Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters . Modern 250 Savage loads

Aquired a. 250 Savage recently. Rebarreled Sako
10" twist Shilen .
Someone here mentioned some loads with R17 that were promising.....
Suggestions ? R17 or any others....
Probably gonna shoot 100g Partitions if it likes 'em.

37gr RL 15 works well in my 700 Classic and Dakota Alpine. 3003fps with 100gr NBTs from the 700's 24" barrel. Work up, as I believe max recommended is 34gr.

In my 250 Savage - a Savage Axis with E;.R. Shaw 24" barrel, 39.5 grains of H4350 gives me 3,000 fps with a 100 grain bullet. I haven't tried other powders with a 100 grain bullet, but Big Game, WW-760, and the new StaBall 6.5 should be good as well.

I haven't reloaded for the 250-3000 for awhile, but the maximum recommended loads seem conservative in respect to the 100 year old rifle that they might be fired in. Rather than push maximum loads, I prefer to use a cartridge with more case capacity, hence the 25 Souper, 257 Roberts', 257AIs, 25-284s, 25 WSSMs, and 25-06s in the rack.

I agree. If you need a little more oomph, getting a more powerful cartridge is a good idea.

It works very well with darn near any thing. One of my best is 4320.
You should have no problem pushing 100`s to 3k. Watch for case stretch.

I agree with Steve. If you need more snap get a bigger cartridge.



Dunno where this falls in the Oomph Index Rating, but have to ask why I need to pump it up? Top group was done with 85 gr BT and the bottom with 100 gr NPT with a 700 ADL, .250 Savage, very early in the load workup process..




Later on, I got bored one day...





All are 100 yard targets shot from a bag rest.

It makes me cringe just a little when I think about all of the Remington 700 Classics and take-off barrels that I rechambered from 250-3000 to 25-284 for those, like me, who felt the need for more speed.

I’ve taken a pile of game with the .250-3000 and 38.7 grains of WW760 and the old style Nosler 100 grain Solid Base boattails.....these are sizzling along at 2850ish - never really had a desire to get more out of this grand old cartridge and like others have said if I needed more speed I went to a different cartridge.

PennDog

I really doubt his rebarreled Sako is 100yrs old. Neither is my Cooper. 3000fps is really not hard in a modern rifle with modern powders. In fact, many of the newer powders are more consistent at normal pressure instead of being downloaded.
Sure, if you've got a questionable rifle, keep it downloaded, but there's no reason a modern rifle with modern powder shouldn't be doing 3000fps with a 100gr bullet.
And 3100fps in the Roberts is not a problem in a modern rifle. So, if you need more speed than that, sure, step up to a bigger cartridge. It's not really a fair comparison though if your going to load one modern rifle down and the other up.

Do you regularly download any other modern rifle? I don't download my 45 colt because of what a 100 year old revolver might need. Why would I do the same with any rifle? You can easily get 3000fps in a modern .250-3000, so why wouldn't you? If I need more than what the cartridge will give me, I will go to a bigger one. I just see no reason to purposefully handicap one cartridge because of what some 100 yr old rifle might need. In a modern rifle, the .250 can be loaded to the same safe pressures as all those other cartridges you mentioned.

The .250-3000 is an extremely efficient round with almost no recoil and little muzzle blast. It is a perfect match for lightweight, short action rifles for deer size game. There's just no reason to not load it to the same standard pressure in a new rifle as any other cartridge. If we were talking about a grand old 99, I'd agree to load it light. We are talking about modern rifles though. I love my cooper M54 and use it as my main deer rifle. I rarely hunt deer with anything else. I load it to a safe pressure that takes advantage of what it has to offer and enjoy the heck out of it. Same with my Roberts. At modern pressures, I've just never seen the reason to go to a bigger cartridge in the 25s.

Never owned one, so there's no dog of mine in this fight, but it seems obvious that if the .250 was adequate in the bad old days with the bullets available then, it should be even better now with Partitions and the like. 100gr NPs and even Sierra PHs have worked fine at 2800-2900 from a .243 for me and mine on deer; can't see why there'd be a difference with the .250.

On the other hand, there are plenty of other rounds in the same class that will do the same job and are easier to keep fed without resorting to handloading, and one complaint I've encountered in print about the .250 is a dearth of good brass, with some resorting to .22/250 brass. So I'll stick with those other cartridges unless an interesting .250/300 rifle follows me home some day.

