338 XC, Snipetac, or EnABELR

[Elk Hunter 338]

To me the problem isn't the cartridges being too long, it's the actions/mags being too short. Why the heck do the manufacturers keep making sub par equipment for these longer cases. I mean a modern action "designed" around a cartridge size should be able to handle that cartridge for its intended purpose. Take the Cheytac case, it is made for ELR work and the actions are made to handle relatively shorter bullets or long bullets shoved way down in the case. The answer isn't to make (or design) the cases shorter (like the Enabler, 6.8 Western, .338 Norma, 6.5 Creedmore, etc) to fit in the actions/mags, the answer is to design the darn actions/mags to fit the cartridges already in existence. Just because some engineers keep screwing that part up doesn't mean they have to going forward.

I couldn't agree more.. most are just reinventing the wheel just too have the same wheel with their name on it.

 

[Decap]

I couldn't agree more.. most are just reinventing the wheel just too have the same wheel with their name on it.

Part of the problem is engineers aren't exactly visionaries. It never made sense to me to build an action for a cartridge like the cheytac and then make the magazine length only .80 longer than a cip lapua magazine. You could use a 50 Cal action but now you're opening up a whole other can of worms especially with the mags. Where they were short sighted was sizing the mag and the action on the original cheytac spec without ever considering that people one day might be running much longer high BC bullets. Cadex likes to talk a lot about how they solved all the problems with a $275 magazine that's .075 longer on COAL.

 

[idcwby]

Good choice, that's what I'm going to using in my 338 am when it's done

It's hard not to consider it with the BC it has. From what I've read, it sounds like the BC numbers are real close to what's advertised. I haven't found anything on minimum expansion velocity though.

 

[Bghunter338]

It's hard not to consider it with the BC it has. From what I've read, it sounds like the BC numbers are real close to what's advertised. I haven't found anything on minimum expansion velocity though.

 

[sable tireur]

From another testing article:

At some point, someone is going to mention the FBI protocol. The FBI ammunition testing protocol, first devised in the wake of the 1986 Miami shootout, calls for the use of 10 percent ballistic gelatin, according to American Rifleman, and for the projectile to penetrate 12 to 18 inches of gel, both in bare gel, through clothing, and after passing through barriers.

So, anyone using 10 percent (by weight) ballistic gelatin is using the same ballistic gel that the FBI does, and the FBI standard - for better or worse - is one of the best predictors we have when it comes to ammunition performance in the real world.

So Badlands is using the FBI specified percentage gelatin for testing which is appropriate.

 

[Decap]

At some point, someone is going to mention the FBI protocol. The FBI ammunition testing protocol, first devised in the wake of the 1986 Miami shootout, calls for the use of 10 percent ballistic gelatin, according to American Rifleman, and for the projectile to penetrate 12 to 18 inches of gel, both in bare gel, through clothing, and after passing through barriers.

In this case the FBI standard is kind of an apples to oranges comparison. For bullets such as this it is a good way to demonstrate expansion at a particular velocity, while allowing the manufacturer to recover them intact for display purposes. It is used to replicate performance on human tissue not game. That's why the manufacturer is talking about speed and expansion not inches of penetration. Actually, 10% ordinance gelatin was the standard used by Dr. Martin Fackler for the original army wound ballistics studies in the early 80's. The FBI adopted it later on. For law enforcement purposes it is mostly used to evaluate the performance of handgun and light rifle rounds. Pretty much any round that bulldozers would be fired from would give you a through and through on human tissue. Even for law enforcement purposes it's not a perfect science. Ball ammo gives you a lot of penetration but no expansion, while frangible rounds give you shallow penetration but practically explode into anything they hit.

 

[sable tireur]

No matter how much history you choose to recite, 10% gel as used by Badlands Precision is just the same as the 10% gel used by the FBI no matter under which circumstances. Any difference is irrelevant. You can put blocks end to end if necessary or desired. I was merely pointing out the similarity to the testing medium by percentage. It was a simple comparison not something complex.

Have a Great Day!

 

[Decap]

Not trying to make it something complex. The brief history lesson was just to correct the AR article you quoted that said the FBI devised the testing protocol after the 86 Miami shootout. The protocol existed for five years before the shootout ever happened, the FBI just adopted it. Of course you are correct 10% ordnance gelatin is going to be 10% ordnance gelatin no matter who mixes it and no matter what they use it for, that wasn't my point. My point was 10% gel is designed to simulate human tissue. The tissue on game is denser, probably closer to 20% which is why I imagine badlands said most manufacturers use it (not to mention it will make the bullet expand more dramatically). Since this is a hunting forum I assume we're evaluating hunting rounds and not antipersonnel rounds, and so if we're talking about real world hunting conditions, the 20% gel would probably give you a more accurate idea of performance. That's what I meant by apples and oranges. That being said, if the Badlands bullet performs that well in 10% gel it should do even better in 20% so good for them for testing it in 10%



Glad I could clear that up. I don't want to hijack the thread so I'm going to hand it back over to Idcwby.



