30-06 bullet test for 220 grains and 200 grains

240 grain in 30-06 - I see Woodleigh suggests AR2213sc - H4831sc - as "best results" for their 240 grain PP SN bullet in 30-06 - max loads (various powders listed) circa mid to high 2,300's for muzzle velocity. I do not have any of those bullets to try for myself to see. I can not find if or where Woodleigh gives the barrel length that they used for their testing.
 
Last edited:
I carried an old Remington bolt action 30-06 some forty-plus years ago for backup while guiding. It was loaded with 250gr Barnes originals and a full case of surplus 4831. That was before I had the Oehler, so can only guess the velocity was around 2200 fps.

Whatever it was, it was enough, to say the least! :)

IIRC, someone on here got the rest of the box a few years ago.
Ted
 
I carried an old Remington bolt action 30-06 some forty-plus years ago for backup while guiding. It was loaded with 250gr Barnes originals and a full case of surplus 4831. That was before I had the Oehler, so can only guess the velocity was around 2200 fps.

Whatever it was, it was enough, to say the least! :)

IIRC, someone on here got the rest of the box a few years ago.
Ted

I miss those Barnes original heavy weights. Shot well in every cartridge I tried them in, though not fast. - dan
 
Hunting bullet performance reminds me of golf.

Everyone is worried about velocity for long range performance, and in golf how far can you hit your driver. For hunting, I have found a real common distance is 80ft-80yards, in golf most of the shots are 100yds and in.

Perhaps hunters in open farming country get longer shots, I wind up with shots driving to and from my hunting spot, or those short shots walking in the thick stuff. Remember from reading Nathan Foster's book on bullet performance, I believe the 7x57 loaded with 162gr Amax performed spectacular on game, at 150-200+ ft/sec slower than 7rm. Much better at 7x57 speeds as the bullet penetrated and performed, without the rapid weight loss/"blow up" found at 7rm velocity. There are a lot of people wh9 like the performance of 303, and 308 its modern''er equivalent. I would bet most factory 303 180 gr is 2300-2400. Would one get a extra 100ft/sec in 308?

I have a box of those Woodleigh 240 30 cal, somewhere. IIRC, the box recommended 2400ft/sec as a max speed. The 300wm would probably be too fast.
 
Hunting bullet performance reminds me of golf.

Everyone is worried about velocity for long range performance, and in golf how far can you hit your driver. For hunting, I have found a real common distance is 80ft-80yards, in golf most of the shots are 100yds and in.

Perhaps hunters in open farming country get longer shots, I wind up with shots driving to and from my hunting spot, or those short shots walking in the thick stuff. Remember from reading Nathan Foster's book on bullet performance, I believe the 7x57 loaded with 162gr Amax performed spectacular on game, at 150-200+ ft/sec slower than 7rm. Much better at 7x57 speeds as the bullet penetrated and performed, without the rapid weight loss/"blow up" found at 7rm velocity. There are a lot of people wh9 like the performance of 303, and 308 its modern''er equivalent. I would bet most factory 303 180 gr is 2300-2400. Would one get a extra 100ft/sec in 308?

I have a box of those Woodleigh 240 30 cal, somewhere. IIRC, the box recommended 2400ft/sec as a max speed. The 300wm would probably be too fast.

Good points. I have Woodleigh Reloading Manual here - published 2014 - I do not think it was ever updated since then. Page 90 says the 30 caliber 240 grain PP SN bullet has "recommended impact velocity: 2000-2400 fps". Loads shown later at much higher muzzle velocities - 300 Win Mag - 2,680 fps (page 113). I note the 300 Weatherby, 300 Rem Ultra Mag, 30-378 Weatherby do not even list that bullet weight - they top out with 220 grain RN SP but even their Start Load muzzle velocity exceeds the recommended impact velocities. So, I think that you are correct - as if even Woodleigh agrees that too much impact speed for that bullet might not be a good thing, in all instances.

I do have a few other Woodleigh Weldcore PP SN bullets here - and they do give their recommended impact speeds on their boxes - 7mm (.284") - 140 grain - 2000 to 3000 fps; .312" - 174 grain - 1800 to 2400 fps; 9.3 mm (.366") - 320 grain - 2000 to 2600 fps
 
Last edited:
I carried an old Remington bolt action 30-06 some forty-plus years ago for backup while guiding. It was loaded with 250gr Barnes originals and a full case of surplus 4831. That was before I had the Oehler, so can only guess the velocity was around 2200 fps.

