Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: 30'06 Elk load workup

  1. #1
    Member Trappnguns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Back on da Rock!

    Default 30'06 Elk load workup

    So I decided I want to work up a load for elk. (got a tag ). I got some Barnes 168 grain Tipped TSX and some Nosler 165 grain accubonds.

    I was really hoping the barnes would work out, but I can't argue with the accubonds grouping

    The first group is the Accubonds, the second from the Barnes. I am going to work on the remaining Barnes to see what I can do... Using IMR 4064 for both loads, seating .050 off the lands.

    All shots were from a Lead Sled Plus, SIG SHR 970, dirty barrel (I don't clean often), 100 yds, minimal time for cooling (30 second during the string, couple minutes between).
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Member hodgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Delta Junction AK


    Those Barnes... it seems a rifle either likes 'em or hates them. Mine hates them. I get great results from Accubonds but I've just given up on the TSX in my rifle. I maybe could get them to shoot if I played around with them but the Accubonds shoot so good I just didn't see the point right now.

    Incidentally, I also had a SHR 970 a bunch of years ago and shot the absolute whiz out of out- loved that gun despite the fact it hated any bullet over 150grs. I killed a lot of deer with it though.

  3. #3
    Member marshall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Near Phoenix, AZ


    I have worked up loads with the Barnes in 300WM, 338WM and 375 Ruger. In those rifles they preferred .075 - .125 off the lands and really came thru with tight groups.

    The Accubonds do well for me at .025 off in all applications to date. Some times they won't load into the mag well when loaded that long.

    Where are you hunting Elk? I just received my take a hike notice from AZ G&F. I tried the last chance draw for the left overs and got the shaft on those too.

  4. #4


    I personally wouldn't use 4064 for 165/168 bullets; too fast for my taste (and rifle). I also think .050" is too far off the lands for a particular bullet. Again, personal preference, but I'm closer to .015"-.020".

  5. #5
    Member Darreld Walton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Arco, Idaho

    Default Why 4064?

    Have you considered 4350? Seems like it's long been the 'standard' for the '06 and 165 gr. and up bullet weights. Not knocking your choice, but unless you have a ton of it, 4064 seems a bit fast.


Posting Permissions

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