Ok, I will ask.
Why the 150AB? Why the 150 over the 165 or 180? Higher muzzle velocity over weight and sectional density?
I get the 180 lower muzzle velocity but is the 150 that much better than the 165? Serious question.
A perfectly reasonable question and the answer is "None of the above".
Instead it was a matter of chamber dimensions and the need for easy visual identification of the ammo. The stainless MKII boat-paddle .30-06 was my 3rd .30-06. An older M77 and a Rem M700 were already in the safe. They both had long throats and I had developed long COL 165g North Fork and 168g Barnes TTSX ammo that could be used in either. Along comes the stainless MKII. It had a shorter throat and wouldn't accept the loads I was using in the other .30-06 rifles.
I developed a shorter COL 150g Ballistic Tip load and switched to AccuBonds shortly before for an upcoming antelope hunt where two nephews would be using the rifle. Those loads worked well and the rifle and load went along on an elk hunt a month later with the boat-paddle .300WM as my deer back-up/deer rifle. The .30-06 was lighter and it ended up being my primary rifle instead of my back-up. The elk shown in my post above was the result.
Both the BT and AB loads were visually very different than my NF and Barnes loads, which was important to me. They worked in all three .30-06s but were the only loads I could use in the stainless boat-paddle. Following elk season I had the throat reamed on the stainless and can now safely use the same loads in all three rifles.
I think the 165gr bullets are what kinda put the 308 on the big game map. A little more lead than the 150's and a little more velocity than the 180's. Really good match of bullet and cartridge. powdr
That was always my thinking too. A smartly loaded 165 partition has accounted for a lot of meat on my family's table.
I have seen a few recommendations in different threads for the 150AB as a great all around 308 bullet to include elk hunting even from respected men like Mule Deer. Got me thinking what I was missing. I could see the 150AB as perfectly adequate for cow elk but does the recommendation stand for a big bull?
I hear the follow up to come.. "That its all about shot placement!"
Well I am a well-practiced ethical hunter not a sniper. So what makes the 150AB better suited for the 308 over the 165 or 180 if conventional wisdom guides one to start at 165+?
As noted above, it was the differences in chamber dimensions and the need for easy visual identification that lead to the development of my 150g BT practice and AB hunting loads. This year I find myself in a similar situation with my 4th .30-06, a Ruger American Dad gave me last summer. It is also short throated and won't accept my 165g North Fork or 168g Barnes loads.
As a result I am developing custom loads for it. It can use the short COL 150g BT and AB loads I have on the shelf but I'm working up new loads specifically for it that will also work in the other rifles - just as I once did for the Remington M700. In addition I have some 180g Ballistic SilverTip (because standard BTs were not available) loads waiting to be tested. If they work I would switch to 180g AccuBonds and verify ballistics before going hunting. Last night I purchased 100 blemished 180g Partitions from SPS. Once they come I will work up a load for the American using them.
Dad gave me 4 boxes of Federal 165g Sierra GameKing s with the rifle as well as 1 box of Federal 165g Trophy Bonded. The GameKings failed to impress in water jug tests or in the accuracy department and won't be going hunting. One box of Trophy Bonded doesn't allow much practice and -- since I don't plan to buy any more -- they aren't likely candidates, either. At this point I'm really hoping the 180's work well. If they do, the AccuBonds or Partitions will be my choice for elk this year.
