My factory M70 300 WSM will put 180 Hornady's and 180 Partition's ...... in the .5-.6's (3-shot, 100 yards) though I've had groups as small as .250" ....... BA
You will have to reread the thread as I have stated my primary reason for posting more than once.
As a secondary reason, it is good to engage in a depate and be forced to defend your proposed actions. There is always a chance someone will put forth a compelling reason to do things a different way.
It is pleasing to hear your rifle does so well with the bullets you mention. What is your secret that prevents bullet tip deformation under recoil within the magazine? Shooting bulets of similar design, my 2d shot was off a fair amount and the impact of the 3d was fairly unpredictable.
In your opinion what is the difference between SMKs and REAL hunting bullets? Most bullets are of cup and core design, same as the MatchKing. If the composition of the alloys is different, tell me the difference. The jacket on MKs is thicker than many hunting bullets, including the Hornady. The SMK does not have a bonded core but neither do most hunting bullets. The Game King does not and I have taken more than a few head of game with Game Kings. Maybe it is the hollow tip? Correct me if the designs have changed, but to the best of my knowledge FailSafes and Xs are still hollow tips. I have exhausted my ideas as to possible differences so you must enlighten me.
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
A gunsmith in my town use to work for PacNor ....... If you would like me to forward his phone number to you I will be more than happy to .........
If you would be so kind as to provide that # I would very much appreciate it.
I have already talked to both TacOrd and PacNor about the polygonal barrels, and of course Mike Rock and a few U.S. Army snipers (the primary users of the Rock 5R barrel) and I am still as undecided as ever.
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
RuffHewn, I knew you had shot out numerous barrels. My WSM has a #7 tapper 1 in 11 twist Lilja finished at 26". The smith that builds my rifles just went Distinguished with the service rifle last week at a leg match in Tullahoma, TN. I helped talked him in to retiring the rifle and my neighbor is building a display case to put the rifle and medals in to hang on the wall.
I have been considering trying a Mike Rock barrel. I have read nothing but good things about them. If I had that kind of luck out of a Mike Rock barrel I would have to try another one. If for no other reason to see if the next one was that good. What powder are you shooting behind the 190 MK? I am thinking RL-19 might be a powder I want to try in the WSM. I use N550 behind the 175 MK. That load hammers in my rifle, but I am always looking for other options as well. I have been playing with a load using N550 and a 155 Lapua that is looking real good at 3290 avg. fps. I just might try it in the next 1K match I shoot, just to see how it does. The wind drift is less than the 175 MK load. I know one thing nothing wrings out a load like shooting it on paper at long range. Have a good week!
Shoot Safe, Shoot Straight......RiverRat
Posts: 413 | Location: Owensville, Indiana USA | Registered: 04 July 2001
RuffHewn: First let me say that I have utmost respect for you both as a Marine and a marksman.
I'd like to respond to your question regarding the difference between an SMK and a "real" hunting bullet.
I have never worked for Sierra, so I can't speak to design specifics. But as an engineer (and ex Army artillery officer) I have worked on a lot of product designs. The design team typically has a number of criteria which the design has to meet. All other issues are secondary. Sierra has stated that they design their SMK's with accuracy, and not terminal ballistics in mind. The fact that their jackets may be thicker than this or that is not relevant (what is the alloy of the jacket?). The fact that their core may be harder or softer is not relevant (they probably chose the alloy based on consistency).
Sierra states emphatically that they do not recommend their MKs for hunting. They are the manufacturer and they are held to a very high standard. Laymen cannot possibly know the details of their design. Heck, a lot of experienced hunters on this forum and others believe that even their GameKings are not good for hunting!
You may have experienced several successes with MKs. I submit to you that your sample, given the number of variables involved in hunting, is not statistically significant enough to reach a conclusion. You may go a lifetime without having a problem using MKs, but your probability of having a problem is, IMO, higher than if you used bullets designed with hunting in mind.
Regards, and thank you for your service to our country. Jim
Posts: 1416 | Location: Texas | Registered: 02 May 2003
I will send you an email on this. Hope your email on file is good. If not update it. When you call him remember that we are two hours behind Alabama time. He normally is in his shop until 12 Noon or so. I think he also does Salmon Fish Guiding or Raft Trip Guiding here on the Rogue River during the summer. Hope it comes to some fruition for you.
