Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors 300 Savage Superformance performance

I ran some of the Hornady Superformance 150 grain SSTs across my chronograph over the weekend. Box claimed 2740 fps at the muzzle from a 24 inch barrel. THe test was conducted at about 1200 feet, temp. 57 degrees.

At 10 feet from the muzzle my 24" EG recorded 2705, 2673, and 2698 fps. (First two were in fact foulers as I had not fired since a deep clean)

22" F made 2658, 2678 and 2639 fps., also out of a newly cleaned barrel.

That performance is within 1.4% of factory claims, and is taken 10 feet from the muzzle, not at muzzle.
Bottom line, the ammo looks to perform pretty close to factory claims.

The box gives numbers for drop with a 200 yard zero at the claimed velocity. Those are: +2" high at 100, 0" at 200, -8.8 inches drop at 300, -25.9 inches at 400 and -53.2" at 500.

The other tests I did all came in at lower than anticipated velocities too, by even more. (some 300 Sav. and some other calibers). I think I am going to get another model chronograph, this one (Chrony Beta) has sure had some squirrely results over the past year.

Nice to see factory ammunition actually test at it's specs, mine usually seem to come out 100fps+ short of advertised. Also interesting to note that you only lost 34fps on average with the loss of 2" of barrel.

Zooka:

1) How did they shoot for groups?
2) Any sticky extraction or other pressure signs?
3) Did the primers look like cratered pancakes? or pretty normal?

Thanks for posting up the velocities! Good info.

Jimmy, No pressure signs in the brass, and I was not shooting for groups, didnt have anything but a 4x scope to see the target and couldnt spot bullet holes with it, so I was just shooting for the feel of the rifles and for the velocities. Grouping will be next trip.
Here's a pic of some once-fired mild handloads I shot same day. No velocities over 2580 fps, pushing 150 gr. SPs:

Turns out the Hornadys also used brass colored Win primers, here are the Superformance primers next to unfired:

Interesting, I wonder if its Superperformance powder they're using, or some variation thereof?

Alliant says 44 gr of Reloader 15 is max, under 165 gr bullets in the .300, giving 2614 fps. I've previously gotten 2620 fps with 150's and 42 grains, which I called max for my 99.

Might be interesting trying some of the Hornady Super ammo, as a comparison to good handloads with rel 15 or Varget

wood these be alright to use in a model 99 or would they be a bolt action only round ?

Interesting!!! is your firing pin bent??? it seems to be hitting way over on the side of those primers,or is it real loose in the face of the bolt. just hoping the tip isn't ready to snap off !!!! Don

They should be fine to run in a 99. Hornady is keeping the pressure within the original specs.

Where did you get this ammo? The local GM and neighborhood gun store say its not available yet.

I got it online from Midway i believe.
Loggah, I was sort of weirded by the off-center primer strikes too. It did it with BOTH rifles, the EG and the F.
I'll take a closer look tonight.
Just for fun I'll post the speeds and loads I got with my handloads too, my first try with the 300 Sav., same trip, 24 inch barrel EG, pushing a 150 grain Hornady flat base soft point (FBSP) #3031, THat bullet is a good bit shorter than the boattail Hornady SP by the way. The prediction was from Quickload's factory presets; looks like they may have a too-low number for case capacity compared to my EG's chamber. I'll measure case capacity on this fired brass here soon. All loaded to 2.60", WLR primers; the highest predicted pressure was under 49,000 psi. and actual pressures appear to have been lower!:

1. H 4895 : 40.6 gr, predicted 2672 fps,
Actual: 2540, 2509, 2591 HUGE variance approx. 100 fps

2. Acc 2495 40.9 gr. Predicts 2691 fps
Actual: 2560, 2596, 2589, error; HUGE variance approx. 100 fps

3. Big game 44.6 gr. Predicts 2678 fps
a. 2564. 2424, 2426 HUGE variance approx.. 130 fps.

Tex, Doubt that it is Superformance powder. I have been running it in a 6.5 Creedmoor and it is actually a little slower burning than H4831 in that cartridge. Maybe it's their Lever powder but actually suspect it may be another formulation not available to us.

The velocity increase for the Superformance doesn't exceed my regular RL 15, 150 grain HotCor handloads by very darn much. I suppose it exceeds other factory loadings though.

Speaking of off center primer strikes, a bunch of us where shooting clays and rifle targets at a friends place one Sunday a few years ago. I was shooting my 1916 vintage .250-3000 at metal plates. The firing pin hits way off center on that one. Mule Deer(JB) was one of the shooters so I asked him what he thought. He replies "does it go bang?". I said "yea". After, oh say 3 seconds of careful and deliberate thought he responded "don't worry about it". Words to live by I suppose.

