.308 load for an odd rifle

[XTR]

If you want to hunt with that rifle, and I would.... (I have a Silencerco that really makes a short barreled 308 sweet) shoot any of the flat based hunting bullets 150gr and under. The Sierra 150 Pro Hunter is the lightest I've shot, but it or any of the other light for class 308s should get you all the velocity you will need and then some to make very dead deer to 300 yards. You have an awesome deer stand rifle unless you are planning to sit a power line or a bean field.

What makes the heavies work at long range is BC more than velocity, and under 300 yards BC is much less of a factor. From a 100 yard zero the difference in come up to 200 yards for most modern high velocity bottle necked cartridges is less than ½ an inch*. Think about that for a while. Take anything out there and come up 1½ inches from your 100 yard zero and your punching center or so close you cant tell the difference at 200 yards.


(*no this doesn't apply to big bores like 45-70s and 458 Socoms, or to shutzen rifles with MVs like a 22LR)

 

[Laurie]

As I recall, the 173-175gr was developed due to the turbulent troubles of the transonic stability problems of the 168 SMK that seems to kick in <velocity and condition based of course> somewhere in the 600-800y distances.

Kevin Thomas, well known on this forum, and working for Sierra Bullets at the time gave an excellent outline of the background of this bullet in Precision Shooting magazine back in the 80s or 90s (??). I discovered it in the excellent (and huge) paperback compendium of selected articles from many years of PS magazine editions on the subject of High Power Shooting.

IIRC, Kevin wrote that the US Army loved the precision of the 168gn MK, but knew it didn't work well at any distance beyond 600 yards, maybe 800 at a pinch. They had the FA 173gn match FMJBT whose origins go back to the work that produced the 1926 M1 long-range FMJBT and which was known for its long-range stability at 30-06 / 308 Win MVs, but was now inadequate in its precision. So the USA commissioned Sierra to marry the two types' strong points and produce a long-range 30-cal bullet in this weight bracket that would also group well, hence the 175gn HPBT SMK which most people would agree fulfilled the Army's brief very well.

There was one other aspect to the tale which I can't remember if Kevin covered - that the US Army got a legal ruling that HPBT Match bullets aren't expanding types and are therefore not in contravention of the Hague convention of 1899 Declaration III which prohibits the use of expanding projectiles in international warfare. Interestingly, even now few if any other western countries will issue hollow-point bulleted ammunition to their forces and even US parties rarely or never say 'HP', but classify them under the anodyne OTM (Open Tip Match) term.

 

[Adam0321/0306]

I really appreciate the help guys. I just ordered the 2155 SMK bullets and a few pounds of IMR 4064. If it down not work out, my 25-06 loves the 4064.

 

[riflewoman]

There was one other aspect to the tale which I can't remember if Kevin covered - that the US Army got a legal ruling that HPBT Match bullets aren't expanding types and are therefore not in contravention of the Hague convention of 1899 Declaration III which prohibits the use of expanding projectiles in international warfare. Interestingly, even now few if any other western countries will issue hollow-point bulleted ammunition to their forces and even US parties rarely or never say 'HP', but classify them under the anodyne OTM (Open Tip Match) term.

The actual wording, I believe, states that bullets should not be designed to cause undue suffering, or something like it. The rationale for accepting OTM bullets for combat is that they’re not specifically designed to expand and tend not to do so. Not that they never expand just not often. But when you consider that both the 7.62 x 39 and the M193 5.56 bullets tumble after entering a body....

 

[Laurie]

The actual wording, I believe, states that bullets should not be designed to cause undue suffering, or something like it. The rationale for accepting OTM bullets for combat is that they’re not specifically designed to expand and tend not to do so. Not that they never expand just not often. But when you consider that both the 7.62 x 39 and the M193 5.56 bullets tumble after entering a body....

Apart from the craziness of international law that disallowed (and still does) the use of a low-velocity expanding 0.312" diameter 'Dum Dum' bullet from early Lee-Metford and Enfield rifles but thought it fine to drop a shrapnel (case-shot) 15-pounder artillery shell a few feet from them and chop & dice them still back in the 1890s ........... never mind today's cluster munitions and worse that make late 19th weaponry and munitions seem almost harmless. But, as you say, the irony and hypocrisy of Hague III was that its sponsor (Germany) whose motives arose from jealousy over Britain's Asian and African colonies, was the first nation to develop and adopt a high-speed tumbling rifle bullet in the form of the 8mm 154gn Spitzgeschoss of 1905. (Nothing new in the 7.62X39 / 5.56 M193 at all.) Unlike the older long round-nose FMJs with relatively low terminal velocities that often inflicted remarkably little tissue damage, the next generation of short, faster, pointed bullets initiated by the German design usually tumbled very badly. We in the UK haven't anything to be particularly proud of here as the 174gn 303 Mk VII bullet of 1910 which survived until 1957 in first line service has a large void under the jacket nose down to the top of the lead core, this designed in as it was believed it would make the bullet base-heavy and speed the start of tumbling.

