.338 300 grain A-Tip in F-Open

[davidjoe]

So, if that velocity reading on the etarget above is correct, then the BC is even higher than advertised. I don’t believe I launched them at more than 2,750, yet the target read them at 2,198 at 600 - and that would be unbelievable retention. If reliable, then either I did shoot them faster than assumed, or the BC is over .9, because they crossed 600 yard target much faster than JBM predicted. Further, our 600 yard target is actually more like 612.

But, I believe I had the target frame size incorrectly entered on the system, because it didn’t save my early morning changes. No one replied on my question of whether having a larger target frame in use than what was programmed would change velocity. I still don’t know the answer myself.

Sunday, I’m going to shoot these at least one relay at 1,000 and compare them to the tried and true recipe of .284 shooting 195’s fast. (I’ve never managed ro blow up any 7mm bullet with a .284 so it’s my reference now, not the saum.)

 

[Bindi2]

So, if that velocity reading on the etarget above is correct, then the BC is even higher than advertised. I don’t believe I launched them at more than 2,750, yet the target read them at 2,198 at 600 - and that would be unbelievable retention. If reliable, then either I did shoot them faster than assumed, or the BC is over .9, because they crossed 600 yard target much faster than JBM predicted. Further, our 600 yard target is actually more like 612.

But, I believe I had the target frame size incorrectly entered on the system, because it didn’t save my early morning changes. No one replied on my question of whether having a larger target frame in use than what was programmed would change velocity. I still don’t know the answer myself.

Sunday, I’m going to shoot these at least one relay at 1,000 and compare them to the tried and true recipe of .284 shooting 195’s fast. (I’ve never managed ro blow up any 7mm bullet with a .284 so it’s my reference now, not the saum.)

All measurements have to be correct for the target velocity to be correct including distance. FYI depending on the daily pressure you will see a large variation in recorded velocity at the target. If you are anal enough you can record this so you could shoot Xs first sighter. You will need a very large book so many variables. My first sighter tells me what is the go for this application at this time. I consider target velocity to be useless info unless you are into ELR in which case it will tell you when you are running out of legs. I have made dope charts which is your next step using that info. They have all been binned I now just use a reference starting point system and sighters. I shoot on multiple ranges.

 

[6BRinNZ]

I understand the temp setting is a factor in the FPS calc...if that is out or abnormally altered due to the probe sitting in direct sunlight you could get an unusual reading at the target.

 

[284winner]

So, if that velocity reading on the etarget above is correct, then the BC is even higher than advertised. I don’t believe I launched them at more than 2,750, yet the target read them at 2,198 at 600 - and that would be unbelievable retention. If reliable, then either I did shoot them faster than assumed, or the BC is over .9, because they crossed 600 yard target much faster than JBM predicted. Further, our 600 yard target is actually more like 612.

But, I believe I had the target frame size incorrectly entered on the system, because it didn’t save my early morning changes. No one replied on my question of whether having a larger target frame in use than what was programmed would change velocity. I still don’t know the answer myself.

Sunday, I’m going to shoot these at least one relay at 1,000 and compare them to the tried and true recipe of .284 shooting 195’s fast. (I’ve never managed ro blow up any 7mm bullet with a .284 so it’s my reference now, not the saum.)

Great news.

 

[davidjoe]

I understand the temp setting is a factor in the FPS calc...if that is out or abnormally altered due to the probe sitting in direct sunlight you could get an unusual reading at the target.

Thats good information. The 195’s averaged 95 FPS slower at the target, and the two rifles were shot close to the same time. 195’s have a high BC. I do tip them but they are at .755 out of the box. The 195’s would have been fired at least 80 FPS faster from my .284 and I’d be shocked if the muzzle difference was less than 50 FPS.

At only 600 yards the A-Tips gained and “passed” the 195’s by a wide margin and that would foretell a significant advantage and greater spread at 1,000.

This doesn’t surprise me because I had already calculated an advantage over even the Saum with 195’s, at the conservative velocity of 2,750. But the target velocity gap is bigger than I and JBM predicted.

 

[davidjoe]

Update: I shot this bullet for the morning and the second match today at 1,000 yards.

I believe that my velocity with RL 25 is comfortable but not necessarily improvable as the bolt began to click on opening. No brass flow. H1000 would probably burn slower and reduce click but yield no more velocity.

It’s not immediately apparent to me that the RSAUM shooting heavies fast is in any jeopardy of being outshone in the wind.

