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
Reloading
Powder Selection
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="trebark" data-source="post: 1452278" data-attributes="member: 19172"><p>Given your range of 400 yards, there is little gained by switching from the 139 to the 150. Using the same formula as before (139 @ 3000 and 150 @ 2850), the 139 gives up 90lbs of energy at 400 yards compared to the 150 (1567 vs 1656). Looking further down range, using 900lb ft of energy as a benchmark to effectively kill deer, the 150 only extends the lethal range of the 150 over the 139 by 100 yards (800 yards vs. 700).</p><p></p><p>So if what you want is superior exterior ballistics (drop and drift) and comparable terminal ballistics (energy on target), stick with the 139.</p><p></p><p>Similar to you, I have a 280Rem that is my deer killing 'carry rifle.' It has a 22"skinny barrel and weighs just 8.5lbs unloaded but with the scope. Like you, my intended use with the rifle is to kill deer from up-close-and-personal out to 500 yards. For all the reasons I cite for you, I shoot 140grain SGKs in that rifle. </p><p></p><p>Now go build a true longrange rig, chambered in something like 300wsm with a truck axle diameter barrel that's as long as your leg and kill those deer waaaaaaaay over there!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="trebark, post: 1452278, member: 19172"] Given your range of 400 yards, there is little gained by switching from the 139 to the 150. Using the same formula as before (139 @ 3000 and 150 @ 2850), the 139 gives up 90lbs of energy at 400 yards compared to the 150 (1567 vs 1656). Looking further down range, using 900lb ft of energy as a benchmark to effectively kill deer, the 150 only extends the lethal range of the 150 over the 139 by 100 yards (800 yards vs. 700). So if what you want is superior exterior ballistics (drop and drift) and comparable terminal ballistics (energy on target), stick with the 139. Similar to you, I have a 280Rem that is my deer killing 'carry rifle.' It has a 22"skinny barrel and weighs just 8.5lbs unloaded but with the scope. Like you, my intended use with the rifle is to kill deer from up-close-and-personal out to 500 yards. For all the reasons I cite for you, I shoot 140grain SGKs in that rifle. Now go build a true longrange rig, chambered in something like 300wsm with a truck axle diameter barrel that's as long as your leg and kill those deer waaaaaaaay over there! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Reloading
Powder Selection
Top