Low recoil defense loads for the .308

[USSR]

USSR, Yup, some snipers took the bullet out and put it in bacwards. It would do more damage that way. And, I guess using your theroy, wadcutters aren't very accurate either? hmmm...

"Yes sir, boys, ya just bite the bullet with your teeth and yank it outta there, turn it round and hammer it back in with a rock or sumthin". "But Sarge, I've only got a couple teeth left". Listen, wadcutters don't have a big 'ol elongated point on the rear end of em, and they don't travel at 2500+ fps. This is EXACTLY how Internet rumors start. Sheesh!

Don

 

[1200 meters]

If your loading your own try 240gr Sierra HPBTs withIMR 4064. test on range i
ive loaded these to 2600fps, but you can load it to slower V's. just a thought. Blitz

 

[Art Eatman]

I have a bit of difficulty with the idea of both a light bullet and a download for power. IMO, FWIW, a full-house 110-grain load in a .308 isn't much of a problem with recoil. Nor for penetration into the vital areas of a human body in a self-defense situation. (To me, "self-defense" is a rather short-range distance. I dunno. Maybe 20 to 30 yards as "defense"; farther, it's more of an offensive effort.)

Off the cuff, a full-house 110-grain load that didn't exit would have blown up inside, creating a four- to five-inch sphere of absolute yuck. This tends to be somewhat debilitating.

Art

 

[Bitswap]

Don, being a pilot, I know a little about aerodynamics. I don't think your statments are based on emperical evidence.

Let's take a look at wings and how they function subsonic first, then supersonic second. These are facts by the way.

Subsonically a symetrical wing is a teardrop shape. The reason for this shape is to prevent turbulence (drag) and to get positive control from the alierons. When the 'backwards' round goes subsonic, it may actually be more stable causing less turblance from the back-end. I'd need a wind tunnel to prove this though.

Supersonically all the rules change. WWII fighters crashed when they went into a dive and achieved supersonic speeds. Going supersonic creates a pressure wave ahead of the object. What happened to those planes is that a pressure wave was created at the leading edge of the horizontal stabalizer making their elevators ineffective due to lack of airflow over the surface.

Chuck Yeager figured out that for the elevators to be effective, the whole elevator must move at supersonic levels. Current supersonic aircraft use this design.

So what can we derive from Chuck's findings and crashed fighters in WWII? A pointed end at the back of the bullet doesn't make a hill-of-beans difference.

Maybe we should call mythbusters or something.

 

[eliphalet]

My guess is Art is speaking from experience shooting or seeing stuff shot at those speeds.
I am sure he is cause what he said is exactly what happens.

What does Mr. yeager's finding about planes have to do with bullets for self protection?
I realize I ain't the sharpest tack in the box so if ya would please splane that one to me.

 

[USSR]

Bitswap,

I'm not a pilot, and I don't play a pilot on TV, but I have shot at 1,000 yards for the past 5 years. The name of the game, as in the type of long range shooting that snipers do, is high BC bullets. High BC bullets drop less at extreme range, and are effected less by wind. Turning a bullet around would turn a bullet with a BC of between 0.500 and 0.600 to somewhere around .100 or less. Now ask yourself, why would somebody handicap themselves by reducing the ballistic efficiency of the cartridge they are shooting by turning the bullet around? And, this doesn't take into account how the bullet would be removed by the soldiers. Have you ever broken down a military round? You need a collet-type of bullet puller to remove them, and they don't come out easy. Snipers, or anyone else looking for long range accuracy, don't fire their bullets ass-backwards.

Don

 

[Bitswap]

Don,

You have a lot of experience. I've only shot 1000 for the past three years but has been bmg. I don't have any 30-06's but do have 308's. Lets load some 'backwards' and actually see how they work out. I'm tired of this debate, time to get some real evidence going. Theroy looks good on paper, but it's only paper. My new rifle is in the shop anyway and have no plans this weekend.

Sorry for the hijacked thread.

 

[LDM]

Bigfoot, I am across the continent from you, so we must be channeling or something. I have a box of Remington Managed Recoil in my closet destined for a trial use in my FAL. I have been musing the same thing as you: a lower recoil .308 for defensive purposes to accomplish quicker follow-up shots. The other bullet that intrigues me is the Barnes Tipped Triple Shot in 130 gr. Lots of testimonials as Triple Shocks opening at a wide range of velocity. The new Tipped Triple Shock has the cavity behind the tip a smidgen larger to open a bit faster. The all-copper construction would also give better barrier performance. Hope to try it in the next few months.
When I get from behind this desk and shoot the Managed Recoil, will report.
Stay safe.

