Went to a gun show in Reno today and sold all my 200 gr 308 cal Barnes X bullets, bought several boxes last year at a very good price. I could not get over 2750 fps with these bullets, tried RL 17, RL 19, Ramshot magnum and IMR 4831, The people at Barnes told me the reason is because of the long bearing surface, pressures max out before max speed is achieved. I am thinking of purchasing either 200 gr Partitions or the ttsx bullets, anybody have any advice or pet loads that they would care to share, any help of advice is appreciated.

I have been shooting 200 grain AccuBonds over 69.0 grains of IMR 7828sc and CCI mag primers in R-P cases. They clock a little over 2,900 fps out of my CZ Model 3, and just under 2,950 fps from a Winchester Model 70 (New Haven manufacture). They shoot sub-MOA in both rifles and I used one to take the biggest-bodied elk that I have ever harvested a few years ago.

Along with the 200 gr Barnes bullets which have more bearing surface touching the bore as Barnes says, you may also have a slightly slower bore as well.

Not trying to make you feel too bad, but here are some #s from my own particular 300 WSM.

66.0 gr RL22; 210 gr Berger VLD @ 2732 fps.
68.0 gr RL19; 200 gr Nosler A/B @ 2818 fps.
66.5 gr RL17; 175 gr Berger VLD @ 2983 fps.
65.3 gr RL17; 190 gr Berger VLD @ 2894 fps.

A little slow maybe? Now to really pee you off! LOL!

Those are out of a 300 WSM Ruger Frontier shorty carbine with a 16.5" barrel.

Yep! I`d change to a different bullet too! And FWIW, the Berger "hunting" VLDs which I use for hunting hogs and elk use the secant ogive. They have less bearing surface than most if not all other bullets.

I think it's the bullets more than anything else, factory 180 gr winchester ammo is advertised at 2970, I got 2985 out of a ten shot average. I have some 168 gr handloads that run 3115 and I can go a little more without any signs of pressure.

Freddy, you might want to try some H4831sc with the 200 grain bullets. I got right around 2900fps(24" barrel).

I have some H4831sc on hand, I think I am going to go with 200 gr partitions instead of the ttsx bullets, Barnes recomends at least a 1 in 10 inch twist which tells me that the ttsx is a long bullet with lots of bearing surface. I did some research and it appears that RL 19 gives the highest velocity, I also have RL 17 on hand, thought about trying Ramshot magnum but I think that is too slow for the 300 wsm. My goal is 2900 fps and 1 inch groups, I might fall short of both goals, if that is the case I will try IMR 4831 or H 4831sc.

If...I ran a 300 Short mag no doubt I'd be going with the 200 Accu, 190 Horn, 200 Noz or the 200 Sierra and 7828 or the H4831 that Sam mentioned is what I'd try first.

Dober

168 grain TTSX and Rl-17 in my 300 wsm give me 3150 fps...

Very flat shooting, very accurate, haven't recovered one yet in mule deer, elk, or hogs.

Manny

FWIW, the 200 Accubonds shot well out of my 1-11" A7.

I tried some H4350 and R17 with the AB's and didn't get the velocity/accuracy that H4831sc produced. RL22 might be another good choice and like Dober mentioned 7828 might work great as well.

RL-22, RL-19, IMR7828 and H4831SC all work very well with 200 Partitions in the .300 WSM, with muzzle velocities in the 290 range. Which one shoots best will depend on the individual rifle.

Just ordered two boxes of 200 gr partitions from Brunos shooters supply, they had the best price that I could find online. I am going to try RL 19 first and see what happens.

Let us know how it goes, I've always had really good accuracy with the 200 Part. Generally a fair bit better than the 180's. 4 me, I want 200's in a 300.

Dober

I will probably get the bullets some time this week however the weather will probably keep me inside till maybe the week end, major winter type storm will be affecting our area through thursday.

I have shot about everything that walks or swims with the 200 gr. Nolser partition in my 300 H&H and you will never use a better game bullet than the 200 gr. Nosler partition IMO...I am shooting them in excess of 3000 FPS with some old surplus Milsurp 4831 powder, and they are NEAR max, but I get about a dozen reloads with that stuff, super accuracy and they shoot so flat its scary and ignore the wind unless its really blowing.

Went out earlier this morning and shot some loads through the chrony. I made up some loads using RL 17 and RL 19, I was using new winchester brass and CCI mag primers. I only had 15 rounds of brass so I cheated a little, I loaded my starting loads in 1 gr increments and fired only one round for the first few loads, then I switched to 2 rounds per load with one half grain increments. Results were kind of mixed.

RL 19
63 gr 2640
64 gr 2666
64.5 gr 2686
64.5 gr 2666
65 gr 2688
65 gr 2699

RL 17
59 gr 2651
60 gr 2666
61 gr 2749
61.5 gr 2760
61.5 gr 2766
62 gr 2812
62 gr 2789
62.5 gr 2842
62.5 gr 2830

Bolt lift was normal on all the loads, the only thing I noticed was that the primers on the 62 and 62.5 gr RL 17 loads were much flatter than the the 61.5 gr load, all the primers on the RL 19 loads looked normal. I know I can go more on the RL 19 but Nosler lists 66 gr as max and I don't think it will catch RL 17 without going over 66 gr and I don't like going over book maximum. I also measured case head expansion, all loads were under .0008 expansion except the 62.5 RL 17 load which expanded .001. I am not sure what to do, thinking of going with 61.5 gr RL 17 and see how accurate it shoots, I am out of new brass, have some H 4831 on hand but I am using that for my 264 mag, also have some Ramshot Magnum on hand but I think that is to slow for the 300 wsm. If anyone has the quickload program I would appreciate it if you would run these loads for me and send me some information via PM, any more advice or help is appreciated.

62.5 grs of R17 was max in one rifle, I also got around 2830fps.

68-69 grs of H4831sc worked well.

seems like 2800 would be fine for this bullet.

I believe you're limiting the true potential of the .300 WSM when you load up 200-grain bullets for it. They extend too far into the casing, and it affects powder capacity too much IMHO.

I know there are going to be folks who disagree with me and will give me a message board flogging for saying all that, but relax guys. It's just my opinion.

I've owned and loaded for six 300 WSM's and have run 200's in every one with a variety of powders and have never found anything you've written to be true.

There, there's your flogging (grin)...

Thanks. I just think that past 250 yards is where it is going to suffer the most. Inside of that, no problem. I would much rather use either a 165- or 180-grain load in mine, and my favorite bullet for it is the 180-grain Nosler Accubond, though. My Steyr loves those darn things.

So, you're thinking that the 200 is gonna suffer at ranges past 250? Actually it's gonna begin to take over at the longer ranges.

Running 200's in the 2850-2900 range isn't chump change is one heck of a good load especially for those hunting elk and for those looking to go long. And with people getting speeds in the 2850-2900 range I'd say that the bullets are not taking up too much case capacity.

What bullets and powders did you work with that you found that the bullets took up too much case capacity?

Last thought, I've used the 250 SMK which is a fairly long bullet in my 338 WSM and never found it to take up too much space.

Floggin Part 2 over....grin, but truly I'd like to hear about your experience with the 200's and what lead you to this thought process?

Many thx

Dober

200's past 250 is where the 300 WSM shines as an elk round.

My fav accuracy load

200 AB
N-165 71.6 grains
Win primer
Norma case

2,900 mv 1.5" groups at 300.

I shot a couple of them in Canada on a whitetail hunt a few years back. Once was with the Speer Grand Slam 200 grainers, and the other was the Nosler Accubond. Both were loaded with Reloder 22, and both seemed to start to drop faster than the 180's I shot past 250 yards.



Do you mean .325 WSM?



The energy isn't really what draws questions in my mind, just the velocity. Yeah, the 200's are going to hit more like a truck, and I could be wrong about everything I've said so far, but I just feel you get the best of all things considered with 180's as compared to 200's, that is all.

Oh, one more thing, I absolutely love the state of Montana. It's one of 3 states I'd like to live in somewhere along the way.

You may be bothered by the idea of the 200 grain bullet having its shank hanging down below the case neck. Any guesses about what it does in a 300 Weatherby?

Having never shot a .300 Wby, I wouldn't even want to venture a guess, and I'm spitballing here, but I am guessing that the .300 Wby casing will hold considerably more powder than the .300 WSM casings will. Does that sound about right?

And it's not so much about the shank going below the case neck which bothers me. What concerns me is more about how much the bullet shanks on 200-grain bullets sit below the case neck once they're seated. After my trip to Canada, I started looking for answers why I was getting bullet drops, and when I looked at a bullet next to a seated round, it was almost numbing to me as to how far into the case it was seating. To me, it was just eating up too much of the case capacity.

It hangs down in the Weatherby too, about the same as in the WSM.

Yes, but there is much more case powder capacity with a .300 Weatherby than with the .300 WSM.

I shot .200's all the time in my .300 Win Mags, but since I could load up to 10 more grains of powder in a typical load, it didn't concern me nearly as much.

True. I'm just saying the relative standings of 308, 30-06, 300 WSM, 300 Win. and 300 Wby. don't shift much with changes in bullet weight.

...............After the 300 WSM first came out, there were concerns and as was written, that because of its shortened case, which in turn reduced powder capacity, that the velocity would suffer using the 200 grainers. It was touted by writers that the 300 WSM velocity "really would" suffer (compared to the 300 Win), when using the 200 grain bullets and that this cartridge is better suited for the 180s and lighter!!.............Absolute horse puckey!!!

Well! So they thought anyway! From a 24" barrel using the 200 grainers and as someone stated before, 2850, 2900 and to slightly over 2900 fps, is extremely good for the shortened 300 WSM case with less powder capacity when using the 200 gr bullets. Gees! I can get 2732 fps using a 210 gr VLD and RL22 out of my 16.5" barreled 300 WSM Ruger shorty carbine, and I haven`t even tried RL17 yet with that bullet which will probably get me to 2800 fps or there-abouts.

Since those velocity #s happen to be reality from a 24" barrel, then why would it matter how deep into the casing the bullet`s shank or bottom needs to be even though the powder capacity is reduced???

Per the 49th Edition Lyman Manual; quote............."Ballistics of the 300 WSM averaged 30 to 50 fps below the full sized 300 Winchester Magnum, while consuming around eight to ten percent less powder in our lab tests.".........unquote.

I`d say that`s a pretty good deal. On the range, or when hunting any animal, an average reduction of 30 to 50 fps in any bullet weight (the 200s included), is absolutely meaningless. And in reality, even a 100 to 150 fps difference is meaningless as well.

So this business about the 300 WSM velocity levels suffering when using 200 gr bullets??,,,,That is absolute BULL***T!! Originally, that probably got started by some rag tag writer who was probably more biased towards the 300 Win, who just maybe didn`t care too much for the new shorty competition!!!!

Well we sure agree on the Montana thingy...over the weekend I spent Saturday taking the daughter and grandkids fishing. They had a super day and wore me plumb out..grin If you get this way this summer and we'll hit the river and rip some lips!

Sunday after church the wife and I took a hike for bruins, saw elk,sheep,goats but no billy the bruin. Had an Amazing day!

And nope I meant 338 WSM... (M70,3 weight Schneider cut to 21", I call it Fat Bastad")

Dober

I got it from personal observations based upon where said bullets were hitting at given ranges. The 200-grainers were hitting lower than the 180's that I loaded and took along, and all were loaded to the max recommended powder charge with RL-22. I didn't need a magazine hack or anyone else to make my mind up for me, so take a valium and settle down. As I said several times before, it's just a personal opinion.

What is a .338 WSM? A necked-out .325 casing?

Yeah I can make cases out of the 300 or the 325, but since the 325 came out that's what I've been using as it's just a bit easier.

I'm a tish bit of a 33 cal nut case.

