.300 Win Mag for long range shooting?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stiletto raggio

Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
549
Location
Mizzoorah
I am leaning toward a Sako TRG-42 in .300 WM. Why? Factory gun, seven round detachable mag, no mods necessary, on a purpose-built military-grade action. The bipod looks impressive, too, although $200 for spare magazines seems really excessive. I was also considering the AI since I could later switch to .338 Lapua but the cost difference is almost $2k and would definitely result in buying a lower-grade scope. Zak Smith's review of the Sako and AI in .338 LM showed they produce almost indistinguishable results and are certainly in the same class.

The other option is a custom or semi-custom rifle on a Big Horn or Surgeon action with a detachable (AI-type) mag system and a quality stock. I have heard that there are 10 round .300 WM magazines for the AI but cannot find them through online retailers. I figure a quality built rifle will cost as much the Sako. After buying the rifle, mount, rings, bipod, scope and a couple spare mags, total cost for either option should come out to about $5000.

I already have a .300 Win Mag (a BAR for hunting) and have picked up 400 pieces of "practice" brass and 190 and 200 grain SMKs. The 200 grain bullets seem to be a really good choice for the .300 based purely on ballistic tables and reloading data, but the 190s seem to get a lot of good results, too. At any rate, I've got a long time to figure out the details, but I figure I can build my skills on a .300 for half the cost of shooting a .338 and "graduate" to the Lapua if and when I am ready.
 
Just see what the 1000 bench rest guys are using for calibers, a lot of magnum .30 calibers in there . I assume you are shooting for either fun or groups but either way the magnum 30's will match the groups of the 338. Just a matter of down range energy and penetration. Its seems you are more inserted in tactical/military "sniper" platforms. I find the 300 WM more appealing because it is so cheaper and has a more usable bolt face (for rebarreling) One thing to consider if you will be shooting it enough to need rebarreling often
 
I actually resurrected the thread from last week after searching the site for references to the .300.

And, yes, Zak is the Demigod of long range.
 
Indeed he is. I believe Taliv, one of the moderators, just had a LR rifle built on a Big Horn action. You might send him a pm and get is thoughts on the rifle as well. Sako TRG (or AI) or custom build gun... 6 one way half dozen the other. Glass will be just as important as the rifle. Something else to consider. And not to be that guy, but have you given thought to 260? Seems it is all the rage in LR competitions these days.
Ah here is Taliv's rifle:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=532478
 
I recommend .260 Remington or 7mm WSM or RM. Both are better "deals" for long range target shooting than the .300.

To get a similar BC as a 140gr 6.5mm bullet or a 160gr 7mm bullet you need a 210gr+ .30 caliber bullet. That means more recoil and more powder for no advantage-- that is, unless you need momentum on target to kill things.

The TRG-42 or the AI-AWM would be good "starting points" for a 7mm RM setup; or the TRG-22 or AI-AW are naturally convertible to .260 Rem. You could get a Bighorn or Surgeon built in .260 Rem or 7mm WSM "natively" from the start as well.
 
I use a number of 6.5's and 7mm's too.
6.5-284, 6.5WSM (soon to have a 6.5 SAUM), 7mm SAUM, 7mm Rem Mag Improved, and the 7mm Dakota.
If I want to go larger, I jump to the 338.
All of these have brakes with the majority being Holland's Radial brake.
The 338 AX has one of Kirby Allen's 5-Port Pain Killer brakes
 
If distance is your game, go for the 338. The 30s and under calibers are much more wind critical. Make sure it wears a good muzzle break, this isn't an option and necessary. The belted short necked 300 Win Mag is not that great to reload with the heavy bullets seated well below the neck into the powder area.
 
Zak,

I understand the relative advantage that the 6.5s and 7mms have over a short .30, but I am looking at the 208 A-Max and it has 50 points or so over the high BC 6.5 MatchKings and 30 points over the 7mm 168 Bergers. The 240 MatchKings are well into .338 BCs with less powder and recoil and beat even the 180 grain Bergers 7mms by 112 points.

I guess I am looking at this as a "not quite .338 LM" rather than a replacement for a short-action rifle. And the "unless you need momentum on target to kill things" caveat is exactly what led me to this idea. Why get a .338, whose brass and bullets are significantly more expensive, when a .300 will launch bullets of similar SDs at similar velocities? So, to be clear, this would be my "heavy" rifle. If I reach the rarified level where having a .338 would actually extend my effective range, I may upgrade. This is one of the reasons I was initially attracted to the Sako and the AI: I could "trade up" to a .338 with no changes in platform whatsoever.

I still intend to get a 6.5mm short-action rifle. My short action rifle right now is a Steyr SBS HB .308 in a McMillan stock, and my inclination is to shoot up its useful barrel life (perhaps using the 190 grain MatchKings for my reloads when my Federal Match runs out) and look at rebarreling or replacing it. Is limited brass production and availability the reason I hear more people recommending a .260 than the 6.5 Creedmoor?
 
Here's how the 240gr SMK and the 208gr AMAX stack up to two known 7mm RM/WSM loads:
Code: 
_Bullet_           _BC_ _MV_         0     300     600     900    1200    1500    1800 | YARDS
300WM 240SMK      0.71* 2700 >    0.00    4.13   17.66   42.82   82.57  139.61  214.91 | wind (inches)
300WM 208AMAX     0.648 2900 >    0.00    4.11   17.69   43.01   83.05  140.86  217.99 | wind (inches)
7mm 180VLD        0.659 2975 >    0.00    3.90   16.72   40.54   78.12  132.47  205.72 | wind (inches)
7mm 162AMAX       0.625 3085 >    0.00    3.91   16.83   40.97   79.27  135.12  210.85 | wind (inches)

300WM 240SMK      0.71* 2700 >   -0.00    1.13    3.66    6.85   10.83   15.88   22.25 | drop (mil)
300WM 208AMAX     0.648 2900 >   -0.00    0.94    3.17    6.02    9.65   14.30   20.28 | drop (mil)
7mm 180VLD        0.659 2975 >   -0.00    0.87    2.96    5.63    9.00   13.29   18.80 | drop (mil)
7mm 162AMAX       0.625 3085 >   -0.00    0.79    2.75    5.29    8.52   12.70   18.13 | drop (mil)
In summary, the .300WM doesn't have quite enough case capacity to shoot the high-BC 240gr SMK fast enough to beat the combination the 7mm RM/WSM puts forth. Depending on which load combination you use, that's 40-68% more recoil to not even match the 7mm's wind drift.

Here's the full comparison
Code: 
_Bullet_           _BC_ _MV_         0     300     600     900    1200    1500    1800 | YARDS
338LM 300SMK      0.77* 2750 >    0.00    3.70   15.76   37.96   72.53  121.92  187.88 | wind (inches)
338LM 250LAP      0.675 2950 >    0.00    3.84   16.47   39.86   76.65  129.73  201.21 | wind (inches)
300RUM 240SMK     0.71* 2875 >    0.00    3.77   16.11   38.92   74.82  126.81  196.96 | wind (inches)
300WM 240SMK      0.71* 2700 >    0.00    4.13   17.66   42.82   82.57  139.61  214.91 | wind (inches)
300WM 208AMAX     0.648 2900 >    0.00    4.11   17.69   43.01   83.05  140.86  217.99 | wind (inches)
7mm 180VLD        0.659 2975 >    0.00    3.90   16.72   40.54   78.12  132.47  205.72 | wind (inches)
7mm 162AMAX       0.625 3085 >    0.00    3.91   16.83   40.97   79.27  135.12  210.85 | wind (inches)
.260              0.615 2900 >    0.00    4.35   18.79   45.91   89.09  151.54  234.13 | wind (inches)