Thats precisely what I am wondering. Whats wrong with good ole huntin bullets? I can consistently get MOA accuracy out of Nosler Bullistic Tips, or Partitions.
If I was satisfied with mediocre accuracy I would have left my rifle as it was shipped from the factory, or even just randomly picked one up from a pawn shop, not practice at all, and shoot factory ammo. However, my standards are higher than that.
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
Jim, olarmy, thank you for your service to our country as well and thank your for joining the debate. Your argument is non-emotional and rational. I will do my best to support my position.
The design team typically has a number of criteria which the design has to meet. All other issues are secondary. Sierra has stated that they design their SMK's with accuracy, and not terminal ballistics in mind. The fact that terminal ballistics were not considered at the time of design is not in itself a forecaster of poor results. Disregard the name "MatchKing" and tell me what you would expect from a 190 gr .308" hollow point cup and core bullet impacting at 2000-2700 fps.
Sierra states emphatically that they do not recommend their MKs for hunting. I can not read anyone's mind but speculate they may not perform satisfactory if major bones are struck or extreme penetration is needed because of bullet placement. Also, the statement reserves the right for Sierra to change the design back to FMJ or use a tungtsen core in the future.
Heck, a lot of experienced hunters on this forum and others believe that even their GameKings are not good for hunting! I have taken far too much game with Game Kings to agree provided the limitations of the bullet is considered during the final stage of the hunt. As I have stated before, I find it humorous that highly proficient or very careful marksmen knowledgeable in game anatomy have relatively few bullet failures.
.... your probability of having a problem is, IMO, higher than if you used bullets designed with hunting in mind. I do not believe there will be a problem with me placing the bullet exactly where I want. I have total confidense that the SMK will penetrate a rib and a heart, a rib and 2 lungs, or 4 inches of muscle and a vertebrae. I accept the limitations of the SMK. I would not touch the trigger if doubt exits as to the results of my shot under the prevailing conditions at the time.
I decided this morning to go with another Mike Rock barrel. Many long range shooters are using polygonals and I believe one would perform for me but I might have to start load development at the beginning.
I am using H4350 powder with the molyed 190 MK. COL is 2.96" I will not share my load because it is over max. It is also near to above max for most non-coated 180 gr bullets. Moly makes that much of a difference.
I have tested VVN560 but velocity was higher than I wanted when I began to achieve accuracy. The only way for me to guarantee >3000fps impact is with >3000fps mv.
RL22 might be a better choice of powder than RL19, but with the moly 190 I speculate the case would be full before max pressure is developed with either powder. I have a bottle of Winchester WXR, imported from Sweden and most likely RL22 with shorter cut extrusions, but have not tried it yet.
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
So you really didn't answer the question. Did you get mediocre accuracy out of real "hunting" bullets? If so maybe you could actually work up some good unmediocre loads out of your unmediocre rifle, not bought at a pawn shop.
I had would have bet you would get another one. The first obviously has worked very well for you. I know that is why I tried my second Krieger. The first was so good I had to try another one to see if the first one was a fluke. It wasn't a fluke, and I would bet the farm your next Mike Rock barrel will be as good as the first. Load development is a good point I know I had very little load development to do with mine. I knew where I was headed with the 142 MK and it shot the same load as my long line rifle does, just slightly different seating depth. How long will it be before delivery of your new barrel?
I have heard that H4350 is a very good powder for both the 190 and 210 class of bullets. I tried H4350 with the 155 Lapua Scenar and it didn't work at all. Found a good load with IMR 4064 and have now found a better one for the 155 using N550. I will give H4350 a try with the 190 MK. I don't blame you for not giving your load. I have a .223 built on a 788 Rem. action that digests loads over max with no trouble. I am sure this is due to the way this rifle was chmabered with a LONG throat, I would not give out my loads for that rifle. If you tell a knowledgeable reloader the powder, he can take it from there.
