Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors .300 Savage Loads

Sorry, Gary, good call, got that % fill reversed, all the other data is correct for those 2 OALs. The shorter round is a 106% fill, the longer is 103. Too late to edit the original post.

Thanks Mr. Cal...to date, I've found that the published LOA of 2.600" is the max I can get away with in this rifle...so seating out to the lands is not an option unless I single feed them...any longer than that 2.600" and they tend to hang up when I eject a live chambered round. And too, I guess if the throat length was all that critical, I'd not be getting the kind of groups I'm seeing with 150's and 125's. That 110 gr FMJ is really short tho, so we'll see. It might turn out to be a moot point.

My next phase of this project will be delayed til after the holidays, when I'll try the Carbine bullet and several cast bullet types I've got on hand: Lyman 311291gc, 311466gc, 311359gc and a cpl others whose numbers escape my memory at the present. I'm up in NY, right now, near Albany with my wife, visiting what's his name and his wife and LILLY AND AUDREY, our grandchildren...just showing you where Grandpa's priorities are!

Thanks again, Rod

I didn't think 41gr of 4064 was a compressed load. Next time I will check it to see if it is.
Thanks for your reply.
Have a blessed ChristMass
Gary

So i finally got to test out my first hand loads. As posted before, here is what i loaded:

1) 38.5 grains BL-C2, 125gr Nosler BT
2) 40.5 grains BL-C2, 125gr Nosler BT
3) 42.5 grains BL-C2, 125gr Nosler BT

I had some 150 gr remington factory loads and shot a few of those just to compare recoil and I did notice a difference between the first two loads, however, once I got up to the max, there was very little difference.

Over-all, I did not get very good groupings with any one of these combinations. As I am still fairly new to shooting and reloading, I'm not sure if this is the lighter bullet weight, or just the combination in general, but my best group was with the max load of 42.5 gr, and even that was around 2 1/2" - 3" at 100 yds. Good enough to kill any deer that i am shooting at...? yeah, but I'm kind of a perfectionist when it comes to this stuff. Think i will pick up some varget and some 150 gr bullets to work up some other loads for the next time around.

In everyones experience with hand loads, what has the greatest impact on performance? Bullet weight, powder weight/ type?

In my opinion, it often depends on the rifle. I'd definitely try a couple of other powders and see how it works out.

Back in 1985 or so, I started playing with .300 Savage loading. I was working in a local gunshop and noticed we had somm 30-30 Remington ammo stuffed with an odd looking 170 grain hollow point bullet. Don't ask me why, but I thought that would be the cat's meow for a .300 Savage, so I started playing. I was able to buy the bullets in bulk, so I bought 500. And started loading them. I started out with 30.0 grains of IMR 3031. 2000fps. I worked up to 35 grains of 3031 and every load shot 1 1/2"- 1 3/4" groups with no trouble. That bullet turned out to be the worst possible bullet I have ever used on deer with a .300 Savage. It was just not a good match. Penetration was horrid, and the hydraulics were phenominal. The one and ONLY deer I ever killed with that bullet was a poorly placed quartering away shot that clipped the paunch as it traveled forward. When it hit that belly there was a :green" explosion of stomach contents. I have never seen anything like that before or after. I use these bullets now in all of my 30-30's and they perform perfectly. After that episode I went back to the bench and came up with the load I use to this day with all of my rifles in .300 Savage.

Powder = 37.2 grains IMR 3031
Bullet = 150 grain Hornady Spire point flat base
Primer = Remington 9 1/2
case = Remington

velocity = 2475 FPS through a chronograph
Extreme spread = 59 FPS
Standard deviation = 19 FPS
energy 2020 FT Lbs.

Rifle used for testing Savage 99EG

rodfac,

If you're messing around with 110 grain bullets for rollin' ground hogs take a look at the Hornady 110 RN, #3015. A good combo for stalking them with an ironsighted rifle, if you're in country that allows that type of hunting. Works well in a 30-30 too.

I'm back in town again and will resume some add'l testing. To date, Hornady's 150 gr Spire point has the edge in accuracy...I've had a half dozen groups below an inch for three shots at one hundred yards. Reloader 15, 3031, and a clone version of 4895 (from Jeff Bartlett at GIBRASS), all of them do the trick with that Hornady offering and with good hunting velocities too...~2550 fps or better. Brass life to date has been good...I'm up to eight loadings with some of it with no real indications of impending separation...and very little trimming which says about the same thing.

Longbeard..my best results with 3031 mirror your load plus a half grain and using Winchester's Lg Rifle Primers. It's a good one. I'm shooting off my porch rail with a 4x Weaver 60-B and estimate my wobble area at 1/2+" or so and still get these fantastic groups. The trigger in this gun has some creep to it, a little like the two-stage 03 Springfield which I have a lot of experience with...but it's entirely manageable with a good let-off.

Steve...I'm going to try some pulled military 110 gr FMJ's for practice...(got a lot of them when they were really cheap)...sometimes they'll do surprisingly well....one of my Springfields will hold pretty close to an inch with them. Too, I've got some TNT's for 'chucks should the need arise... but there is one down in my lower meadow that probably needs to go before the horses find a way to stick a leg down in his hole.

I'll continue to report as the project unfolds...many thanks to all of you who've shared your experience.

Best Regards to all, and Happy New Year. Rod

Rod, just for thrills I put your numbers into QL and at that temp with that bullet powder and COAL data (using the QL preset values) it predicted 2585 fps. That is pretty darned close! Though when the temp gets up to 70 you may find the group opens a bit as the powder burns faster. That is a very safe load, too, predicted max pressure under even the "moderate" zone.