You have a great day too!

 

[idcwby]

Not trying to make it something complex. The brief history lesson was just to correct the AR article you quoted that said the FBI devised the testing protocol after the 86 Miami shootout. The protocol existed for five years before the shootout ever happened, the FBI just adopted it. Of course you are correct 10% ordnance gelatin is going to be 10% ordnance gelatin no matter who mixes it and no matter what they use it for, that wasn't my point. My point was 10% gel is designed to simulate human tissue. The tissue on game is denser, probably closer to 20% which is why I imagine badlands said most manufacturers use it (not to mention it will make the bullet expand more dramatically). Since this is a hunting forum I assume we're evaluating hunting rounds and not antipersonnel rounds, and so if we're talking about real world hunting conditions, the 20% gel would probably give you a more accurate idea of performance. That's what I meant by apples and oranges. That being said, if the Badlands bullet performs that well in 10% gel it should do even better in 20% so good for them for testing it in 10%



Glad I could clear that up. I don't want to hijack the thread so I'm going to hand it back over to Idcwby.



You have a great day too!

It's always good to learn this stuff.

 

[idcwby]

Got a Stiller Tac Driver (408), single shot, on order. Who makes stocks for it? Can you use a 700 stock and just open it up more?

 

[Decap]

My preference is a McMillan A5 supermag, but to make your weight limit your only real option is a Manners with the elite carbon shell. My recommendation would be the T4. Can't use a 700 stock because the footprint to the recoil lug is longer and action screw spacing is different.

 

[VLD Pilot]

Ramble all you want, helps the process of trying to figure out what to do.
Recoil isn't a concern for me, but I would like other people to be able to shoot it also. With enough practice, part of the reason for building this is to be able to shoot game out to 2000yds and hit steel further. Idaho's 16lb limit for hunting, is why I want to have it finish in the 14-15lb range, that way if I want to change something down the road, I have some flexibility. I'm thinking 32" barrel also.

2000 yards on game is extremely far not to mention the 3+ second travel time of the projectile to the game animal. Steel and paper targets don't move before bullet impact. In a 3 second window period, that can't be said with any game animal. Not trying to be the ELR ethics police but for me, that's just not a place I'd put myself in a hunting scenario. 1200 yards is plenty far on big game and in most scenarios, that's a bit far depending on the animal ( and the actual scenario).Pronghorns are jumpy. Elk and deer can offer this as well as big bears. Any of these animals can do a 180° turn in 3 seconds easily and not even from being spooked, just casually turning. I'd have to have a very high percentage guarantee that my impact will be in the vitals or I wouldn't take that shot. Nothing is 100% as things happen but I can control a huge percentage of it. Again not to be the ethics police, you decide what's "YOUR" too far, not me. To the post, any of the cartridges listed are good options for shooting to 2500 yards IMO.

 

[idcwby]

2000 yards on game is extremely far not to mention the 3+ second travel time of the projectile to the game animal. Steel and paper targets don't move before bullet impact. In a 3 second window period, that can't be said with any game animal. Not trying to be the ELR ethics police but for me, that's just not a place I'd put myself in a hunting scenario. 1200 yards is plenty far on big game and in most scenarios, that's a bit far depending on the animal ( and the actual scenario).Pronghorns are jumpy. Elk and deer can offer this as well as big bears. Any of these animals can do a 180° turn in 3 seconds easily and not even from being spooked, just casually turning. I'd have to have a very high percentage guarantee that my impact will be in the vitals or I wouldn't take that shot. Nothing is 100% as things happen but I can control a huge percentage of it. Again not to be the ethics police, you decide what's "YOUR" too far, not me. To the post, any of the cartridges listed are good options for shooting to 2500 yards IMO.

Completely understand your position. This is just the first step in the process to get shooting that far. If I ever do feel comfortable making a shot that far, the opportunity may never present itself either. It's just an end goal, there is still a lot in between now and that goal.

 

[VLD Pilot]

Completely understand your position. This is just the first step in the process to get shooting that far. If I ever do feel comfortable making a shot that far, the opportunity may never present itself either. It's just an end goal, there is still a lot in between now and that goal.

Love to see a post of one you hammering one that far out. Pics for sure. That'd be an awesome accomplishment.