I'll soon be acquiring a savage 110 in 300 WM. Having a 7mm as a big game rifle already, my first thought was possibly re-barreling to a round i may have more use for. However, upon discussing it with my nephews, 14 and 18, we agreed to work on the rifle together as sort of a ''tactical, long range'' sort of rifle. none of us are experienced shooters past 400 yards, but would like to use this rifle as a platform to extend our capabilities and skills in the long range department. We figure at a minimum, we'll be doing a trigger upgrade, new stock, and glass as good as we can afford. this will also be one of the first rifles we'll be handloading for. I'm receiving the rifle as part of my uncle's firearms, which i nherited and will take possession of as soon as the estate is settled. he also lleft me his reloading equipment, and i couldn't think of a better way of putting it all to use then a project with MY nephews. Finding a place to shoot long distance is NOT an issue. so....any advice....any ideas as to what we should aim for as a reasonable, hopefully achievable goal with this rifle/cartridge combination....any ideas where to start with the rifle tself, or loads or factory ammo to try first? my inital thoughts, from a sheer economy standpoint, was to start with some PRIVI facotry ammo, if for nothing else to gain a feel for the rifle and collect some brass for reloading, and its hard to beat 16 bucks a box for .300 win mag ammo LOL any and all advice regarding the project would be most welcome............
.300 win mag savage 110 project
- Thread starter Davek1977
- Start date
- Status
Spunds like u guys have a great project going!
Ive done a 300 conversion on the 110. Only issue i had was the magazines a little short for loading VLDs out to the lands. I think the savage box runs about 3.3-4 cant remeber now. That left me a ways of with Berger 180s, and accuracy sucked when loaded to mag length. The newer bullets might be better tho....newer mag boxes maybe longer as well.
Savages are so popular there are tons of good options for parts and accessories.
I would suggest going to a longer heavier barrel than comes stock on the savage 110s (unless it IS a heavy barreled gun). The 300s can be pretty brutal from fixed position when fired from sporter weight rifles repeatedly. Or you could go to a smaller cartridge like the 6.5-284, or perhaps the .280Ai? Those will both deliver good performance at range, as will a bunch of other cartridges (i went with the .250Ai for my build).
If you decide to rebarrel and stick with .300 or another belted mag (I'd suggest a second heavy barreled 7mm, but das cause im an unabashed 7mm fan), ive got a barrel nut wrench, and headspace gauges i can loan you for the install
A decent stock can be had from Boyds, Choate (horsey reminded me of these, they were very popular, dunno how much so they are now), B&C and a dozen others
Triggers from all the Majors, i personally LIKE the old savage trigger but its pull weight adjustment is course, and the sear engagement shouldn't be adjusted too short or it can slip off pretty easily. For target work i think your right, a new trigger, perhaps a timney? Would be in order.
Optics wise is where your likely to spend the most money. My only recommendation is to get the best scope you can afford, and mount it in decent mounts.
Ive done a 300 conversion on the 110. Only issue i had was the magazines a little short for loading VLDs out to the lands. I think the savage box runs about 3.3-4 cant remeber now. That left me a ways of with Berger 180s, and accuracy sucked when loaded to mag length. The newer bullets might be better tho....newer mag boxes maybe longer as well.
Savages are so popular there are tons of good options for parts and accessories.
I would suggest going to a longer heavier barrel than comes stock on the savage 110s (unless it IS a heavy barreled gun). The 300s can be pretty brutal from fixed position when fired from sporter weight rifles repeatedly. Or you could go to a smaller cartridge like the 6.5-284, or perhaps the .280Ai? Those will both deliver good performance at range, as will a bunch of other cartridges (i went with the .250Ai for my build).
If you decide to rebarrel and stick with .300 or another belted mag (I'd suggest a second heavy barreled 7mm, but das cause im an unabashed 7mm fan), ive got a barrel nut wrench, and headspace gauges i can loan you for the install
A decent stock can be had from Boyds, Choate (horsey reminded me of these, they were very popular, dunno how much so they are now), B&C and a dozen others
Triggers from all the Majors, i personally LIKE the old savage trigger but its pull weight adjustment is course, and the sear engagement shouldn't be adjusted too short or it can slip off pretty easily. For target work i think your right, a new trigger, perhaps a timney? Would be in order.
Optics wise is where your likely to spend the most money. My only recommendation is to get the best scope you can afford, and mount it in decent mounts.
Last edited:
Sunray
Member
"...a Savage 110 in 300 WM..." Add some weight, a recoil pad and/or a muzzle brake(despite the noise increase). A 110 only weighs ~ 7 pounds. Felt recoil will be high. No synthetic stocks either. Synthetic stocks increase felt recoil due to their weight. Boyd's laminates are reasonably priced.
