-30 on elk..don't need to..I know it works at 200 yards.

Just an extension of your post..What a difference range makes..

However, there is an argument to be made that the 308 win is easier to shoot within its effective range with respect to the impact of wind. By "easier", I am not referring to absolute wind drift but the impact on the shooter and their ability to hit the target within the range limitations of the cartridge.

Ranging a target and "holdover" has been solved with LRFs and ballistic reticles. However, wind over the course of the range is still a judgement call and the hardest of all judgment calls.

If we take the far right hand column as a maximum practical range for the cartridge, and apply a 15 mph wind, we find:

The 308 win shooter has to account for 18 inches @ 400 yards where the 300 WM shooter has to account for 34.7 inches @ 590 yards.

I personally have a much easier time of assessing 18 inches left to right than I do ~35 inches and of course a 20% error in wind assessment is 3.6 inches on 18 assuming a correct hold, very likely still in the vitals. But a 20% error on ~35 inches is 7 inches, which maybe out of the vitals.

Even with a high end scope that allows me to dial MOA windage, I don't know that I would be confident dialing 22 clicks of windage.

Wind is the wounding culprit in more than a few cases..something were all guilty of from time to time I suspect..

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
However, there is an argument to be made that the 308 win is easier to shoot within its effective range with respect to the impact of wind. By "easier", I am not referring to absolute wind drift but the impact on the shooter and their ability to hit the target within the range limitations of the cartridge.

Ranging a target and "holdover" has been solved with LRFs and ballistic reticles. However, wind over the course of the range is still a judgement call and the hardest of all judgment calls.

If we take the far right hand column as a maximum practical range for the cartridge, and apply a 15 mph wind, we find:

The 308 win shooter has to account for 18 inches @ 400 yards where the 300 WM shooter has to account for 34.7 inches @ 590 yards.

I personally have a much easier time of assessing 18 inches left to right than I do ~35 inches and of course a 20% error in wind assessment is 3.6 inches on 18 assuming a correct hold, very likely still in the vitals. But a 20% error on ~35 inches is 7 inches, which maybe out of the vitals.

Even with a high end scope that allows me to dial MOA windage, I don't know that I would be confident dialing 22 clicks of windage.

If you are going to shoot at LR, holding off using a reticle marked with either mrads or MOA is the way to go. I judge the wind using my side parallax, then when I see the prevailing wind, I spin it into focus and shoot. Last Friday was windy was here in AZ; I shot a Lapua at 800; judged 3.5 MOA wind and hit just below my circle. Shot my 28 Nosler next; wind was a bit stronger so I held almost 4 (and had the benefit of seeing my shot with the Lapua) and hit 2 inches right (4 MOA would have been perfect) and about 4 inches low. Took the 28 out to 1190; angle was different so wind hold was 4.5 MOA. Hit just to the right, 3-4 inches, but 3/4 MOA low.

All winds were from the left but I didn't allow for what Litz calls "aerodynamic jump" or the the propensity of a bullet to hit lower when winds are from the left and higher when from the right (Litz says this is 1/3 to 1/2 MOA for a 10 mph wind). It was a bit cooler, which can change my impact at 1190 but has negligible effect at 800 unless the difference is huge.

The other point along your line of reasoning is this: all else equal, an accurate rifle has more allowable wind error than others. Assume the 308 above shoots 1/2 MOA and the 300 WM 1.25 MOA and the vital area is 10 inches. The 308 shoots a 2 inch group and therefore has 4 inches of error. In your example, a 20% wind error keeps them all in the vitals. The 300 has only 2.5 inches of error. Assuming it drifts 12.4 inches at 400 in a 15 mph wind means your allowable wind estimation error is 17%, less than the .308 Win allowable error of 22.2%.

Recently compared my .300 WM to my .338 WM for long range applications. In a .300 WM the 168gr can be loaded at 3300 fps mv according to Nosler. I can load the .338 265gr at 2700 fps mv.

No comparison, .338 WM / 265gr AB LR is the way to go. Heavier and wider bullet with considerably more energy at long range. Lose the .300 WM.

