300 RUM/TTSX Load Development:

[Dinky]

Folks,

As I said in another thread, I ceased my very bare-bones reloading efforts in my mid-'forties and now, one year away from seventy, I am taking it up again--this time with more accurate rifles, in magnum calibers, with better gear. So I am taking each step as a painfully slow process, trying to be as certain as I can that I understand each step before carrying it out--so I don't ruin a perfectly good rifle finish with brain tissue! With help from you folks and a few books as well as the Web, I think I now have a basic understanding of brass prep. Accordingly, I would like to run my first loading effort by you for comments. (Don't hold back--I never let pride get in my way).

I am starting with both the 300 RUM, and the 300 Winchester, both using new Remington brass, (I have a lot of it), RL 25 (mostly for the RUM) and RL 22(usable in the RUM, but mostly for the Winchester) (I have a lot of both), and Federal 215 magnum primers, (I have them by the metric ton). The bullet of choice for load development in both rifles, will be the Barnes 130 grain TTSX (I have a few of those too, but it is a bullet that really intrigues me as well.)

Let me head off a few possible concerns with this setup at the pass. I realize the objections (and very valid ones) folks may have with (1) low weight for caliber for downrange performance and penetration on large game, and (2) the use of non-lead/cup bullets on small deer--like the puppy dogs we have here in Texas. Let me say that I do understand those concerns and the first time a well-hit whitetail the same weight as my five-foot tall daughter runs very far after a good hit from the 130 grain, I will cease and desist on this experiment.

300 RUM: The little TTSX bullet was recommended by my rifle smith. In fact, it was one of two with which he broke in the barrel and shot in the Ultra Mag. The load he used consisted of Remington Brass, Federal 215M primers, and 104.0 grains of RL 25 behind the 130 grain TTSX. Three shots averaged 3936 FPS out of the 27 inch barrel and show on the target as three overlapping holes, with no horizontal stringing (indoor range), one on top of the other with less than .5 inches on center. This managed to get my attention. I have not run the ballistics between this bullet and say, the 180 grain Accubond--or what a wind would do to it downrange. But of course, I will.

Now of course, even though he developed the load, I will not just plug in the 104 grains of RL25 and simulate the bombardment of Omaha Beach! I will start out lower--although trouble is, I do not have any starting load data. The best I can come up with is on the Barnes website, showing not the TTSX, but the 130 grain Barnes XBT with a starting load of 98 grains of RL 25 pushing it out of a barrel an inch shorter than mine at a reported 3635 FPS with a maximum load of 103 grains getting it up to 3862. Does anyone see any reason why this would not be a good place for me to start?

300 Winchester: I would like to use this same bullet and primer in the Remington brass I have for it as well. Problem is as most of you no doubt know, RL25 in that case no workee for ca ca. I was able to lay my hands on 5 pounds of RL 22, which I will not hesitate to use behind 165 to 200 grain bullets in the Winchester round--however--I can find no load data for RL 22 with bullets lighter than 165 grains--probably for some excellent reason. I would buy a few pounds of H4350 or IMR4350 in a heartbeat, but...I occasionally see some RL19 available, but I hate to settle for what appears at least, to be second best.

Any ideas or comments are welcome and thanks again to everyone for your help.

 

[mrultramag]

Think you'll have a tough time getting enough RL22 into the 300 win case to get it up to proper pressure and speed with the 130 ttsx. Prob one of the 4350's as noted would be your best bet. re: barnes data. However I would be intrigued enough to give RL17 a drive if you can get your hands on some. It can give more velocity than H or IMR 4350 under certain circumstances and has similar burn rate.

 

[markopolo50]

Here is a page right from Alliant, bullets from 150 to 200. Should get you started on the 300 win mag

Alliant Powder - Reloader's Guide


And here is a start for the 300 RUM

Alliant Powder - Reloader's Guide

Good luck

 

[mrultramag]

Looks like 78 gr is max for RL17 and H4350, while its 80.5 for IMR 4350 according to Barnes. the 4350's give 3500-3550 + change for velocity. RL17 gives a touch over 3600 w/24" bbl. OAL is stated at 3.340 This is 2010 Barnes data. Remington case and Rem 9.5 M primer. Definitely start lower and work up a load safe for YOUR rifle. This data is for the 130 TSX BT. The 130 TTSX should be similar but not the exact same.

 

[Dinky]

Marcopolo:Yes, I had seen that data but I do appreciate the links.

[Mrultramag:[/B] thanks--this was information I had looked for but had not found. So the RL17 does look very interesting. I saw some RL15 available but did not look for any 17--but I will!

 

[Lefty7mmstw]

I'm not a fan of going as light for caliber as you are but I've played a bit with the 300win and lighter bullets; I'm also a rl fan so that's about all I burn in my 300win. I've got a box of 125 nos bt's in my hand loaded with 81 grains of rl19, win brass, and a 215 lighting the fire. The older barnes book shows 80 grains rl19 with 130 x bullets and the newer barnes book shows 83 grains rl19 with 130 tsx bullets.
I see no reason that you couldn't use rl22 in place of 19 since it is a bit slower burning as long as you do a proper load workup starting from 8 - 10% down.

