|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,939
Campfire Regular
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,939 |
After initially shooting well my new 308 Win. Rem 700 was stringing shots vertically. After trying a few different things, I just re-bedded it and am getting nice results with the 150 TTSX and E-tip.. It really is amazing the difference a proper bedding job can do. To my main question...what have you experienced in terms of max loads with E-tips? I called Nosler and the tech said they always recommend backing off two grains from any max listed in their 5th Edition loading manual. What makes me a little nervous is their max load of Varget is listed at 48.5 grains; this is about 1.5 grains higher than any other source I can locate. I have avoided the E-tip in the past due to supposed higher pressures, but it is accurate, has a high BC, and supposedly expands wider than the Barnes. At 45.5g Varget I got an average of 2745 fps with the E-tip. With the TTSX I have got about 2740 fps with 46.6g Varget and 45.5 grains RL15. Neither of these loads are book max, but close with the RL 15. I�m thinking same/same velocity means I am close to max with the E-tip and 45.5g Varget (21.5 inch barrel btw). What are your thoughts? Before... ![[Linked Image]](http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/5870/img1907t.jpg) After re-bedding.... ![[Linked Image]](http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/9290/img1908w.jpg)
The truth angers those whom it does not convince
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,340
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,340 |
fwiw in my 30-06 the 150 e tip did about 60 fps faster than cup and core bullets with the same load. Here is a quickload projection. My version doesn't have the etip so I used the older (longer) barnes xbt as a "like" bullet. If this data is usable and I think it is you are near max based on speed. Cartridge : .308 Win.
Bullet : .308, 150, Barnes 'X' BT 30817
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 2.800 inch or 71.12 mm
Barrel Length : 21.5 inch or 546.1 mm
Powder : Hodgdon VARGET
Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 1.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !
Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms
-10.0 95 40.95 2549 2164 48258 7542 94.1 1.105
-09.0 96 41.41 2575 2209 49609 7630 94.5 1.093
-08.0 97 41.86 2601 2253 50999 7716 94.8 1.081
-07.0 98 42.32 2627 2298 52430 7800 95.2 1.069 ! Near Maximum !
-06.0 99 42.77 2653 2344 53903 7883 95.6 1.057 ! Near Maximum !
-05.0 100 43.23 2679 2390 55420 7964 95.9 1.045 ! Near Maximum !
-04.0 101 43.68 2705 2437 56983 8043 96.3 1.033 ! Near Maximum !
-03.0 102 44.14 2731 2484 58593 8120 96.6 1.022 ! Near Maximum !
-02.0 103 44.59 2757 2532 60253 8195 96.9 1.010 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
-01.0 104 45.05 2783 2580 61963 8268 97.2 0.999 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+00.0 105 45.50 2809 2628 63729 8340 97.5 0.988 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+01.0 107 45.96 2835 2677 65557 8408 97.7 0.976 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+02.0 108 46.41 2861 2727 67450 8475 98.0 0.965 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+03.0 109 46.87 2887 2777 69410 8539 98.2 0.954 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 110 47.32 2913 2827 71441 8601 98.5 0.944 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+05.0 111 47.78 2939 2878 73545 8660 98.7 0.933 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Results caused by � 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 105 45.50 2927 2854 73438 8271 99.9 0.937 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 105 45.50 2656 2350 53915 8059 91.7 1.050 ! Near Maximum !
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,580
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,580 |
I find an accurate chronograph very important when working towards max. If your speeds are in a normal range I'd be pretty comfortable. If you are getting higher than usual velocity you are generally getting the pressure too high as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,939
Campfire Regular
|
|
OP
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,939 |
Thank you both for the information.
I am going up .3g grains on the Varget (just to see) and am going to try 44g of RL 15 too. I know 2750 isn't going to bounce off anything but still want to safely optimize my results.
The truth angers those whom it does not convince
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,259
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,259 |
Edit: misread op.
Last edited by greentimber; 09/17/11.
RLTW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,741
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,741 |
I have loaded Etips in the 300win mag and 243 win. Nosler suggest a long jump to lands which takes up powder space and possible raises pressure. In my experience i found .030 off the lands in both rifles gave me the most consistant velocity and accuracy. I would also use slow powder with the 150gr Etip. In the 308 case i know i would start with H414/W760. My normal 308win 150gr ballistic tip load uses varget with good results but the Etip is a long bullet that has the bearing surface more like a 165gr or 180gr standard bullet.
The anti American Constitutional party (Democrat). Wants to dismantle your rights, limiting every aspect of your constitutional rights. Death by 1000 cuts is the tactic. Each cut bleeds constitutional rights to control you. Control is the goal.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,439
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 11,439 |
well not shot any e-tipe but get 2740fps with 168ttsx with 45.5gr vargot in a 24" barrel
|
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,220
Posts18,447,487
Members73,899
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/163/img1907t.jpg/)
![[Linked Image]](http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/190/img1908w.jpg/)