Shoot Safe, Shoot Straight.....RiverRat
Posts: 413 | Location: Owensville, Indiana USA | Registered: 04 July 2001
Earlier in this thread I referred to an article on bullet tests published in Oct 2002 Shooting Times. I incorrectly stated the author was Ross Seyfried. The actual author was Rick Jamison. I have corrected it in the posts.
Ross Seyfried wrote a more recent article on popular bullet test mediums and somehow I had the info cross-wired in my brain. It must be old age setting in.
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
I don't know man, you don't sound like much of a hunter to me. But someone that likes to boast alot and be the big man. Probably someone that reads all the mags. Are you saying you can do better at 300yards with this 300WSM and matchkings <1" groups? I would love to see this if you can consistently.
As far as the savage, don't hold your breath. Had one of the 10fp and got rid of that POS quickly. It shot poorly. Traded for a Medallion and not looked back.
I think you have pocketgopher hunting, statistical accuracy, and big game hunting requirements confused somehow.
All I can say is, if you can't find a quality hunting bulle that was designed, BY INTENT, to be a hunting bullet and still provide all of the fundamental accuracy you'll ever require for any sort of big game hunting anywhere, then you're an exception to just about every rule.
As I've previously indicated, I've used Matchkings before on about a dozen animals. I've had excellent performance on occasion, bombastic blowups on other occasions, poor penetration (as in 1"!) on one memorable occasion, and complete, pencil-hole penetration for the balance. Very erratic performance indeed, which gets to the real reason that Sierra does not recommend them for hunting. I'll never Matchkings again for hunting, period......
In answer to your original question; it wouldn't be my choice.
I've only used my 300WSM on kudu and oryx so far. I see no additional value to a load heavier than 150 gr. particularly for the pronghorn. They are not hard to kill. The mule deer is not much tougher.
Switch to a different bullet in that weight and you have a nice elk load.
Posts: 13922 | Location: Texas | Registered: 10 May 2002
quote:Originally posted by bigcountry: I don't know man, you don't sound like much of a hunter to me. Probably someone that reads all the mags.
I was small game hunting at around 8 yo and began hunting big game at 12. I was absent from the activity throughout most of my military career but now I am back.
I read all the magazines for a while and still scan the contents for interesting articles. However, there is nothing being said now that was not being said 25 years ago. Only the bullet names have changed. Gun writers are still paying their bills with articles of which bullet is right for what animals. They must be doing some fantastic brain washing by the number of comments on this thread. A practical view I would like to see expressed by gunwriters is "if your bullet disrupts a vital organ, the particular caliber and bullet used is unimportant."
quote: Are you saying you can do better at 300yards with this 300WSM and matchkings <1" groups?
My worst group at 600 yds with the 190 moly Match King and my best load with H4350 is less than 1" veritcal. Horizontal depends on environmentals but has been slightly over 1" to 6.2". The same load at 300 yds, worst group .671".
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
quote:Originally posted by allen day: As I've previously indicated, I've used Matchkings before on about a dozen animals. I've had excellent performance on occasion, bombastic blowups on other occasions, poor penetration (as in 1"!) on one memorable occasion, and complete, pencil-hole penetration for the balance. Very erratic performance indeed, which gets to the real reason that Sierra does not recommend them for hunting. I'll never Matchkings again for hunting, period......
AD
I know people who have claimed disappointing performance from Game Kings, Ballistic Tips, FailSafes, and Xs, and Partitions and have vowed to never load another one. I have taken many animals with Game Kings, and several with Xs, one with a Failsafe, more than a few with Ballistic Tips, 2 with 190 gr HPBT match bullets that might have been Hornady or Sierra, and 3 with Sierra MatchKings. I never had a bullet failure, defined as having to shoot an animal twice or loosing one. When down, almost all were visible either from my firing position or from the spot they stood upon impact. Maybe I am just lucky? Load testing and during tgt practice I did experience disappointing consistency with the 2d and 3d shots when fed from the magazine, due to tip deformation under recoil, with Game Kings and Partitions.
I did read a number of years ago a response by Barnes addressing claims of erratic performance with Xs. The rep from Barnes stated that the supplier of the copper wire was at fault becuse the wire was inconsistent toward the ends, causing some Xs to blow up and others to pencil through without expanding.
