Light Bullets/Slow Powders

[Jim Hundley]

I have been loading with 168gr.TSX and H1000 powder and it has been a very accurate load averaging around 3195-3205 fps.After playing with the Quick Load program,I see that it predicts more velocity at the same pressure as the above ,if I substituted Retumbo(+2grs.).Assuming that I can equal the accuracy of the H-1000 load with an increase in velocity of 50fps. is there any reason to not go with the Retumbo?Am I overlooking safe and sound reloading practices?By the way,the caliber is .300Win.mag.
Could I load a 150gr.bullet,safely with the Retumbo?QL shows around 3400fps. with the 150 Accubond.Again assuming good consistant accuracy.Trying to find the best Texas whitetail load out to 400yds.
Thanks for any comments!
Jimmy

 

[Fiftydriver]

Jimmy,

I would personally feel H-1000 is even a bit slow for the 300 Win Mag with this bullet weight.

I have always found Rl-22 and H-4831 to be about as good as it gets with the 150-180 gr bullets in the 300 Win Mag.

Certainly nothing wrong with using the slower burning rounds if they are consistant. You may run into more powder fouling with the slower burners.

Good Shooting!!

Kirby Allen(50)

 

[D.P.]

Jimmy
With 165 NBT's in my Sendero nothing comes close to the speed and accuracy of R-22.

I have used IMR 4350 and the 165 NBT which was the most accurate load at 3000fps

With R-22 and the 165's I'm at 3400fps. It is ugly what it does to whitetails under 200 yards.

 

[Derek M.]

Why go with the 150? The 168 TSX is perfect to 400 from the WM. I prefer Re22 in 300 Win, but a good load is a good load, no matter the powder. Sounds like you're ready to hunt. Stick with the TSX. The 168 is my favorite in my 30 cal rifles.

 

[kraky2]

Jimmy--don't worry at all about getting that 50 fps more. Just go for accuracy at a reasonable speed. If you have quickload you also got "quicktarget" when you bought the quickload. (at least I did). run the extra 50 fps past quicktarget and you will see it is virtually meaningless to the flight path of the bullet. If you can get 3/4 moa out to 400 yds you are set to kill reagardless of even 100 fps.
Play around with some "flight paths" on quick target. Often you get get the same trajectory out of a 100 fps slower load just by raising the "midpoint" of the flight path ever so slightly. I have a 300 wby that is somewhat finicky--I could care less if my load winds up being 3200 fps or 3300 fps or 3350 fps--it's accuracy that will put the meat on the dinner table. The flight path will hardly vary for me with these speeds. I've found the quicktarget program almost as much fun to work with as quickload itself. (It also helps me calibrate my burris ballistic plex and several other custom reticle scopes for different calibers.)

 

[Jim Hundley]

I have had good velocity and accuracy with RL-22,but find it very sensitive to cold temperatures,so have been loading the Hodgdon Extreme powders with good results.I really like the performance of the TSX,but was wanting more blood and guts results from the wound channel.If I don't anchor the deer on the spot and they run,it would be very difficult to track.The TSX doesn't open much of a wound channel.These are the reasons that I was thinking about the 150 Accubond.
Jimmy

 

[Fiftydriver]

Jimmy,

Try the H-4831 or H-4831SC. Both are nearly identical to Rl-22 in burn rate and very temp resistant.

I have never noticed a real problem with Rl-22 in cold weather but I use nothing but the hot Fed-215 magnum primers for all my magnum loads. This may solve that problem but with the two Hodgdon powders being so close in performance to RL-22, just go with those!

Let us know the results.

Kirby Allen(50)

 

[Derek M.]

[ QUOTE ]
The TSX doesn't open much of a wound channel.These are the reasons that I was thinking about the 150 Accubond.
Jimmy

[/ QUOTE ]

That is not my experience. I've killed and have seen kills with the TSX from 130 .277's to 168's and 180's in 30 cal. I've been fortunate to take about 16 animals with the TSX since 2003. I haven't seen blood trails so good if even necessary. My first kill, a small mulie in CO had a wound channel about the size of a tennis ball. With respect to total lung volume, that bullet removed about a third of it. How much more trauma do you need?

I used a 140 Accub. in my 270 last year and shot a buck at 45 yards. It killed him but I was not real impressed with that particular situation or wound channel at all. But this will not keep me from using it again or in different cals. Example, I use the 200 in my 300 RUM.

The following were all killed with either the 130 TSX or 168 TSX. No tracking necessary. All fell where hit. No matter the distance.

The last 3 pics are the same deer: kill pic, entrance, and exit hole.

Trust me, there was plenty of blood coming out of the deer in case one needed to track it. In fact, I've had more blood release from the all metal razor petals than a typical mushroomed bullet. Tearing flesh causes bleeding, cutting it with a razor, like the petals of a TSX makes it hemorrhage in copious amounts.

 

[Jim Hundley]

Derek,
Thanks for the photos.Even though the deer I have shot with the 168TSX didn't display impressive holes,I'll say this:when gutted most everything of value to the deer had turned to jelly.Hit one buck at 212yds.and it was like the earth was jerked out from under him!!
Thanks,
Jimmy

 

[Jim Hundley]

Krakey1,
I have used up Saturday morning playing with QT and QL.It is simply amazing how a lot of us toss and turn at night with different combos of loads for the extra velocity,safe pressure,accuracy,etc.,when all we really need is the accuracy and reasonable velocity with a good bullet.
I have come to the conclusion(for now!!)that I might just load up some 180 Accubonds,test for accuracy in my .300 Win.and go hunting!Don't know about others,but I can shoot the tiny groups from the bench,but in the field I don't think I could utilize an extra 75fps.or .5" in drop.
Thank you for throwing the cold water in my face!!I would bet that there are a few more people like me that read this thread.
Jimmy