Man that is a loaded question! Go to a reloading forum and you will hear a number of different theories about that subject.

I was writing a long and boring addition to this, with discussions of OBT and OCW and such, but really, in my experience the Optimal Charge Weight method of load development is what will give you best results the easiest, without a lot of fancy equipment. Read about it here:
http://optimalchargeweight.embarqspace.com/

I have been using IMR 3031 with hornady interlock sp 150 gr. bullets. My most recent load is 37.0 grains and it works pretty good. 36.5 grains was also a good load. This is pretty mild and I have no desire to shoot blazing fast rounds. My 99 is a 1937 EG and I see no need to push the limits. A good accurate load is all I want.

For some unknown reason I never got good results with BL-C2 in the .300 in any of my guns and others I loaded for. Pretty fair results in a few other calibers though. My old standard for the .300 is 4064. 39-40 grains under just about any 150 grain cup-n-core bullet gives me excellent accuracy in mine and and my BIL's rifles. Funny thing, I get high pressure signs if I step even � grain past 40 grains, but it could be due to the truly ancient (but still good) DuPont 4064 I'm still using. Velocity unknown. I don't chrono every load I ever work up. (Still have 4 cans to go before I can start buying "modern" 4064. The stuff I have is still sealed and smells/works fine when I crack the seal on a can. It has been stored properly for nigh on 40 years now.)

That answers lots of my questions.........

Haha! Nothing like ether fumes gently wafting up out of a can of powder to deaden the senses!

My senses been dead fer years!!!!!!!!!

Zooka...yep...pressure indications are about factory expansion across the web, and in the same brass.

Gnoahhh...my lot of 4064 is from 2004 and seems to run a little cooler than previous lots. I've got a sizable supply having used in the 5.56 mm for across the course loads in the AR-15. 99% of my loads use Winchester primers, in my experience, a little hotter than the others...and too, they work well through a Dillon 55B. Loads worked up in warmer weather, may chrono a bit slower in the fall but not by much, at least in the AR. Can't say with regard to the 300 Sav. tho.

Too cold here for the last two days to do any shooting, let alone chrono work...but the end of the week looks better.

Best Regards, Rod

Rod, you bring up a good point. Perhaps I better get a new can of 4064 and compare chrono results between it and my old stuff. I always suspected it to be a tad hotter when loading "by the book", which is why I drop the loads way down when using it. Everybody seems to like loads of around 2-3 more grains in several calibers than where I start getting pressure signs. Just one more good reason to not put blind faith in any reloading manual, and always start low and work up.

Gnoahh,
From what I've read, that'd be an interesting experiment. Good to get the real truth rather than hearsay.

gnoahh, I'm with ya on that. Seems to me that a lot of the guys I talk to at the shooting range use the max loads in manuals as starting points. I admit that I used to run my reloads a little "warm" shall we say. I of course had special rifles with fast barrels that showed no pressure signs. Yea, right. I finally realized I was wasting my time and risking my noggin and equipment.

I used to love 4064 but I no longer use it in any of the 15 or so rifle calibers I reload for. I've found other powders that I liked better, usually the Ramshot powders.

For the 300 Savage it's 150 grain Speers or 165 grain Partitions and Reloader 15 for me. I can't believe there could be any loads that are more accurate in my rifles.

Gnoahhh...a cpl more thoughts on powder burning rate come to mind...BTW...I subscribe to your thought that dead is dead and an extra 100-200 fps in the bullet makes no real difference at real hunting distances...and guns that are 50-100+ years old do not need to be pushed to the maximum.

I use Winchester Primers for all my loads, in all calibers..the standard caps, but they do have an anecdotal reputation for being hotter than most of the other makes. So it occurs to me that where I'm seeing a "hotter" burning powder, I may in fact have "hotter" caps increasing the burning rate, or at least moving the pressure curve closer to the chamber. I've used them for the last 15 yrs at least. They work well through a Dillon 550B for all my pistol loads where some of the others hang up, (CCI in particular)...and are generally available here in Louisville at the big gunshows.

That said, I have found that Unique, manufactured in the last 5 years burns slower than the lots available 15 yrs ago...chrono'd. It's not much, 0.2 grain differences on a 5.0 - 7.0 grain load, but it's there in my experience. On the other hand, 2400 is faster...in particular, Keith's old load for the .44 Magnum (22.0 of 2400 behind a 240 gr cast SWC) is too hot for my guns. I've found that 20.0 gr of current production 2400 gives the same velocity.

Lastly, at 65 yrs old, I've accumulated a bunch of different loading manuals over the years...all the way from Whelen's "Why Not Load Your Own" published in the late 40's, to Sierra's most current "Infinity" computer based loading and ballistic program. The differences, in some cases, are remarkable...(BTW: most of the Whelen jacketed loads in some of my favorite older calibers, are definitely too hot, but he was spot on with his cast bullet data.)

Now whether it's due to faster lots of powder or hotter caps, I can't say. But I'd caution that anyone who routinely goes to the max loads in any manual, or feels that some of the current "milder" max loads are due to a lawyer's influence on the powder manufacturer's published data, may be walking in a fool's paradise. The old saw about starting low and working up is as true today as it was 50 yrs ago when I started rolling my own.

Recommendations offered here or anywhere for that matter, are of use in a general sense...particularly so, in the brand/type of powder selected, but the actual charge wts. that'll produce the elusive one hole group are a function of the individual gun, its owner's loading techniques, and the components employed. So too, is the pressure generated.

Best Regards, Rod