I am not advocating use of Match Kings by any one else. I do not know which members here have the requisite patience to wait for a near broadside shot whare Match Kings, Game Kings, or Ballistic Tips would be very effective. Most hunters are better served by trading the instant kills I have obtained with MatchKings and Ballistic Tips after waiting some time for the perfect shot opportunity for the sure kills provided by Xs and FailSafe on even sharply quartering angles and after impacting heavy bone.
quote:Originally posted by bigcountry: As far as the savage, don't hold your breath. Had one of the 10fp and got rid of that POS quickly. It shot poorly. Traded for a Medallion and not looked back.
Your results with the Savage are proof that any company can let out a substandard product on occasion.
As to the A-bolt, I would not buy a firearm or related product manufactured in a country that has internationally lobied for added gun control in the U.S.A. However, most Brownings leave little else to complain about.
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
What we are doing is nothing new. We are simply waiting for that instant that is personally acceptable to send a bullet toward a game animal. The intent is, or should be, the humane death of our quarry. This has been successfully accomplished using bullets of every jacketted design including FMJ and hard cast bullets not designed to expand. If the bullet disrupts a vital organ it has done it's job and we, as marksman, have done ours.
This thread is sinking to personal attacks and no new logic nor experience is being expressed. We are not going to agree whether the MatchKing can take a broadside elk, or even the thickness of that elk's body. We should agree to allow this thread to die a humane death.
Posts: 285 | Location: Alabama | Registered: 01 June 2003
Well, I might be down in the Alabama area sometime in the next 6 months. I would love to see this 1" group at 600 yards. Thats pretty outstanding. Just everytime I do this, I get disappointed. But if you don't care to demonstrate and teach a 200 yard hunter like myself.
Your right about the savage. I so happy when I recieved it due to the success of so many. I didn't give it much of a shot, only 50 rounds. And said trade it. As far as the A-Bolt, hey I can't change politics, I only want a gun that shoots well. I was so dead set against these browning rifles for so many years. Finally, I got this one, was so pleasently surprised. Fit and finish was great. Lightweight and no adjustment needed to anything. But then again, 1MOA is all I need out of a rifle.
Im a believer in what my signature states, but I also subscribe to the use of time tested expanding/mushroming bullets. IMHO the most common bullet failure on NA game today is a penciled wound channel which is why I also have no use for barnes/failsafe type bullets, but to each his own. Extremly tough dangerous game that requires bone crushing results I see as another league altogether and super penetrators belong there. In fact, I think it would make a lot of sense for "x" type bullets to be made no smaller than .338 caliber. It would be the ethical approach on the manufacturers part. Thats just my opinion, but like you, Im entitled.
What your are subjecting yourself to is an experiment in the field on a living thing, which is largly how bullet construction was developed. I see no need to do this to myself since there has already been over a century of trial and error put into it. Clearly you and I, like many others in this forum would not take the same approach, nevertheless, good luck and we will look forward to hearing the final results of your testing.
Posts: 10190 | Location: Tooele, Ut | Registered: 27 September 2001
quote:Originally posted by Wstrnhuntr: What your are subjecting yourself to is an experiment in the field on a living thing, which is largly how bullet construction was developed. I see no need to do this to myself since there has already been over a century of trial and error put into it.
This deer was taken by a buddy of mine at 75 yards with a 280 Rem using a 168gr MK.......RUFF......I would suggest trying 63 to 66gr of H4350 with a win LR primer and the 190 ......I shoot a 300wsm for 1000 yard BenchRest....My bullet of choice is a 210gr JLK.....My load for that is 60gr of 4350....Velocity is 2803 in a 30" barrel...
No Brad, obviously that is not an elk, but you failed to see that it is not of the Canine family either. Gosh, and they say us Hillybillies are not smart. I hope you are not shooting Canines in Montana and trying to check them in for deer. You can get into hefty trouble for that, even in Montana.
Quote by Boyd Heaton: Read about where a very good friend of mine shot a black bear at 700 yard's with a 200gr MK...On another web site a story about an elk shot at 2890 yard's using a MK bullet.Bullet went through BOTH shoulder's and left an exit wound the size of a volley ball.. Boy Heaton, your not going to have us pull our armchairs in closer to hear your stories again are you?