Years back, reading of the work of military surgeon Martin L Fackler

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Fackler

and his wounds research work, I was amused, intrigued and in part outraged by what he said about the short-range hit tumbling effects of the standard NATO 7.62 cannelured FMJBT ball projectile. especially the West German mild steel jacketed version. Its behaviours in tissue mirror those of the little M193 only create a larger wound channel and do more damage being a larger diameter and heavier piece of metal. Why outraged? For years,as a young adult back in the 60s I'd read bleeding hearts pieces in UK Sunday newspapers about the 'inhumane' rifle ammunition used by US forces in Vietman, and the chief critic was Sweden which talked seriously about prosecuting the USA for war crimes over the use of M193 5.56 ..... then I learned years later from Fackler that the Swedish forces used a direct copy of the German 7.62X51 ball round, the deadliest bullet in military service that you could be shot with at the time!

I suspect the reluctance of other nations to use OTMs in sniper ammunition is down to the understandable fear among those issued with it, that capture in the possession of hollow-point bulleted ammunition will lead to immediate torture and execution. ........... or maybe an even greater but much more craven fear from their governments that some journo' will write in today's Sunday newspapers that soldiers and marines are being issued with 'Dum Dums'.

 

[2506]

For the deer hunting part don't over look the 125 gr Nosler BT or the Sierra Pro Hunter. I use 46 grs IMR 4895 out of a 21 1/2" barrel for 3000 fps and it SMOKES deer out to a little over 300 yards which is as far away as I have shot any deer with them. You should be able to get them to shoot fine with IMR 4064. The 150 Sierra Pro Hunter flat base is a fine bullet also but I have had more deer run off about 50ish yards after taking one than with the 125s which most of the time drops them in their tracks. For a one bullet and load combo if you can get the 155 "Hunting" Berger VLD (which used to be their target bullet) to shoot in your rifle it will do great out to 600 yards for target and pulps the vitals and blows baseball size exit holes in deer.

 

[riflewoman]

I think snipers have an equal fear of a horrific end if captured even if they don’t use OTM bullets.

 

[Zero333]

150 gr Berger Flat Base.
With those bullets even if you pull a shot it will still go in the same hole as the rest.

 

[Zero333]

I gave it a few seconds more thought....

For your 14" twist 308win, the hamBerger 155 VLD HUNTING can be the 1 bullet that will do EVERYTHING for you... Target, Long Range, competition, hunting, and anything else you can think of doing with a bullet.

 

[MrMajestic]

I think snipers have an equal fear of a horrific end if captured even if they don’t use OTM bullets.

Pilots never faired much better...

 

[Adam0321/0306]

Pilots never faired much better...

I would say more so. When I went to SERE, it was mostly pilots. Although these days our current enemies could care less as long as you are an American, or other allied nation. Information extraction is not a concern as much as just straight exploitation.

 

[Adam0321/0306]

I gave it a few seconds more thought....

For your 14" twist 308win, the hamBerger 155 VLD HUNTING can be the 1 bullet that will do EVERYTHING for you... Target, Long Range, competition, hunting, and anything else you can think of doing with a bullet.

Thank you. Is there a powder you would recommend with that bullet?

 

[Zero333]

Thank you. Is there a powder you would recommend with that bullet?

Varget is always popular.
With 155 grainers... Depending on your freebore and the brass you're using, you'll find a node around 45 gr. and 47 gr varget. But be diligent working to 47 gr. I've had barrels that were good up to 48 and I've had others that trashed brass at 47 gr.

I you prefer a ball powder, I like W-748.

There are so many powders that will work in the 308win it's kinda crazy.
H-4895 is also a very popular stick powder in the 308 with light and heavy bullets.

So yeah, Varget and H-4895 or W-748 if you prefer ball powder would be my top 3 picks.

 

[Adam0321/0306]

Thank you very much. I am using LC LR brass. I only have 46 rounds down the tube of this new build and am already thinking about a new barrel. I now see why I got such a good deal on a 1:14 twist .308 barrel. When I go to the Berger site and use the ballistic stability calculator, even the 155 VLD hunting bullet is listed as "marginally stable". It recommends a 115 grain bullet. For the deer I will be hunting, mostly under 100 lbs, I am not too concerned with the weight, but I less enthusiastic about shooting an animal with a small flat base target projectile.

I have gotten m118 rounds to group under an inch at 100yds. I know this will be fine for my purpose of hunting. However, being that this is a custom rig, I want to squeeze as much out of it as possible.

My next .308, or at least the barrel on this one will be faster than a 1:11 twist for sure.

 

[riflewoman]

If you’re getting M118LR under an inch, then you don’t “need” a new barrel. You need to go shoot more.

 

[Adam0321/0306]

If you’re getting M118LR under an inch, then you don’t “need” a new barrel. You need to go shoot more.

I think it would be safe to say that we all need to shoot more. I am just not confident that the group of M118 at 100 yards is indicative of what it will do at 600 yards.

 

[riflewoman]

I think it would be safe to say that we all need to shoot more. I am just not confident that the group of M118 at 100 yards is indicative of what it will do at 600 yards.

Only one way to find out!

 

[Adam0321/0306]

Only one way to find out!

This is true. I will stretch it out this weekend and see if I get any key holes or sporadic shots.

I am still learning this game. However, from what I have read, pushing a 175gn bullet out of a 14 twist 18 inch barrel with precision would contradict conventional wisdom.

 

[riflewoman]

Stranger things have happened.

 

[Zero333]

I though I saw 14" twist on a box of the Berger 155 VLD hunting several years ago.
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong and if they changed that.