.308 168gr bullets

[Kenai river]

What's wrong with .308 168gr. bullets? Tres Monceret wrote an article about reloading for long range shooting. In the 2nd article he made the comment about .308 168gr bullets being not worth the time and money to load. He never explained why. I'm curious why he says that.....


Unapologetically AMERICAN gun)

 

[Motocross308]

im guessing due to low BC . Ive found that the 178 a max is in the goldielocks zone for me not too slow , better BC but its all relative .

 

[Str8shooterTX]

im guessing due to low BC . Ive found that the 178 a max is in the goldielocks zone for me not too slow , better BC but its all relative .

I was thinking that also but then I wondered how long ago this was written and how much BC has improved on the 165/168's have improved.

 

[venatic]

The Applied Ballistic book I believe has some info about the Sierra 168gr becoming unstable at the longer ranges.
The newer tipped 168gr may do better but I know the 175gr work fine

 

[dgarrett]

Everyone answered your question above. I think the author might define Long Range as something like 800 yard. The 168 goes sub-sonic. That is why most use the 175 gr or other higher BC heavy bullets when shooting further.. I have seen posts with pictures where after going subsonic the 168gr hit the target making keyholes with the bullet completely sideways... If you want to use the 168's run a ballistic app and see where your load goes subsonic and shoot it to that distance. Dave .

 

[roninflag]

that is because he has never shot them out of 30-06 or 300wm mag with a krieger barrel.

 

[MudRunner2005]

Nothing wrong with a 168gr bullet for the .308 Win. My main high-volume shooting loads I use 168 and 175gr bullets. For my LR shooting loads, I use Berger 210 VLD's...They're not the fastest, but they retain good energy.

 

[MMERSS]

Consider the form factor of same weight and caliber bullet for long range work. Don't confuse the form factor with BC. The lower the form factor the better. 168gr 30 cal bullets commonly vary in form factor compared to the G7 standard bullet from .095 to 1.2. Any bullet with a form factor of 1.0 or less is generally considered a good option for long range. For comparison, the 168 SMK form factor has been listed as 1.16 compared to the 168 Hybrid listed as .95 using Applied Ballistics reference.

 

[Kenai river]

I appreciate the input fellas. I've always had good results with Hornady 168 match bullets in .308 win. and 30-06. I have a savage 11 fcns in 300 wsm and have had great results at 100 yds. Obviously it pushes the bullet much faster than a .308win.
I'm going to try 178 match and possibly 190-95 gr. bullet. Higher BC I'm sure will make a difference at extended ranges, ie. past 600 yds. We shall see. Any experience with 300wsm would be appreciated. I'm using RE17 as it shoots as well as IMR 4350 but with more speed.


Unapologetically AMERICAN gun)

 

[Greyfox]

As has been stated in a prior post, it's possible the person is referring to the 168SMK. Bryan Litz's book does a good job of explaining the design flaw in the geometry of the boat tail on this specific bullet that effects it's stability past 600-700 yards. This issue is not characteristic of all 168 gr bullets.

 

[roninflag]

What's wrong with .308 168gr. bullets? Tres Monceret wrote an article about reloading for long range shooting. In the 2nd article he made the comment about .308 168gr bullets being not worth the time and money to load. He never explained why. I'm curious why he says that.....


Unapologetically AMERICAN gun)

Kenai- reread your and his. he talks about beyond 600 yd. ....... up to 600 yds a 140 7mm is faster and flatter than a 168. up to 600 yd a 168 30-06 is not bad . i also shoot 167, but the higher bc bullets really help with drop and wind for 600-1000. check riflemans journal. German shoots a lot of 190 grain. a simple check of a chart with bc, wind drift , drop will show this. the 168s are not bad out of an accurate gun, but a 175-210 is better . Tres is trying to save you some $$ and time i believe.