Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
338 Allen vs. 338 Snipe tac vs. 338 XT - Which one?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="edward hogan" data-source="post: 300811" data-attributes="member: 1341"><p>Not my intent to give offense.</p><p></p><p>Good luck with your information gleaning.</p><p>Best of luck with any super longrange rifle project you may decide to pursue.</p><p></p><p>Your remark: "As your 338/300 would be in the transonic range from about 1200 yards onwards, I doubt it would get anywhere near 2000 yards with any sort of accuracy", shows me you have lots of ballistics theory to digest.</p><p></p><p>I was able to find my Sierra 50th anny manual a moment ago. </p><p>Started at 3400 fps the 338 300gr smk has lost 1200 fps at 1000yds, and is going at 2196 fps.</p><p>Started at 2700 fps same bullet has lost 1050 fps, and is going 1656 fps.</p><p></p><p>The same bullet with MV of 1900 fps is still at 1137 fps at 1000yds.</p><p></p><p>If the physics of the ballistics is relative, then a bullet already going 1656 fps will drop off another 700 fps in the next 1000 yds. (Probably won't have as much a decline, but not having a ballistics software program, I am swagging.) </p><p></p><p>At any rate, looks to me that any cartridge that starts a 300gr .338 smk at 2700 fps is still super-sonic at a mile easily. </p><p></p><p>Not to be heretical, but... if a milder load in a shorter barrel provides better intrinsic accuracy with the same bullet it is more likely to do so at distance as well, and it is way more useful in a greater variety of situations.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="edward hogan, post: 300811, member: 1341"] Not my intent to give offense. Good luck with your information gleaning. Best of luck with any super longrange rifle project you may decide to pursue. Your remark: "As your 338/300 would be in the transonic range from about 1200 yards onwards, I doubt it would get anywhere near 2000 yards with any sort of accuracy", shows me you have lots of ballistics theory to digest. I was able to find my Sierra 50th anny manual a moment ago. Started at 3400 fps the 338 300gr smk has lost 1200 fps at 1000yds, and is going at 2196 fps. Started at 2700 fps same bullet has lost 1050 fps, and is going 1656 fps. The same bullet with MV of 1900 fps is still at 1137 fps at 1000yds. If the physics of the ballistics is relative, then a bullet already going 1656 fps will drop off another 700 fps in the next 1000 yds. (Probably won't have as much a decline, but not having a ballistics software program, I am swagging.) At any rate, looks to me that any cartridge that starts a 300gr .338 smk at 2700 fps is still super-sonic at a mile easily. Not to be heretical, but... if a milder load in a shorter barrel provides better intrinsic accuracy with the same bullet it is more likely to do so at distance as well, and it is way more useful in a greater variety of situations. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
338 Allen vs. 338 Snipe tac vs. 338 XT - Which one?
Top