Woodleigh 240 grain 30-06 bullet

[lgm270]

Another interesting listing of Woodleigh bullets.  A 240 grain .308" designed for the 30-06.   Kind of interesting.  Any thoughts?

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=458262

[jro45]

I think that the 240gr bullet will not go fast enought. The 220gr bullet only get to 2400fps
Witch would make a good bear bullet close up. How fast will the 240 go?

[03A2]

I'd try them out of curiosity, but I'm one of those who likes the heavy for caliber bullets, especially in northern idaho where the brush and timber are thick.  My main problem would be finding good reloading data, I suppose one could use sierras data for a baseline with their 240 matchking, but that  is the only source I can think of.  Surely one could get 2200 fps wich is as good as a krag or 30-30, but you'd have a lot more weight.

[03A2]

Wanted to add that my sierra manual actually does NOT list data for the 240 in 30-06 as I had believed.  Hogdons website does list data for the 250 grain barnes however, they claimed a max velocity of 2281 I believe.  I would feel safe using their data for the woodleighs.  If you try it let me know.  I would imagine one would want to have the 10" twist for these.

[Casull]

I remember reading a Bob Milek article years ago that listed a 250 grain bullet at 2400 fps out of the 30-06, but don't recall the load.

[lgm270]

Here's a post from Steve Timm,   an Oregon elk guide who long throated a Rem 700 30-06 and  obtained increased ballistics after seating bullets bases flush with the case neck:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/1331118/Gunwriters_Elaborate_on_long_t


"Re: Gunwriters-Elaborate on "long throat" please. [Re: Furprick]
dogzapper Offline

Campfire Kahuna Emeritus &
Campfire Tracker

Registered: 03/19/03
Posts: 5208    
Many years ago, I had a pair of Remington 700s that were chambered for long throat standard cartridges. One was a .30-'06 and I shot 200-grain to 250-grain bullets. The other was a .280 Remington and I primarily shot 175-grain Hornady Spires.

Obviously, the action was the Remington long, which will handle up to a .375 length round, so mag length was not any issue at all. And, man, the looooong rounds fed wonderfully.

This was in my early days of guiding elk hunters and the idea was that the high-SD bullets would give me pretty good penetration. Usually, when a guide shoots, it's a stern shot after following up a bull for a couple of miles. Been there, done that...lotsa times.

Let me tell you, a bull that is shot up the ass at close range with a 250-grain Original Barnes goes nowhere but DOWN. I've saved lots of difficult mule packs by such a nasty shot. It ain't "classic," like is written about by artsy-fartsy writers, but it friggin' gets the job done pronto.

Writing about what a guide, a good guide, has to do in the common case of the paid-hunter gutshooting a bull...running the tracks and greenshit, while the paid-hunter stays where he is told, is not the stuff of art. It's not PC, it's simply the way it is. You run them down and you kill them. That's it.

The concept worked well and accuracy was superb. The added benefit was that the extra powder capacity put the resultant cartridge squarely in the Improved class when using 180-grain bullets.

I eventually wrote an article on the .30-'06 rifle, the ballistics and results on animals. Those who are interested should seek out Guns & Ammo July 1988. The artice is entitled "Heavyweight Bullet Handloads for the .30-'06."

This was my one and only article for Guns & Ammo. By the time they published the article, I'd experienced the wrath of about six editors and re-written the piece at least once for each of the jerks. This was pre-computer and the manuscript had to be done on a typewriter. I got a kingly $125 dollars for my efforts.

At the time, I still owned my store and I could make the same amount of money in one hour working gold. Working for the likes of the G&A folks was a waste of time...they argue, piss and moan; then when it comes time to pay, they are misers. Screw 'em.

Steve"
_________________________

[Barstooler]

If I wanted to go that heavy in an 06 I would be looking to getting a custom bullet mould made and just use cast bullets with a GC.

HCLBs in that weight/caliber would likely not require "reduced loads."

Would not be sacrificing velocity and would be much less expensive than using Woodleighs in the long run.

Barstooler

[Lone Star]

A better solution is to open up the neck to .338" and use a 250-grain Nosler.  Proven by throngs of hunters wordwide, including Elmer Keith - enough "heavy-bullet" cred for y'all?  Keith never had much use for the standard '06, considering it marginal on deer.



.

[Drilling Man]

  Keith never had much use for the standard '06, considering it marginal on deer.

.

  That "once again" proves just how stupid some of the stuff he said, was!