Whatever it was, it was enough, to say the least! :)

IIRC, someone on here got the rest of the box a few years ago.
Ted

I miss those Barnes original heavy weights. Shot well in every cartridge I tried them in, though not fast. - dan

hawk is supposed to be the old barnes ... wait and see,.
 
Good points. I have Woodleigh Reloading Manual here - published 2014 - I do not think it was ever updated since then. Page 90 says the 240 grain PP SN bullet has "recommended impact velocity: 2000-2400 fps". Loads shown later at much higher muzzle velocities - 300 Win Mag - 2,680 fps (page 113). I note the 300 Weatherby, 300 Rem Ultra Mag, 30-378 Weatherby do not even list that bullet. So, I think that you are correct - as if even Woodleigh agrees that too much impact speed for that bullet might not be a good thing, in all instances.

i have found out that the woodleigh manual not only is good but also accurate when talking about rn like the design of the old kynoch even in a stronger design but i have not been able to make the pp sn working in my rifles.
 
Hunting bullet performance reminds me of golf.

Everyone is worried about velocity for long range performance, and in golf how far can you hit your driver. For hunting, I have found a real common distance is 80ft-80yards, in golf most of the shots are 100yds and in.

Perhaps hunters in open farming country get longer shots, I wind up with shots driving to and from my hunting spot, or those short shots walking in the thick stuff. Remember from reading Nathan Foster's book on bullet performance, I believe the 7x57 loaded with 162gr Amax performed spectacular on game, at 150-200+ ft/sec slower than 7rm. Much better at 7x57 speeds as the bullet penetrated and performed, without the rapid weight loss/"blow up" found at 7rm velocity. There are a lot of people wh9 like the performance of 303, and 308 its modern''er equivalent. I would bet most factory 303 180 gr is 2300-2400. Would one get a extra 100ft/sec in 308?

I have a box of those Woodleigh 240 30 cal, somewhere. IIRC, the box recommended 2400ft/sec as a max speed. The 300wm would probably be too fast.

Depends where you hunt I guess. Field edges in the fall can get you some very long shots, as can cut lines. - dan
 
Unfortunately, they are not nearly as tough. Very rapid expansion and pure lead cores don’t dig very deep.

Instantly lethal on light game, but not a truly BIG GAME choice.

Ted

Good to know. I have a few Hawk bullets in various calibers and weights, but have only ever used them on deer. Barnes used to even have different jacket thicknesses in some of their line you could choose from. - dan
 
:popCorn:

I want to see the woodleigh 240 and 220 grain Hornady roundnose results.

I know a guy who took a bison with one shot with 220 grain round nose bluebox you might be surprised by it
 
A few of the more astute shooters realize the benfits of good heavy bullets at toleralble velocity/recoil levels, but most are drawn to the heavily constructed lighter bullets, which do work very well.

Medvedqc, I've been following this thread from the beginning and thank you for pursuing it.

These days, finding heavy and usually long for caliber bullets are difficult to find and quite expensive.

Not only that, many people don't have appropriate powders and some are afraid of the resulty recoil.

When I hunt with one of my 30-06 rifles, I use the Speer SP spire point, flat base bullet which I have several hundred on hand.

In my rifles two have 22 in bbls and velocity is about 100fps less in them than the other two, one with a 24 in bbl and one with a 26 in bbl.

The highest velocities are of course from the 26 in bbl but the 24 in bbl is within 50fps.

The 26 in bbl, Hart, is very smooth, isn't prone to jacket fouling and is one of those jewels that doesn't change point of impact as the barrel heats up over a ten shot string.

This barrel will allow the compressed charge of 57.5 grains of H4350, over CCI250 primers, seated as far out as the magazine will allow at 2600 fps average at ambient temps of 10C.

This bullet isn't a premium bullet and built on the old cup/core design. They're Hot Core, so bonded to the jacket when the core is poured.

I've shot four large animals with these bullets, including three Moose and one Elk a few Deer and Bears.

I haven't done the tests you folks have but I can attest to the performance in a ''real'' life hunting situation.

Two of the Moose only required one shot, from a distance under 75m. They were both shot at the top of the lungs, just behind the shoulder, but pentrated the shoulder blades/ribs on both sides, taking out the two arteries just under the spine and continuing on their way on the far side, where there was a 2cm exit hole in the body and about half that size in the hide. Both animals didn't go down instantly but stumbled for appx 25m and were dead when I got to them.