Hornady brass is on sale at Midway. $40.49 per 50. Not the only game though. Graf's wants $34.99 per 50 for Prvi brass.
Hornady brass is on sale at Midway. $40.49 per 50. Not the only game though. Graf's wants $34.99 per 50 for Prvi brass.
I agree with Loonwulf about metrics. Better bc for less recoil. I've owned my wm for a LONG time and launched them a LONG ways, but to be honest there are better options available. That being said, recoil management should be your starting point. It may not seem like it's too bad at first, but see how much your groups start to open up by the 40-60th round! It's cause even if you're not flinchy you're fatigued! Pads, weights and brakes would all help. Then, a good, reliable optic. Bipod or good bags will be worthwhile as well. Heavier longer barrels will not be amiss either.
yeah, definitely going to be adding some ''beef'' in terms of stock, barrrel, etc as well as likely putting on a brake [having one on my 7mm mag, i'm familiar with the added concussion and whatnot involved with one]. while not set in stone by any means, the .300 is what i have, or will have shortly, rather. I suppose with a 110 being what it is though, if i were going to rebarrel, rechambering really isn't the issue it is with some guns. using the same bolt face and what, what would give me the ''best'' long range performance in a long action round, with the minimal amount of recoil..... in the interest of economy, maybe something in the 6.5 caliber [one less caliber bullet to buy], as i also just acquired a savage model 11 trophy hunter in the Creedmore variety, but that rifle will be a lighter weight hunting rifle.
Youll need to change your bolt head to use it but the 6.5-284 would be a great option in that long action. Youll be able to load out and get the most of the available case capacity. Since you have a magnum magazine it's likely some judicious bending of the mag lips will allow it to feed correctly with little work.
Another option sticking with the bolt face and also taking advantage of the Magnum box, would be the .264Win mag. Out of a long tube that thing should be a lazer with 140s. As you already have a 7 you might want to consider that for economy sake, but really on a fresh build, Go for broke!.....ish
Another option sticking with the bolt face and also taking advantage of the Magnum box, would be the .264Win mag. Out of a long tube that thing should be a lazer with 140s. As you already have a 7 you might want to consider that for economy sake, but really on a fresh build, Go for broke!.....ish
Last edited:
yeah, i now the ''smart'' money would be another 7mm, but i want something a bit ''different''. I've had my 7mm for about 20 years now, and love it, but need to expand my centerfire collection and experience a bit. i've pondered the .264, but have heard bad things regarding barrel life. i honestly dont know how big of a concern that will be, because i'm not going to lie and say i'll be putting thousands of rounds a year though this rifle. another caliber thats always intrigued me a bit ballistically is the .257 weatherby mag, but honestly haven't done a ton of research into it. i just remember thinking at one time it looked like about the ultimate long range mule deer round.....no idea what barrel life would be like compared to something like the .264. Then again, why should things like barrel life concern me...i have two nephews to help foot the bill on ths project MUAHAHAHAHA
If you are worried about barrel life, you need to forget such overbores, personally a new barrel every 1500-2000 rounds is acceptable for me, thus the interest in everything from .243,6.5-284, .284 AI etc etc no belt, most pop for powder capacity. The quarter bore weatherby won't be that awesome, the bc game only beats the 6mm if you run 115-120 gr or specialty fast twist ultra low drag bullets (custom make) a fast 6.5 or 7 mm will do everything you want and the 6.5 140s will STRETCH a LONG way, the 7 mm starts getting extra credit around the 150 gr. The big difference, is how much powder does it take to get the velocity you wish to obtain? If you just got the creedmoor, the Norma 6.5 will make her look slow with just a little extra recoil. If you want a target muley thumping round, the .243 250 AI all the 6.5 kids and your 7 mm are quite capable. The hottest 6.5 cartridges should be close to 20 lbs recoil on an 8sh lb rifle (if I remember right) with about 1200-1500 rounds barrel life before your favorite groups start to open up worse. .243 gets 1500 and I think the .250 AI would be CLOSE to that as well but I'm not sure. Both recoil half of the hot 6.5 loads. If you're used to the 7 mm then the 6.5 will be a breeze. For the length of action, a .280AI would fit, though the bolt face shouldn't. And give you a beltless fast light recoiling 7mm.
LOL! Good thinking
The .257 and the .264 are very similar, much like my .250Ai and 6.5CM. They basically use the same case with similar capacities.
