Update on the 338-06 project

[handirifle]

Well, range day is here, with mixed results.

This is the same 338-06 that had pressure, headspace and velocity issues, and the missfires.  First the velocity, I believe was off on the chrono, and I saw why.  Someone mentioned that if the chrono wasn't opened completely, it would read fast.  Guess what , the head on my tripod was keeping it from opening any more than about 90% of the way.  It was hardly noticeable, but when I was looking for it, I saw it.  Thanks for that tip.  The readings were more more believable this time.

If you recall, I had some excessive headspace last trip out and had since then adjusted the barrel in a bit.  Headspace corrected , BUT when I started to load the Nosler Accubonds into the chamber, the bolt wouldn't close , what the?

I had loaded just 10 of those to test for the flat primers and velocity, but it wasn't gonna happen.  Apparently. they were loaded OK for the previous headspace setting, but no-go for the new setting.  The Accubonds' fat frontal ogive made for a too tight fit.  Sooooo, I set those aside and went right to the Barnes TSX loads.  I had loaded those much shorter, based on the Barnes loading data, and they fit and shot fine.  ZERO pressure issues this trip.  I did have two miss-fires, and the primers seemed like they were barely hit.  One did fire later on when I tried it again, but the other did not.

Found some loads that were OK for groups, nothing to write home about.  I did get at least one load for each caliber shot, 338-06 and 243, that made a 3 shot 1" group, but shots 4 and 5 opened that up quite a bit, to about 2".  Acceptable hunting accuracy, but not for me.

Velocities, for the 185gr Barnes were running an average of 2950 FPS towards the upper level loads for the Barnes "X" bullet, but still 1.5-2gr under the Barnes suggested max loads for the TSX.  The groups seemed to get better as the speed went up.  Using BL-C2 and H4895 for the 338-06, and IMR 4895 mostly for the 243.

Will be looking for different powders that others have used with the TSX bullets in these calibers.  Any suggestions there?

Sorry for the long post, but as you can see this project hit a speed bump last time out and I was really concerned.  My only concern now is running out of money with these $1 ea bullets (almost), before I find the perfect load.

[Boxhead]

Just a suggestion. I would get the gun firing right using cheap Speer 200 gr bullets. Get all of the "bugs" worked out and get it grouping well. Then proceed with load development using the premium bullets. I solely use VV-N550 powder in my 338-06 though H-414 did well too. Good luck.

[handirifle]

Boxhead
Probably a good idea, but I have seldom found a load that worked with one bullet work well with a different one, at least in my rifles.


Did you try other powders first?  How'd you end up with the VV?

[6.5BR]

Work up loads with IMR 4320 and 200 ballistic tips, perhaps Hornady's, and ANY 225 gr as mine put all into .5moa with 6x scope, using WW brass, std primers, Hart barrel/700 action

4320 was MY go to powder based upon LOTS of research prior to testing.  Accuracy WITH velocity.  It is a top choice in my opinion/experience.  H414 did not get speeds I wanted, at the loads I tested, so I moved on, but they may be there....but with 4320, there was no doubt.

2909 fps 200gr
2670      225gr
2790      215

[deltecs]

Accuracy WITH velocity.  It is a top choice in my opinion/experience.  H414 did not get speeds I wanted, at the loads I tested, so I moved on, but they may be there....but with 4320, there was no doubt.

2909 fps 200gr
2670      225gr
2790      215

What is your barrel length and COL?  I wonder what sort of pressures you are working in with these velocities, especially with 4320.  Not any criticism, just dubious if you were working within the SAAMI range of 52,000 psi.  If you are, then you are getting really good velocities from this fine cartridge.  If it shoots as accurate as it efficiently burns powder, I want one.

[k3yston3]

I thought SAMMI spec'd out 60,000 psi for the 338-06 A-Square....



EDIT:

It looks to be 65,000 psi according to the A-square loading manual, which should be fine since the .270 is also rated at 65,000 psi

[deltecs]

I stand corrected, I meant 52,000 CUP max average pressure standard.  This is the same as the .270.  Still curious as to barrel length, powder load, and cartridge overall length.  Is you barrel freebored?

[handirifle]

Work up loads with IMR 4320 and 200 ballistic tips, perhaps Hornady's, and ANY 225 gr as mine put all into .5moa with 6x scope, using WW brass, std primers, Hart barrel/700 action

4320 was MY go to powder based upon LOTS of research prior to testing.  Accuracy WITH velocity.  It is a top choice in my opinion/experience.  H414 did not get speeds I wanted, at the loads I tested, so I moved on, but they may be there....but with 4320, there was no doubt.