  DM

[Casull]

 

Keith never had much use for the standard '06, considering it marginal on deer.

.


  That "once again" proves just how stupid some of the stuff he said, was!

On that point, you are quite correct.  If the '06 is marginal on deer, then the .223 is too light for tree rats.

[lgm270]

If I wanted to go that heavy in an 06 I would be looking to getting a custom bullet mould made and just use cast bullets with a GC.

HCLBs in that weight/caliber would likely not require "reduced loads."

Would not be sacrificing velocity and would be much less expensive than using Woodleighs in the long run.

Barstooler

Very interesting post, Barstooler.  Could you please shed a little more light on the weight, profile, etc. of the cast bullet you would specify?  Could you identify a mold maker who could  fill the order?

[Barstooler]

You would have to special order the mould.

I have bought several special orders from "Mountain Molds."  Web site is here:  http://www.mountainmolds.com/

You can design it yourself, with or without GC.  Just go to their "Online Bullet Design" link in the upper left portion of their home web site.

I normally order an "Iron" mould and you will have to order the handles seperately.   RCBS handles normally fit.

These are very high quality moulds and worth the price.

Barstooler

[kombi1976]

Having read articles about the Woodleigh 30 cal 240gr RNSN it is well up to the most punishing work you can think of.
It was designed to help cull water buffalo in Australia's Northern Territory and proved an excellent choice in bolt guns and O/U doubles.
It is NOT suitable for 300 Win Mag as it was designed with the lower power of the '06 in mind.
Woodleigh also make an 8mm 250gr RNSN and this can be pushed to 2200fps.
I know.....I've loaded them.
If you can't do the same using the significantly larger case of the '06 you need to re-examine your load.
It should also be remembered that Woodleigh's approach is that bullets ALWAYS expand and that a lower velocity enabling a more controlled expansion is preferable to higher velocity.
An experienced hunter and Woodleigh rep I know of loads all of his buffalo rifles to between 2000fps and 2100fps with as heavy a bullet as possible.
He has found that often a 9.3x62 loaded with a 286gr pill at 2100fps will be more effective at flattening a buff than a 375 H&H punching out a 270gr pill at 2550fps.
The bullet stays together better and expands properly, not drastically all at once.
Moreover, the guy shooting the 9.3mm is able to KEEP shooting buffs all day.
The H&H shooter finds himself sore pretty soon.
Granted culling is not hunting but less recoil equals easier accurate shooting.
And these are not a long range bullet either......they're designed for close stalking.

[lgm270]

HI Kombi:

Interesting observation that for large amounts of shooting, the lesser powered 9.3x62 is more viable than the larger, more powerful .375 H&H. 

I've friends who have gone to South America for wingshooting who prefer small gauges  because of the  diminished recoil that allows them to shoot all day and bring down the fantastic bag limits permitted in those countries.

[kombi1976]

Certainly the sort of hunting, the number of shots and the proliferation of game without bag limits here in Oz makes a big difference to the approach when hand loading.
There is only one species of deer in Oz that requires tags and has bag limits.
Most feral species, deer and buffalo usually being the exception, are shot in as high a number a possible.
We hunt hogs and goats like you hunt varmints because they are pests.
And when you cull hunt buffalo, a practise that is done on particular properties because of the damage they do to fences and the feed they take away from beef cattle, you have to be able to shoot all day.
Much of our shooting is across open country at decent ranges but we have to take a lot of shots too.
So 223 and 243 are probably the most popular cals as they recoil less, are flat shooters, are very accurate and are flexible for small and medium game.
Plus they're cheap to load or to get factory ammo.
But using either the 240gr 30 cal in an '06 or the 250gr 8mm in my 8x57 I'd take on a buff.
That's what Woodleigh designed these pills for.
What they lack in calibre they make up for in penetration.
That said, neither 30 cal or 8mm are ideal cals for buffalo.
If you had a teenager or woman not up to a 338, 9.3 or 375 that was nonetheless a good shot with the 30 cal it would be a good alternative.
Or if you were touring Oz and could only take 1 rifle then an '06 and a Lee Loader with a range of projectiles it would be a good compromise.
And more importantly, if you were part of an experience d professional hunting team contracted to cull buffalo on a regular basis the 240gr RNSN would be a superb choice.
But aside of that give me my 9.3x62 or better still, my Ruger No1H in 450/400 NE 3"!

[lgm270]

Hi Kombi.  A great post. I really enjoyed it. Happy New Year.