Well, hell, my Lapuas and Edges do even better!

Wind drift is missing. I ain't sayin' ditch the .300, but shoot something like the 220 ELD or heaviest Nosler AB.

There is a lot to be said about going to the trouble to learn long range shooting before you hunt, as AntherAZwritter makes clear to all..its a whole nuther ball game..Ive never done it, but Im still hunting with a 30-06 with a 3X Leupold and my windage take at best is a 3" guess, then 5" then 6 if the deer will stand for it! so I can make do at up to 300 and an ocassionl 400 yard shot, after that I start crawling to get closer.

I find long range shooting very interesting and wish I had gotten into it long ago but today Id be plumb wore out before I got to my kill..

416,

Nice stats but completely irrelevant to the discussion because we are doing an equivalent comparative analysis of the same caliber at different velocities with typical velocities, not a cherry pick analysis of this cartridge vs that cartridge.

Did you know a 375 Weatherby Mag can push a 300 grain bullet at 2940 fps and if that 300 grain bullet is a Nosler Accubond it will out do your 338 Win Mag at 500 yards?

By the way, energy is not the best choice for killing effectiveness.

Did you know a 30-378 pushing a 210 ABLR at 3159 also produces more energy at 500 yards than your 338 WM 265 ABLR at 500 yards?

See, isn't it fun to change the analysis, mix match, and cherry pick data?

The problem as I see it is mostly the human factor..with most of these tests...Ive ofter wondered what the difference in wind is at the shooting point and 1000 or 2000 yards out there?? I know they have a thingie for reading the wind but how accurate is it at long range when your reading wind at the rest..just curious..

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
The problem as I see it is mostly the human factor..with most of these tests...Ive ofter wondered what the difference in wind is at the shooting point and 1000 or 2000 yards out there?? I know they have a thingie for reading the wind but how accurate is it at long range when your reading wind at the rest..just curious..

Ray:

That is why you learn to read mirage to judge the wind and why my preferred method is to use the side parallax. I can honestly say it has been a long, long time since I hit more than 5 inches from my POA at 500 and I shoot at least once a week at this range. At 800 I put 80% within 5" and probably 95 within 1 MOA (would have to look at my notes to be sure) in a variety of wind conditions. At 1190 I start to have more trouble with vertical impact than I do wind, but I would say 75% of my shots are within 8 inches of my POA. At 1190 spin drift is significant. A misread of wind at 800 is generally a 1 MOA miss while one at 1190 is 2 MOA. For me, a 2 MOA miss at 800 yards is exceedingly rare; I can only recall one in the past year. But a 1 MOA miscue is enough to wound.

There seems to be two camps on AR with respect to long range shooting: those who think 400 yards is unethical, and those who think there is no limit and "just because you can't do it doesn't mean I (or someone else) cannot." I am somewhat in the middle...you can prove mathematically that every cartridge has a range that is just too far for a reasonable chance of a first round hit. Brian Litz discusses a concept he calls WEZ modelling, which takes into account the uncertainties of wind and the inherent dispersion of shots due to accuracy (bullets travel in an ever expanding cone, a fact 99% of posts on AR fail to acknowledge), but not TOF. You mention 2000 yards; I am guessing the TOF of most cartridges is going to be three seconds, which is enough time for an animal to move or the wind to change, let alone the incredible accuracy demands.

I just watched a Gunwerks video on a mile shot. Guy hits a gong on the first shot, but what we don't know is the size of the gong (I guarantee I can hit a four feet by four feet gong at a mile, but so what?) or how many shots he took before the video.

316-318 yards is the max long range I can shoot at my gun club.

One of these days I will take a long range shooting course.

Just going from 200-300 yards is a non linear move for everything I shoot.

Mike

Considered the 30 caliber 190gr AB LR. Requires a 1:11 twist or faster so that rules out my .308 Win. My .30-06 which has a 20" 1:11 twist barrel could probably fire this bullet at 2600 fps but with my .300 WM way faster at 3100 fps.