The .264 has the advantage of readily available high bc bullets allowing the extra velocity to really shine at longer range.
The .257 is cooler looking imo, and will do anything that someone needs done on medium game at any reasonable range. The only real down side to the .25s are relatively small selection of high BC target bullets.
For either cartridge id be considering a really long barrel and slow powder, probably 28+. But i also LIKE long barrels.
Both of these cartridges have fairly short barrel lives compared to say a .308, but compared to other higher intensity rounds like the RUMs or other "long range" stalwart magnums, they arnt bad.
Also if super Accuracy isnt called for, than usefull barrel life can be extended some by chasing the lands, setting back the barrel (leave the barrel shank long) or simply accepting groups opening up.
The .257 and the .264 are very similar, much like my .250Ai and 6.5CM. They basically use the same case with similar capacities.
The .264 has the advantage of readily available high bc bullets allowing the extra velocity to really shine at longer range.
The .257 is cooler looking imo, and will do anything that someone needs done on medium game at any reasonable range. The only real down side to the .25s are relatively small selection of high BC target bullets.
For either cartridge id be considering a really long barrel and slow powder, probably 28+. But i also LIKE long barrels.
Both of these cartridges have fairly short barrel lives compared to say a .308, but compared to other higher intensity rounds like the RUMs or other "long range" stalwart magnums, they arnt bad.
Also if super Accuracy isnt called for, than usefull barrel life can be extended some by chasing the lands, setting back the barrel (leave the barrel shank long) or simply accepting groups opening up.
Here's the approximate barrel lives of top ranked long range rifle shooter's cartridges. Based on averaging 1/4 MOA at short range and 1/2 MOA at long range starting with a new barrel properly installed tested. Rebarreling point is when accuracy degrades 50%; groups open up that much.
Cartridge..........Rounds
308 Win, ...........3000
30-06, ...............2500
243 Win, ...........1500
300 Win Mag, ...1100
6.5x284, .............900
7mm Rem Mag, .800
264 Win Mag, .....600
In hunting rifles at normal ranges, double those numbers.
Combat/service rifles, three to four times.
Cartridge..........Rounds
308 Win, ...........3000
30-06, ...............2500
243 Win, ...........1500
300 Win Mag, ...1100
6.5x284, .............900
7mm Rem Mag, .800
264 Win Mag, .....600
In hunting rifles at normal ranges, double those numbers.
Combat/service rifles, three to four times.
Last edited:
So rebarrel is usually at around 1moa? Also does barrel life degrade faster after the initial 1moa limit is reached? Or is it pretty linear, and expect 2moa or so at double that number of shots?
Also what do you think about setting the barrel back and rechambering? I've obviously never done this, but its been recommended enough that ive assumed it was an acceptable practice.
Also what do you think about setting the barrel back and rechambering? I've obviously never done this, but its been recommended enough that ive assumed it was an acceptable practice.
Rebarrel when you don't think the rifle's as accurate as it used to be.
Barrels loose accuracy at a constant rate for a while, then slow down or speed up depending on several things. Hotter burning powders tend to have a sharper accuracy loss curve than others. Cartridges burning one grain of powder for each square millimeter of bore cross section area have quite linear accuracy loss for the first 3000 rounds, then the curve often flattens out a little and accuracy loss will be a bit less per 1000 rounds. Too many variables to be more precise.
Barrels can be set back to restore accuracy as long as that happens before the bore's eroded too far forward. A good rule of thumb for centerfire rifles I listed in post #11 is when that round count is reached, set the barrel back equal to the overall length of the cartridge. Be sure the 'smith uses a pilot on the reamer that fits the bore perfectly else the new chamber may be a tad off or irregular. If a .2995" pilot was used on that barrel when new, a .3000" pilot may be needed after setting it back. I've had 'smiths tell me they'll use a slightly larger pilot for half the chamber reaming then a smaller one to finish; this accounts for the slight diameter taper of .001" or less the bore has for the cartridge OAL. Barrel life on the shortened barrel will be 10% to 20% less than when new, but it's still going to shoot the same. So, determine the shortest barrel you want to have overall, then add cartridge OAL for the finished size of the new barrel's first length.
Barrels loose accuracy at a constant rate for a while, then slow down or speed up depending on several things. Hotter burning powders tend to have a sharper accuracy loss curve than others. Cartridges burning one grain of powder for each square millimeter of bore cross section area have quite linear accuracy loss for the first 3000 rounds, then the curve often flattens out a little and accuracy loss will be a bit less per 1000 rounds. Too many variables to be more precise.
