No matter how much that fact is pushed, many go to the theory of the written numbers. They must be true. After shooting the Berger 195s from a truckload powder cartridge to next zip code ranges, then following up with the 300 grain 338 projectiles, it's just a no brainer. Same range, same wind, same shooter. The bigger heavy but equal bc bullet always wins. When wind isn't a factor, I'll take the 195 in a 7mm just for comfort and a pleasure shooting.
250gr A Tip in a 308
- Thread starter APGE
- Start date
Preaching to the choir! Been there....done that!
For what is worth they are available in Europe
sincerely
Filippo
ps: about € 1.1 x bullet
dcali
Bullet Maker
I hate to break it to you guys, but the numbers are right. 
Bigger isn't always better - it's all about matching the bullet to the application.
As for the 250 in a .308, I'm still curious to see how it does in this specific application. It *might* be optimal for 1000 yard F Class. I kind of doubt it, but we'll see as soon as someone puts the money up to try it!
Bigger isn't always better - it's all about matching the bullet to the application.As for the 250 in a .308, I'm still curious to see how it does in this specific application. It *might* be optimal for 1000 yard F Class. I kind of doubt it, but we'll see as soon as someone puts the money up to try it!
I follow the logic and I scrutinize the numbers as much or more than anyone. Multiple times from my own experience and many I have shot in competition with will speak to the fact that when numbers are equal on windage they have come out on the short end of the stick against a heavier bullet. Now, with all due respect we also know that many factors come into play, especially involving reading the wind, shooter, etc. I concede to the fact that a better shooter could have been behind my gun and the results may have been different. Nobody necessarily wins these arguments and I want to believe the numbers as much as the next guy.I hate to break it to you guys, but the numbers are right.
As for the 250 in a .308, I'm still curious to see how it does in this specific application. It *might* be optimal for 1000 yard F Class. I kind of doubt it, but we'll see as soon as someone puts the money up to try it!
I feel like you do on the 250 in a .308.....hope the experiment is successful, but my experiences with really long skinny bullets with excessive bore/length ratios have not been great! I am certainly interested in any results involving the 250 because the BC is impressive! I have had better accuracy without using the heaviest bullet available! Accuracy usually trumps everything else.
dcali
Bullet Maker
That's my concern too - long bullets time and time again seem to be the ones that people have trouble with. Not always, but often. The numbers do bear this out - it's not unexpected behavior. They're just less stable and more sensitive. (Shameless plug- this is why my 200 grain bullet is not quite as long as other 200 grain bullets, and the BC is not quite as high. It's an intentional balancing act of good behavior vs BC). What really intrigues me about the 250 out of a 308 is that the retained velocity is just high enough to be useful at 1000 yards even with a low muzzle velocity, which mitigates some of its downsides.
Also, they are made exceptionally well. .1 grain spread is all I’m seeing on a 250 grain bullet, but beyond that, they are just plain pretty. Any imperfection the pictures reveal are from my failure to wipe them down, specks or grease but not actually in the surface; they look GOOD, almost too good shoot.
Last edited:
Velocity curiosity got to me before the next (formal) range outing. Two shots chronographed 15 feet from the barrel. (Ranch).
The number is 2,539. Duplicated. And witnessed by my pet Nilgai. 8 twist barrel. So there is no question now whether these could be shot fast enough for a material advantage.
That is 48.0 grains of 17. This is more pressure than the brass likes, but I was wrongly guessing 47.0 to be around 2,300, so I loaded a few here, and 45-47 would keep brass happy. (The bullet costs more than the case though).
In any event coming down to find a target V is sure a lot more relaxing than hoping you can incrementally load up to one.
The number is 2,539. Duplicated. And witnessed by my pet Nilgai. 8 twist barrel. So there is no question now whether these could be shot fast enough for a material advantage.
That is 48.0 grains of 17. This is more pressure than the brass likes, but I was wrongly guessing 47.0 to be around 2,300, so I loaded a few here, and 45-47 would keep brass happy. (The bullet costs more than the case though).
In any event coming down to find a target V is sure a lot more relaxing than hoping you can incrementally load up to one.
Attachments
That velocity is great! Much better than I expected.
Right, I’m thinking that 2,450 would be plenty fast and yield 5? reloads. I was just surprised that with just barely compressing the load, the case could generate that velocity. The bolt wasn’t hard to lift though. But I imagine that the primer pocket is on a 3 load track at 2,500, (plus). I mainly shoot only open and 5 loads in a Norma .284 or Saum case is par.
Way more
Ned Ludd
Silver $$ Contributor
RL17 is not a powder I would generally recommend for F-TR loads. No matter how many might claim it's a great powder, there are also many well-documented occurrences with velocity excursions, blown primers, and other pressure-related issues in the long strings of fire. If I had to resort to RE17, PP2000MR, or something similar to get sufficient velocity with the 250s, it might not be worth the effort, IMO. However, the fact that your were able to achieve ~2540 fps with the RL17 suggests that a more suitable single base powder might still be readily capable of generating velocity with the 250s in the 2350-2400 fps range. In my mind, the use of a more temperature-stable [but lower energy] powder would still be worth the effort if velocity of 2350-2400 fps was achievable.