At maximum load levels only about 300 ft-lbs less at 500 yards compared to my .338. Still for a small bore long range/general purpose hunting rifle for Elk as well as for Moose and Bear my .338 WM/265gr AB LR gets the nod because of the heavier, wider and higher bc bullet.

Killing power score at 500 yards: .300 WM / 53, .338 WM / 84.
https://www.chuckhawks.com/rif...lling_power_list.htm

Got mine tuned up and shot these groups recently. Easy to do using the Nikon 4-16x with mildot reticle calibrated for my hunting load. Range it. Aim with the appropriate dot. Fire.

You really need to trade in the wimpy 338WM and get a 338 RUM or 338-378 Weatherby and get another 250 to ~300 fps then you can deliver an additional 675+ ft lbs of energy @ 500 yards. I mean after all if a 338WM is so clearly superior to a 338-06, then a 338 RUM or Weatherby is clearly superior to a 338WM

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
Wind is the wounding culprit in more than a few cases..something were all guilty of from time to time I suspect..

True for me, I don't worry about drop too much but I am very poor at judging wind speed. I don't shoot farther than 250 yards on almost all hunts. I try to shoot 100 yards or less if possible.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
You really need to trade in the wimpy 338WM and get a 338 RUM or 338-378 Weatherby and get another 250 to ~300 fps then you can deliver an additional 675+ ft lbs of energy @ 500 yards. I mean after all if a 338WM is so clearly superior to a 338-06, then a 338 RUM or Weatherby is clearly superior to a 338WM

How right you are Mike! I love my .338 WM; my favorite all around hunting caliber. But if I had know I am shooting LR, I would pick my .28 Nolser, 300 RUM, or either of my Edges or Lapuas. All shoot the heaviest for caliber bullets available except for the RUM, which loves 220/225 ELDs

If you are only getting 3100 fps with 168s in a .300 you're not even trying. Try adding a couple hundred to that.

Well...I actually use lab generated published data across multiple sources when I do an analysis.

Average maximum velocity of 27 published loads for 300 WM 165/168 from Hodgdon & Nosler = 3102 fps

Average mid point velocity just using Barnes data 3074. Average maximum velocity of Barnes data 3205. Even using 3205 that's a 3.4% delta from 3100. But if one is going to use 3205 for the 300WM, then you have to use 2776 for the 308 Win. If you want to use 3282 (not 3300) for the 300 WM then you should use 2877 for the 308 Win. The WM increases by 5.8% the Win by 5% - that should make a big difference in the analysis

Another data point - let's just take Nosler Data and use the velocity for the "Most Accurate Load Tested" (since that is the most readily available data of that type) given that some of this is focused on longer range shooting and we know that drop (which is driven by velocity) is the easier part of the equation. The average velocity of the most accurate loads tested is 3019.

Alternatively, we can also look at the powders that have the highest velocity in the Nosler data and lo and behold what do we find, that the most accurate loads for the three highest velocity powders are the minimum loads for those powders and guess what? - they avg for the most accurate loads is 3103 fps.

Average maximum velocity for only Barnes data is 3205. Note; the Barnes 168 TTSX has a BC of .470

I could have also not used the Barnes 168 TTSX and simply used the Nosler AB with a BC of .475 and then the Barnes data which is unusually high as compared to the other industry data wouldn't even come into play and the numbers in the chart above would all have moved slightly higher but compared to each other the same relationship would exist.

In summary:

1) doing an analysis and using 3300 fps muzzle velocity for the 300 Win Mag with 165/168 grain bullets lacks analytical integrity

2) If your going to pic some theoretical or best max for 1 cartridge, do it for all cartridges and see if it makes any practical difference in the data, the analysis, and an individual's resulting decision. The answer here is, it does not.