 

[Bigfoot]

Yeah I said why hot rod the 6.5, 6.8 or 7.62x39 when you can just download the 308 a bit. Especially if you own the 308 for hunting already. Those here who scorn using the 308 for defence must have never heard about r-e-l-o-a-d-i-n-g. You chose your powder and velocity so you chose how your bullet performs and how much the rifle recoils. I also hear that if fast enough powders are used that even the lighter loads will function the action. Seafire, a fellow Orgonian shooter and the light load master says that 4198, Rl 7, SR 4759, 2400, Blue Dot and 5744 are the ones to look at, in that order

I love the TSX for hunting. It mushrooms reliably and penetrates deeply. For defensive use they need good velocity to perform comparably to the lighter constructed bullets because they don't frag. Here's some gel tests that show this.

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/conte...el/gelatin_308_125gr_barnes_triple_shock.html

Here's where I come close to breaking my own rules by jacking my own thread. Get a 7.62x39 for backup defense and for cheap shooting. Everybody needs one of em anyway. After days of comparing the two best performing 7.62x39 loads to the best 308 load I was struck by how similar they were. Closely compare Brass Fetchers 123 gr V-MAX test

http://www.brassfetcher.com/D&S Manufacturing 123gr Hornady V-Max.html

this Wolf Military Classic HP test (pre-Wolf MC packaging, same 8M3 bullet, same factory)

http://www.snipersparadise.com/tsmag/june2000.htm

with the 155 gr A-MAX 308 load.

http://www.tacticalforums.com/cgi-bin/tacticalubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=78;t=000433#000002

and

http://www.tacticalshotgun.ca/conte...in_barrel/gelatin_308_155gr_hornady_amax.html

Very, very similar. Not many would walk away after being hit with either IMO.

Edit: Sorry LDM this site is having a tough time uploading a Barnes 130 TSX and TTSX gel test from my files. It shows them at different velocities and the two tested at around 2000 fps just about penciled through, very little disruption. You should see this test, I'll try to upload the pic later. I wish I could remember where I found it so it could be linked. It looks like it came from Barnes site, here's the title under the pic. barnesbtests8772qe3

 

[Regolith]

In any case, if it was done, it was apparently to improve anti-armor capability against early tanks.

That doesn't sound right to me either. To defeat armor, you want to put as much pressure into as small of an area as possible. This is how long rod penetrators fired from Sabot anti-tank rounds work. They're essentially shaped like huge darts, and use kinetic energy focused onto as small an area as possible to defeat tank armor.

By shooting the bullet backwards, you increase the amount of area that the energy is being concentrated on. This is counterproductive.

The only way this would work well would be if the armor was so week that the bullet could penetrate no matter which direction it was facing. Then loading it backwards would increase the size of entrance hole and possibly increase spalling, which could increases the lethality of the round.

 

[Zak Smith]

Impact velocity is key to armor penetration. Loading it backwards would dramatically lower the BC value which would in turn reduce the impact velocity.

 

[Bigfoot]

Now it won't show. Can someone more web savy than me help here?

 

[LDM]

Bigfoot, thanks for that specific info. I will probably try the RL7 with the Barnes 130 gr. when I get around to it. BTW that bullet is available loaded from CorBon in .308, but...it's $40+ a box! Also, good info as to expansion threshold at 2000 fps.
Concur that a .308 loaded down is functionally equivalent of 7.62 or even a .30-.30, neither of which is a slouch in stopping. In a domestic defense situation, over 200 yards is...homicide. And even then, most combat studies indicate most action is at 200 and under. Control and fast follow-up trump in my book over the ability to reach 200+. And even then with an FAL, change mags to a heavier load and turn a click or two on the gas regulator and you're in the game.
Stay safe.

 

[Bigfoot]

Hey, look what I found. Thanks Google.

http://www.gunsandhunting.com/Extraordinary.html

 

[LDM]

Bigfoot, that is a great article with solid info. I will be trying the Barnes .308 130 gr. TTSX. Will advise.
Advances in bullet design and construction in the last 10 years or so, are really making me re-think conventional wisdom and old habits. What were my first line bullets are now looking like plinker fodder.
Lighter & faster, less recoil, but with expansion & penetration. That's what what I am taking away form this.
The enemy of good enough, is better.
But I'm still gonna use 165 gr. bonded on feral hogs.
Stay safe.

 

[Mannlicher]

Messing around with something, trying to fix things that are not broken........ waste of time and effort.
147 to 170 grain FMJ is just fine for defense.

 

[Bigfoot]

The 147 gr Nato ammo penetrates point foreward about 6" then tumbles. Not exactly stellar performance.

The 170 gr FMJ? Doesn't exist, but the 168 gr and 175 gr FMJ versions perform similarly to the 147.

Good thing we arn't limited to ball ammo like the military is.

 

[USSR]

The 170 gr FMJ? Doesn't exist...

The Lapua 170gr D46 FMJBT bullet.

Don