Weatherby ultra lightweight 338/06
- Thread starter Thebear_78
- Start date
DrMike
Ballistician
- Nov 8, 2006
- 37,402
- 6,213
You did well with that scope. Glad to hear that you are still working. To be certain, many others are not earning a paycheque at this time.
35 Whelen
Handloader
- Dec 22, 2011
- 2,237
- 516
Excellent scope choice Bear, let us know how the Alaskan
Moose like it......
Moose like it......
Cleveland48
Handloader
- Jul 28, 2015
- 1,972
- 166
Great rifle and caliber! I almost went with 338/06 when I had my first 9.3x62 made. Still would like to get ahold of one myself.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- #25
Thebear_78
Handloader
- Sep 30, 2004
- 3,098
- 859
Took it out with a quick load. Just took 5% below max of IMR 4895 with 200gr SST.
I shot several 3 shot groups. All roughly the same. From a cold bore two rounds within 1/2” and the next would be 1” or more lower. I know this is a light contour barrel but it’s hard to imagine it’s heating up that quickly. On a good note after a few minutes it’s back to hitting the first shot again.
I’m thinking this may be a bedding issue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I shot several 3 shot groups. All roughly the same. From a cold bore two rounds within 1/2” and the next would be 1” or more lower. I know this is a light contour barrel but it’s hard to imagine it’s heating up that quickly. On a good note after a few minutes it’s back to hitting the first shot again.
I’m thinking this may be a bedding issue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dr. Vette
Handloader
- Apr 16, 2012
- 1,480
- 365
I've been following this thread because I purchased a Mark V ULW in 338-06 at the same time you did.
So far I have only used the 210 TTSX, but for powders used RL-17, RL-16 and H4350.
RL-17 shot for me similar to what you show, no matter what I did over a few times at the range.
RL-16 was very slow, so I didn't go far with it.
H4350 shows promise from the first ladder, so I will move forward with it.
Mine is not bedded as I wanted to see how it shot as-is.
So, my suggestion is to try other combinations first.
So far I have only used the 210 TTSX, but for powders used RL-17, RL-16 and H4350.
RL-17 shot for me similar to what you show, no matter what I did over a few times at the range.
RL-16 was very slow, so I didn't go far with it.
H4350 shows promise from the first ladder, so I will move forward with it.
Mine is not bedded as I wanted to see how it shot as-is.
So, my suggestion is to try other combinations first.
- Thread starter
- #28
Thebear_78
Handloader
- Sep 30, 2004
- 3,098
- 859
This was 225gr Partition with IMR 4895 at 2540fps. I feel this is acceptable accuracy for what the rifles intended for. I’m still getting two close and third low with the 200gr SST load. I think I’m going to pick up a lee factory crimp first and see if crimp doesn’t make neck tension more consistent.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dr. Vette
Handloader
- Apr 16, 2012
- 1,480
- 365
I'm going to weight in again since, as noted, I purchased the identical rifle at about the same time.
I was getting mediocre accuracy at best, with even low ES/SD loads going 1 1/4 to 1/1/2 inches at best, usually 2 somewhat near and another out a ways. Nothing ever really looked great despite the data.
Having tried 3 or 4 powders with the 210 TTSX and never hitting a great load, I decided to improve the rifle rather than keep wasting bullets and powder. So, this week I bedded the recoil lug. I did it with a bit of pressure on the front of the action to mimic having the action screw tight, and left the pressure points in the stock. Usually I stress-free bed them and float the barrel, so this is different for me. I figured I could always remove the pressure points and add some bedding later if needed.
Based on yesterday's shooting it is FAR more accurate than it was before. The recoil lug had some rub marks on it, so I did suspect there was movement going on. Yesterday everything shot an inch or less, and even the recoil seemed smoother.
The only down side is that I'll now have to re-do my load workup, but it appears like RL-17 is going to be my first choice.
If you're interested in the details of how I bedded the lug, let me know.
I was getting mediocre accuracy at best, with even low ES/SD loads going 1 1/4 to 1/1/2 inches at best, usually 2 somewhat near and another out a ways. Nothing ever really looked great despite the data.
Having tried 3 or 4 powders with the 210 TTSX and never hitting a great load, I decided to improve the rifle rather than keep wasting bullets and powder. So, this week I bedded the recoil lug. I did it with a bit of pressure on the front of the action to mimic having the action screw tight, and left the pressure points in the stock. Usually I stress-free bed them and float the barrel, so this is different for me. I figured I could always remove the pressure points and add some bedding later if needed.
