What's your opinion on shooting a 250gr. bullet from the a Lapua when hunting over 1K?

[BergerBoy]

I never understood why guys would build/buy a rifle like a 338 Lapua and not shoot one of the higher BC bullets. Generally speaking all the 250's have a considerable lower BC than the 300's - even the 285. In Litz's book the Lapua Scenar does not even have a .600 BC, That's terrible when you look at the other choices. If you run the numbers-in therory a 300 shooting one of Bergers 230gr would start to fly faster and hit harder at around 800 yds.

I know the 250gr. enjoys a stable flight through transonic into subsonic but nobody I know hunts that far away unless it's another human. (Longest confirm kill is over 2700 yds. with a 250 gr. Lapua Lock Base)

So what do you guys hunt with and if you uses one of the 250s would you tell me what your experience has been?

Thanks

 

[yobuck]

I never understood why guys would build/buy a rifle like a 338 Lapua and not shoot one of the higher BC bullets. Generally speaking all the 250's have a considerable lower BC than the 300's - even the 285. In Litz's book the Lapua Scenar does not even have a .600 BC, That's terrible when you look at the other choices. If you run the numbers-in therory a 300 shooting one of Bergers 230gr would start to fly faster and hit harder at around 800 yds.

I know the 250gr. enjoys a stable flight through transonic into subsonic but nobody I know hunts that far away unless it's another human. (Longest confirm kill is over 2700 yds. with a 250 gr. Lapua Lock Base)

So what do you guys hunt with and if you uses one of the 250s would you tell me what your experience has been?

Thanks

Well i can only speak about the area in which i hunt, and those i know who use 338s. First off very few kills are made at distances beyond 1000 yds. You can only
shoot the animals youve first found and thats not always easy due to poor conditions. Also, most shooters arent proficient enough to be comfortable about
shooting very long distances. Talk is one thing but actually doing it is quite another
and that includes me. Velocity is also a factor which can help a poorer b c bullet.
Experienced hunters i know tend to stick with what works for them regardless of
what others might think. That of coarse includes the distances we hunt and shoot.
Its no doubt gotten to the point where its easier to build guns and produce bullets
for them more capable than most of the people using them in a hunting situation. Some of us know that and others are slowly finding that out. But in theory you are correct.

 

[BergerBoy]

I agree with you. I would never take larger game at that distance unless I had to. I have never lost any game yet and I don't want to start now. Terminal preformance becomes a HUGE issue at that distance so as a general rule I try not to shoot elk and deer past 700-ish.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[sp6x6]

In my circle I know guys that have taken the 300 to 1300+ on game, the bullet was showing some varied results,but the game was harvested no problem. There are guys on here that favor the 250, it can be pushed fast and look at what they do with 30 cal 230. I shot the majority of my elk with 225 Nosler part. out to the 900 range no problem,some like spine hits where just one and done. I use 300 otm and never feel undergunned for 1000 type.When I used my 7rem I did.I load 250 NAB for my Marine double sharp shooter son in the 340Wby. Has no problems, I have shot a lot of game with the NAB's and like them. In my area here I am seeing more guys using the 300 NAB with good results.The 300 gr. is just a hammer dont care if it is a berger or a NAB.The Nosler seems always easier to get accurate load.

 

[HARPERC]

At the ranges, and targets you're taking about the 250's will get it done.

A matter of perspective, this site is about Long Range Hunting. What many of us consider a long shot, is generally better described here as mid-range.

The equipment needs are different, and when I got the chance to use stuff specifically designed for long range a big light lit up above my head.

Any more Leupold's marketing of CQ/t, MR/T, LR/T, and ER/T is how I look at equipment. as opposed to trying to make one rifle work from mice to moose, from in your face, to cross canyon.

In the .338 RUM I've had some success with the Accubond family 180-250, with the middle weights being slightly less useful to me, as a mid-range shooter.

A lot of good shooting to be had at mid-range, but as one gets closer to that 1000 yard magic mark, the equipment choices of the leaders of the pack start making more sense.

 

[BergerBoy]

I agree the 250, ".....the 250s will get it done" but at 1400 yds. the 300s have ~ 700ftlbs. more of energy than the 250s. I guess I don't understand why one would use the 250s unless there was a stabilization issue or lack of ammo etc....

God Bless N Happy New Year

 

[MMERSS]

I agree the 250, ".....the 250s will get it done" but at 1400 yds. the 300s have ~ 700ftlbs. more of energy than the 250s. I guess I don't understand why one would use the 250s unless there was a stabilization issue or lack of ammo etc....

God Bless N Happy New Year

Recoil sensitivity. The 250 is pleasant to shoot compared to the 300. If someone is not looking to hunt much past 800 to 900 the 250's have marginal difference in drop and drift than the 300's. Personally I would just consider a 30 cal 230 or the 180 7's if recoil is the issue but some just love the frontal area of the 338.

 

[HARPERC]

I agree the 250, ".....the 250s will get it done" but at 1400 yds. the 300s have ~ 700ftlbs. more of energy than the 250s. I guess I don't understand why one would use the 250s unless there was a stabilization issue or lack of ammo etc....God Bless N Happy New Year

Again at 1400 yard the 300's will rule. Some of us aren't ready to shoot game that far. It could be a habit I've shot 250'ss in .338's since before some of the larger cases' and bullets were available. Recoil is a factor for me, my fused neck doesn't tolerate it as well as I get older. If there is another build in my future it probably won't be in .338, more likely it will be to take advantage of higher BC in smaller calibers.

Ballistically you're on the right track, for over a thousand, my answer was intended to point out some of us stretch that far only occasionally.

 

[sp6x6]

Some of the early rifles TRG in particular where designed for the 250 that was avaliable at the time and dont have right twist rate for the 300.

 

[RMulhern]

Get closer!

 

[machiavelli]

I run a 338LM using 300g hunting goats on the tops I've found they buck the wind far better than the 250g.

 

[Topshot]

The Berger 250gn Elite Hunter is an excellent bullet. It can be driven quite fast and this makes up for its slightly lower BC.
In most .338 Lapua, .338 RUM and .338 Edge rifles you would be hard pressed to pick much difference in wind drift between it and a 300gn Berger out to 1400 yards.

A muzzle brake also performs better with a 250gn bullet than a 300gn bullet.

With these Berger bullets it is the impact velocity that determines the killing ability rather than the impact energy. No good having heaps of impact energy if the projectile doesn't have enough impact velocity to initiate expansion.

 

[LeddSlinger]

I agree with an earlier poster that there really isn't much difference in drop, drift, or energy between the 250gr Berger Elite Hunter (BC: 682) and other high BC 300gr bullets.

I use the 250gr Berger Elite Hunters in my 338-375 Ruger because I don't have a muzzle brake. I push them at 2930 fps from a 26" Brux barrel and recoil is about on par with a 300 win mag using 215's. So recoil is manageable. I have shot 2 deer with that bullet so far, one large mule deer buck at 380 yards and one doe at 265, and they both were one and done. The 250gr Berger is a laser beam at higher speeds and is an absolute hammer on any game North America can offer for hunting.

 

[machiavelli]

When shooting at high altitude 2000metres plus the 300gs far out performs the 250gs with the multiple cross winds and the wind shear coming off the faces the 300gs just buck the wind far better.