Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Need a little help guys.......I'm stumped

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage,AK/ Omaha,NE
    Posts
    177

    Default Need a little help guys.......I'm stumped

    I have been doing some load developement for my new 325WSM and have decided on 3 loads that I will using out of it-
    1. Nosler Ballistic Tip 180gr- BC of .394, velocity of 2927 (max listed load)
    2. Barnes TSX 200gr- BC of .421,velocity of 2788 (max listed load)
    3. Swift A-Frame 220gr- BC of .393,velocity of 2706 (max listed load)

    The other night I loaded all the info into the Hornady website's Ballistic Calculator and was shocked at the info!!! It says that the 180 & 200gr loads were carrying more energy downrange then the 220gr load.How is this possible? Shouldnt the added weight help carry the energy farther (meaning the lighter bullets should slow down faster)? I was really surprised and also bummed out because I had just ordered a box of the A-Frame's at $60 a box.So did I just waste the money? I have only shot the B-Tip and TSX so far with very good accuracy,but wanted the added security of shooting a 220gr bullet.I did try the 220gr Sierra and was not impressed,which is why I ordered the Swifts.

    So the question is.........am I crazy? (Dont ask my Wife,she'll tell you I am)

  2. #2
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default This is an easy one...

    I can expalin this easily enough. You may still feel ripped off however.

    You say you've been developing loads, do you use the same powder for all weight?

    Have you fired these loads and obtained this velocity?

    What was unimpressive about the Sierra on paper?

    What was the max range you used with the calculator? Was it beyond your max hunting range? Bullet performance beyound 300 yards is purely conversational.

    Ballistic coeffecient numbers are the SD of the bullet mixed with a form factor number. This form factor is highly exaggerated by most manufactuters and seems to be a one-upmanship-contest among them. I have shot many of those bullets through my chronographs at various ranges out to 400 yards and back calculated the BC's and all were higher than actual use would indicate. In your calculator, one of the inputs is the BC right? Vary that and you will see how the bullet drop changes.

    The 220 grain velocity is rather low, it should be about 2750 fps. Also you'll find that it is difficult to get enough powder behind the TSX to get the published velocity from it.

    And, last but not least, Energy is derived from 1/2 the mass * the Velocity Squared. Just because the energy numbers are higher, doesn't mean that is the better killer. Bullet weight and design play a much larger role.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    North Pole, AK
    Posts
    175

    Default

    Any 220 gr bullets you can't get your 325 to take I'll buy from you! Oh yeah and those 200 X's too. My Big 8 will shoot'em all.

    Jake

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage,AK/ Omaha,NE
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Murphy View Post
    I can expalin this easily enough. You may still feel ripped off however.

    You say you've been developing loads, do you use the same powder for all weight?

    Have you fired these loads and obtained this velocity?

    What was unimpressive about the Sierra on paper?

    What was the max range you used with the calculator? Was it beyond your max hunting range? Bullet performance beyound 300 yards is purely conversational.

    Ballistic coeffecient numbers are the SD of the bullet mixed with a form factor number. This form factor is highly exaggerated by most manufactuters and seems to be a one-upmanship-contest among them. I have shot many of those bullets through my chronographs at various ranges out to 400 yards and back calculated the BC's and all were higher than actual use would indicate. In your calculator, one of the inputs is the BC right? Vary that and you will see how the bullet drop changes.

    The 220 grain velocity is rather low, it should be about 2750 fps. Also you'll find that it is difficult to get enough powder behind the TSX to get the published velocity from it.

    And, last but not least, Energy is derived from 1/2 the mass * the Velocity Squared. Just because the energy numbers are higher, doesn't mean that is the better killer. Bullet weight and design play a much larger role.


    Thanks Murphy for the info,I was hoping you would respond.I have read many of your posts and have alot of respect for you.Too answer some of your questions,I have used the same powder in all of my loads so far (IMR 4831). I havent shot the the A-Frames yet,i just ordered them yesterday because I was very unhappy with the 220gr Sierra Gamekings.I was not happy with the way they shot,or even felt and looked.They had a very "porous" feel to them and just did not look quality.The smallest group I got was right at an inch.

    I have not chrono'd any of the loads because I do not currently own one.I was just using the published max load velocities from the IMR website.The disatnce on the calculator went out too 500 yards,but even at 300 they were about even(+ or - a few ft lbs).

    Bullet weight and design play a much larger role.[/QUOTE] That is exactly what I thought also,but something just didnt add up.I dont see how a 180gr bullet will perform as well as a 220gr bullet. I did mess around with the numbers a little,but wanted to keep it as close to published (just on the calculator,I have loaded some "hot loads" already for the TSX).

    So thank you again,maybe I am just looking into this a little too much-Tim

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage,AK/ Omaha,NE
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CZ_IN_AK View Post
    Any 220 gr bullets you can't get your 325 to take I'll buy from you! Oh yeah and those 200 X's too. My Big 8 will shoot'em all.

    Jake
    Sorry Jake,just about used them all up.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage,AK/ Omaha,NE
    Posts
    177

    Default One more thing too add............

