In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
30-378 or 300 RUM
62fuelie
Member Posts: 1,069 ✭✭✭
Just thinking of some possibilities; given the Sierra 240 Match bullet how close to the capabilities of the 338 Lapua could you get? With a bullet that heavy what twist rate would be best 1:8.5;1:7 or??? Would the super slow powders like Rotumbo be the best or would something like one of the 4831's be better? Barrel length?
Thx
Talked to Sierra Ballistics a few minutes ago and they are still in production and Midway is still cataloging them. They recommend 1:8.5 or 8. Say the RUM would be good for 2800+ and the 30-378 would go 3000 and use 10%+ more powder.
Thx
Talked to Sierra Ballistics a few minutes ago and they are still in production and Midway is still cataloging them. They recommend 1:8.5 or 8. Say the RUM would be good for 2800+ and the 30-378 would go 3000 and use 10%+ more powder.
Comments
I thought Sierra discontinued the 240gr match king?
"...how close to the capabilities of the 338 Lapua could you get?"
What capabilities of the .338 Lapua are you asking to compare?
With which bullets?
With which powder?
Under what circumstance?
Are we shooting targets at 1,000 and farther or are we shooting elk at 1,000 yards?
The 240 gr. Sierra MatchKings are still listed for sale on the Sierra website.
Sierra recommends a minimum twist rate of 1:9" for the 240 MK.
They also claim a BC of .711 which is slightly overstated based on the tests run by most of the folks I shoot against.
Basic information:
.338 Lapua w/250 Lapua Scenar = 3,000 FPS/ 5,000 ft/lbs. (28" barrel)
.300 RUM w/240 MK = 2900 FPS/ 4450 ft/lbs. (28" barrel)
.30-378 WBY w/240 MK = 3,000 FPS/ 4850 ft/lbs. (28" barrel is the limiting factor here)
Best.
62fuelie,
"...how close to the capabilities of the 338 Lapua could you get?"
What capabilities of the .338 Lapua are you asking to compare?
With which bullets?
With which powder?
Under what circumstance?
Are we shooting targets at 1,000 and farther or are we shooting elk at 1,000 yards?
The 240 gr. Sierra MatchKings are still listed for sale on the Sierra website.
Sierra recommends a minimum twist rate of 1:9" for the 240 MK.
They also claim a BC of .711 which is slightly overstated based on the tests run by most of the folks I shoot against.
Basic information:
.338 Lapua w/250 Lapua Scenar = 3,000 FPS/ 5,000 ft/lbs. (28" barrel)
.300 RUM w/240 MK = 2900 FPS/ 4450 ft/lbs. (28" barrel)
.30-378 WBY w/240 MK = 3,000 FPS/ 4850 ft/lbs. (28" barrel is the limiting factor here)
Best.
Your question and the possibilities cover a fairly broad range of data and experience. In general though, any of the 3 cartridges named are capable of performing in a 'tactical'-type situation. The load will be the factor which offers the discrimination of choice. In actuality, the necessity and economics may be the determining factors.
I have never been one to attempt to dissuade a shooter from a cartridge or load choice unless there have been significant, reasonable drawbacks in which another choice would be better. Your group of cartridges has an uphill battle to fight on both fronts.
In the tactical field, we already have the .223 Rem/5.56mm, .308 Win. and the .300 Win. Mag. courtesy of the military commitment. These three cartridges will cover about 99% of the often tested scenarios dreamed up by the planners. Add the .338 Lapua and you have everything covered in spades.
Does this mean that there isn't any room for improvement or variables such as a different cartridge? Heavens NO! We should (and are) constantly re-examine the needs and requirements for our safety and protection. But here we're talking about basic overlap and even some 'overkill' if you'll allow the term with application to the .30-378 Weatherby.
Sure we can step the bullet caliber down from the .338 Lapua to the .300 RUM or the .30-378 WBY but what is to be accomplished other than offering another choice?
Recoil will be reduced when you compare the RUM to the Lapua but the military/security folks have tackled the solution to this by adding weight and suppressors. So the RUM has no advantage.