3) Anybody can do any kind of biased analysis they want, but as soon as they start using multiple data sources and using averages across the multiple data sources (which is the proper way to do an analysis) they are likely going to get the same the results as in the table above with less than a 5% delta. So if anybody wants to find fault with above analysis because they think 300 win mag got cheated by about 50 yards because 3205 fps was not used - knock yourself out. For anybody who thinks that 3300 fps is the proper velocity to use for the 300 WM with a 165 grn bullet in any kind of realistic analysis, well then you probably don't want your analysis reviewed by anybody who is competent in research and analysis techniques because they are likely going to make you look like a fool.

3100 fps with 180gr bullets from my .300 WM no problem. Don't see why 3300 fps isn't possible with 168gr. Nosler lists 3290 fps for 165/168gr (24" barrel) -

https://load-data.nosler.com/l...0-winchester-magnum/

I have 165gr bullets on hand. Should give these a try with Re22 to see what I get from my .300 WM. I'd bet 3300+/-~25 fps.

Even the most cursory look at the Nosler manual will show 3 165 grain loads considerably over 3200 fps and a couple just under the line. Some one who was trying would notice that.

These are taken in a 24" barrel when anyone who is actually trying would be looking at a 26" which is about standard in magnum rifles. That last 2" is worth 100 fps with slow burning cartridges as regular as clockwork. That's not even starting in on that I'm currently shooting 5 of the things. Don't even get me started on how many '06s and .308 I have laying around the place.

Analyze that.

quote:

These are taken in a 24" barrel when anyone who is actually trying would be looking at a 26" which is about standard in magnum rifles.

I don't have any factory Magnum rifles that came with a 26" barrel all mine are 24 to 22"?.
I even have a .338 Win Mag with a 21.5" barrel (after the BOSS was removed).

Even the most cursory read of my post would show that I accounted for those 3200 fps and more loads in more ways than one.

Further, the most cursory read of the nosler data would show that any powder with a max velocity even approaching 3200 fps let alone exceeding 3200 fps had the most accurate load at ~3100 or below.

So let me theorize why someone might be trying to get maximum velocity, hmmm, might it be because they are shooting at longer ranges. Hmmm, I wonder if that longer range shooter is going to sacrifice an MOA for 100 fps, especially when that 100 fps equals ~3%.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with what a comparative analysis is and what it means to treat all the subjects in the analysis equally.


If you want to analyze the performance of the 300WM with a 165 against other cartridges by using 3300 fps go right ahead.

You know the 2014 Jeep Cherokee is rated for 22 city and 31 hwy mpg. But if I drive my 2014 Jeep Cherokee an entire tank all on a flat interstate and keep it at 65 mph I get 34.5 mpg. I guess I should tell all those other owners of 2014 Jeep Cherokees they should be using 34.5 mpg as their estimated hwy mpg for comparison persons.

Long range shooting being discussed so consider the 190gr AB LR. What's the 2500 ft-lb threshold range for example? Maximum muzzle speeds for my rifles at industry standard maximum pressures -

.30-06 (20" barrel): 2600 fps
.300 WM (24-5/8" barrel): 3100 fps

Run the calcs: http://gundata.org/ballistic-calculator/



.30-06: 125 yds
.300 WM: 525 yds

Considerable difference in effective range!

So where does a 2500 ft lb threshold come from? Never even seen that referenced by anybody anywhere other than you just now. I honestly would love that reference.

If 2500 ft lbs is the threshold for the effective range on game, then a 308 win with a 165 grn bullet has an effective range a of ~73 yards and both the 35 Remington with a 200 grn bullet and 30-30 with a 150 grn bullet have an effective range of 0 yards. I wonder how those animal died?

Given you are making a judgement on two cartridges' velocities and hence their abilities at ranges; isn't it pretty friggin biased to use a slightly longer than average barrel on the higher velocity and measurably shorter than average barrel on the slower cartridge?

Did you type your above post with a straight face?

But for grins I will play along and take the Dogleg approach and your normal approach which is:

I will disregard that you kinda sorta qualified your post and sorta put a context to it by saying it was your rifles with the 20" and 24 5/8". Because that is a consistent pattern in many of the above responses...Let's forget what the poster actually wrote and just focus on "I know I can get more velocity" than what was stated.