Hornady says the Superformance powder they sell is NOT the same formula as what they use in their various Superformance cartridges. So, for example, the powder formula in their .308 Win Superformance cartridge for sale at wherever, is a different powder formula than the can of powder called "Superformance" sitting on that store's powder shelf. IMHO that is one of the dumber things a powder company has ever done; inviting someone to pull and weigh a Superformance load and try and substitute it at home.

MW406, thanks for that about the off center strikes, makes me feel better. FWIW I bought a bag of so called "once fired" brass on GB, mixed manufacturers, and many of their strikes are off center as well. And most are cratered to boot, some backed out a bit... yikes... they may not ever be reloaded by me. I will chalk that one up to "Internet 'once fired brass' auctions: Lesson learned. Don't go there."
Your RL15 performance lines up with QL's predictions, that is, "pretty close to Superformance factory ammo". Hornady's 150 gr. SST is longer and has a better BC than the Hot Cor, though I bet that makes about zero difference in normal use. Hot Cor is a darned fine bullet.

Almost certainly it is another formulation, they claim that every load for every caliber is different. The powder they sell could be any one of dozens (hundreds?) which happens to work well in many applications and incredibly well in a few.

BTW, I'm thrilled that Hornady is taking the time and effort to upgrade the performance for older cartridges like the .300 Sav, 6.5x55 and 7x57 rather than spending all their research on those with highest volume.

Agreed, it is nice to get another bit of velocity out of the old ones. I also have several rifles that use Varget, so it would be nice to settle on a powder that I use in other rounds. I have some Super-P than I want to try in my .22-250, but have not done so yet.

When I first started loading for the .300 in a 99, no one published Reloader 15 loads for the cartridge. I took R12 data and worked up with R15, knowing it was a slower powder. It shot very well. I'll probably try some Varget in my 1920 this weekend

*******************************************************

My hunting load for my Model 99 (EG) in .300 Savage is 40.8 grains (1/10th of a grain under the MAXIMUM load) of H4895 yielded a chronographed muzzle velocity (taken 15 feet from the rifle's muzzle) of 2635 with a total variance of just � 3 fps (+1 fps/-2 fps). Hodgdon H4895 is one of Hodgdon's EXTREME rifle powders meaning these rifle powders are not effected by temperature. I've found this claim to be true.

Accuracy with this close-to-maximum-load is very good giving me 3-shot groups at 50 yards of just .404 inches. Zero'd at 25 yards, this load gives a point blank range wherein the path of the bullet never gets more than 3 inches higher or lower than the direct line-of-sight from the muzzle out to 260 yards where the 150 grain bullet is almost 3 inches low.

Using a Sierra Ballistics Program, the 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Bullet I use is about an inch high at 50 yards which is verified by the actual fired rounds I shot at 50 yards. The Sierra Program indicates the bullet is about 2� inches high at 100 yards with it's maximum high of 2.9 inches at 140 yards. The bullet is dead center at about 213 yards and almost three inches low (2.8 inches low) at 260 yards according to the Sierra Ballistics Program.

Since I have limited my shots to standing or walking deer ONLY (I won't take any shot at a running deer) and limited the range to no more than 250 yards and preferably to much shorter ranges for close to 45 years, this load gives me all the power and range I want or need with accuracy of an inch or less at 100 yards.

Sensed recoil is reasonably low, even when shooting this load off the bench-rest. In the field, I don't even feel the recoil which is commonplace for most hunters and most loads.

I'm not against new innovations, but no one can beat the laws of physics... namely that to any action, there is an equal and opposite reaction (aka "recoil").

I.E., the extra 100 fps the new Hornady "Superformance" 150 grain load gives has a "price"... increased recoil as well as being considerably more expensive per shot. And for me, my handloads of 40.8 grains of Hodgdon's H4895 already give me everything I want or need in a hunting load.

In addition, I can load my hunting loads for 44� a round using the relatively expensive 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Bullets, 40.8 grains of H4895 rifle powder sparked by a standard Winchester large rifle primer in Winchester cases.

I don't know what the new Hornady Superformance loads cost, but I'd guess they're close to or exceed $2.00 per round.

Too "rich" for my blood!!!

Jus' my 2�...


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

Ron, Sounds like you have the load you need! I admire the accuracy you have developed, and hope to achieve it some day myself with my 99s.

Midway's price for the Hornady Superformance bullets is 29 bucks for 20, so not as bad as you feared, though not cheap. But acceptable for the non-reloading hunter I'd think, especially since to start reloading would cost hundreds of dollars in equipment. Pure deer hunters don't shoot that many bullets usually anyway. Sighting in, checking zero, and the hunt itself. When I was in that mode I could make a box of shells for my 30-06 last 5 to 8 years. Plinkers, now, are a different story.

