Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire another Mark V catastrophe

retract statement

Since we are all sitting around here having a friendly conversation, I grabbed a couple of my reloading manuals.

I have never loaded 150's in the 300 win, but I have loaded 165's. I had no problem meeting the numbers in the book with an old 26 inch push feed model 70, so I see no reason to suspect the numbers are bad for the 150 gr bullets.

Hornady #6 says the 300 Win will make 3300 fps with five different powders.
Hodgdon #26 says she will make 3300 fps with RL 22, or H 380.
Sierra #5 gives us six powders which will make 3300 fps and 3400 fps with IMR 4350.
Nosler #4 hits 3420 fps with IMR 4350 and 3390 fps with IMR 4831.

The fastest 150 gr bullet load in the Nosler book for the 300 Wea is 80 gr of IMR 4350 at 3412 fps.

Nosler actually runs the 300 Win faster than the 300 Wea.

Sierra runs the 300 Wea to 3400 fps with a 150 gr bullet but they give you a much wider choice of powders in the 300 Wea than they do in the 300 Win.

Hodgdon's only breaks 3400 fps with two powders in the 300 Wea. Rl 19 and Rl 22 are both good for about 3460 fps in the Hodgdon's book.

Obviously, we know the Wea does have a bit more powder capacity. So it has to produce more velocity, right? But how much more?

RCBS Load 2.88 says the Wea holds 92.8 gr of water to the top of the case. The Win holds 82.4 gr of water to the top of the case.

I could refine the accuracy here a bit if I could calculate water volume with the bullet seated. But this should be close enough for our needs.

The Weatherby case has 12.6% greater volume.

If I remember Mule Deer's calculations correctly, we should see 3.15% greater velocity from the Weatherby at equivalent pressures and barrel lengths.

If we average out the reloading manuals and say the Winchester is good for 3300 to 3350 fps with a carefully chosen propellant, then the Weatherby should be good for an additional 100 fps.

That is why I claim there is not a nickle's worth of difference between the two cartridges. They are about like comparing the 308 against the 30-06.



ETA:

Remember when Weatherby used to advertise their 150 gr 300 Wea loads at 3600 fps. It is possible to make her run that hot. And that explains the anecdotes of super high pressure ammo which the good Dr. Howell has relayed to us.

The AK 47 ?

Come now.


Shooting a 7.62x39 is no kind of test.

And an 8x57 Mauser is a high pressure test vehicle?

Good informaion. I knew you would spend more time than I did researching the velocities.

The numbers I posted are from the Nosler reloading website and I realize one source, a limited online manual which obviously from your research is not a good resource, wasn't a valid basis to show my point. But, the Weatherby does give enough difference for SOME to justify the additional expense of brass, powder charge needed, cost of gun, etc. to justify the purchase of a new gun. I purchased mine more for the weight and price than the hype, but I had no 30 cal hunting gun, only 7mm's, which allowed me to buy more bullets for my inventory...lol


A good 30-06, practice and a range finder would be cheaper than a 300 wby purchase, but the additional flat shooting ability and energy of a faster 308 bullet is a real world benefit.... worth at least a dime's advantage....

Allen

I have never had the chance to shoot at game over 300 yds. my 06 does just fine.

Maybe I missed it, but I don't remember anything being posted that stated that the problem ammo was Weatherby brand.

I don't remember seeing it on this forum or the Wby. forum. Does anyone know for certain that it is Weatherby brand ammo that is causing the alleged problems?

As far as the 9 lugs vs. 2 lugs, somewhere in the Weatherby catalog it states that the 9 lugs have more surface area than the two lug actions.

With the gas ports in the Wby. bolt, I just do not understand how the firing pin mechanism blew out of the rear of the bolt. I also don't understand how the bolt could have sheared off all 9 lugs, in addition to the bolt handle and come out of the rear of the receiver.

It seems to me that with as much pressure involved as alleged on these threads that the brass case head would have melted.

Even if the cartridge gave 100,000 PSI, the case head of a .300 Wby. is only about 1/4 of a square inch, (.221 by my calculations) so the pressure against the bolt face would only be in the range of 25,000 PSI. Of course, the base of the .378 is a bit larger than the .300, but in square inches, just a small amount.

These incidents might have indeed taken place, but until I see pictures and well documented results as to the cause, I will remain skeptical.

I will research it later, but IIRC, Gen. Hatcher tested .30-06 loads up to 125,000 PSI in the 03 Springfield and it stayed togather, and the I think the Mk V action is as least as strong as the 03 action, and would handle the escaping gas from a ruptured case much better.

If I have my figures right, the 125,000 PSI was determined by the copper crusher guage pressure measuring device. It has been proven that the copper crusher guage read less than actual pressures, so the actual pressure of the test loads Gen. Hatcher fired would be in the range of 140,000 to 150,000 PSI, or maybe even more.

