Efficiency question about guns....

BergerBoy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
282
Location
I'm NOT a patriot... I am a U.S. Constitutionalist
The few on here that know me know that I am a big 30 cal fan. I think science has really taken the round (and MANY others) far the 5-10 years.
My question is when does it not make sense to shoot a particular round anymore or to choose one over the other???
We live in a free country (mostly) and I believe in the luxury and fun of experimenting with firearms/ammo and I am not a "cheap-skate" I just like and try to make good/practical decisions. Efficiency is key.

EXAMPLE: I have a 300wm 27 in. barrel and I push a 230 OTM at 2844fps with 75 gr H1000. My friend has a 300 Ultra (26 in.) and pushes the same round at 2959 but with 96 gr. Retumbo (I may be off one gr. north or south). Approx. 21 gr. more powder for 115 fps.??!! To me that seems ridicules..... Why not just shoot a 338LM? He is burning about the same amount of powder.....right? This is in NO WAY an affront on any of you Ultra guys just using you as an example and there are many more we can get into....
Does anyone else agree or disagree with me on this? I just wanted to know what your thoughts were on the subject. Maybe if I made another 100k a year It wouldn't cross my mind. LOL..... Or at least made that!! lol:D
What say you?

And God Bless this poor country, we need his help and guidance more than ever....
 

brentc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
2,527
Not defending either choice here, I have both chamberings that you speak of, but you're comparing apples to oranges in a sense. On one hand you're comparing H1000 to a step slower burning powder, so naturally there is some imbalance. Also, that's alot of Retumbo for that bullet. If that's what he's running, it's abnormal. Most guys are running a touch below 90 grains of Retumbo with a 230 in the RUM which closes the gap a bit more.

My experience with both is that the RUM does in fact use more powder for performance but it's not as drastic as you think when comparing the same powder with the same bullet in each. Both of my 300s have an H1000 230 grain Berger load. My 26" 300 WM burns 74.0 grains of H1000 and nets 2730 fps and my RUM burns 85.2 grains of the same powder to get 2880 fps. If you do the math on my loads, the 300 WM gets 37 fps per grain and the RUM gets 33 fps per grain. So really, it comes down to performance. If you want (need) the extra 150-400 fps (depending on the load) with a 230 grain Berger, then the RUM is available.
 

BergerBoy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
282
Location
I'm NOT a patriot... I am a U.S. Constitutionalist
Thank for the response but your looking into the example WAY TOO much. I was just speaking more bang for the buck issue. Apples and oranges? We just may have to agree to disagree on that one.... Same bullet, VERY similar and sometimes even the same powder used with similar speeds. I'm sorry that I was off on my ultra load but you get the point of what i was saying.

Thanks for the response
 

MudRunner2005

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
14,708
Location
Alabama
Maximum efficiency is important to me as well. And I'd say that 21gr of powder for only 115fps is not an efficient upgrade. But that's my opinion. Same arguement of .25-06 AI vs .257 Wby. I have had both for fair amount of time and the extra 10-15gr of powder required by the Wby to achieve barely, if any, gains is not worth it, IMO.
 

FEENIX

Well-Known Member
LRH Team Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
16,486
Location
Great Falls, MT
Efficiency is all relative! For instance, when I was deciding on my 1st AI, I originally was going for the .280 AI, but was always fascinated with the legendary Jack O'Connor's .270 Win.

Most were telling me it's not worth the effort and expenses associated with it. That even drove me more to prove the naysayers wrong. With a 30" Lilja 1:8" 3-groove barrel, I am able to propel the 175 Matrix VLD near 3100 FPS out of my .270 AI with BR2 WW brass but settled for 2993 FPS (58 H4831SC) accuracy load ... for now. :rolleyes:

In comparison, my hunting buddy is pushing the factory HSM 180 Berger VLD @ 2850 FPS out of his factory 7MM Rem Mag Weatherby with 24" barrel.

IMHO, it's not too shabby for a cartridge 16 grains less case capacity. :cool:gun)
 

dkhunt14

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
462
Location
selinsgrove pa.
Why not do a 300 WSM in a long action. That way you can throat it out (280 freebore) and still get the bullets out where you need them and use a Magazine. With a 230 Berger you can get 3000 with 7828SSC. Less powder and longer barrel life. Matt
 

J E Custom

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
10,723
Location
Texas
Efficiency is relative to many things. When comparing one cartridge to another everything comes
into play. Barrel quality, chamber quality, barrel length, powder burn rate, primers ability to set off the particular powder. bullet weight, twist rate and most of all Pressure produced by the load combination and the volume of gas used to do so.

Smaller cartridges burn less fast burning powder to get the same velocity than a large cartridge
that uses more slow burning powder reaching the same pressure.

So the answer to your question is simple, the larger the cartridge the less efficient per grain
of powder it will be. If it uses the best powder for velocity at the same pressure for the volume of the case. PO Ackley called the point where a cartridge gained less velocity per grain of powder "Over Bore"

All cartridges reach a point of diminishing returns where the gain in velocity is not the same per grain of powder. In fact I have seen cartridges slow down when the wrong powder or more powder was used.

Velocity comes at a price, More velocity, requires more powder, and in order to get this with all other things being equal, more case capacity is required.

Physicist would simply say it is a mater of time and pressure. (Time in the barrel and peak pressure).