Dober

Mark what kind of speed do you get with 225's, 250's, 275's from the 338WSM? Is it in 338-06 class or a bit more?

I work with a gunsmith who does rebarreling and such, and people are all the time coming up with chamberings which amount to wildcat cartridges. One of the most popular versions around here is the .300 Whisper.

Jimmy-to save time this morn I'll just say that with the 180's to 250's subtract 100 fps from the 338 Win Mag and it's pretty much what you've got.

About the 275's that I can recall I've not ever run them in it. But, I might of tried the 275 Speer..would have to check the records.

I found that the sub 100 fps of the original mag to be true of the 300 and 270 wsm's as well. They're very very close to the original mags but 100 fps is the diff. 4 the most part, how's that for being non commital...grin

Dober

...............I wasn`t trying to make up your mind for you! And, any frustration that I seemed exhibit regarding this subject was not directed towards you in any way.

So, I don`t need any valium, nor do I need to settle down.

so Mark, we NEED a 9.3WSM, wait a minute JB already did this!

bigsqueeze,

I don't know who the "writers" were who "touted" that with 200-grain bullets the .300 WSM "really would" suffer. To my knowledge, I published the first article on handloading the .300 WSM and I'd found that 200's worked just fine, getting around 2900 with (as I recall) H4831 and RL-22.

But one of the Winchester ammo representatives at the time the .300 WSM was introduced did say at one of the writer get-togethers that 200's wouldn't work. Now, he wasn't one of the techies, but a sales/marketing guy, and never said how he knew this.

My guess was that he was just parroting the same old BS some old-time gun writers pushed for years, and really didn't know anything. Maybe the "writers" you read just repeated what he said, but I didn't, since I actually tested a bunch of handloads in the .300 WSM before writing about it.

I wouldn't make so much of this except that over the years I have grown quite weary of claims that "writers" say this, or "writers" say that. In fact at one gun show where my wife and I had a table, one guy came up and looked at the books. When he deduced that I was gun writer, he immediately went into a rant about "you writers saying the .270 isn't enough for African game."

At first I gently tried to tell him that I had never written anything like that in my life, but when he just kept ranting I finally had to get in his face and tell him to fold it five ways and put it where the moon don't shine. He was somewhat startled, perhaps because up to that point he'd been so self-entertained, but did shut up and move on.

I know a lot of gun writers and often they don't agree on anything, anymore than 100 Internet posters agree on anything.

I`m with ya all the way on this one! I cannot recall the names of specific writers, but have read these deductions when it comes to the 300 WSM and 200 gr bullets; basically saying that the 200 grainers are too long thereby decreasing the powder capacity, which in turn diminishes performance.

Just now thought of something!!!

Well! Well!! Looky at what I read in my Edition V Sierra Manual under the 300 WSM summary!!

About half way down I read.....Quote....."Given the similarity in velocities, most comments concerning the 300 Win Mag apply equally to the 300 WSM. One important difference is that because of OAL limitations set by the action length, THE 300 WSM IS PROBABLY BEST WITH MEDIUM TO LIGHT HEAVYWEIGHT BULLETS OF 150 TO 180 GRAINS. THE HEAVIER 200 AND 220 GRAIN BULLETS WILL REQUIRE A SEATING DEPTH THAT PLACES TOO MUCH OF THE PROJECTILE INSIDE THE CASE. THIS REDUCES AVAILABLE CAPACITY THAT IN TURN, REDUCES PERFORMANCE LEVELS."....Unquote

Any cartridge, regardless of case capacity or lack of it, WILL ALWAYS fire a lighter bullet faster??? I also see four loads in my Sierra manual showing 24" tubed 300 WSM 200 gr velocities at 2850 and one load at 2900 fps. By comparison, a "26" tubed" 300 Win Mag, shows one loading at 3000 fps and five loads at 2900 fps.

I don`t see or understand how the 300 WSM can be labeled as,,,,,"probably at its best with 150 to 180 gr bullets because of its reduced casing capacity." Sure! the lighter 150s and 180s will move faster. But that also applies to the 300 Win and all other cartridges....