Any thoughts about trying something like Varget, IMR4320, N150, H4350, or some other single base powder toward the slower end of the typical .308 Win range?
Any thoughts about trying something like Varget, IMR4320, N150, H4350, or some other single base powder toward the slower end of the typical .308 Win range?
Varget is definitely the established gold standard for long strings and varying conditions. I’ll be trying it and probably 4350 as well.
edit - Varget would seem to be logically ruled out. Everyone runs ~ 44.4 grains of Varget with 200’s, even though the case holds more. If you could load that same charge with much heavier 250’s, that would imply that all of TR is leaving significant performance on the table. If Varget is optimized for the 200 below case capacity, then it is too fast burning for the 250’s.
edit - Varget would seem to be logically ruled out. Everyone runs ~ 44.4 grains of Varget with 200’s, even though the case holds more. If you could load that same charge with much heavier 250’s, that would imply that all of TR is leaving significant performance on the table. If Varget is optimized for the 200 below case capacity, then it is too fast burning for the 250’s.
Last edited:
XTR
F-TR obssessed shooting junkie
Curious if you can get enough H4350 in the case. It will depend on the length of the boat tail and the lot number I think.
I've noted here before that 4-5 yrs ago I was experimenting with Berger 215s and H4350 in WW brass for F-TR. I had a really good load running 47.5 grains and getting 2550-2575FPS, then I had to change powder lots. Load dropped to 2465 and I could not get enough powder in the case to make it work. So now I've got about 15 lbs of H4350 and 1000+ 215 Hybrids for which I really have no use.
I'd be more inclined to find a VV powder that will work, esp if you are running at the edge of capacity. That is how I stumbled onto VV N150 for 200s in F-TR. I was looking at burn rates and thought it would be a slightly faster than H4350 option. It's not, with 200s loads are usually w/i 0.2 gr of Varget.
Greg once commented that I was approaching an "event horizon" trying to find a powder that was slightly faster than H4350, that was temperature stable, and had a density that would work in a 308 case.
I do have this 1:8 twist barrel here from a different failed experiment. hmmmm...
I've noted here before that 4-5 yrs ago I was experimenting with Berger 215s and H4350 in WW brass for F-TR. I had a really good load running 47.5 grains and getting 2550-2575FPS, then I had to change powder lots. Load dropped to 2465 and I could not get enough powder in the case to make it work. So now I've got about 15 lbs of H4350 and 1000+ 215 Hybrids for which I really have no use.
I'd be more inclined to find a VV powder that will work, esp if you are running at the edge of capacity. That is how I stumbled onto VV N150 for 200s in F-TR. I was looking at burn rates and thought it would be a slightly faster than H4350 option. It's not, with 200s loads are usually w/i 0.2 gr of Varget.
Greg once commented that I was approaching an "event horizon" trying to find a powder that was slightly faster than H4350, that was temperature stable, and had a density that would work in a 308 case.
I do have this 1:8 twist barrel here from a different failed experiment. hmmmm...
dcali
Bullet Maker
They're still at roughly 1400 at 1000 according to a calculator. That should be solidly supersonic, I would think.
I tried other powders for the .308 but Varget was far better for accuracy. 175 gr to 230 gr....185 Jugg with 44.0 Varget was go to load. However with 250 you are in territory I've never been in. As already stated, I never found good accuracy above 200 gr bullets. Just as general statement you may want to try something slower burning than Varget ????? Which you are doing!
XTR, the “bore rider” free bore concept is not just to compensate for longer bullets, it’s to allow longer bullets to intrude less into the .308 case than even a 155 would intrude.
In other words, the point is to use the bore to do more of what the neck normally does, and effectively make the .308 case larger than it is from the standpoint of boiler room.
Edit: this was considered beneficial years before the 250 A-Tip, but now that such a long high BC bullet exists, it’s like adding a nitrous tank to the concept.
Also, I agree the TR rules, (as I see it clones to the two NATO Alliance non magnum cartridges) especially with something like this, permit such a freakish .308 that from the Palma head with its higher pressure handing, to twist requirements, to the COAL that would fit no magazine or chamber, we might as well stop calling it a .308 Winchester.
In other words, the point is to use the bore to do more of what the neck normally does, and effectively make the .308 case larger than it is from the standpoint of boiler room.
Edit: this was considered beneficial years before the 250 A-Tip, but now that such a long high BC bullet exists, it’s like adding a nitrous tank to the concept.
Also, I agree the TR rules, (as I see it clones to the two NATO Alliance non magnum cartridges) especially with something like this, permit such a freakish .308 that from the Palma head with its higher pressure handing, to twist requirements, to the COAL that would fit no magazine or chamber, we might as well stop calling it a .308 Winchester.
Last edited:
Upgrades & Donations
This Forum's expenses are primarily paid by member contributions. You can upgrade your Forum membership in seconds. Gold and Silver members get unlimited FREE classifieds for one year. Gold members can upload custom avatars.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.
Click Upgrade Membership Button ABOVE to get Gold or Silver Status.
You can also donate any amount, large or small, with the button below. Include your Forum Name in the PayPal Notes field.
To DONATE by CHECK, or make a recurring donation, CLICK HERE to learn how.