quote:

Originally posted by TC1:
I did the .338-06 and pretend it's a .318WR.

Terry

So did I with my 8mm-06

M

Actually, I did it with a 338-284 on a M96 naction with a British stalking rifle style stock. Looks like a pre-war medium.

Hi Art,

I've chronographed four different .318 rifles, and found that it's not terribly difficult to get 2400 fps with the 250 grain Woodleigh. That bullet kills all kinds of big animals very convincingly.

I've also found that 2 400 fps is not all that difficult to get with our South African propellants. In fact, one can probably get 2 500 with a bit of a stretch but I feel there's no need - at 2 250 that 250-grain Woodleigh really takes a lot of stopping and meat damage is just about zero.

I have chronographed a couple of batches of original Kynoch ammo, though, and they came nowhere near 2 400 - 2 100 was more like it.

A friend of mine had a .318 years ago. Along with the rifle he got a hundred original 250-grain Kynochs. He used the rifle extensively for the first year that he had it and was most impressed. I remember one wildebeest. It was a frontal shot and we recovered the mushroomed bullet just below the anus. As my friend's ammo started to run out he made plans to reload for the rifle and fired a couple of the old Kynochs over the chronograph to check their velocity. Imagine his surprise when they barely made it past the 1 900 mark! They sure worked, though.

On paper there shouldn't be a difference between the .318 and a couple of other similar cartridges but in the field there surely is. Don't aske me why, but my .318 drops them in their tracks and it definitely has a certain something. We will probably never see the cartridge regain its popularity of days gone by but the .318 certainly has a certain "something" that others don't have. Charisma and history counts for some of it, I suppose, but performance in the field also weighs in heavily.

As someone else mentioned, other cartridges have been invented over the years in an attempt to fill the .318's shoes. I'm not knocking any of them but I suspect many of those who criticize the .318 have never tried one.

quote:

Originally posted by jvw375:

I have chronographed a couple of batches of original Kynoch ammo, though, and they came nowhere near 2 400 - 2 100 was more like it.

A friend of mine had a .318 years ago. Along with the rifle he got a hundred original 250-grain Kynochs. He used the rifle extensively for the first year that he had it and was most impressed. I remember one wildebeest. It was a frontal shot and we recovered the mushroomed bullet just below the anus. As my friend's ammo started to run out he made plans to reload for the rifle and fired a couple of the old Kynochs over the chronograph to check their velocity. Imagine his surprise when they barely made it past the 1 900 mark! They sure worked, though.

Reminds me of Boddington also writing something along those lines and wondering if the ammo was just plain old or if it never really achieved the advertised velocities.

It does not cease to amaze me how well some really slow bullets work. It is hard to see the correlation between penetration and velocity for sure.
Some recent tests I've read seem to indicate that above a certain threshold velocity the penetration actually decreases - especially when you move up from the .30-06 to the .300 magnums. And on the other side the .308 gives nothing to the .30-06 in penetration.

However, the effect on recoil that the velocity has is surprising: I was absolutely flabbergasted how low the recoil from a 8x57 felt in comparison to any .30-06 and even .308 I've fired. Yet with the heavier 200gr bullet you gain the same energy levels.

- Lars/Finland

However, the effect on recoil that the velocity has is surprising: I was absolutely flabbergasted how low the recoil from a 8x57 felt in comparison to any .30-06 and even .308 I've fired. Yet with the heavier 200gr bullet you gain the same energy levels.

------------------------------------------

That brings up the point I have preached for a long time in other threads, most often comparing the 416 Taylor et al to the Rigby. I don't have it here to give the exact reference, but I was recently reading an article from American Rifleman which I had originally skipped concerning the 450 Marlin. Their engineers, in developing the cartridge, had done a lot of detailed experimental work concerning recoil. After a lot of data and regression, they determined that approximately 90% of the measured recoil of a cartridge was directly attributable to the weight of the powder charge, not the bullet or bullet velocity.