Jim (Savage T).....
Thanx for the compliments. Unfortunately, I can't tell you what the Nosler Ballistic Tip boat-tails are doing "down range" (they're suppose to "hold" their velocity better than "flat-based" bullets), but 15 feet from my rifle's muzzle where I set up my chronograph, the Nosler Ballistic Tip, boat-tails are EXACTLY and CONSISTENTLY 30 fps FASTER with every “maximum” powder load of IMR3031, IMR4895 and IMR4064 than the Hornady 150 grain BOAT-TAIL BULLETS. Both bullets have the nylon/plastic tipped nose.
I haven't tried any "flat-based" bullets so I can't say what the "difference", if any, would be. I can only account for that consistent velocity difference by assuming it has something to do with possibly a longer bearing surface on the Hornady Bullet running on the barrelÂ’s lans and grooves vs. a somewhat shorter bearing surface on Nosler Bullet. Something is slowing the Hornady Bullet down by a consistent 30 feet per second.
In hunting loads, increased down-range bullet velocity means increased ft/lbs of bullet energy.
Hornady makes great bullets… I used their 50 grain “SX” bullets for years in my .222, but I wish they'd take the "crimping grooves" (can't remember how to spell their name... is it "canitures"?) off their 150 grain, .30 caliber bullets. I prefer to seat the bullets in my handloads where I WANT THEM, not where a manufacture decides to put those little vertical "crimping grooves" on the bullets.
This is especially true of "single loaded" bullets that don't have to fit inside the rifle's magazine. Using single loaded bullets, as in "varmint hunting", the initial bullet put in the rifle's chamber might be only .001 to .002 inches from "touching" the barrel's lans and grooves... meaning the bullet has been set out farther in the cartridge case neck than normal to increase accuracy. The bullet is set out far too much to fit in or work through the rifleÂ’s magazine, I.E., the overall length of the round is too long to "work" through the rifle's magazine.
That may sound odd unless one realizes that in varmint hunting... especially with a super-accurate rifle... one shot is all that's ever taken at a "target"... no more shots are needed or necessary. And so, there's no real disadvantage for the projectiles to be set out further and cause the overall cartridge length to be too long to fit or function through the rifle's magazine.
When I did a lot of varmint hunting (mostly woodchucks) when I was younger. I kept 3 rounds with deeper seated bullets and a shorter OAL (“Over All Length”) expressly for putting them into and working them through the removable clip in my heavy-barreled .222 Sako varmint rifle. Years went by and I never used a single round from the magazine because another "shot" was never necessary... OR... the initial shot I took missed, and the 'chuck scurried down it's hole and didn't come back out. I’d love to say it was ALWAYS the “former”, but it was also the “latter” sometimes.
I would try to set up AT LEAST 150 yards, but no greater than 250 yards, from a chuck's hole. I refused shots of less than 150 yards because a short shot of that range or less was just too easy with the extremely accurate .222. My best bench-rest, 5-shot group with that rifle was/is a .086-inch group... that's right, less than 1/10th of an inch... no brag, just fact. It's the rifle that can shoot that well... I'm just holding onto it.
YIKES!!! I've "done it" again... I've totally digressed off the subject. Sorry... can't help it... love to talk about guns and loads and shooting and hunting... and... and... and... ohhhhh, never mind! (Grumble.. grumble)
Ok, Jim... when I shoot the .300 Savage "for record" using the Varget rifle powder, I'll let you know what happens. I've got all my loads already loaded... 3 shots each of the Varget powder beginning at 'way down there with the lighter loads and working up in 2/10ths of a grain increments all the way to .2 of a grain over "maximum load". Yeah, I "know"... you're NOT supposed to exceed "maximum load".
The truth is... I often NEVER GET to "maximum load"... either the accuracy goes to "goes to pot" first... or I get too many high-pressure "signs" and stop below "max. load".
Jim... it's my person opinion that IMR4320 powder is too slow for the .300 Savage case. I noted, during my tests with IMR3031, IMR4895 and IMR4064 that I ran out of case capacity BEFORE I achieved reasonably high velocity using the 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip Bullet with IMR4064... and IMR4320 is even SLOWER than IMR4064. I don't mean IMR4320 won't "shoot" in a .300 Savage rifle... it "shoots" quite well according to one of my old Lyman Reloading Handbooks (45th Edition, circa 1970) which shows an "Accuracy Load" using a 150 grain spitzer bullet and a Model 99 with a 22-inch barrel. The Accuracy Load was 42.0 grains of IMR4320 yielding 2590 fps out of the 22-inch barrel of a Model 99 which was used for testing purposes.
However, the same loading tables indicated the “Factory Duplication Load” was 43.2 grains of IMR4320 yielding 2659 fps. NOTE: Max. load was shown as 43.5 grains of IRM4320, but that was back in 1970, not necessarily with today’s powder. Naturally, when working up a load, one should always start with a reduced load and work “UP” with caution… constantly watching for high-pressure signs.
Did you ever TRY to “stuff “ 43.5 grains of ANY kind of rifle powder into a .300 Savage cartridge case?!?!? It won’t GO without the base of the bullet “crunching and munching” the top layer or so of the IMR4320 into a fine “powder” rather than the “granule form” in which it comes. Obviously, the “burning rate” is being changed as those powder granules are CRUSHED by the base of the bullet. THAT “scares” me and I’m “fearless”! Hahahahahahaha……
IÂ’ll keep you informed as to the results I get with the Hodgdon Varget rifle powder. IÂ’m not sure where it falls on the Burning Rate Tables, but IÂ’d guess it somewhere between IMR4895 and IMR4064Â… but I could be wrong. WeÂ’ll seeÂ…Â….
In my initial tests with max. loads of IMR3031, 4895 and 4064, I found that the loads containing the Federal and Winchester standard large rifle primers were the most consistent shot-to-shot loads.
On 6/17/02 at a temperature of 73ºF, using max loads of IMR3031 (40.0 grains), I had an average MV of 2644 using standard Winchester large rifle primers with a maximum deviation of +9 and –8 for an average velocity deviation of just 17 fps.
On the same day under the same conditions, using standard Federal large rifle primers and a max load of IMR3031, I got an average MV of 2654 fps with a standard deviation of just 11 fps (+7, -4 fps). HOWEVER, while the rounds using the Winchester primers shot small tight groups, the rounds using the Federal primers consistently had either one or two “fliers” causing the otherwise extremely tight group to open up to over an inch at 100 yards.
On 6/24/02 at 85ºF, using a maximum listed load consisting of 41.5 grains of IMR4895 and a standard Winchester large rifle primer yielded 2664 fps with a standard deviation of 19 fps (+9, - 10 fps) giving a .3125-inch (5/16ths of an inch) 3-shot group.
The smallest 3-shot group I’ve ever fired with this M-99 Savage in .300 Savage caliber was fired on 6/24/02 at a temperature of 85ºF and consisted of a load of 41.1 grains of IMR4895, a 150 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip, boat-tailed bullet in Winchester twice-fired brass and using standard Winchester large rifle primers which yielded a MV of 2647 fps with a standard deviation of just 13 fps (+6, -7 fps). This group measured .1875-inches (3/16ths of an inch)… 1/8-inch or .1250 inches smaller than the max. load group which measured .3125-inches (5/16ths of an inch).
WHEW! ThatÂ’s enough information for tonightÂ… my fingers are getting sore.
ThaÂ… thaÂ… thatÂ’s all, FolksÂ…Â…..
Strength & Honor,
Ron T.