The bullet is very finely made. It’s worth buying. However, if that indicated target velocity is indeed already at practical maximum, then it’s not going to shoot inside an Rsaum with 195’s. 195’s have crossed the 1,000 yard target some 300 FPS faster, and that overcomes a BC deficit. Nearly all of them survive the trip.

Moreover I feel the A-TIps at this velocity suffer a little more vertical dispersion from tail wind and let ups, even compared to lateral drift, than 195’s in a Magnum do.

We lacked mirage but had changing tail wind. This was the better and more representative target, before I chased bad shots in the second match.

The SD’s at the target were ok considering the wind. With an RSAUM I’m rarely if ever going to lose more points to vertical than horizontal. 7 and 17 are obviously bad wind calls but those high shots concerned me because I would expect that wind today to have influenced 195’s less, having shot that range many times.

 

[davidjoe]

These bullets’ vertical shrunk markedly with RE 33.

At 600 yards my best vertical group (worst horizontal) with them in 10-12 quartering wind was with 92.0 grains of 33 and the 5 shot group was 1.6” high.




The best head to head test I know of would be the same shooter with equal rifles shooting the same target consecutively.

My toughest midrange load is an RSAUM with 184’s.

93.0 grains was the next set of 5 shots which predictably centered higher up the disk than 92.0. Then I shot a group of 5 after warming up the Saum.

The height of each group was 2.3 inches. The saum shot 1.7 inches wide and the A-Tips 2.4.

Because shot 1 of a group is often high for my rifles, I like to also look at the four best, and on that score the saum shot much tighter.

 

[davidjoe]

Even in 1000yd Heavy Gun (where guns can weigh whatever the shooter can carry) the 338s never really set the world on fire, most sticking with big 30s at the most. With the lighter 10kg F open rifles and no brakes allowed, not many people ever go larger than 300WSM, though a very few do use a 300 PRC

Agree 100%. High BC bullet options have definitely lagged in the .338’s, and wider wind calls (done poorly) have been the holdup for me. Maybe this bullet might nudge the needle. I believe that if the caliber isn’t utilized by anyone, the NRA will find a reason to make the Fclass limit 30 cal. My plan is to try to refine the load to Saum capability, with a cartridge that is 100% bullet blowup proof.

The 30 WSM guys are saying the modest velocity big bullet consistency/accuracy and SD attraction is the draw over the sheer BC/frenetic barrel burning Saum.

Looking along those lines for that same benefit I found today in shooting with a friend who brought a Labradar, that I’m shooting these at 2,822. I had underestimated speed. SD’s in the 7 range, but encouragingly, almost the same at 600. The target velocity was also very strong, although my saum today crossed the target at 2,360. Not sure whether a “same shooter” with these will be able to out-score a Saum, but it hung in today by a point lead over a fiercely good 284 in a short but windy practice match, which was encouraging.

Edit: I changed stocks since that 1,000 yard match. The flat rear typical Fclass/benchrest stock I used now has an rsaum back in it. The light shoulder approach doesn’t work best for me with this caliber. The current set up is a angled rear (Manners T3 I believe it’s called, plus Sinclair for end sled) with an angled rear bag, very much like TR shooters are using, with a big Seb Max front rest.

 

[davidjoe]

I find the 300WSM about my limit for recoil. (Also about the limit of muzzle energy in most ranges in Australia unfortunately)

I can’t imagine shooting a 3 day comp with the 338, recoil fatigue is a definite factor to consider.

At the last world match (Canada 2017) the range imposed a BC limit that was based on MV times BC. The right to collect and disassemble some of your rounds to verify your schematic and written description was expressly reserved. They chronographed guns on the line and I’m sure would have pulled bullets to ascertain the exact projectile being used if doubt existed. We all know that the trajectory of an errant discharge on the Connaught range could obviously exceed the perimeter, bearing no resemblance to the arbitrary BC limit.

They were consummate hosts and gentlemen following an existing mandate but that kind of rule and limitation has little to do with safety in my opinion and more to do with taking an accepted bullet/cartridge combo and saying “you don’t need to have more than this can do, here.” That kind of thinking takes the “Open” out of Fclass while uniforming the sport, through its gear.

I could see the .338 LM being regarded more as an ELR or military round by the NRA. Not too many years back I had to request the state LR match program writers reconsider their 30 cal max, in light of the NRA permitting .35. They did, and I was extremely grateful. The bullet has been due for attention to match that superb LM case, and I’d love to see or show some success with it.