Boyd, I don't know what your experience is as a hunter.
I do know this: The Sierra MK is a paperpuncher's bullet, not a hunting bullet, and there's absolutely no good reason under the sun to use it for big game hunting. And no, smaller groups on paper targets at the range don't cut any ice here; not when there are much better HUNTING bullets available that will still deliver more than enough accuracy for any hunting task.
It was implied earlier in this thread that MKs are no more unpredicatable and inconsistent (as far as terminal performance goes) than any other projectile that is classified as a true hunting bullet. This notion is unadulterated nonsense, pure and simple, and this is where I become inspired to use terms like "inexperienced", and "stubborn ignorance".
quote:Originally posted by RuffHewn: I plan to hunt pronghorn, elk, and possibly mule deer in New Mexico in 2005.
What do you all think about using the same rifle and load, .300 WSM with 190 gr Sierra moly Match Kings @ 2950 fps mv, for all?
Hey BigCountry... the man wants to hunt elk with a MK. Posting a photo of a dead, dog-sized deer shot at 75 yards is no proof of anything except the MK can kill a dog-sized deer at 75 yards once. The preponderance of evidence is that MK's are apt to erratic performance on deer-sized game, let alone on mature elk.
BTW, we DO legally kill canines here in Montana... they're called coyotes.
quote:Originally posted by bigcountry: Did you get mediocre accuracy out of real "hunting" bullets?
Barnes 168 XLCBT 74.0 gr VVN560, 300 yds worst group 1.2"
Nosler 180 BST 71.2 gr VVN 560, 300 yds worst group .98"
If I could be satisfied with that I would have bought a Savage M10FP .308 for much less money and shot Black Hills Match or Winchester 168 BST.
Ahother National Champion in the making.
Most of us retired Marines believe in one shot one kill WITH the emphasis on kill. Fired thousands of MKs at paper.
The dog/deer picture is an indication of what happens when fools use target bullets for hunting. Probably only 35 pounds of boned out meat in that little guy if shot with a proper bullet.
Wally
[ 07-16-2003, 10:52: Message edited by: wallyw ]
Posts: 472 | Location: Oregon | Registered: 08 March 2002
Looks like a nice 1 1/2, maybe 2 1/2 year old buck that dresses out about 125#. Nice healthy whitetail but as Brad said that ain't no elk. When I look at the size of that exit wound I'd sure hate to think what the bullet would have done had it hit significant bone. To me this is a topic that seperates hunters from stunt shooters.
Jeff
Posts: 784 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 18 December 2000
Jeff you're right... while a fine, healthy looking whitetail it's no more than a 2.5 year old. Everyone's different and I understand in Pennsylvania the hunter pressure is high... big bucks are fairly rare so the above would be considered a nice buck. Here, I commonly pass on whitetails that are bigger than that. As the original poster stated he wants to use these bullets on elk... whitetails of any kind are not elk.
As Allen said, this is about the inexperience and stuborn ignorance of a paper puncher.
quote:Originally posted by Brad: Jeff you're right... while a fine, healthy looking whitetail it's no more than a 2.5 year old. Everyone's different and I understand in Pennsylvania the hunter pressure is high... big bucks are fairly rare so the above would be considered a nice buck. Here, I commonly pass on whitetails that are bigger than that. As the original poster stated he wants to use these bullets on elk... whitetails of any kind are not elk.
As Allen said, this is about the inexperience and stuborn ignorance of a paper puncher.
BA
Our blacktails are even smaller. They still deserve to be killed humanely with minimum loss of of meat.
The posted picture is of an exit wound caused by a bullet that blew up, turning bone into shrapnel aided by the hydostatic shock of velocity.
Wally
Posts: 472 | Location: Oregon | Registered: 08 March 2002
......I shoot a 300wsm for 1000 yard BenchRest....My bullet of choice is a 210gr JLK.....My load for that is 60gr of 4350....Velocity is 2803 in a 30" barrel...![[Big Grin]](images/icons/grin.gif){kind=icon}
![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif){kind=icon}