This sort of gets us into the magnum vs. medium speeds, doesnt it? A perfectly placed 222 will take a deer out to 200 yards and way beyond. A hole in the heart or skull kills em all. Adding velocity and/or "knockdown" just makes a killing shot doable across a broader range of "oopsies" on the shooter's part. These "oopsies" include maladjusted sights, weather/wind conditions, buck fever, bad angles, slope compensation, bad trigger control, bad rest, and such. It's up to each of us to know ourselves and to only take the shots we are confident of, with the given gun/bullet. The more powerful bullets just give us more leeway to be wrong in that analysis, or to shoot from farther out.

Funnily enough, recoil is not just about the bullet's acceleration. Recoil also includes the action/reaction effect of ejecting any unburned powder, plus the "rocket nozzle" effect of the high pressure gas at the muzzle. Different burn rate powders means different gas pressures at the muzzle. You can get quite different recoils from the same bullet leaving at the same speed using different powders.
If "felt recoil" was solely about the action/reaction of accelerating the bullet, muzzle brakes would not work. As it is, they harness some of the high pressure gasses (which have already shoved the rifle backwards), and convert their energy to a forward thrust on the rifle, instead of just a backwards push.
Ultimately, the difference in recoil shooting a 150 Nosler BT through a 7.6 lb EG using H4895 at 2640fps vs. 2740 fps is only about 1 ft-lb of felt recoil, 13.2 ft-lbs vs. 14.2 ft-lbs.

I won't be buying more of the Superformance myself since i am going to be reloading, but I think it is a good addition to the arsenal for non-reloading folks who want to hunt their 99s and other 300 Sav. rifles. I'm planning to develop a load for my EG that is pretty hot, perhaps even using some of the 180 gr. Speer mag Tips I stocked up on, and a different, very low recoil load using 130 grain Barnes for my F. The EG for me and my son in laws to use up to big deer/ or close elk and big hogs, the other for grandkids, wife, and daughters, limited to use on smaller Texas deer and medium to small hogs.

ZookaTx...

Thank you for your kind remarks and, "Yes", I've fairly well got my hunting loads where I want 'em and their accuracy plus their relatively light recoil make for a very pleasant, accurate round with which to hunt.

Incidentally, to get the TOTAL COST of those Hornady Superformance loads, you need to add Midway's MINIMUM shipping charge ($8.00 the last time I bought something from them several years ago) plus those "Haz-Mat" charges (used to be $15.00, but I think it's gone up to $20 lately). Adding those charges, it ends up making the minimum TOTAL cost $2.60 per round or $52 per box of 20 rounds.

Like I said... too rich for my blood especially when I can load a fine hunting round with a premium bullet for 44� per round or a mere $8.80 per box of 20 rounds.

You're also correct when it comes to how many rounds the non-reloading hunter uses in a year... or in several years. However, reloading is as much of a hobby as 'most any other hobby except that one gains inexpensively loaded rounds which means he can have the enjoyment of doing a lot more shooting at the same cost if he reloads his own cartridges... and this sez nothing about the "self-satisfaction" of taking game with rounds you personally reloaded.

I've gone through that "magnum vs. medium speed" thing 'cause I hunted for 40 years with my custom pre-'64 Model 70 in .338 Winchester Magnum caliber. That rifle was one that could make your eyes "water" and your shoulder ache when shooting "hot" handloads in it from the bench-rest.

After one particularly long "sighting in" session in which I finally found out a screw in the scope mount had been sheared off which was causing my "groups" to look more like they were fired from a shotgun than from a "minute-of-angle" pre-'64 Model 70 Winchester.

I replaced the scope mount screw, but I never took my faithful Model 70 back to the rifle range... 40 years of being "bashed" around by those magnum cartridges fired in that magnum rifle was enough!

Instead, I decided to retire the big Winchester to an honored place in my gun-safe and find a lighter recoiling rifle... and I found it... my pristine 1953 Model 99 Savage (EG) in .300 Savage caliber.

Now... if I like, I can take a couple or three boxes of cartridges to the range to sight in my "99" and have a pleasant afternoon of shooting... and go home with my shoulder feelin' good and no bruises or aches & pain.

That's a nice change... and life is good...


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

Now that Hornady has broken the ice and started to load .300 Savage ammo, I wish they'd offer a 165-grain load. I think that weight would be ideal for all big game that you'd be likely to hunt with the old .300 plus, no other manufacturer has ever offered that weight, to my knowledge.

I've loaded for 3 or 4 rifles in that caliber and RL-15 is my favorite powder for it, although I've also used 4064, H-335, and Varget.

Jocko...

+1 big time!!!

I totally agree with you... and I bet a good many hunters using the excellent .300 Savage round who don't reload and who mix black bear, elk, caribou, moose and large, heavy wild boar with their deer hunting would love to be able to get the 165 grain bullet for use in their .300 Savage rifles for the larger, heavier boned & heavier muscled big game animals.

Jus' my 2�...


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.