2909 fps 200gr
2670      225gr
2790      215

Thanks for the load info.  It was obvious to me at the range, that my rifle didn't really seem to like the BL C2, it DID seem to like the H4895 (at least I think, been a week since I looked at the loads) but I ran out of that pretty fast.

I was HOPING to use a 180-185gr bullet to start, especially since the deer in this area are small, and get used to that.  But I may have to just work up a load with the heavier bullets and stick with one load.  Don't like to keep switching loads.

[Boxhead]

Boxhead
Probably a good idea, but I have seldom found a load that worked with one bullet work well with a different one, at least in my rifles.


Did you try other powders first?  How'd you end up with the VV?

Yes I developed a number of loads using IMR 4320, 4064, W748, H414, H380, and H4350 with 210 and 225 gr Partitions, 200 gr Ballistic Tips, 185, 210 and 225 gr Barnes X's or TSX's and 200 gr Hornady's in Federal, Winchester and Hornady brass. While no loads were really poor shooters, a testament to the rifle, when the dust settled the best accuracy and velocity came from VV-N550 and the 210 and 225 gr Partitons and the 185 gr TSX. I have hunted a fair amount with the two lighter slugs taking elk, deer, bear, hogs and nilgai with complete satisfaction. When I want a heavier bullet I move to either my 35 Whelens or 9.3x62's and shoot 250's. Hope this helps. 

[handirifle]

boxhead
Yes it does, thanks.  What it does tell me is there is a lot more work ahead for me.  I need to give my barrel a good cleaning as well.

Interesting point about using heavier in the Whelen.  My load books show them pretty much the same, but do you get more from the heavier slugs from the whelen than the 338-06?

I will have to get some of the VV powder and give it a try.

[6.5BR]

Accuracy WITH velocity.  It is a top choice in my opinion/experience.  H414 did not get speeds I wanted, at the loads I tested, so I moved on, but they may be there....but with 4320, there was no doubt.

2909 fps 200gr
2670      225gr
2790      215

What is your barrel length and COL?  I wonder what sort of pressures you are working in with these velocities, especially with 4320.  Not any criticism, just dubious if you were working within the SAAMI range of 52,000 psi.  If you are, then you are getting really good velocities from this fine cartridge.  If it shoots as accurate as it efficiently burns powder, I want one.

23", 10" twist, standard chamber, partial sized WW cases, don't know pressure, it was I am sure close to safe max or at it, but I don't think overly high either based on loads used by others, even if one used loads 100fps less, no measurable difference would likely be seen in the field, but they were safe in mine.  No problems or signs of forthcoming problems. 

I honestly believe with more than 6x scope, my gun would have shot UNDER .5 MOA ALL DAY Long, for 3 shots, at 100 and 200, never shot past that, given gun range used then. 

COL If I Recall, was around 3.35, chamber was done for 250 gr option-throating, never used them, but it might have helped my pressure ceiling, Hart made the barrel and did the work.

[deltecs]

I like this post BR.  The info you provided has convinced me to have 338-06 A Square made up on a Ruger Mark 1.  I've debated over it and the 9.3x62 as a second rilfe for a planned trip to Africa.  The .338-06 would be a much better overall rifle for use back here so wanted to lean toward that decision.  But the 9.3 had much harder punch compared to the .338-06 loads as listed in the manuals.  Admiittedly some of the manuals are conservative prior to the .338-06 became a standard commercial cartridge and pressure standards were variable.  It is hard to make a decision based on variable pressure standards.  However, after lots of confirmed reloads and chonographed velocities with the .338-06, the punch levels are more closely matched to the 9.3x62.  The other caliber for Africa will be a 404 Dakota.  It basically is a 330 Dakota or 375 Ruger necked up to .423 with ballistics equal to the .416 Taylor.  The barrel length you have is same as I've chosen for both weapons.  Just hope mine shoots as good as yours with the same throat.

[Boxhead]

My observations show that my 9.3x62's hit with more thump than the 338-06. I used the 250 gr X in one of my 9.3's in Africa at a very safe 2650 fps. Below is one critter that quickly dropped to this load. I have also loaded the 9.3 with the 286 gr Partition at 2400 fps and the 320 gr Woodleigh's to 2250 fps which is a real penetrator. Though I have not taken game with the latter load I know a gent that has dropped cape buffalo with it. As I wrote above if I want to shoot 250+ gr I go to the Whelen or 9.3 that are in rifles set up a bit different than my 338-06 which was built as a lightweight elk rifle.