Barrels can be set back to restore accuracy as long as that happens before the bore's eroded too far forward. A good rule of thumb for centerfire rifles I listed in post #11 is when that round count is reached, set the barrel back equal to the overall length of the cartridge. Be sure the 'smith uses a pilot on the reamer that fits the bore perfectly else the new chamber may be a tad off or irregular. If a .2995" pilot was used on that barrel when new, a .3000" pilot may be needed after setting it back. I've had 'smiths tell me they'll use a slightly larger pilot for half the chamber reaming then a smaller one to finish; this accounts for the slight diameter taper of .001" or less the bore has for the cartridge OAL. Barrel life on the shortened barrel will be 10% to 20% less than when new, but it's still going to shoot the same. So, determine the shortest barrel you want to have overall, then add cartridge OAL for the finished size of the new barrel's first length.
very good info, and still a lot to consider. my older nephew seems attached to the the idea of a muzzle-braked .300 still, and i guess i understand his thinking. I was about his age when I purchased my 7mm Mag, and i doubt anyone could have talked me into a non-mag, smaller caliber at that point. however, i may get him sold on the .280AI, if not now.....after he goes a few rounds with the .300 lol Then again, Loon got me thinking about just going with a 2nd 7mm, and i can't say theres much i dont like about the round. As a hunting caliber, its served me extraordinarily well. HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.............
entropy
Member
A McMillan stock will go a long way towards recoil management; I had one on a Ruger 77 in .300 WIn. Mag., tamed it down to .30-06 level recoil, even with the moose loads I cooked up for it.
Clark
Member
Bart, I first saw your formula in 1992, but I have only been a fan since 1997.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!msg/rec.guns/iC-CoKQCeW8/UF0WINR94kAJ
I am glad to see you have opened up the numbers for putzes like me. I have hunted with a couple 7mmRM factory rifles and hunted with a couple 7mmRM rifles I built. I don't think I put more than 100 rounds through any of them.
All 4 killed big game.
I am working on a Sav 110 this morning. I just got some Whidden bedding V blocks. They are 20 degrees. I am making one that is 45 degrees.
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!msg/rec.guns/iC-CoKQCeW8/UF0WINR94kAJ
I am glad to see you have opened up the numbers for putzes like me. I have hunted with a couple 7mmRM factory rifles and hunted with a couple 7mmRM rifles I built. I don't think I put more than 100 rounds through any of them.
All 4 killed big game.
I am working on a Sav 110 this morning. I just got some Whidden bedding V blocks. They are 20 degrees. I am making one that is 45 degrees.
If your nephew is anywhere near my neck of the woods he can shoot my 300 any time! And if he falls in love he can take it home for a mutually beneficial agreement, at best I've launched 150 rds downrange with it and I've had it for 12 years, I don't miss, nothing walks away after I've hit them but my new fascination is with the 6.5-284 Norma.
I've since learned rapid fire (up to 10 per minute)as I mentioned doesn't wear out barrels very much at all.
And loading for pressures over SAAMI max wears them out fast.
Powders with higher heat indices wear out barrels faster. A heat index table is shown in:
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...ter-6-5-creedmore.816749/page-2#post-10466982
Last edited:
Howard Roark
Member
An Excel formula for estimating barrel life has been created by a member at Accurate Shooter which expands on Bart's rule of thumb formula. The new estimator is user configurable for several variables not included in the original research; power heat potential, pressure and bullet coating.
Modifying these variables show that effective barrel life of a given caliber can be extended or shortened by the shooter's choice of loads.
It would be interesting to see how or if different barrel rifling methods, barrel materials, treatments such as barrel and bullet nitride coating affects barrel life and accuracy. Most likely until someone is motivated by a doctoral dissertation to research or establish reliable empirical data we'll never know.
Modifying these variables show that effective barrel life of a given caliber can be extended or shortened by the shooter's choice of loads.
It would be interesting to see how or if different barrel rifling methods, barrel materials, treatments such as barrel and bullet nitride coating affects barrel life and accuracy. Most likely until someone is motivated by a doctoral dissertation to research or establish reliable empirical data we'll never know.
That's Mike Crawford's formula. He used powder heat indices from Quickload; a good thing to do. I think his barrel life base is based on 15 to 20 percent more than my 3000 rounds for charge weights at bore capacity. He used different sources, conditions and standards than I did.
No big deal as two methods giving a small difference in results for the same load is much better than none at all. Both show that the more powder used for a given caliber bore, the less barrel life there is.
No big deal as two methods giving a small difference in results for the same load is much better than none at all. Both show that the more powder used for a given caliber bore, the less barrel life there is.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