I had worked with faster powders (than rl19) with my rifle but was seeing shoulder dents consistent with low initial pressures (4895 and 4320) so I scrapped those loads before I got into trouble and went for something that filled the case.

I am burning rl22 in my 300win using 78 grains under a 165 hornady with a 215 and rl25 in my 300rum using 93 grains under a 180 hornady with a 215. I think you would be very happy with those loads too.

 

[Dinky]

Thanks for the info, Lefty. I wouldn't really call myself a fan of the smaller bullets, but this load I do find interesting (the 130 in the RUM). Bob Hagel's books had me convinced years ago of the benefits of heavier bullets. However, the raves and reviews I have found of the 130 TTSX make me think I want to give it a try--at least on some of the 200-500 pound Texas hogs that have ruined about 150 acres of improved grass land on my place!

 

[BigSwede]

I load my Remington RMEF stainless 26'' with 165 tsx and get very good accuracy nodes at 90.2 and 93(caution) grains R22 and F215 primers. Chrono says 3440fps. H1000 posted good accuracy also 1/2'' -3/4'' with the 165 tsx

 

[Thebear_78]

I have a buddy back in michigan that uses the 130 TTSX in a 300 rum. Said it kills like lightening and shoots flat as a frozen rope!

I shoot the 168gr TTSX with 96.0gr of Retumbo. Clocks out at 3340fps out of my 26" barrel. I could push it harder but get excellent accuracy out of my rifle and several others. This load shoots well under MOA with 3 shot 300 yard groups under 2" consistently. So far 4 bears, 3 moose, 3 caribou and 1 unfortunate grouse have fallen to this load. Performance has been awesome. I have yet to stop one of these bullets even shooting thru 5+ feet of moose. I took one stem to stern with a classic texas heart shot on a wounded bull moose at just under 200 yards. I took my longest shot on game with this load last year on a nice bull caribou, 519 yards.

If I could only have one rifle with one load this would be it.

 

[Dinky]

T'hanks to both of you, Bear and Swede. I will ask both of you, given the specific loads and bullets you mention, if you were to begin loading for a new rifle, what would be your starting powder charge in the H1000 and Retumbo, respectively? Say, 85 grains and work up one grain at a time?

Bear: I have read many accounts such as the one your buddy relates. I also have read on various threads (here and elsewhere), the traditional reaction that 130 grains is not enough bullet for elk as well as the tried and true notion that a "solid" bullet such as this one will not open up on deer and pronghorn. I am unwilling to totally discount those ideas which have so many years and so much experience behind them. Still, I cannot help thinking this bullet, especially in the 300 RUM, must be special. My rifle builder tested mine with 104 grains of RL25 and I may have already mentioned, got an average of 3935 FPS. I am thinking I will start out at say, 98 grains and work up--even though I would probably be safe starting about 3 grains or so under his maximum--since, after all, it is the same rifle. Different lot of powder, though, and a different hand on the lever of the press.

Your story about the grouse reminds me of the day I was sitting up in a deer blind in South Texas--on one of those few really cold days we get down here. I had thrown some corn out under a tree about 200 yards away in a clearing (legal here) and the only living thing in the area was one damned squirrel that kept running around picking up kernels. I stood it for about an hour after legal shooting light, then leveled the seven mag (just behind the shoulder, so I wouldn't ruin too much meat ) and squeezed off. Not only was I unable to salvage many steaks, but at the shot, a modest, but shootable buck, standing in the nearby brush took off like he had been given an acetone enema.

I know I will go to Hell for wasting that cute little squirrel.

 

[Thebear_78]

I load the 130gr TTSX in my sons 308. The lighter bullet weight keeps the recoil down but still getting nearly 3100fps. We haven't shot anything with it yet but it should work fine. I"m hoping he gets a chance to take a moose with it this fall.

The thing about 130s for big game is that people compare mono metal bullets to old cup and core bullets. With the mono metal bullets retaining 90% or better of their original weight they perform much better than the older cup/core bullets that lose 40-60% of their original weight. I have no doubt that a 130 TTSX will retain more weight than any 150-165gr cup core style bullet. Even the mighty partition, starting off at 165gr will loose 40% or more of its original weight and if exits will weight roughly 100grs, the 130 TTSX retaining virtually 100% will still weight 130gr exiting the animal.

High weight retention combined with the larger physical size due to their relative densities means that a lighter mono metal bullet performs like a heavier cup/core bullet.

That said I would probably step up to the 168 TTSX for elk. The heavier bullet has a much better BC and SD it will fair a little better in the wind and the extra weight won't hurt it any.

my 300 rum LOVES retumbo.

 

[BigSwede]

Dinky , I gave the charge I used for R22, which performed very well I might add in the RUM for the 165tsx. I did have great results with H1000 also with hornady 165 accubonds and the barnes xlc and tsx. I will get my load notes out tonight and report back.

 

[Dinky]

Thanks. No hurry.

 

[BigSwede]

Ok, according to my notes I had accuracy peaks at 90.0 and 93.0 @3450fps out of factory rem 26" r-22. It is hotter load so go slow. Slightly flattening primers but gut liked it. H1000 shot well for me at the nosler #6 max at 98.0 grains for the 165's. the nosler book shows min/max for 125's of 103/107grns.