Load data for 300 win mag needed

billn17

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2011
Messages
123
I've been trying to find load data for the 300 win mag using wc872. I've found data for 7mag. Any help would be great.

Yes I know there is better powders out there for it but since I have 4-8lb kegs of it. I might as well use it for that also.
 
I've been trying to find load data for the 300 win mag using wc872. I've found data for 7mag. Any help would be great.

Yes I know there is better powders out there for it but since I have 4-8lb kegs of it. I might as well use it for that also.
Hey there. I've been burning wc872 for a while in some rifles too. It burns almost exactly the same as accurate 8700, which used 86 grn on a 220. You probably won't want to go under 180-190 grn for bullet weight, as this powder wants quite a bit of load for uniformity in mid calibers-- I've used it with 160 and 175 in the 7 mag. Start down some on charge, as you may have powder that is faster than 8700. You won't get to full velocity in this cartridge with this powder, but you may get pretty good accuracy; my 270 is pitching 130 grn bullets with 68.5-69.5 gr depending on brass. It hits just under 2700 fps. 5 shot moa..
 
Thank you. This at least gives me a starting point. I plan on using either 208 Amax or 220 smk's. Depends which one my gun, powder likes the best.
 
It (wc872)is fair powder, but it is application specific. I've had it do very well and terribly poorly depending on the rifle.
The 7stw hates it, with 100 fps x and 4 inch groups.
The 270 and 300 u both like it, but with specailized loads; heavy bullets in the 300 u and heavy compression with bullets on the lands in the 270. If you have used h870 or 8700, this is pretty much the same game, but you've still got to start low and work it up as they aren't exactly the same. And if you aren't as over-bore as the 7stw or 300 u, you probably will be a couple of hundred fps down from top speed and burn a bit dirty. It is cheap, though, I ordered 2 kegs when it was still 50$ a keg. 40$ is even better.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.
Top