Not answering for 260Remguy and not trying to be argumentative but I don’t consider 150 fps as “downloaded” and at practical hunting ranges and for the game typically gone after with the 250-3000 that extra 150 fps is insignificant - at least based on the results I’ve had over the last 40 years with the cartridge. If you can get 3,000 fps in your rifle and that load meets your needs/criteria then you should do it and I do have loads for my 250s (have eleven of them now) that fall in that velocity range but they do nothing any different than the load I mentioned.

PennDog

I just have a hard time buying the old rifle so have to keep it loaded down argument. The 30-06 is about the same age and is a 114 year old cartridge yet is loaded to 60,000 psi I believe. Same with the .257 Roberts. I am pretty sure It came out about the same time or after the 270 Winchester which if memory serve is loaded to 62,000 psi.

I can see not wanting to stress a M99 so maybe there should be loads for certain guns like there are for the 45-70 and 45 Colt when it comes to the .250 Savage. Also, unless there are pressure spikes in the .257 Roberts like there is reported in the .243 Win. than it should be modernized too.

I know a bit off topic from the OP, but that ship sailed before I got here.

I didn't intend to suggest that the 250-3000 should be down-loaded, I thought that I had communicated that I think that many published maximum loads for the 250-3000 are on the conservative side due to the old, mostly Savage 99s, rifles that they might be fired in. The inference being that the maximum published loads could probably be safely exceeded in a strong action in good condition. That said, it would be irresponsible for me to suggest that anyone should exceed published data. Not all people who reload ammo are competent or careful.

I have been loading for the 250-3000 for over 50 years and have around 80 rifles chambered for it, so I do have a bit of experience with it. My comments are based on my experience and my experience will be different from everybody else's. I load for accuracy, not necessarily for speed, and I have found that the best accuracy in my rifles has usually been found, with a few exception like the 25 WSSM, at less than maximum operating pressures. Also, since I have a plethora of 0.257" bore rifles chambered for ten different cartridges, I don't need to load any of them outside of their most accurate performance envelopes.

Different people with different hardware and levels of experience often leads to forming different perspectives on the same issue.

EDIT: I looked at the log books for the four rifles in 250-3000 that I remember shooting within the past five years. These are accuracy loads, not maximum velocity loads, that show no signs of pressure in these specific rifles. I am not recommending these loads to anyone.

Remington 7, 100 grains Nosler Partition, Winchester brass, CCI primer, 37.3 grains of Varget. NOTE; this is a parts gun with a 21" 700 Classic barrel.

Ruger 77 RSI, 100 grains Nosler Partition, Winchester brass, CCI primer, 35.5 grains of H4895.

Savage 1920, 87 grain Speer HotCore, Winchester brass, CCI primer, 35 grains of Varget. NOTE; this was one of Larry Koller's rifles.

Winchester 70, 90 grain Sierra BTHP, Winchester brass, CCI primer, 38 grains of Varget. NOTE; this was one of John Barsness' rifles.

The .250-3000 was originally chambered in the Savage 99, and action which is fairly strong, but not on the same level of strength as a modern bolt action rifle, and both factory loads and hand loading manuals reflect that fact. You can push the cartridge a good bit in a strong rifle. I know because I did so in a Remington Model 7. But I wouldn't do the same in a Savage 99.

I have a 250 Savage bolt action and a 250-3000 Savage 99 lever action. The lever gun definitely won't handle the pressure the bolt gun will. A friend had a Remington Model Seven rebarreled with a Hart 250 Savage barrel matching the length (20") and contour of the original Model Seven barrel. It shoots very accurately, but loses some velocity by comparison with my 24" Savage Axis. It is a really nice woods rifle.

Somewhere in my handloading notes I have the results I got shooting various handloads in a Ruger 77 RSI with 18-1/2" barrel, the 20" Model Seven, my 22" 99 Savage, and the 24" Axis. The bottom line is short barrels give away a lot of velocity.

But 99s are chambered to .243, .308, .284, and .358, so strength is there. In Dad's old 99 .250, circa 1919, Hornady's old load of 37gr IMR4320 gives 3071fps with 87gr bullets. I worked up to the same load with Speer Hotcores that absolutely hammer deer. No issues with brass, either. I gained 200fps with 75gr V-max in the 700 by gently working up to 40.3gr RL15; 3415fps and sub-1/2" accuracy. Knocks groundhogs all to hell.

While the design of the Model 99 action didn't change dramatically until the tang safety style mostly superseded the lever safety style in 1961, the metallurgy and heat treatment did. At some point in time, I'm sure Calhoun knows the details, Savage would require actions to be re-heat treated if they were sent to the factory to be rebarreled.

The Model 99 action does have some "spring" in it and is not as strong a design at the post-WW2 Winchester Model 88 or Sake Finnwolf, both of which have opposing front locking lugs.

I'm pretty conservative about the loads that I put together for use in pre-WW2 rifles, regardless of who made them or where they were made. For example, there are 6.5x55 loads that I feel totally comfortable and safe shooting in rifles featuring WW2 vintage Husqvarna built M38 actions, but would drop back at least 10% in a pre-WW1 vintage Carl Gustafs built Model 1896 long rifle. I have one of the match rifles that was built on a 1901 vintage Carl Gustafs Model 1896 and am very careful how I load for it, same/same for a sporterized Norwegian Krag that lives here. Even the Mexican Mauser in 257 Roberts that I bought from Mule Deer back in 2003 gets fed reduced loads in deference to its age.

If I want to shoot deer with a 1-14" ROT 250-3000, I load my ammo with 87 grain Speer HotCores or 75 grain Barnes Original X bullets. One of my early, 15xx, Savage Model 1920s must have had its barrel made on Monday morning or Friday afternoon 'cause it has a 1-11" ROT and will shoot 117 grain Hornady RN bullets without any keyholes if they are pushed along at over 2,600 fps mv.

Metallurgy and mechanism design..

Quite to my point. The same metallurgy and mechanisms were available to all these cartridges yet some are loaded down because of the guns and some aren't.

260
Not trying to argue with you at all as I know you have lots of experience with these rounds or directing all of that toward you.

I just get tired of people arbitrarily saying some cartridges should remain where they were 100 years ago and others shouldn't. Yeah, I've killed a lot of game with 2850fps and it works great, but really, how many of us have limited ourselves to that?

There is no reason to not load a modern rifle with modern brass and modern powder to modern pressure. Lets compare apples to apples. The .250 will do 3000fps at the same pressure the 25-06 will do 3300fps. I'm perfectly happy with 3000fps and burning 25grs less powder. At 3000fps, I see no need to go faster. Because the diminutive .250 will give such great performance, I have no need for a bigger 25. Well, OK, maybe a Roberts.

I use H4895 and get 3000fps from my Cooper and 2850fps from my RSI. That will do almost all my deer hunting needs. It's just as safe in a modern rifle as any other cartridge, so why not?

It seems every time someone asks a question about a modern load in modern brass in modern rifles, someone always chimes in about a 100yr old rifle. Seems like they could make their own 100yr old rifle thread.

With respect to the M99 and the 250-3000, the mechanism may be the same but the metallurgy, perhaps not so much. The 99 wasn't chambered for the 243, 308, 284, etc. until after the War (obviouusly). Just me, but I'd treat and older M99 in 250 with "respect".

I have a '51 EG in 300 Sav. I still load it relatively light. Brass lasts a long time, recoil is mild, hogs drop dead, and i use it only where long range shots are not likely. Different strokes...

.

When someone asks a question on this site, or sites like it, they're likely to get a variety of answers that are both sincere and different because they come from a variety of experiences and degrees of risk tolerance.

I think that the 250-3000 is factory loaded below its potential in deference to old rifles that they might be fired in.

I think that most maximum published loads for the 250-3000 are also below its potential in deference to old rifles that they might be fired in.

I think that you'll find that the four loads that I cited for four different rifles are equal to or greater than the maximum recommended loads published by the bullet makers, Nosler, Sierra, and Speer. I'm not against pushing pressures within reason, but I'm also not going to push them very far if I have a rifle within a niche that will do the same job without pushing pressure above my comfort level. I don't have any way to test pressures and the resident expert has said time and again that pressure signs don't always show up until pressures have risen well above what might be considered prudent.

I've been reloading for over 50 years and have pretty well figured out what works for me. I don't believe that I've ever suggested that my way was the best or the only way, just that it is my way. I try to keep an open mind and learn from the experiences others discuss, but if my interest in piqued, I like to try different rifles and cartridges for myself.

I did not read his post in the same way you did.

Good post.

I bought a 2003 Sav Vbss 22-250 in 2017.
I put a Lilja 250 Sav barrel, Boyds stock, Timney trigger, Glade bolt handle, homemade bolt knob, and homemade 20 degree Vblock on it.

It shot a 1" 3 shot group at 200 yards sighting it in.
100 gr Nos Bal Tip 39 gr CFE223, 2.550" OAL
62.5 kpsi 3154 fps Quickload
3115 fps chrono
3197 fps chrono
3253 fps chrono

Clark, accutrigger?

It came with one, but I took it off.

What is the standard deviation like for that load?

Stock looks very nice.

Did you ever replace it with another trigger?

I know I built it in Sept 2017 and shot it Oct 2017, but it looks like I bought it in March 2017, and was ordering parts in June 2017

I have not shot it, but I got a scoped and camo painted Savage 12VSS from a pawn shop for $475 + $45tax 3-14-2017 .. made between 2003 and 2010.
I have not used it, but in Dec 2013, I paid $45 for a used PTC 250 Savage reamer.. it is supposed to be sharp. looks unused
I got a Lilja .257-10 SS 3-Groove #3 Contour barrel for $355.00 +$20 shipping.
I got a Boyd's Pro Varmint Centerfire Savage 110 1St Generation Short Action Walnut $174.00 +$20 shipping
I ordered a Timney 63816 replacement trigger for $120 +$8 shipping
I got a Sharpshooter recoil lug for $30+ $8 shipping
I got a steel trigger guard for $28
I got a Whidden 20 degree Vblock for it for $90 +$6 shipping. I also made one from 6061 Aluminum.
I ordered a stainless bolt handle from Glade for $56 +$6 shipping
I ordered a 250 Sav go-gauge for $26.

Are any of you guys shooting the Barnes 80 gr. TTSX in the .250Savage?

Bought some to load. It should be a great bullet for it.

Here are some loads from my 2018 book, GUN GACK II, using a Savage Axis, with 22-inch E.R. Shaw barrel, 1-10 twist:

85 Nosler Ballistic Tip/CFE223 36.5 grains/3098 fps/.75 accuracy at 100 yards
100 Barnes TSX/ Reloder 15 35.0 grains/2963 fps/.94
100 Speer Hot-Cor/H4895 35.0 grains/ 3038 fps/1.27
117 Sierra 117 GameKing/IMR4451 37.0 grains/2745 fps/.85

All loads used Hornady brass and CCI 200 primers.

I'm very grateful for your Gun Gack books. You have answers to questions I have yet to realize I have. I'm anxious to get GG III.

My old Nosler #3 manual listed 35 grs of H4895 behind 100 gr bullets, the newer manuals have lowered the charge. Anyway 35 grs behind any 100gr bullet has always produced 3000 fps and MOA accuracy in my NULA.

Nosler #6 shows 35.

Good to know. I’ve never had a problem with it.

Probably of limited use to the OP as my rifle was a 250 Ackley, but since you asked about R17 I thought I would post:

Prvi Brass / CCI 200 / 100g Hot Cor / 44.2g R17 / OAL 2.71”
Chronoed 3040fps from 21” Shilen 10” twist barrel.

I reiterate this was a 250 Ackley Improved.

Savage varied on their opinion on early 99 heat treatment over the years. Some years it was guns made prior to 1928, later it was ANY conversion to 250 or 300. The factory demanded on redoing the heat treating if converting the 99 from something like 303 Savage or 30-30 to 250-3000 or 300 Savage.

They wouldn't touch receivers under serial number 90,000 for converting to 250 or 300.. in fact the factory wouldn't work on them at all, really.

And you can't convert any Savage 99 under 900,000 to a 243/308/358/etc, the internals and magazine won't work for the longer cartridges. It'd be a single shot. I don't know of any change to heat treating starting at serial number 900,000 in 1954 for the 243/308/358 guns. They just had to reconfigure the internals to allow the cartridges to fit.

All that aside.. I have too many guns in 250 Savage to want to load some rounds hot for my couple of bolt actions and risk shooting them in a 99. I hate stuck bolts and brass.. But as long as it's a sane load and not hotrodding it like crazy, I can understand wanting a bit more oomph out of it for a modern bolt action.

I have a 198,000 takedown from 1917 that I made a 6mmBR barrel for it. I shot it at pressures no large primer Mauser case head could take without the primer falling out. The rifle survived and got great groups, but the brass stretching is terrible.