 

[deltecs]

There is no doubt in mind that the 9.3x62 hits harder than the .338-06.  It is much better for African plains game than the 338-06 and also has the better reputation there for doing it too.  However, I think for most "repeat most" North American hunting the 338-06 is preferable.  It has very good velocity and penetration at 350 yds with the 185 TSX and as flat shooting as 140 gr 270 Win.  With the 200 or 210 gr, it makes a good western deer rifle.  With the 225 it does good with elk, big mulies, and big black bear.  The 250 have good trajectory for moose at longer ranges and it hits hard enough on grizzly close that I am not in least concerned about being undergunned.  With the 275 gr Speer and 300 Woodleighs, it is adequate for the majority of African Plains game.  I believe it to be a very versatile cartridge and maybe not the best for all game.  The 9.3 has my highest regard for a game cartridge but I believe the 338-06 better for my applications in Alaska.  The 9.3, if better known by hunters, would gather more respect when compared on the same game as some of the magnums used and exhaulted by them.

[deltecs]

As an aside, if one was to just neck up the .35 Whelen from .358 to .366, he effectively would have a 9.3x62.  The difference in case dimension between them other than head space is so minimal that it can be ignored.  According to my data, the .35 original case holds 72.63 grs of powder.  The 9.3 has 74.87.  Once the .35 was opened up to .366 the differences in powder capacity just aren't relative anymore.  Both cases are similarly designed, so no great efficiency in powder burn would indicate any appreciable difference between the 2.  The 9.3 has not had a problem or rumor of a problem with head space.  The .375 Whelen got a bad rap by some regarding head space problems that really are not warranted.  A standard 30-06 case necked to .366 or .375 with no other changes has sufficient head space to reliably shoot game safely.  There is a diameter difference of .009 between the .375 and .366 with nearly the same shoulder angle.  Not trying to argue just stating some facts relative to the choices between .338-06, .35 Whelen, 9.3x62, and .375 Whelen

[Boxhead]

Based on my experience using all three rounds in a number of rifles I consistently get another 100 fps or so with the 250's as I go from the 338-06 to the 35 Whelen to the 9.3x62.  Not a big factor for sure but real nonetheless. As we all know case capacities vary by manufacturer. They are all great rounds and I use them all extensively. In fact, short of my whitetail hunting for which I use a 270, they are the only calibers I hunt with. I use 185's and 210 in the '06, 225's and 250's in the 35's and 250's and 286's in the 9.3's and choose the calibers based and how my specific rifles are set up and the hunt I have planned. For example, the 338-06 is my go to elk rifle period as it is a lightweight (I hunt at 11000+ elevation), just fits me perfectly and is well proven up close and a ways out there on the critters. Great to have such choices , eh?

By the way, I am reconsidering the 185 gr TSX as though it was a quick kill on my last bull it lost all petals weighing 122 grs recovered at an impact range of 280 yards. I wonder what it would have done at, say 50 yards? I am going to try out the 210 gr TSX and may land back to the tried and proven 210 gr Partition, but part of the fun is experimenting for me. Here's a picture of the bullet.

[deltecs]

I Could hunt with either caliber for the rest of my life and probably be extremely happy with any of them.  I was only commenting that all things being equal with regard to the same manufacturer of the brass, the .35 whelen necked up to .366 is for all practical purposes within a grain or so at most from the capacity of the 9.3x62.  The difference between the 2 is like differentiating between the .270 and .280 capacity wise.  Neck the .270 up to .280 and there is a difference, but not enough to change bullet trajectory or velocity.  The extreme spreads on good handloads are sometimes as much as 50fps and point of impact is less than the shooter can hold, unless he is a markman of international capability.  I like any of them.  I like the bigger bores for bigger game and use the appropriate bullet for the game.  I don't think I'd use a 185 on elk, but at 350 yards on sheep, it should be a fine killer.

[Boxhead]

Well it is often healthy to agree to disagree. I know a lot of folks that use and have used 180 gr bullets via 30-06 and 300 Win Mag to take elk. Note that the bull taken with the bullet above dropped at the shot so certainly ultimate performance was there. I believe Barnes has a problem with the design of the 185 gr .338 X as I have hunted with the X in other calibers and have never seen one lose all petals, particularly as the lower impact velocities.

[Mac11700]

I'd like to see how the 180 Accubonds & the 200 grain CT Silver BT's hold up on elk...If I ever get out west to hunt them...I think I will..

Mac

[deltecs]

I too think a healthy discourse is great.  I'm not in disagreement with any of the posts, just expressing my preferences and opinions.  That is a nice bull though, and I hope to be able to do the same some day.