Velocity will be increased by using the WBY as opposed to the Lapua but the net gains will be reduced significantly by the 'tooling up' costs and the cost of the WBY + additional powder consumption. Remember, the folks that design and build these loads for the military and security needs will often make decisions based on saving a penny per round by changing the method of painting loading designations on the bullet nose... [:D]
Does any of this mean that we should stop looking for alternatives? NOPE. We should always be examining potentials and opportunities to improve our security or tactical advantage.
I shoot all three cartridges in competition so I have some working experience with all three. I suggest taking a look at the .300 Norma Mag. which is where I'm headed after I get some of the other projects off my bench...
Best.
62fuelie,
Thanks for your thoughts on this. I know there are definite overlaps in the capabilities of the rounds presently available and in use. Our first SWAT sniper rifle was a Remington 700V in .223. I had the team's first kill with it, an 800 pound Angus steer, but that's another story. As you noted in your first response, the .711 BC may be a bit optimistic, but it sure is attractive in the context of retained momentum over long ranges. Whether this is a project that ever goes anywhere or remains untested will depend on a lot of variables. I looked at the .308 Norma Magnum when I decided to get another .30 magnum. My neighbor had one and it was an excellent performer and easier to reload than my .300 Win Mag or .300 Whby. The 100-150 fps it gave up to the Win Mag was not a problem as we were using them for hunting and out to 400 yards the game never knew the difference.
Thanks again.
Your question and the possibilities cover a fairly broad range of data and experience. In general though, any of the 3 cartridges named are capable of performing in a 'tactical'-type situation. The load will be the factor which offers the discrimination of choice. In actuality, the necessity and economics may be the determining factors.
I have never been one to attempt to dissuade a shooter from a cartridge or load choice unless there have been significant, reasonable drawbacks in which another choice would be better. Your group of cartridges has an uphill battle to fight on both fronts.
In the tactical field, we already have the .223 Rem/5.56mm, .308 Win. and the .300 Win. Mag. courtesy of the military commitment. These three cartridges will cover about 99% of the often tested scenarios dreamed up by the planners. Add the .338 Lapua and you have everything covered in spades.
Does this mean that there isn't any room for improvement or variables such as a different cartridge? Heavens NO! We should (and are) constantly re-examine the needs and requirements for our safety and protection. But here we're talking about basic overlap and even some 'overkill' if you'll allow the term with application to the .30-378 Weatherby.
Sure we can step the bullet caliber down from the .338 Lapua to the .300 RUM or the .30-378 WBY but what is to be accomplished other than offering another choice?
Recoil will be reduced when you compare the RUM to the Lapua but the military/security folks have tackled the solution to this by adding weight and suppressors. So the RUM has no advantage.
Velocity will be increased by using the WBY as opposed to the Lapua but the net gains will be reduced significantly by the 'tooling up' costs and the cost of the WBY + additional powder consumption. Remember, the folks that design and build these loads for the military and security needs will often make decisions based on saving a penny per round by changing the method of painting loading designations on the bullet nose... [:D]
Does any of this mean that we should stop looking for alternatives? NOPE. We should always be examining potentials and opportunities to improve our security or tactical advantage.
I shoot all three cartridges in competition so I have some working experience with all three. I suggest taking a look at the .300 Norma Mag. which is where I'm headed after I get some of the other projects off my bench...
Best.
Please note that I the reference is for the .300 Norma Magnum (beltless), a completely different animal than the older .308 Norma Magnum which is belted.
.338 Lapua(L) .338 Norma(R)
Best.
62fuelie,
Boy, is it! I wasn't aware of this one.
Thanks,
B
Please note that I the reference is for the .300 Norma Magnum (beltless), a completely different animal than the older .308 Norma Magnum which is belted.
.338 Lapua(L) .338 Norma(R)
Best.
Yes, the parent case is the .416 Rigby.
There are two versions out currently:
.338 Norma Magnum
.300 Norma Magnum
These are the beltless, improved versions. Here is the ad from Norma which illustrates both the older belted cartridges and the newer beltless cartridges.
Although the .338 Lapua has an enormous civilian following because of the military support (as do all military cartridges), these two Norma cartridges are seeing more attention from the competition side of the shooting sports.
Best.