Longer barrels produce more velocity to a point and then they reach there practical limit.

Comparing one cartridge to another, is as said "APPLES AND ORANGES"

J E CUSTOM
 

Timber338

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
1,818
Location
Colorado
I totally hear where you're coming from, I really like efficient rifles. My ultralight pack rifle is based on a WSM cartridge on a short action. It is very fast in the thick forests, so light you don't even notice it, and you don't sacrifice too much bullet performance. All around a very efficient package. While it is very accurate, it's light weight and short barrel limit it's effective range on game.

So I think each cartridge (.308 family, WSM, win mag, RUM, etc) is best optimized in different platforms. A .308 win long range hunting rifle is never going to run with a 300 RUM if they are built to the same exact specs. The RUM is always going to carry more energy, shoot flatter and drift less in the wind at extended ranges.

I like the point you bring up, I just don't think it's fair to compare a 27" 300 win mag to a 26" 300 RUM. If those are my choices I'll always go with the win mag like you are pointing out. I don't think your buddy is optimizing the potential of his RUM with only a 26" barrel. A 28-30" barrel is going to make better use of all that powder and I think will push the 230 around the 3100 fps mark.

But aside from all those details, I think that one thing overlooked here is energy. Efficiency is based on energy in vs energy out.... so velocity is simply the wrong metric to track if you're trying to compare efficiency between two different rifles/cartridges. If you build an optimized 300 RUM and are getting 3100 fps with the 230 berger compared to the 2844 from the win mag, you are putting in 28% more powder for only a 9% gain in velocity, but nearly 19% gain in energy.

It's obviously true that larger cartridges are never as efficient as smaller ones shooting the same bullet, but when you look at energy and build the rifle to best optimize the cartridge, the larger cartridges really are not all that bad. And if you want/need the performance, like energy at long range to kill an elk, you have to be willing to sacrifice something....
 

tailbon3

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
83
So, to attempt to answer the juicy question, "My question is when does it not make sense to shoot a particular round anymore or to choose one over the other??? "

My answer is, "It only makes sense to switch when you just can't stand not to switch!!!" Once the itch gets too much you just have to scratch it :)
 

brentc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2009
Messages
2,527
Thank for the response but your looking into the example WAY TOO much. I was just speaking more bang for the buck issue. Apples and oranges? We just may have to agree to disagree on that one.... Same bullet, VERY similar and sometimes even the same powder used with similar speeds. I'm sorry that I was off on my ultra load but you get the point of what i was saying.

Thanks for the response

I guess it also comes down to where you want your bang to occur. Do you want your bang to be efficiency, or do you want your bang to be performance?

If efficiency is your game, get a 300 WSM, burn 65.0 grains of 7828ssc and push a Berger 230 at 2700+ fps, or better yet, get there with 60.0 grains of RL17. If you need to push the performance just a little more get a 300 WM and drive them to 2750 fps with 75.0 grains of H1000. If you need a lot more performance then get a 300 RUM and drive them at 3050+ with 95-100 grains of RL33. We could go on like this for quite a while with everything that's out there.


As stated earlier by myself and others. Apples and oranges. Trade offs and compromises. Get what fits your desires.
 

bigngreen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
8,336
Location
SW Montana
Comparing a fast 300 Win to a slow 300 RUM isn't really about efficiency, it's about barrels and loads and maybe some throating.
 

Punisher

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
750
Location
Kansas
I think that you are talking about a barrier that most of us think about. But when selecting a cartridge, you need to ask yourself what you are going to do with it.

If I want a long range hunting/ everything rifle, I pick up my 7 mm mag. It fires a big 168 gr bullet with about 70 grains of powder. It gets me close to the performance of the big magnums and the 30 Carl's with about 20 grains less powder and a lighter bullet with higher BC.

I have a .243 that I am building for long range plinking because... The ammo is so cheap, it's almost free.

But I do want to build a .338 edge next. Not for plinking, not for shooting matches, but strictly for 5-10 hunting shots per year. Because It shoots flat and doesn't suffer much wind drift... It isn't for practice with its expensive brass and expensive dies... But it is a tool that will do what I want it to, when I want it to do it.

I chose the 7mm mag over the 30 cals because it had similar performance and was cheaper to shoot. It was a good compromise of power and price in my eyes. But that's probably the reason you would like a .300 Winchester.

I think that is the answer to the idea you are developing. All of us shooters are dealing with different limiting factors like time and budget. What's a good compromise for you?
 

BergerBoy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
282
Location
I'm NOT a patriot... I am a U.S. Constitutionalist
Why not do a 300 WSM in a long action. That way you can throat it out (280 freebore) and still get the bullets out where you need them and use a Magazine. With a 230 Berger you can get 3000 with 7828SSC. Less powder and longer barrel life. Matt

You are absolutely right. The only reason I did not use a 300 wsm was brass cost and availability.

Great point.
 

BergerBoy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
282
Location
I'm NOT a patriot... I am a U.S. Constitutionalist
Comparing a fast 300 Win to a slow 300 RUM isn't really about efficiency, it's about barrels and loads and maybe some throating.

So.... Let's ay that the Ultra was 200 fps faster than my 300 wm. Wouldn't it still be less efficient? More? What??
The guy (please forgive me for not remembering your name) choosing his 7 mm over a 30 cal. makes a good point and understands the debate.

Thanks for ALL your responses.
 
Top