    I dont see how the BC of the Ballistic Tip and A-Frame are almost the same. I mean .001 off?? The A-Frame looks like a brick and the B-Tip is the complete opposite.Just another thing that is boggling my mind right now...........

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    100

    Default What about the .325?

    TJ and Murphy:

    Since you both are talking about it, I want to ask: What do you think about this new 325? I really like the looks of it on paper and have talked to a few people that have them and like them. I currently shoot a .270 and need an upgrade. I am convinced that the .325 is what I need for all but the biggest brownies. I also reload, so the limited factory loads currenlty available is not an issue for me. When reloading, do you crimp or not?

    Just out of curiosity, what brand rifles do you have? I know there is a rather limited selection now, Kimber, Browning, Savage. Any word on whether or not Remington is putting it in their veneralbe 700? My .270 is a 700 with a laminated wood stock and weighs no less than 10 lbs!

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage,AK/ Omaha,NE
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKdreamn View Post
    TJ and Murphy:

    Since you both are talking about it, I want to ask: What do you think about this new 325? I really like the looks of it on paper and have talked to a few people that have them and like them. I currently shoot a .270 and need an upgrade. I am convinced that the .325 is what I need for all but the biggest brownies. I also reload, so the limited factory loads currenlty available is not an issue for me. When reloading, do you crimp or not?

    Just out of curiosity, what brand rifles do you have? I know there is a rather limited selection now, Kimber, Browning, Savage. Any word on whether or not Remington is putting it in their veneralbe 700? My .270 is a 700 with a laminated wood stock and weighs no less than 10 lbs!
    AKdreamn, I have a Browning A-Bolt Stainless Stalker,with Talley Lightweight rings/bases and a Leupold VX-II Ultralight 3-9x33.All together it doesnt weigh 7 lbs,so it does move you a little.I chose the 325 because I wanted something a little bigger then a .300 but not as harsh as a .338.The gun is lighter and much shorter then a .338 (3") so it is a little easier too pack around and doesnt have as much recoil.

    So far I am very pleased with it.I too handload so that was a deciding factor when buying it,if I didnt only having 3 factory loads available might have steered me away.As I stated earlier I will be shooting the 220gr Swift A-Frame's out of it,so I am not worried about much anymore.Hope this helps-Tim

  9. #9
    New member George's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    286

    Default BC for different shapes

    Quote Originally Posted by tjkanavel View Post
    I dont see how the BC of the Ballistic Tip and A-Frame are almost the same. I mean .001 off?? The A-Frame looks like a brick and the B-Tip is the complete opposite.Just another thing that is boggling my mind right now...........
    Comparing the lighter Ballistic Tip with the heavier A Frame--- Within the same caliber, the greater momentum of the heavier bullet... (the A Frame)... makes up for its less streamlined shape. BC is combination of 'Shape' and 'Sectional Density' as Murphy mentioned in an earlier post.

  10. #10
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKdreamn View Post
    TJ and Murphy:

    Since you both are talking about it, I want to ask: What do you think about this new 325? I really like the looks of it on paper and have talked to a few people that have them and like them. I currently shoot a .270 and need an upgrade. I am convinced that the .325 is what I need for all but the biggest brownies. I also reload, so the limited factory loads currenlty available is not an issue for me. When reloading, do you crimp or not?

    Just out of curiosity, what brand rifles do you have? I know there is a rather limited selection now, Kimber, Browning, Savage. Any word on whether or not Remington is putting it in their veneralbe 700? My .270 is a 700 with a laminated wood stock and weighs no less than 10 lbs!
    I missed this the first run through but I'll coment on it now.

    I like the 325 WSM. It, like the other WSM's isn't magical, but I do like it and the niche it fits into. It's ballistics are rather unique. Big enough to be useful but not hard to handle. It is a step up from the 30-06 though not so much as to make it a stomper. It can be found in well made light weight rifles and still be easy on the shooter. I really like the Kimber Montana in 325 WSM. I want one. I will take it like it is with it's slightly too light barrel and its strong but not fantastic stock and it's good but not great lockwork. This rifle is number one in it's price range. It fits me well and is so light and handy. I have a bunch of brass holed up for it and there are plenty of good bullets available and I can make it do all it's capable of doing. It isn't a super long range shooter and neither am I. It doesn't hit like a 375 or even a 338 mag but sometimes I do better work with something that is a little softer. In good hands it is capable of taking all manner of game, large and small, and can do so with finesse. Not too much for sheep, not too little for grizzly. This is the best factory round ever to bear the ubiquitous "WSM" headstamp.

    I will say that I think the WSM's are going to die. I don't think there will be any American made rifle chamber for them in the near future. For me, that is one more reason to buy one! If you've found one you should get it now.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Murphy View Post
    I missed this the first run through but I'll coment on it now.


    I will say that I think the WSM's are going to die. I don't think there will be any American made rifle chamber for them in the near future. For me, that is one more reason to buy one! If you've found one you should get it now.
    That's an interesting take on it, Murph. Actually, I kind of feel the same way about it. Won't be too long and they'll be 'collector's items'. I am really excited about getting home and getting my hands on one!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •