Home Forums Reloading Big Game Rifles RL 17 / 300 WSM Load Results...

Mark, the point is advances in powders actually CAN happen... there are a few smart engineers, that know a thing or two more than me, out there working on problems my meager mind can't cope with. The 300 WSM has been out enough years now, and has achieved enough popularity, that I'd be willing to bet several brainiac's have been at work on this powder for quite some time.

Do you really think Alliant, in this day of litigation, is going to make claims that pressure data doesn't support?

It's a good thing we didn't all sit back and accept the 2,700 fps the early powders gave us with the 150 grainer in the 30-06 Springfield's 24" barrel back in 1906... 3,050 fps today is no problem with that bullet in that barrel length... something absolutely unheard of in it's day.

Seems to me a 50 - 100 fps gain (or whatever the real gain is) is relatively small by comparison.

Mac, how's this fittin the conversation? (really I think I know so never mind)

But being as you asked we'll take this thread for a slight detour. I guess if you work with enough 270's and with enough tubes sooner or later you'll find a quick footed bugger that'll do something like that. The one you're talking about of mine would do it with a book load of R22 and 150 Nozlers. I sure wouldn't be for counting on one doing it very darn often but I've seen it personally once and have a couple of buds who have done it b4 as well.

A fella will see fast tubes, and one will see slow tubes is my way of looking at this gack.

Mark, the point is I don't have any reloading manual that shows, and have never had any 270 tube that would do, 3K with a 150 (22-23" bbl).

I'm absolutely not saying it's not possible because obviously you're getting there, but to further the point, just because I haven't seen something doesn't mean it's not realistic or possible (safely).

I think that relates very well to some of the points you're obviously trying to make here.

PS Amigo, here's a pic of the full moon rising above the Crazies for ya!

Where we watched those two Antelope bucks fighting was just to the right of the pic:

Brad, the only obvious point I was trying to make is I'd like to see the case life. If one can get the case life with those kinds of speeds then it's wonderful.

The only other point I was trying to make is I'd be for thinking that if similar pressures are run with a 300 winne then it would be seeing the same kinds of gains.

I know that the speeds are real, I've heard what's been said but I still wish to see that the case life is there. I've long thought that the WSM's camo pressures fairly well and case life for me is one way to sort of play around that. But that is only how my meager mind works.

Those were my only points, wasn't taking any below the belt shots either.

Mark, IMO that's a layman's thinking... the WSM case exhibits a different pressure curve (apparently) than the WM case and RL17 is formulated accordingly, which is why you'll never see the same gain in the WM case, just as the same powders that are optimum in the WM aren't optimum in the WSM.

Apples/Oranges...

No offense guys....but there is nothing magical about the wsm case except it is tougher and being run to higher pressure. In the long run I will be shocked (but it won't be the first time) if anyone proves short and fat is faster.

There absolutely is nothing "magical" about the WSM case. Period. Everyone knows that. "Fat is NOT faster" and I've never, ever said so. Even with RL17, the 300 WM is still, in most rifles, a solid 50 - 100 fps faster. How the WSM case burns powder and what it's pressure curve is IS different and that also is a known quantity and has been proven in the labs. RL17 was formulated to work optimally in the short-fat and it indeed seems to do just that as no other powder of all those I listed above have given the velocities with the 300 WSM that RL17 has... obviously this is a hard concept to grasp.

I'm also starting to think something is afoot with RE 17 - too many folks with higher reported velocities. I do believe every cartridge has an ideal burn rate associated with the case idiosyncracies. The magic behind some of the ammo mfgs specialized loadings (Heavy mags for example) is the marriage of an idealized powder, and associated burn rate, developed for a specific case or range of cases. In essence, we are trying to gain more area under the pressure/time curve. Possibly RE 17 has done that for the WSM's.

I also can't quite understand the fast barrel thing - slow barrels yes, fast barrels no. The only way that can happen is either pressure is higher or physics is re-invented for the Ideal Gas Law. For example, my Dad has a McGowan barreled 24" 30-06 that will run 2900+ with 180 grain Sierra's with zero pressure signs and a book load of IMR 4350. There ain't no friggin way I'm buying its running at 60,000 psi or less. Ain't happening.

I note that those claiming special barrel status never have pressure tested data to substantiate their claims. The real test is simple - what does the preponderance of the evidence say? Using the 30-06, 2800 in an 06 is max, plus or minus a few feet per sec. There is only about 4 gazillion pressure tested loads that back that up. Same goes for every cartridge thats been in existence for any length of time.

Yeah, I'm not really sure what to make of the "fast barrel", "slow barrel" thing... for sure, new powder technologies can increase velocities without excess pressure. OTOH, when guys are getting a solid 100 - 150 fps over what the books list with standard powders and identical book charges, my gut tells me there's no free lunch. Pressure = velocity.

But I'm not an engineer and have no way of being definitive about it.

All I ever wanted was a fast '06 anyway....grin

Ha!

You cannot misinterpret or mangle physics or empirical data enough to convince me that shape does not matter. It does.
---But then I must be biased due to falling for the 284 Win and 300WSM cases the moment I touched them off---before even trying to compare their shape vs performance.
I also bet that those brainiacs that are custom blending powder for the short, fats are taking after those infernal fishing lure people. Just out to catch the fisherman (by the wallet) not actually catch more and bigger fish.

The merits (or lack of) shape have been hammered here before.

There are very few instances in this world where shape does not matter--I am trying to think of one now but...
JMHO
Tim

Huh?

What's the point.

The point is-- you stated "the hype appears to be true" at the start.
I believe the "hype" is true even though I have yet to break the seal on my RL17. Some things do work better than others (sometimes) such as shape, chemistry, etc. I have no doubt that an improved shape and improved chemisty will show a little magic together. My 6.5x284, 284Win and 300WSM are anxious to take a shot at the new RL17.

My mind has a few cobwebs due to not shooting for a couple months, so sorry if off track or not clear. I took a mental health day today, and as of yet it is not working.

Thanks to those who have provided some load data here. I have no doubt that my results will match the hype and it is nice to have a reference point when using something new.
Tim

I believe "fast barrels" are mostly the result of fast (min. spec.) chambers. All of my custom barreled rifles have min. spec. chambers, as opposed to sloppy chambers in a lot of factory rifles. My custom barreled rifles usually reach max velocity with less powder than my factory rifles.

Tim, thanks for the clarification... I was wondering whether I had completely lost my ability to comprehend the written word.

If there is any "magic" in the WSM case it's in the way it burns powder likely... however, I don't believe it's any "faster" because of its case shape than if it had been made longer and skinnier with equal capacity.

I just think the WSM case design lends itself to excellent accuracy for reasons unknown to me. That may have to do with the way it burns powder.

As to RL17, I'm pretty well convinced its absolutely ideal in the 300 WSM. However, looking over the other WSM load data (270, 325) the gains that the 300 WSM shows don't appear to be there... I guess time will tell.

Bottom line, for me, I like the 300 WSM for no reason more than the Kimber Montana it's housed in.

That's likely one reason... variations between barrels may be another reason.

David Miller, who's not exactly inept when it comes to cobbling together accurate rifles, says in the several hundred 300 WBY's he's built (all Krieger barrels, obviously with custom chambers from just a few reamers), he's seen a 200 fps variation in velocity from the "slowest" to the "fastest" of those several hundred "identical" rifles.

I think there's a lot of unknowns when it comes to this stuff and what is the obvious answer might not be the "right" answer.

Today I worked up some more loads for my 300wsm using RL 17 and the 168 gr xlc bullets, The results using the xlc bullets were kind of confusing, here are my results from today. I was using new brass for these loads, the last load I fired yesterday was 67 gr and produced 3058 fps and expanded .0010



68 gr 3115fps +.0015 expansion



68.5 gr got an error reading +.0013 expansion



69 gr 3152 fps +.0020 expansion



There was no heavy bolt lift with these loads, with the expansion as much as it was there should have been a heavy bolt lift, I even used my other micromiter that measures in increments of .001 and it confirmed the amount of expansion. I was hoping to get to 3200 fps. I had better luck with the 200 gr x bullets, here are those results, I used once fired brass with these loads.



60.5 gr 2721 fps + .0006



61 gr 2737 fps + .0003



61.5 gr 2743 +.0002



62 gr 2766 +.0005



There was no heavy bolt lift with these loads either,as you can see the increase in velocity was very consistant with these loads. I checked the primer pockets using winchester magnum primers and they almost fell in the pocket without any effort, however I have had problems with these primers with the wsm winchester brass, I then checked the pockets with CCI 250 primers which is what I was using with these loads, they fit much tighter, they are .001 larger than the winchester primers. trying to figure out what is going on with the xlc loads, maybe the problem is the brass, once fired brass may make it easier to check for excessive pressure, besides not having a heavy bolt lift the primers looked ok, you could still see the radius of the primers,no ejector marks either, factory rounds have a heavier bolt lift.

I'd be pretty concerned about the WLR's falling in. And with the expansion you are seeing, I'd think those loads were hot.
I have had rifles that never got a sticky bolt lift, and am not sure it is always a reliable indicator.
Just my thoughts...