I'll go take the highest velocity I can find for a 190 grain bullet of any kind in fact it is Nosler data for their own bullet which is 2749 fps in a 24 inch barrel. I'll even not use the Dogleg routine of adding velocity because anybody serious would be using a 26 inch bbl.

Then switching from the normal approach that has been deployed in various posts above, I will go look at the real specifications of the ABLR which says minimum impact velocity is 1300 fps. I will also use the more common number of 1000 ft lbs of energy (even though I am not a big believer in using energy numbers as killing power but isn't that part of many of the typical internet responses - changing logic.) I mean even Chuck Hawks who I am not really that impressed with uses 800 lbs for medium game. I honestly really want to know how you decided on 2500 ft lbs as an energy threshold.

Now, I'll be a little less crazy and a little more practical and will add a 250 fps impact velocity margin and say minimum impact velocity needs to be 1550 fps and...

Voila! the effective range of the 30-06 with a 190 ABLR and a muzzle velocity of 2749 is 1070 yards delivering 1016 ft lbs of energy.

By the way, if you simply discard the ludicrous specification of 2500 ft lbs and use your 2600 fps and look at 1550 fps of impact velocity; the effective range is 955 yards delivering the same 1016 ft lbs of energy.

x 1-2/3 for good measure = 2500 ft-lbs.

quote:

Originally posted by 4sixteen:


x 1-2/3 for good measure = 2500 ft-lbs.

Commonly recommend by who????

Way to many deer and elk have been killed with less foot pounds.

These numbers are normally promoted by some fish and game member who thinks he knows better then anybody else.

Hardly ever is there any scientific data involved.

Just like when Wis required pistol calibers of 357 41 and 44 mags.

No others were allowed. Why because some game warden had a bug up his ass.

I talked with him he was very proud of the fact that he got that written into the law.

It has changed now.

One thing which seems to escape many is the man behind the gun.

Shooting accurately under field conditions is not the same as shooting off the bench.

I have seen extremely good shooters make a mess of shooting in the field.

I use a single rifle, 375/404, which not a long range rifle by any imagination. Sighted to hot about 1 inch high at 100 yards.

I have shot animals with it at over 500 yards.

Regarding energy numbers published that assert that X level is needed for Y game, any practical and intelligent level of the application of these specifications knows that they aren't to be taking in isolation. Even if anybody accepts 1500 on it's face, they would then be accepting that the typical 30-30 Win carbine loaded with factory ammo and a 170 grain bullet is limited to an effective range of about 40 yards for elk hunting.

416,

Regarding your decision to take 1500 ft lbs then increase it by 66% and then use that to evaluate the effective range of elk cartridges; thanks for providing the insight into your thought processes, logic, and posted information. I'll keep it in mind for future reference.

Does this mean one cannot kill an elk at 200 yards with a 243 Winchester??

Elk have to be standing behind you and shot into a headwind, to be killed with a 243 saeed.

It's a good thing animals can't read ballistic tables.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:

quote:

These are taken in a 24" barrel when anyone who is actually trying would be looking at a 26" which is about standard in magnum rifles.

I don't have any factory Magnum rifles that came with a 26" barrel all mine are 24 to 22"?.
I even have a .338 Win Mag with a 21.5" barrel (after the BOSS was removed).

Remington, Winchester, Kimber, Cooper just for American factory rifles today. I had one of the Boss back in the early nineties. How time flies.

Another look at the formula for killing power score or KPS. Not saying it's definitive but does support not using a 22LR on big game -

https://www.chuckhawks.com/rif...lling_power_list.htm



d = bullet diameter (in)

w = bullet weight (grs)

SD = w / [7000 x d^2]

KPS = E x w / [7000 x d^2] x pi/4 x d^2

d^2 cancels out of the formula.

Meaning KPS equals only the product of energy and bullet weight times a constant.

Implies bullet cross-sectional area is irrelevant??

quote:

Originally posted by Dogleg:

quote:

Originally posted by Snellstrom:

quote:

These are taken in a 24" barrel when anyone who is actually trying would be looking at a 26" which is about standard in magnum rifles.