 

[Bindi2]

existing mandate and limitation has little to do with safety in my opinion and more to do with taking an accepted bullet/cartridge combo and saying “you don’t need to have more than this can do, here.” That kind of thinking takes the “Open” out of Fclass while uniforming the sport, through its gear.
.

This has happened in Australia in several States. One of those States holds the Nationals there (should revolve around the States). The Nationals are now just a local shoot not F Open. Why go

 

[Ned Ludd]

I'm not personally a big fan of having the NRA (or anyone else) arbitrarily change the rules to "level the playing field" due to requests from a small number of shooters. In the case of using a .338 Lapua with 300 gr bullets in F-Open, I believe the Laws of Physics will do that very nicely without requiring any new Rule changes.

 

[Tempest]

FWIW.

Went shooting 2,000 yards out west a couple years ago. Was shooting a .338 with 300g Berger and 100g of RL33. We tried to shoot in same conditions so were shooting back to back shots many times. 5-7 shots was as many as we could get before we had to stop and cool the barrel.

 

[davidjoe]

I’ve been at exactly that same place. The brass is so strong I went to 99 grains with no problem. That was a few years back when BC at 1,000 lagged (although as the distance increases they surpass smaller bullets seemingly defying the BC principle). But that much heat it did show me the cartridge won’t blow up these titan jacketed third inch bullets. I’m at 93 with 33 at the speeds above (equals 86 of re 25) and the barrel heat like a .284 with 195’s. Mild.

 

[davidjoe]

I'm not personally a big fan of having the NRA (or anyone else) arbitrarily change the rules to "level the playing field" due to requests from a small number of shooters. In the case of using a .338 Lapua with 300 gr bullets in F-Open, I believe the Laws of Physics will do that very nicely without requiring any new Rule changes.

I’m hoping Hornady has passed some “new legislation” with these A-Tips. In the past confirming accuracy I’ve gotten .338’s shooting well in the calm, only to find in the wind at 1,000 that the calls have to be much bigger, meaning “better” than with a 7. On the other hand I’ve thought they can do a plain super job at 2,000.

 

[No i deer]

That's been some great write ups Dave.
A great read..
Thanks for that..!!
I use the saum and 184gr hybrids which is my go too load..
The 180gr ELDM's shot great too until 3 didn't make the target ggrrrrrrr..!!!
Stick with Berger..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Txmack]

David. I am just starting to reload atips with Reloder33 any loading info you would like to share

thanks

 

[RDavies]

I'm not personally a big fan of having the NRA (or anyone else) arbitrarily change the rules to "level the playing field" due to requests from a small number of shooters. In the case of using a .338 Lapua with 300 gr bullets in F-Open, I believe the Laws of Physics will do that very nicely without requiring any new Rule changes.

My thoughts exactly. The 338s are not an unfair advantage, so why ban them in NRA matches? Personally I wouldn't want to use one for a serious F class gun, but I certainly have no issues with anyone who does want to try one.

 

[RDavies]

The 180gr ELDM's shot great too until 3 didn't make the target ggrrrrrrr..!!!
Stick with Berger..!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Or Sierra, they are even tougher than Berger.

 

[RDavies]

I’ve been at exactly that same place. The brass is so strong I went to 99 grains with no problem. That was a few years back when BC at 1,000 lagged (although as the distance increases they surpass smaller bullets seemingly defying the BC principle). But that much heat it did show me the cartridge won’t blow up these titan jacketed third inch bullets. I’m at 93 with 33 at the speeds above (equals 86 of re 25) and the barrel heat like a .284 with 195’s. Mild.

If barrel heat is a concern, maybe H1000 would be more suitable than RE33. The Heat of Explosion for H1000 is 3600 kj/kg while the Heat of Explosion for RE33 is 3900kj/kg according to Quickload.

 

[davidjoe]

Yes, I agree H-1000 is looking more suitable for string fire, for two reasons. Since those posts, I’ve compared H-1000 for accuracy heads up with RE-25. I’m getting better accuracy with the H-1000 using both A-Tips and 300 scenars. The scenars actually shoot as well at 600 as dedicated 7mm Fclass loads are shooting, both of mine and my buddy’s. I think the RE powders get more accurate as you approach a strong “max” charge than they are at low pressure, and that greatly increases heat. H-1000 on the other hand gives me equal size groups across a wider velocity range.