an exceptionally versitile 30/06 load

grumpyvette

Administrator
Staff member
it takes a few years before most guys stop believing the gun magazine articles and acquire enough experience to realize that shots at big game at ranges over about 300 yards are far from common,
and even longer before most realize most hunters can,t effectively and precisely place shots under field conditions at ranges that exceed about 300 yards,
yes I'm well away that probably doesn,t apply to everyone, but next time your out where you can safely do so, tack a 5'-6" diam. paper plate with a 3" orange dot in its center to a stump and back off a measured 300 yards and see where your first shot impacts, and if its not on that 5"-6" plate you need to rethink your hunt strategy.
yes I know the 165 grain boat tail bullets shoot flatter and in theory make hits easier at long range,but the heavier bullets have thicker jackets in many cases compared to the lighter 150-165 grain designs, they retain energy better, tend to penetrate deeper and expand far more predictably on impact. but after seeing the results of both bullet weights on big game, I vastly prefer the 200 Speer or if you must have a boat tail the 190 grain hornady bullets on game.
Ive loaded 200 grain Speer bullets, these expand well at the 2700fps-2200fps impact velocity they seem to get used at, and occasionally 190 grain hornadys (these are a bit more rigid and penetrate better)in 30/06 cases with 60 grains of h4831, over a fed 215 primer for a good many years as almost a standard elk load in our hunting group,either of the bullet groups well and they produce good results at the range from most rifles, and tend to be consistent, and accurate and my experience shows the loads are deadly on elk, and deer, velocity on my chronograph varies with the rifles obviously but about 2580 fps is close to an average
Ive yet to see a well placed shot using that load not result in a very dead elk, or deer, the average guy may be amazed to find the flat base Speer 200 grain doesn,t shoot a great deal less flat than the more ballistically slick 190 hornady

3006charts.jpg

http://www.speer-bullets.com/ballistics ... spx?id=103

READ THESE


viewtopic.php?f=97&t=4560&p=12166&hilit=+targets#p12166

viewtopic.php?f=92&t=2370&p=9272&hilit=printable#p9272


use this target, change the size so the grid squares are 1" and sight in so you aim at the lower red dot and impact on the upper green dot, that sights in most big game calibers to a very useful trajectory

http://www.mytargets.com/target104%20gr ... 20high.pdf

Ive used 200 grain 30 cal speers in my 30/06 for decades
but like the others have said shot placement and bullet construction is more important than caliber or bullet weight
Ive used a 6mm rem and 257 roberts on the lower range of power and about all the semi popular calibers up to 378wby-to-458 LOTT at one time or another deer are just not that hard to kill, Ive seen at least 5 ELK killed real dead with a 257 roberts and a couple with 44 mag revolvers so Id be far more concerned with shot placement.
but that being stated I can in good conscious recommend those 200 grain 30 cal speer bullets for ALL deer & elk big game hunting when using a 30/06 you can get good accuracy with 4831 or WW760 and a 215 federal primer in most 30/06 rifles Ive tried.
 
heres a rather interesting post I copied where a guy with a short barrel 308 win carbine, did some testing with different weight bullets and found out that the heavier more ballistic efficient bullet designs hold some advantages. a 30/06 would add about 130 fps with any load but otherwise its valid

Coyote_Hunter said:
The chrono says my 16"barreled Ruger Scout loses 170fps over published velocities for factory (Winchester and Remington) 150g ammo. Average is ~2650fps instead of published 2820fps. So far I haven't built any test loads for it and started giving the matter of a do-all load some consideration. After playing with the ballistic calculator a bit I've come to the conclusion one could do a lot worse than using a 210g AccuBond Long Range bullet for serious work and a 208 A-MAX for practice loads.

Here are some comparisons based on the assumption all are zeroed for Maximum Point Blank Range for a target 6" in diameter, a 10mph crosswind and that I can continue to get within 150fps of published handload velocities:

150g AccuBond, B.C. .435, 2650fps, 2339fpe, zero 224 yards, MPBR 263 yards
165g AccuBond, B.C. .475, 2550fps, 2382fpe, zero 217 yards, MPBR 255 yards
208g A-MAX, B.C. .648, 2300fps, 2443fpe, zero 201 yards, MPBR 238 yards
210g AccuBond LR, B.C. .730, 2300fps, 2466fpe, zero 202 yards, MPBR 239 yards

300 yards:
150g = -7.0", 2092fps, 1458fpe, 7.6" drift
165g = -8.0", 2048fps, 1536fpe, 7.2" drift
208g = -10.8", 1947fps, 1751fpe, 5.9" drift
210g = -10.7", 1986fps, 1838fpe, 5.4" drift

400 yards:
150g = -23.0", 1922fps, 1230fpe, 13.8" drift
165g = -25.0", 1893fps, 1313fpe, 13.1" drift
208g = -30.9", 1837fps, 1558fpe, 10.8" drift
210g = -29.8", 1886fps, 1658fpe, 9.4" drift

500 yards:
150g = -48.7", 1762fps, 1033fpe, 22.6" drift
165g = -52.2", 1748fps, 1119fpe, 21.6" drift
208g = -61.7", 1732fps, 1386fpe, 17.7" drift
210g = -59.3", 1790fps, 1495fpe, 15.3" drift

As the numbers above show, inside 300 yards there isn't much difference in drop or drift but the 210g retains considerably more energy. At 500 yards the 210g drops an extra 10-1/2" (22%) but has 7" less drift (33%) and retains an extra 462fpe (45%) compared to the 150g load. Calculated recoil is a bit over 19 ft-lbs compared to a calculated value of 15.0 ft-lbs for the 150g load.

Suggestions?
 
Back
Top