Rifleman1911
CGN Regular
- Location
- Leduc county AB
I weighed mine and it came in at 9.4 lbs, as compared to my M1 at 9.5 lbs.
Well what do you do ?
Well what do you do ?
Downloading a .300 win mag.
- Thread starter Rifleman1911
- Start date
As far as loading down the 300 not a very good idea. It is a mag cartridge for a reason. I believe shot placement is the answer to your problem, Shoot them where the neck meets the body they will fall on the spot and the only meat damaged is neck meat and that doesnt even make good sausage. Just my $.02
Kurt
Kurt
As has been previously stated many times over the shot placement is the more important factor. However, downloading your load could help with this. I have no idea how you shoot, but personally I download my 300 Win mag so that it has less recoil and I can handle the gun better. This allows better shot placement. even if you are comfortable with the gun and how it handles, if you have a low recoil load you can practice more at the range. With 180 gr factory loads I take 5 shots at the range to make sure the scope is still on and then wait a week for the bruise on my shoulder to heal. The more practice you get with it the better, and a downloaded load is gonna make that easier for you. A head shot never ruins any meat 
Typically, this would be a concern with the slowest powders. Keep in mind, this phenomenon has never been intentionally duplicated, so it remains a theory. Sticking with published loads is still a good idea, however. You will find that most of the published reduced loads use powders in the medium burning range.
Also, a reduced load most often does not give the best accuracy, make sure you get at least "hunting" accuracy with whatever load you decide on.
- Location
- Somewhere on the Hudson Bay Coast
To me, the whole point of handloading is to increase the versatility of your rifle. There is no reason not to down load a .300 Winchester. It is safe, it is cheaper, and it increases the life of both your brass and your barrel. I load low velocity loads for my .375 Ultra (the Ultra cartridge has much more volume than the .300 winchester) and does about the same damage to small game as one might expect from .22 rimfire. At 25 yards the low velocity load's point of aim is the same as the full powered load sighted for normal range which is a happy coincidence. Ammo for the .300 Winchester can be loaded through a broad range of velocities and .30 caliber bullets cover a broader range than any other caliber, making it suitable for use in almost any imaginable hunting scenario. Your "shoot them in the neck" solution is fine if you are presented with the suitable shot angle at close enough range to pull it off, and you have favorable wind conditions; but it is a low percentage shot. More often than not, limiting yourself to this shot or that leaves you without a shot. If you simply switched to a bullet of equal weight and velocity but with a tougher jacket, meat damage would be reduced with any given shot over a similarly placed shot with a light jacketed bullet. My son in law shot a moose this year with 180 gr Ballistic Tips loaded in his .300, he reported that it appeared as if someone had thrown a football through it. He mistakenly took the box of BTs and left the 180 gr TSXs on his loading bench. By contrast I heart shot an impala (about one tenth the weight of a moose) with a .375 loaded with flat point solids and it dropped as if struck by lightning. Yet there was no visible meat damage when the carcass was put on a spit over the fire, and we ate right to the bullet hole.
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
Try 180gr TSX with 59.0 gr of H4350 or 63.0 gr of IMR4350 for low to mid 2700 velocities. The IMR powder shoudl fill the case a bit more than the Hodgdon powder which is a consideration with reduced loads. The tougher bullet will also help reduce meat damage as will shooting the deer behind the shoulder.
Please.
Downloading is not complex, as many others have pointed out this thread. It is also not dangerous, as there is a lot of published data that starts out at the lower velocities that he is seeking.
I have fired and chronographed a .300 Winchester Mag quite a bit. I shot some reduced power loads and they were accurate as well.
The selection of powder is often key, and those suitable powders are listed; Hogdon site also includes some loads in their Youth Loads page.
If it were my rifle and I was concerned about meat damage, I would load up some Partitions, and consider shooting 180 grain bullets rather than 150 or 165 grain. There is a good reason that the 180 grain was considered the general purpose load for the .300 Winchester Magnum. You would not have to switch back and forth for different game.
Pathfinder
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northeast Ontario
I was told Norma reproduced S.E.E in their Labs. We were just discussing this earlier this week. http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=408737 (see post #40)
Seems to be quite a division about this subject, All I can say about it is that selecting the right powder in order to download is crucial as far as far as safety is concerned.
Pathfinder
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Northeast Ontario
That would apply for slow burning powders typical for loading a 300 WM. If using a medium burning one then its a different story. For example: 300 WM - 150 gr. bullet. 4064. a range I found is 47.5 to 65.5 . 47.5 gr. is not a lot of powder in that case but its tested and safe .
Would I ever load 47.5 gr. of RL-22.......hell no.
The guys in my hunt camp came to the conclusion we were ruining too much meat. We concluded that if we went to the heaviest bullet in our caliber, and loaded closer to the Start Load with a medium fast powder, we would not ruin so much meat.
I had shot a deer that year with a 308/150gr bullet. it looked like a bomb had gone off. 180 and 200 gr bullets just make nice big holes.
I had shot a deer that year with a 308/150gr bullet. it looked like a bomb had gone off. 180 and 200 gr bullets just make nice big holes.
Well I hadn't seen that info until now. While interesting, the sceptic in me immediately asks why no other manufacturer's labs seem to be able to make it happen(at will).
I guess there is more reading to do yet.
Well I hadn't seen that info until now. While interesting, the sceptic in me immediately asks why no other manufacturer's labs seem to be able to make it happen(at will).
I guess there is more reading to do yet.
Ditto - I would consider that to be decent evidence and not just hear say anymore. Thanks for that read.