338LM 300SMK      0.77* 2750 >   -0.00    1.06    3.44    6.38    9.98   14.44   19.97 | drop (mil)
338LM 250LAP      0.675 2950 >   -0.00    0.89    3.00    5.69    9.06   13.32   18.77 | drop (mil)
300RUM 240SMK     0.71* 2875 >   -0.00    0.94    3.15    5.92    9.36   13.69   19.18 | drop (mil)
300WM 240SMK      0.71* 2700 >   -0.00    1.13    3.66    6.85   10.83   15.88   22.25 | drop (mil)
300WM 208AMAX     0.648 2900 >   -0.00    0.94    3.17    6.02    9.65   14.30   20.28 | drop (mil)
7mm 180VLD        0.659 2975 >   -0.00    0.87    2.96    5.63    9.00   13.29   18.80 | drop (mil)
7mm 162AMAX       0.625 3085 >   -0.00    0.79    2.75    5.29    8.52   12.70   18.13 | drop (mil)
.260              0.615 2900 >   -0.00    0.95    3.22    6.16    9.96   14.90   21.33 | drop (mil)
 
Point taken. I've been back and forth on the 7mm/.30 issue as of late, but that chart pretty well lays it out. Essentially, I can shoot a .30 that will beat the 7 Rem Mag, but I would have to go up to a .300 RUM (which eliminates several of the advantages I saw in the .300 WM), and either are going to beat the hell out of me compared to the 7mm.

So, if I read correctly, the 7mm in either WSM or RM will outperform all but the heaviest .30 cartridges. While I like the widespread availability of the 7mm Rem Mag, I think a short action custom WSM on a Big Horn action looks pretty tempting. If I go that route, I can have what I want built from the ground up and won't be trying to mod a TRG or AI that is already in the $3-5k range.

Will the AI mags work with a case as fat as the 7 WSM?
 
I did an analysis to see what the best option for LR precision shooting up to 1mi. would be. My chosen platform was limited to the following cartridge choices: .243Win., .308Win., .300WM, and .338LM. I ended up choosing the .300WM because I could just squeak out a 1760yd shot while remaining supersonic when using the 240gr. SMKs. The cost savings of going with the .300WM over the .338LM were outstanding (whether reloading or not), which equates to more time with me behind the rifle, getting better at long range, so perhaps I can someday make the 1mi. marker shot that the rifle is capable of. When I re-barrel 7mmRM will be a strong consideration.

FWIW, I chose a Desert Tactical SRS, but the Sako TRG, AI-AW, Armalite AR-30, and GA Precision Crusader were also viable options. My next build (moderate-long range) will probably be a GAP, chambered for .260Rem.

:)
 
From AJ at Bighorn:

"The WSM family of cartridges will feed just fine from an AI mag. In
fact Surgeon has been doing it for some time. We did have to open up the
bottom of the action a little more to accommodate the feeding of the WSM
cartridges. This opening is standard on all actions at this point.
Thanks for the interest.
AJ"

Excellent. I am going to find out if the Morta mags will fit in the Surgeon bottom metal.
 
morta mags will fit. they are made to fit anywhere ai mags fit.
 
Last edited:
I bought the video "The One Mile Shot". The gentleman built a 6.5-284 Win. He hit steel on about the 3rd of 4th round.

I would rather pull the trigger on that round than my .300 Win Mag. :eek:

Geno
 
Last edited:
My buddy Ray shoots 7WSM in a Surgeon loaded from short AICS mags. It works fine.

With regard to ultra long range limits (terminal velocity), here is the same chart with mach number
Code: 
_Bullet_           _BC_ _MV_         0     300     600     900    1200    1500    1800 | YARDS
338LM 300SMK      0.77* 2750 >  2.4783  2.1885  1.9188  1.6688  1.4390  1.2412  1.0835 | mach ratio
338LM 250LAP      0.675 2950 >  2.6586  2.3160  2.0014  1.7141  1.4541  1.2337  1.0631 | mach ratio
300RUM 240SMK     0.71* 2875 >  2.5910  2.2702  1.9746  1.7007  1.4480  1.2315  1.0637 | mach ratio
300WM 240SMK      0.71* 2700 >  2.4333  2.1247  1.8399  1.5764  1.3389  1.1439  1.0030 | mach ratio
300WM 208AMAX     0.648 2900 >  2.6135  2.2610  1.9388  1.6458  1.3852  1.1701  1.0140 | mach ratio
7mm 180VLD        0.659 2975 >  2.6811  2.3287  2.0058  1.7114  1.4459  1.2219  1.0515 | mach ratio
7mm 162AMAX       0.625 3085 >  2.7802  2.4016  2.0553  1.7410  1.4584  1.2211  1.0434 | mach ratio
.260              0.615 2900 >  2.6135  2.2430  1.9059  1.6014  1.3351  1.1222  0.9765 | mach ratio
This was run at 2000' Density Altitude.

