Now you got me thinking Gene, I might have had an elk this year if I was able to shoot accurately @ 400yds.. I believe my 180's were dropping about 24" @ 400 yds.. 8" less drop would allow a hold on the elk's back for a heart shot.. Sounds pretty impressive.. Thanks for all the data..
...Hail Mary...
- Thread starter wildgene
- Start date
Depending upon your cartridge, 400 yards may not even require a hold over. Most magnums with a sight in, of 3.7 inch high will remain flat enough at 400 for a high shoulder hold. My bull last week was at 360, I was prone using the bi pod, in a very stable position with the elk quartering away from me. I held lung high and the 180 Partition exited out the chest between the two front shoulders. It did require a followup shot primarily because, I did not delay my recovery of the oncoming darkness, and got him up out of his death bed.
Gene I am totally lost here?????? I can't come up with the numbers you posted.
Max load velocity
06 , 2,710 fps
300 WM 2,938 fps
300 WSM 2,929 fps
300 B 3,013 fps
Using "these" figures I cannot see how the same bullet from a WSM with slightly less velocity generates more energy than either the 300 WM or the 300B. Also with conversely at game ranges the bullet from the B, and the WM should actually have less drop than the same bullet launched slower from the WSM. Their website also shows the max load for the WSM at 70 grains, and the B at 79 gr. So the B uses substantially more powder than the WSM. What data did you use.????
I went to the Hodgdon web site and found using H-4831, with a 180 bullet the following.
Max load velocity
06 , 2,710 fps
300 WM 2,938 fps
300 WSM 2,929 fps
300 B 3,013 fps
Using "these" figures I cannot see how the same bullet from a WSM with slightly less velocity generates more energy than either the 300 WM or the 300B. Also with conversely at game ranges the bullet from the B, and the WM should actually have less drop than the same bullet launched slower from the WSM. Their website also shows the max load for the WSM at 70 grains, and the B at 79 gr. So the B uses substantially more powder than the WSM. What data did you use.????
- Thread starter
- #25
wildgene
Handloader
- Jul 4, 2011
- 1,597
- 2
Elkman":mvpqw9m7 said:
...Sierra 5th, because it's open on the desk (max.MV's run pretty close to Nosler book); 180gr.//06'/58gr. avg/2800fps//.300WSM/66gr. RL-17 @3050fps from Alliant (actual 3088 chrono'd)//.300WM/73gr. avg./3100fps//.300Wby/85gr. avg./3200fps//.30-378/115gr./3300fps...
...energies/ trajectories calc'd w/ Sierra Infinity 6, same bullet (SBT), just changing the MV w/ a 200yd. "zero". To be clear, the .300WM gains about 2% on the .300WSM using 7% more powder, etc., etc., etc. Differences in "book data", rifles, other references, we have to remember these are estimates, even QuickLoad is an "Educated Guesstimate". My point being, even using the Hodgdon data w/ a 180gr. AB, the .300 WSM is a significant step up from the .30-06 (16%/ 4"less drop @ 400yds.), while the larger magnums require more powder w/ less return, & it does it w/, IMHO, a lot less boom & flash than the bigger magnums...