I don't have any factory Magnum rifles that came with a 26" barrel all mine are 24 to 22"?.
I even have a .338 Win Mag with a 21.5" barrel (after the BOSS was removed).

Remington, Winchester, Kimber, Cooper just for American factory rifles today. I had one of the Boss back in the early nineties. How time flies.

My 300H&H in Ruger No. 1 has a 26" barrel.

My 340 Wby. Mag in Weatherby Mk V has a 26" barrel.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
Even the most cursory read of my post would show that I accounted for those 3200 fps and more loads in more ways than one.

Further, the most cursory read of the nosler data would show that any powder with a max velocity even approaching 3200 fps let alone exceeding 3200 fps had the most accurate load at ~3100 or below.

So let me theorize why someone might be trying to get maximum velocity, hmmm, might it be because they are shooting at longer ranges. Hmmm, I wonder if that longer range shooter is going to sacrifice an MOA for 100 fps, especially when that 100 fps equals ~3%.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with what a comparative analysis is and what it means to treat all the subjects in the analysis equally.


If you want to analyze the performance of the 300WM with a 165 against other cartridges by using 3300 fps go right ahead.

You know the 2014 Jeep Cherokee is rated for 22 city and 31 hwy mpg. But if I drive my 2014 Jeep Cherokee an entire tank all on a flat interstate and keep it at 65 mph I get 34.5 mpg. I guess I should tell all those other owners of 2014 Jeep Cherokees they should be using 34.5 mpg as their estimated hwy mpg for comparison persons.

You should consider shooting rifles instead of loading manuals.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
416,

Nice stats but completely irrelevant to the discussion because we are doing an equivalent comparative analysis of the same caliber at different velocities with typical velocities, not a cherry pick analysis of this cartridge vs that cartridge.

Did you know a 375 Weatherby Mag can push a 300 grain bullet at 2940 fps and if that 300 grain bullet is a Nosler Accubond it will out do your 338 Win Mag at 500 yards?

By the way, energy is not the best choice for killing effectiveness.

Did you know a 30-378 pushing a 210 ABLR at 3159 also produces more energy at 500 yards than your 338 WM 265 ABLR at 500 yards?

See, isn't it fun to change the analysis, mix match, and cherry pick data?

The 375 Weatherby is definitely superior to the 338 Win Mag, more power, more range, and in our 7 1/2 lb Rem XCR II, mild recoil. We ( my sons and I) only load our 300g bullets to 2800 fps.

Dogleg,

Setting aside the fact that your last post is a non-sequitur, a completely unsupported assertion on your part, and assumes that my responses are actually my held view on the subject as opposed to simply being a response to the inconsistencies of other's statements; the level of hypocrisy between your previous post and your last post is astounding.

quote:

Originally posted by chuck375:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Dettorre:
416,

Did you know a 375 Weatherby Mag can push a 300 grain bullet at 2940 fps and if that 300 grain bullet is a Nosler Accubond it will out do your 338 Win Mag at 500 yards?

The 375 Weatherby is definitely superior to the 338 Win Mag, more power, more range,...

.338 WM / 265gr AB LR / 2700 fps mv has more energy beyond 700 yards. VLD bullet advantage, 0.732 bc vs 0.485 bc.

416,

First, I think 375 Weatherby was a typo and it was supposed to be 378 Weatherby. But weather or not it is 375 or 378 Weatherby really won't matter in a fair comparison.

If you want to do the comparison at beyond 700 yards, then an apples to apples analysis would be using a similar bullet type for the 375 such as 325 grn long range Lazer from Cutting Edge which has a BC of .740. Even starting it at 2625 fps it delivers over 200 ft lbs more at 750 yards and a 144 ft lbs more at 1000 yards. Even starting that 375 bullet at 2550 fps out performs the 338 265 at 750 and 1000 yards.

If your going to use a long range bullet for 1, you use a long range bullet for the other with a similar SD. 331 for the 265/.338 and 330 for the 325/.375.