338 lapua/300 gr bullets/2800 fps minimum?

[Ombre noire]

Hi,

Working on load development on TRG42/338 lapua mag with H1000 (89 gr), Berger OTM 300. As of now, good results up to 400 yards but didn't stretch it yet; MV is 2680 fps, very little SD.
On the subject, I know a little, there is a lot more I do not know.
I keep on hearing bullets (300 gr) should reach a minimum MV of 2800 fps. Is this correct and if yes, why?
Rifle will be used to shoot up to 1500 yards max.

Thanks for your input.

 

[338 Mollett]

2800 fps is a strong load.Being barrel specific,and I've heard of powders getting 300's to 2900 fps.But not on my crono.

 

[Eric Leonard]

with a stout load of Retumbo I have seen over 2800 from the same rifle but at 1500 you should be fine with the load your shooting and H1000 is much cleaner than Retumbo,,

 

[R.Morehouse]

RL25 or 33 might do the trick... 8)

 

[Sniper338]

Re33 will do it from what ol dkhunt says... i havent had a chance to try it yet.. got it sittin on the bench on standby...

 

[oreina]

Sako TRG 42

Berger 300 grs
Vihtavouri N-570 ---- 92,5 grs
Lapua
Federal mag 215
0,5 mm vuelo libre
845 m/s --- 2810
disparos a 100 metros

 

[oreina]

Tengo problemas para poner foto,

4 tiros un, solo agujero

 

[Sniper338]

Tengo problemas para poner foto,

4 tiros un, solo agujero

this is america. Pero im white and habla espanol tambien

he said "i have problems putting up a photo, 4 shots one hole...

 

[Ombre noire]

Lol...Sniper338, thanks for translation.
oreina, nothing wrong with 4 shots one hole; congrats and gracias for the load. Got a few lbs of N570, will have to try it sometimes.
Follow up on load
Went to range today, 1000 yards ; cool and sunny, no wind, 50% humidity.
Loads were still accurate at 1000 (less than MOA); will shoot around 1300 next time.

 

[Bryan Litz Ballistics]

There's no reason you have to be at 2800; it's just where a lot of guys end up with barrels a little longer than the TRG.

I have that same rifle also, and run about 92 gr H1000 which gets like 2770 fps with the 300's. It's stout, but doesn't seem to show too much pressure.

Take care,
-Bryan

 

[Ombre noire]

There's no reason you have to be at 2800; it's just where a lot of guys end up with barrels a little longer than the TRG.

I have that same rifle also, and run about 92 gr H1000 which gets like 2770 fps with the 300's. It's stout, but doesn't seem to show too much pressure.

Take care,
-Bryan

Thanks Bryan; I'll stick with this load as long as it will be accurate and if it sticks at moa at 1500, i'll call it my go-to load (still will work on other options, you know...the endless quest for accuracy, the fun stuff).
If it fails at reaching 1500 accurately, then will have to add a few horsepower and see what happens

 

[Ombre noire]

There's no reason you have to be at 2800; it's just where a lot of guys end up with barrels a little longer than the TRG.

I have that same rifle also, and run about 92 gr H1000 which gets like 2770 fps with the 300's. It's stout, but doesn't seem to show too much pressure.

Take care,
-Bryan

Another follow up; Today 3/17/15, 0650 h, perfect day, NV desert, barely any wind, same loads, same rifle (see 1st post).
I used my buddy's dope chart and it got me damn close right away.
1460 yards, loads are still good; 3 shots to be on target, then several impacts.
1760 yards, loads are still good; 2 shots to be on target, then several impacts.
Don't get the wrong impression, we hit often but we missed a few times too

2680 fps will still deliver the 300 gr pills accurately at a mile. My buddy Mark was shooting a SAC 338LM loaded with 300 berger OTM, 91.5 gr H1000 and was ringing steel in a consistent manner too; Mark Gordon did a great job on that stick, luckily the TRG was keeping up with it. I believe his pills are close to 2800 fps, as he is using more powder and a longer barrel. An interesting fact was in our elevation; we both had Nightforce scopes, his ATACR x25 (moa/moa), mine NXS x22 (moa/moa), he has a Murphy Precision 45 moa cant rail, mine is a 35 moa badger. So even though he uses more powder, has a longer barrel and has more moa build in the rail, he still needed a bit more elevation than I did; he needed 60 moa elevation (for 1 mile) and I was at 59.75. It is very close but you would think I would need more elevation due to the facts mentioned above. As the day went on and the temps got hotter, we both needed a bit less elevation.
Anyway, all I can think of is that my loads may have more neck tension than his, which would create more pressure but then again, his pills are faster than mine on the chronograph...so if anyone has an explanation, I wouldn't mind hearing it; always curious to learn something.
Another good day in the NV desert; glad this load proved itself accurate up to a mile and long live the 2nd amendment.

 

[Ombre noire]

After talking with a few friends and considering all facts, we still could not explain why i did not need more elevation than Mark at 1760; so as we are curious to find the answer to this, we decided to check the tracking on both our scopes and to re-check the speed of our bullets, on the same day, using the same chronograph. We are also be looking at how far our reloads are of the lands. All of this may give us a part of the answer, hopefully ???