As you can see the 7's still enjoy an advantage over those .300WM loads.

One aspect this thread has brought up is that for each caliber (bore diameter), considering the best long-range bullets in the caliber (high BC range), there is a minimum case volume that will allow a certain level of performance. The example earlier was that compared to 7mm RM/WSM, the .300WM does not have enough case capacity to shoot comparably-high BC bullets fast enough to have equal ballistics.

A corollary point is that as caliber increases, a bullet of the same profile/design and construction will have a higher BC value. This can be restated that for bullets of the same design and construction, the longer one will have a higher BC value. However, as you get to larger calibers, you need more mass to meet the same BC value, and so you need more powder, and a bigger case, and then get more recoil, etc.

If we define "efficient" to mean a certain level of long-range wind/trajectory performance at a minimum amount of powder burned and recoil, then it's easy to see why the 6.5mm is more "efficient" than the 7, the 7 more "efficient" than the .30, etc.

This is why 6.5's and 7's dominate the winning ranks at practical long-range matches.
 
After checking out Midway, Wideners and Natchez, it looks like 6.5 and 7mm match-grade bullets are essentially the same price. .260 brass seems to be a bit cheaper and much more plentiful, but you definitely give up some performance compared to the 7mm WSM. The .260 will give higher magazine capacity (10 versus 6 or 7), but I am not sure how much of a factor that is in practical rifle competition. Anyone care to chime in on this issue?

Either cartridge will cover me for practical shooting up to 1200+ meters, which is a lot farther than I ever thought I'd shoot. If I get decent, I may still consider a .338 LM in the future, but with the understanding that everything--rifle weight, component cost, recoil, etc--will be in a totally different class. Why should I go with either?

Also, I assume the reason cartridges like the 7mm RUM are not popular are blast/recoil and greatly reduced barrel life. Would you say there is a velocity "ceiling" for practical shooting cartridges? Nobody seems to use loads over 3100 FPS or so, and a great many start off in the mid 2000s. I guess if you are burning enough powder to push a smaller bullet at 3500 fps, the conventional wisdom is to go with a larger bore, similar designed bullet.
 
If I am competing with the max range at 1000 yards I'd just as soon shoot my .260 (vs. the 7 RM). Both guns shoot very similar, but I'd just as soon take less recoil.

A lot of our matches around here have 5 or 6 round stages, so having >= 6 round mags is nice. But you can win these matches (Steel Safari and Sporting Rifle) by single loading into the port if you are efficient.

I don't think there is a velocity ceiling per se - however as a side issue I know of quite a few matches that limit muzzle velocity to 3200 fps for target longevity reasons. I think that once you get to 3100 fps you'd either be better off stepping up to a heavier bullet in the same cartridge (higher BC) - or - you're past the bang for buck point on barrel life.
 
Zak,

Thanks so much for your help. Do you have any preferences on barrel makers? I'm leaning toward a Lilja 28". Also, since I know you are a huge AI fan, I am considering the AICS 2.0. The McMillan A-4 and A-5 or a Manners custom are also on my short list, although they will require separate bottom metal for the AI mags.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Opinion: Armalite AR-30 in 338 lapua mag
Replies
2
Views
882
Geno
G
S
  • Locked
.338 Win Mag for long range shooting
Replies
5
Views
4K
stiletto raggio
S
A
  • Locked
Absolutely confused need help
Replies
6
Views
383
Zak Smith
Zak Smith
A
  • Locked
absolutely confused
Replies
4
Views
269
Eagle1899
E
A
  • Locked
Educate a newbie.....
Replies
5
Views
399
270Win
2
Back
Top