My beautiful 1899, 250-3000 has a wee bit of an issue with Nosler E-tips. It seems they ain't that stable, even at 25 YARDS!!!!!....
I had a box of them and had to at least try a few so I loaded up 15 of them. I'm thinking they might be good for charging bear at 25 yards. I'd imagine they hit hard hitting sideways at that range....
Now to go get some 87 grain Speer's or Sierra's.
If God wanted us to be vegetarians, he would have made broccoli more fun to shoot!
If guns kill people, does that mean I can blame misspelled words on my pencil?
Did you try them to see if they spun around to hit nose first at 50 yards, and then at 75 yards to see if they were hitting sideways again? I bet they're nose-on at 100 yards then if that's the case. You might want to check that.
How do we know that a bullet fired at a 600 yard target doesn't stop for a second and do a little pirouette at the 314 yard mark before continuing on its way? Inquiring minds want to know.
"You can lead a man to logic, but you cannot make him think." Joe Harz "Always certain, often right." Keith McCafferty
Holy cow, good thing they didn't boomerang and head back your way. Had the same thing with 115 gr ballistic tips. 87 gr v max shoot good, and an old box of Sierra 100 gr flat base do ok.
If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics are questionable.
I fired the first five and just looked through the scope an saw they were high and right. Messed with the scope and the next group just dropped a bit. So I walked up and looked for quite a few seconds before I realized every one went in sideways. In over 45 years of shooting, I've never seen that before.
If God wanted us to be vegetarians, he would have made broccoli more fun to shoot!
If guns kill people, does that mean I can blame misspelled words on my pencil?
Les and I were joking about a dozen or so years ago about 117gr roundnose out of a 250-3000, so I gave it a try.
Looked exactly like that, except wider pattern at 100 yards. With the rounded end, it took me a few seconds to realize what I was looking at as well.
“The Savage 99 Pocket Reference”. All models and variations of 1895’s, 1899’s and 99’s covered. Also dates, checkering, engraving.. Find at www.savagelevers.com
I had that happen to me once also. It was with a 1916-vintage Lee-Enfield No.1MkIII whose bore looked bright and crisp. Unbeknownst to me the bore dimensions were ludicrously large, so much so that standard .303 British (.311") bullets must've just rattled down the bore. My initial 50 yard target looked much like the OP's. I stuffed some 8mm lead bullets in some cases (by using 8x57 loading dies to expand the necks and seat) and presto, groups shrank to a sort of satisfying size. (Which begs the question of its ludicrously large chamber neck diameter too.) How the heck that rifle stayed in service for so long with standard issue ammo is beyond me. I realize the Brits cut corners with quality control in an effort to arm the burgeoning ranks of their army in WWI, but this was, well, ludicrous.
"You can lead a man to logic, but you cannot make him think." Joe Harz "Always certain, often right." Keith McCafferty
Grouse load? I thought that target sorta looked like grouse tracks.
wyo1895 With Savage never say never. For a copy of my book on engraved Savage lever actions rifles send a check for $80 to; David Royal, p.o. box 1271, Pinedale, Wy., 82941. I will sign and inscribe the book for you. [email protected]
I had that happen to me once also. It was with a 1916-vintage Lee-Enfield No.1MkIII whose bore looked bright and crisp. Unbeknownst to me the bore dimensions were ludicrously large, so much so that standard .303 British (.311") bullets must've just rattled down the bore. My initial 50 yard target looked much like the OP's. I stuffed some 8mm lead bullets in some cases (by using 8x57 loading dies to expand the necks and seat) and presto, groups shrank to a sort of satisfying size. (Which begs the question of its ludicrously large chamber neck diameter too.) How the heck that rifle stayed in service for so long with standard issue ammo is beyond me. I realize the Brits cut corners with quality control in an effort to arm the burgeoning ranks of their army in WWI, but this was, well, ludicrous.
I think it was Frank Marshal that said he had a Lee-Enfield with similar dimensions and what a great cast bullet shooter it was.
Shew me thy ways, O LORD: teach me thy paths. "there are few better cartridges on Earth than the 7 x 57mm Mauser" "the .30 Springfield is light, accurate, penetrating, and has surprising stopping power"
My 1/14" .250-3000 will do that with everything except the 87 Speer, and my .22 Hi Power will do that with everything except the 70 grain sisk and the 63 Sierra SMP (the SMP groups like a shotgun, but at least it makes a round hole).
I gotta admit, when the bullets hit a rabbit sideways, it makes a hell of a "splat".
My 99 takedown, 1928 vintage in 250-3000 will tumble projectiles like that with any bullet other than a 85 or 87 grain bullet. It simply cannot digest anything else, especially 100 grainers. My understanding is that the 250-3000 was specifically designed and a twist developed for the 85/87 grain bullet to get that magical ‘3000 FPS’, the first round to achieve this. In my rifle, anything other than a 85 or 87 grain pill and you don’t have a chance of any accuracy. It’s physically impossible for a bullet to be more accurate at 200 yards than at 100 yards.
I've seen bullets yaw a bit (heavy/long projectiles in .22HP & .250-3000), but never make perfect, sideways cuts. Impressive, if not intended/good. Go lighter/shorter. -TomT