The third Moose required a second bullet. It was walking up a slope, slowly, stopping to browse and moving again when I shot him. We all know, a slow walk for a Moose is a good run for most people.

I did hit him in the boiler room, which caused him to hunch up and run. A Moose can run a long way when lung shot and when they go down in an old burn, full of black stumps an logs on the ground, they can be extremely difficult to find if they bleed out internally, which often happens with lung shots.

The second bullet was to the tip of the spine, through the tail and just above the anus. It was the only shot I had, when he stopped briefly, before entering a bunch of thick deciduous scrug brush. It dropped him like a hammer.

That was the only bullet I recovered and it was fired about 120m from the poi.

That bullet, broke the pelvis, shattered a half dozen vertebrae and deflected down into the chest cavity to come to a rest against the breast bone. It was perfectly mushroomed and retained just over 100 grains of weight.

The Elk was another ''gimme'' at less than a hundred meters and dropped to a similar shot as on the first two Moose.

This is slightly off topic but pertinent.

My present go to hunting rifle is a rather clunky looking standard length, large ring 98 Mauser put together with parts from the bins. The barrel is an issue 8x57 NOS surplus, never mounted item. The receiver is a Czech BRNO surplus, mounted in a lovely 60 year old, very stable, highly figured, AA Walnut stock from Bishop. Trigger is an afer market adjustable.

This rifle is an amazing shooter with "heavy bullet'' and not so amazing with lighter, shorter bullets around 150grains.

It's ok with 170grain bullets but the heavy 196+ grain bullets are a dream to shoot. It really likes the 196 grn Norma Oryx, loaded to 2600 fps, measured with my magnetospeed.

The load is safe, according to European standards, 56.0grns of W760 over CCI250 primers in Norma cases.

A 200 grain bullet, whether 30cal or 8mm at 2600fps hits very hard and whatever is on the receiving end definitely knows something has gone awry, but not for more than a few seconds if the shot is well placed.

Good you you folks for looking at this.

Back in the day we used heavy/long for caliber bullets because of the manufacturing methods used and lighter construction.

Today lighter bullets will penetrate just as well and hold together while doing it.

However, there is something to be said about a heavy bullet's felt impact.

I see a continuing trend towards "solids" happening, but it's not a retro thing. The new monolithic bullets are accruate and hold together very well. Just not as heavy as I like without getting to long for the twist rate of some rifles bores.
 
Last edited:
When I was a young buck, there were quite a few old timers that hunted with the 30-06, and most used 220 gr bullets. They worked on moose and caribou and muskox (pretty much all the big game where I was at the time) quite well. Excellent penetration and they opened up nicely. Not a good choice for the 600 yard hunters, but certainly a good choice for where most game is taken. - dan
 
When I was a young buck, there were quite a few old timers that hunted with the 30-06, and most used 220 gr bullets. They worked on moose and caribou and muskox (pretty much all the big game where I was at the time) quite well. Excellent penetration and they opened up nicely. Not a good choice for the 600 yard hunters, but certainly a good choice for where most game is taken. - dan

Pretty surprised to see over .70" expansion AND penetration to 26" + in the video above. That'll do it.

Still lots of nice shank underneath that wide open mushroom, and they go straight.

For one "do everything" cartridge, thats hard to argue with inside that "most of game is taken at this distance" window you mention...looks like it doesn't do a tremendous amount of meat damage on thinner skinned game at those speeds either.

Is the 220gr Core Lokt their own design, or does Remington load the 220gr Interlock for that one?
 
Pretty surprised to see over .70" expansion AND penetration to 26" + in the video above. That'll do it.

Still lots of nice shank underneath that wide open mushroom, and they go straight.

For one "do everything" cartridge, thats hard to argue with inside that "most of game is taken at this distance" window you mention...looks like it doesn't do a tremendous amount of meat damage on thinner skinned game at those speeds either.

Is the 220gr Core Lokt their own design, or does Remington load the 220gr Interlock for that one?

Core-lokt was a Rem design. Hornady's Interlocks were basically their version of the same idea. As for the heavy for caliber thing, you used to be able to buy 215 gr 303 bullets and ammo, worked pretty much the same way.- dan
 
Back
Top Bottom