Then wouldn`t the 300 Win with its full sized casing, given the same comparison,,ALSO,,be better with 150 and 180 gr bullets as opposed to the 200 grainers?

Any 30 cal round, shorty mag or otherwise, that uses a longer and heavier bullet, will certainly have reduced powder capacity and in turn, reduces velocities.

So what began several years ago with opinions in labeling the 300 WSM as an inferior performer using 200 grain bullets, has apparently carried over into at least one reloading manual`s summary,,,namely Sierra!

The only compressed loads I ran into was a 200 AB(at 2.880"COL) and +68 grs of H4831sc and a caseful of R22 and 180 TSX.
Trying to remember but I think the powder was crunching enough that I used a droptube. Not too big of a deal

Mule, Bigsqueeze,

For whatever it is worth to either one of you, I don't have a copy of a Sierra reloading manual and never have owned one. The three I get my load data from primarily are Nosler, Hornady, and Swift. Occasionally, I will get data from powder companies, but most of the time, I get my data from the 3 manuals I just named, and I never consult the commentaries other than maybe to see where the chambering in question originated from.

I simply did not care for the bullet drops I got in Canada 3 years ago when I shot 2 different 200-grain loads, and I loaded the things almost religiously and exclusively when I lived in Alaska. I'm one of those people who likes to find reasons why something went wrong and try to fix it. When I compared an unloaded bullet to one which was fully seated into a loaded case, I simply arrived at the conclusion that the reason for the drops I observed was that the bullet itself was cutting too far into the case's powder capacity, thus negatively affecting its downrange performance. Never at any time did I consult a reloading manual to arrive at that conclusion.

And no, the .300 Win would not necessarily be subjected to the same reduced capability as was previously described. The reason has to do with the fact that there will be more powder in the .300 Win Mag casing than in the .300 WSM, and that difference can be as much as 15 grains depending upon the powder you're using.

I am someone who loves shooting his .300 WSM, and in fact, it is the one rifle which outperforms everything I've ever owned. Even still, we would all come across as being terribly naive if we didn't recognize that there are limitations with every load and chambering we could name, wouldn't we? The 180-grain load is no slouch in the .300 WSM, and it may be the best overall choice for that chambering.

What we have all been discussing may be a big part of why ammo companies aren't loading too many 200-grain rounds in the .300 WSM. In fact, right off the top of my head, I cannot think of even one company which is doing so.

SPH, what's your favorite powder/bullet for the 300 WSM.

Brad's reports got me to give R17 a try.
Glad I did, H4350 was good with 180's but I like R17 even more.
Very consistent powder and IMO less sensitive to temps than H4350.

175 SMK's/Nosler CC's and 180 Partitions shoot great.

I am very fond of my Kimber classic 300WSM. I have a new load which consists of a 180 accubond over 61 grains of Viht N550 with a CCI LR magnum primer. This lays 5 of them into an inch at 100. I wish I had a 300 yard range to shoot at, I need to practice at further distance. So far I am very fond of that Kimber, I guess I will just shoot it until the barrel wears out.

Mule Deer,

Amazing how one guy at a gun show can decide you represent "all" gun writers. Instead of just asking for your opinion of using a .270 in Africa...

Reloder 22 & 180-grain Nosler Accubonds. I prefer using Winchester Long Rifle primers when available, but right now I have to take whatever I can get my mitts on.

Speer Grand Slams are a close second, though.

I've used RL22 behind a 200grn Nosler Partition in my .300 H&H for years. It works great on elk.

I tested some 200 gr NP loads in my 300 WSM LH Win 70 yesterday.
WW Brass CCI Mag primer 61 gr of RL 17 3@ .75" @ 100 yards. Forgot tripod for the chronograph. Went up to 62 gr of RL 17 but accuracy was around 2.5".

I worked up a load with 61.5 gr of RL 17 and the Nosler 200 gr Partition, will go out in a few days to check for accuracy.

Let me know what kind of velocitys you get with 61 gr of RL 17 & 200 gr bullets?