My point being, if the 03 Springfield withstood this amount of pressure, the Mk V should withstand it, too.

I read somewhere, I can't remember where, of an action blowing up, and the estimated pressures were something like 200,000 PSI. I can't even remember the type action. Maybe some of the other readers can find out something about this.

IIRC the issue with redlined ammo was "for" Weatherby which would certainly imply "their" ammo. While I know there are several factory loadings for the .300 Wby the only company I know that has loaded Wby ammo "for" their line of cartridges in quite a while is Norma.

Others may know more and can chime in.

Also, does anyone know the caliber of the ammo that is allegedly causing problems? I assumed it was the .300 Wby. Mag., until it dawned on me that Wby. makes other calibers as well.

As a self appointed Campfire conscious - And isnt everyone appointing them selves in this game, I stand by my statement that you don't keep a confidence on a thing of this nature unless your a priest or a lawyer.

And, if you don't want to be faulted for being part of the cover up, you don't post it on the internet under your own name.

I read a lot of Elmer Keith and believe he would have put the whole truth out and let the chips fall where they may. That was the point of his stories about his WWII years as a government inspector wasn't it?

Think about this - if a lug started to sheer, the next lugs would start to take up the strain, BEFORE THE FIRST ONE CRACKED EVEN A FRACTION OF ITS LENGTH. It isn't like one lets go and the bolt gets a flying tackle at the next one.

Pictures, court documents, anything please, just produce evidence, instead of passing on rumors.

Hmmm...do you think Michael Jackson had one? I mean, his nose and all...

Sounds like a lot of posters are making this into more than it probably is.

Threats of Lawsuits, liability in a lack of full disclosure, blame for witholding information, a lack of full information.... Bunch of scared people, from my take.

If you don't own a MarkV Weatherby, why are you even posting this type of scare tactic to get information, which you don't need or deserve?

Seems like the issue MAY be overloaded factory ammo, causing damage to a brand of firearm. Then it becomes an issue the gun manufacturer has hidden facts, is liable for damages, etc.

What an odd turn for the posters request for information....

Even the thread at Wby Nation has died, but they own the gun in question, have probably handloaded and aren't afraid of the gun or shooting them, unlike some here who would never own one, nor shoot one, who seem so concerned for us Weatherby owners safety... Thanks...

Allen

If I don't own a product I ''deserve'' all the information I can get to determine if I want to own it in the future.

Owning and deserving information aren't connected...

Actually I was trying to be funny...sorry.

I almost bought one last year actually. It drowned in Hurricane Ike and was priced at $150. It was a German .300 but it was a lefty, so I couldn't think of anything to do with it.

This thread sounds like BS to me!
I heard from a gunsmith that testified in a court case once, when a dipstick bought 7mm Remington Magnum ammo because it was five dollars cheaper than the Weatherby stuff.
He then proceeded to blow the trigger guard off and split the stock. I think he got a sliver and decided to sue!
Anyhow the gunsmith testified that because of the excellent gas system of the Weatherby, (which directs gas down in a ruptured case situation) he didn't have a firing pin in his eye or something more serious than a sliver in his finger.
Rumors are for old women!
whelennut

I own Weatherbys and all this talk - and THAT'S ALL IT IS IS TALK - doesn't affect me .

However , hitting what you aim at is mostly a mental exercise and the foundation of all of it is confidence in your rifle and your ability .

Speculative posts that bring the integrity of a rifle into question don't do much for a shooter's confidence if he doesn't have the length of experience some of us old pharts have .

This is not much different from telling a fella his wife is cheating on him but you can't give him the details .

My friend Ken don't step in it often , but he did this time !

Point taken.

If you are one of the "speculators" demanding information, like their life depends on it as an exuse for Dr Howell to give full disclosure, they don't need or deserve information , IMHO.

If you plan to own a Weatherby, and handload, again this seems to have nothing for YOU to use in your purchase decisions.

My point is, some are making a mountain out of a molehill on this. If there are sound reasons to tell people there is an issue that could be beneficial to WEATHERBY OWNERS I am sure full disclosure would have been made long ago...


After reading much of where this thread is going, I believe the accusational tone is rediculous, considering we are gun people, probably reload and take risks every time we pull a trigger( bug in the bore, patch left in, etc). The frequency of the reports of accidents are in the noise, ie the odds are more you would be struck by lightening than an accident with a weatherby gun happens to one of us.

I think we are making a big deal out of nothing, making accusations of liability, or responsability and trashing peoples reputation for basically "nothing better to do".

But I could be off base, and someone really does benefit from hidden information, but I am a thrill seeker and take risks....

Allen

I own Weatherby - so that answers that load of nonsense.

I think this posting was put up here to discredit Weatherby and I don't know the reason Ken Howell wants to discredit them. I am giving him the chance to redeem himself, but it isn't his style.