Based on yesterday's shooting it is FAR more accurate than it was before. The recoil lug had some rub marks on it, so I did suspect there was movement going on. Yesterday everything shot an inch or less, and even the recoil seemed smoother.
The only down side is that I'll now have to re-do my load workup, but it appears like RL-17 is going to be my first choice.
If you're interested in the details of how I bedded the lug, let me know.
- Thread starter
- #30
Thebear_78
Handloader
- Sep 30, 2004
- 3,098
- 859
Thank you, I’m definitely interested in a more detailed description of what you did. I think this rifle could use a bit of help.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
6mm Remington
Ammo Smith
- Feb 27, 2006
- 5,255
- 626
Nice rifle, great cartridge, and awesome scope. Nice size and power range. I think bedding might be a good bet on the issue if it was doing it every time. Can't wait to see and hear a story about you getting a chance to hunt with it.
6mm Remington
Ammo Smith
- Feb 27, 2006
- 5,255
- 626
Maybe this is something and maybe it is not. I had a 280 Remington in a Remington 700 MTN Rifle that was a lightweight rifle too. It would consistently shoot 3/4" groups or about that with the load I shot in it. That is IF I kept my form solid for each and every shot. The rifle made you shoot like you meant it. Slow, methodical, smooth, with proper follow through.
I know that doesn't explain the 2 in 1 out but just something to consider. I'm with you on the bedding and I bet that is it. I'd like to see you shoot some 200 gr. and 225 gr. Accubonds in it too. We sure like to help a guy spend his money on this site!
David
I know that doesn't explain the 2 in 1 out but just something to consider. I'm with you on the bedding and I bet that is it. I'd like to see you shoot some 200 gr. and 225 gr. Accubonds in it too. We sure like to help a guy spend his money on this site!
David
Dr. Vette
Handloader
- Apr 16, 2012
- 1,480
- 365
I’ll update this thread.
In my rifle, the best load with the 210 TTSX is RL-17 at 61.0 grains with the Federal 210M primer. It’s about 0.6 inches (nice cloverleaf) at 100 yards. I used the CCI 200 for load development, but in my primer shootout last week, Fed 210 was better than CCI200 was better than Rem 9 1/2. Each was about half the size of the next, with the Remington having the only (?) dud primer I’ve ever shot. Perfect primer impression, no bang.
As noted previously, bedding the recoil lug really helped. I have been tempted to try the H-4350 again, but RL-17 works well so I’m going to save the barrel and my time since I have other rifles to work on. The only down side is that I only started with 1 pound of RL-17, so I suspect I will have to tweak the load when I move on to another pound/batch. I’ve got enough though to get ready for this fall, so I’m good for now.
In my rifle, the best load with the 210 TTSX is RL-17 at 61.0 grains with the Federal 210M primer. It’s about 0.6 inches (nice cloverleaf) at 100 yards. I used the CCI 200 for load development, but in my primer shootout last week, Fed 210 was better than CCI200 was better than Rem 9 1/2. Each was about half the size of the next, with the Remington having the only (?) dud primer I’ve ever shot. Perfect primer impression, no bang.
As noted previously, bedding the recoil lug really helped. I have been tempted to try the H-4350 again, but RL-17 works well so I’m going to save the barrel and my time since I have other rifles to work on. The only down side is that I only started with 1 pound of RL-17, so I suspect I will have to tweak the load when I move on to another pound/batch. I’ve got enough though to get ready for this fall, so I’m good for now.
wvbuckbuster
Handloader
- Nov 5, 2015
- 2,683
- 2,403
Glad it came together for you. That should make a good carrying thumper. Dan.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 24,344
- 3,185
Shoot 2 or 3----- 2 shot groups at the same target. Cool COMPLETELY in between.
- Thread starter
- #37
Thebear_78
Handloader
- Sep 30, 2004
- 3,098
- 859
Tried out some H414 with the 225 Partition. A max load running 2572fps. I think this should work out nicely.
I used it to smack the 200 and 300 yard gongs using the built in drops in the reticle. It resulted in nice centered hits on the 8” gongs. I don’t think I will mess around with this anymore until after hunting season.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,342
- 8,903
Nice rifle. A 210 gr PT should handle most anything you want to hunt. A 225 gr PT would really penetrate for big bears and moose.
JD338
JD338