It will be a few days before I get out to shoot again, going to try to go out either sunday or monday.

Finally got a chance to see what the 200 gr partition will do with 61.5 gr of Rl 17. First group went 1.47 inches, two rounds close togeather and one round about 3/4 inch to the left and 1/4 inch high. Second group measured 1.12 inch with two rounds almost touching and one off to the left and high, the third round produced the flyer on both groups. I am at 2.850 oal, thinking I should seat the bullet out a little more.
Chrony results were very good, I used once fired brass for all the tests.

1. 2766
2. 2783
3. 2777
4. 2772
5. 2783

Average velocity 2776
Extreme spread 17
Standard deviation 7
Thats the lowest SD that I have ever gotten with any load.
If I can get a good group without a flyer it's looks like I may have a winner.

I have had really great luck with 58 gr of H4350 and the 220 gr Sierra Match King. My 5 shot groups are sub .4 MOA. Shot out of a 1:10 Hart barrel.

Just one more comment on this thread. It's easy to predict what velocity a new bullet weight should get in any given case by a simple mathematical formula, if you know the potential velocity of another bullet in that case:

1) Add the two bullet weight together.
2) Divide by two.
3) Divide the new bullet weight by this product.
4) Multiply the result times the velocity of the known bullet.

Let's use the .300 Winchester Magnum as an example, and figure out how much velocity a 200-grain bullet should get, figuring from a 180-grain at 3100 fps.

1) 180+200=380
2) 380/2=190
3) 190/200=.95
4) .95x3100=2945

So we should be able to get around 2950 fps from a 200-grain bullet in the .300 Winchester Magnum. This is about what most manuals suggest.

If we apply the same formula to the .300 WSM, using a 180-grain at 3000 fps as a starting point, it suggest we should get 2850 fps from a 200-grain bullet. Again, this is about what most manuals suggest is possible.

If a 200-grain bullet were actualy reducing the potential of a 200-grain bullet's velocity in the .300 WSM, then a 200 wouldn't reach it's mathemmatical potential. But it does.

Guessing that a 200-grain bullet is being some reduced in potential because it drops more than a 180 at 300 or 400 yards is faulty reasoning. Of course a 200 will drop more than a 180 at such ranges, because it starts slower--but how much aparent drop can also be vastly affected by a little difference in 100-yard sight-in between the two bullet weights.

Also, the type of powder used can have a big effect, especially in cold weather. I have seen some powder lose 150 fps or more in muzzle velocity in codl weather. This affects long-range trajectory a little, but it can also affect 100-yard sight-in a LOT, in exactly the same way that point of impact can change between loads with different powder charges when we're working up a load.

Trajectory is determined by muzzle velocity. If a 200-grain bullet chronographs 2900 fps from a .300 WSM it will have exactly the same trajectory as when it started at 2900 from a .300 Winchester Magnum.

Shot my 300 WSM Win 70 24" today with 200 Gr Nosler Partions,

Loaded 3 shots with CCI Mag Pr & RL 22 67 Gr 2759, 68 Gr 2816 &
69 Gr RL 22 2868 FPS. 66 Gr was around 2700 FPS.

With my test loads of RL 17 & 168 Barnes TSX I worked up to
3250 FPS reduced one grain to 3150 FPS.

As Ramshot does not have data for the 200gr bullet and Hunter, I contacted Johan at Western Powders and asked him for some recommendations for my 300WSM and 200gr bullets. This is his reply.

Caliber: .300 WSM � Winchester Short Magnum.

Barrel length: 24�

Powder: Ramshot --- HUNTER.

Bullet weight: 200 grains.

Start load: 56.7 grains (2500 � 2600 ft/p/sec)

Maximum load: 63.0 grains (2800 � 2900 Ft/p/sec).


I don't have my numbers in front of me, but if I recall correctly my velocities were pretty close to his data in my CZ Model 3.

Great tip, thanks!

Went out and shot some more groups, seated the bullet out an additional .010 from 2.850 to 2.860 oal, groups went from 1.17 inch to .959, flyers are gone. I am satisfied with this performance.