O.K., continuing my quest for a flat shooting rifle in the 7mm-.30 cal calibers. Still looking at a .280 Rem, but have read a lot on other rounds. The .330 RUM seems very flat but uses 60% more powder than a 30-06 to get 15% faster results in the 180-220 grain range. Which of the rifles which will move at least a 165 grain bullet, and preferably a 180, over 3200fps does so most efficently? This rifle should have less recoil and be more to my liking. Any advice/help is appreciated as always.

Befus, if you're looking to better 3,200'/sec with 180 grains all cartridges .300 weatherby and under are out of the equation.....and it appears as though the .300 RUM is what you want.

Now, about this efficiency thing.....it's merely mental masturbation at it's best...give it up and get over it....you can't kill anything with efficiency and the value is a little powder and an unknown amount of barrel life.....it's really not an issue and gets talked about way too much.

Sounds like you are looking for a 300 win mag, which is a fine, fine hunting round.

There aren't any magically efficient rounds, it takes a certain amount of powder to push a given weight bullet to a given muzzle velocity. The most efficient would be the smallest case that can hold that amount of powder.

"Flat" and "efficiency" are diametrically opposed concepts in the shooting world.

For that matter, the concept of "Flat" is a chimera in it's own right. When you get anal about drop figures, PBR and trying to avoid changes in POA, you are doing yourself a disservice as well as your chosen round. Trajectories get round on all of them at some range, deal with it. At closer distances they're all kinda "flat".

Hey befus, Just tossing in a bit of non-chimera for you.

1. You can always go to a l-o-n-g barrel to help your efficency with the slow powders. You end up gaining increased performance for the same Load used in a short barrel.

2. If you Moly Coat your bullets, you gain about 5% on the old Balliatic Coefficient and can generally add a bit more of the slow Powders at a SAFE MAX pressure. Both provide increased performance for you.

3. I've seen maybe 18 or more of the 300RUMs at the range and they were all amazingly accurate. I believe all of them had Muzzle Brakes and they were indeed quite loud. However, once you get into the performance level you are seeking, it isalways a good idea to wear some form of hearing protection while actually hunting with that rifle. I use the good old Sonic Ear Valves with my extremely loud rifles.

No Chimera?

quote:

---

Originally posted by vapodog:
Now, about this efficiency thing.....it's merely mental masturbation at it's best...give it up and get over it....you can't kill anything with efficiency and the value is a little powder and an unknown amount of barrel life.....it's really not an issue and gets talked about way too much.

---

I sorta agree & disagree.

"Efficiency" exists, but I agree it's not a valid indicator of performance.

Efficiency (to me at least) is translated directly into "FPS per grain of powder burned".

It's sort of interesting to see how different cartridges compare in that regard, and some definitely do give you more bang for your buck.

However, while it's a "nice-to-know" piece of info, it has no bearing on absolute performance, and especially if you're looking for MAX performance. Max performance is all about using "whatever it takes" to get your desired result.

Here you go, partner:

For any given weight, the bigger caliber will go faster.

For any given bullet/speed combo, generally the smallest case that will do the job will give less recoil.

For any given bullet/speed combo, generally the bigger case will do it with less pressure.
Also, longer barrels make bulelts go faster, and heavier stocks make them kick less.
It's all about give's and take's.
Long barrel life = low pressure = less-than-max performance for a given case.
There's no doubt the RUM will best the Wby by quite a bit in the heavier bullets, but this 165 (180) at 3200fps is not a small request.
Also, you might want to factor in SD more than bulelt weight. You could get a 35 Whelen with a 28" bbl to push a 165 close to 3200fps, but that ain't the same as a .308" 165g bullet, you dig? The 140g .284" and 200g .338" have about the same SD, and so penetration will be similar in like-bullets (although not entirely, b/c a 20gg bullet will always have more KE than a 140g going the same speed).
Now, step away from the computer and think aboutwhat a 165g at 3200 fps has done for people over the years. The 300WM can do that all day long. And give it a 26" bbl (which the RUM would have to have, and Wby likely) and all you gain is a hair more weight and 50-75 fps more "efficiency." Then your 180g would get awfully close to 3050fps, and do it about as efficiently as a handy sporter will allow.
Another aspect of efficiency would be how much powder and how many bullets it would take to find a good reload. There's about - oh - six trillion times more reload data on the Win Mag than on the Wby and RUM put together.
(OK, maybe four trillion.)

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.