Which Long Range Caliber for 1600 Yards?

I'm fortunate to have a buddy that has a pile of land, and a hunger for long range shooting. He supplied the space, I donated the steel. We've got a Cortina deer, and blackjack rack at 500Y along with a permanent Shotmarker frame. There's a KYL rack at 750Y, targets from 4" to 16", KYL at 1061Y with 6" to 18" plates and a Shotmarker frame. A full size steel bear at 1472Y, 24" plate at 1595Y and a full size elk at 1762Y. The elk has an 18" or 1moa hole in it, with a separate impact plate behind it. If you hit the body/head/legs of the elk, you get a red flasher. Thread the needle and hit the .97moa, you get a green flasher. Then lastly there is another bear at 1890Y. There's other random steel scattered around, and more targets will be added in the spring. All of this is 17 minutes from my door, a covered 10'x20' deck on top of a sea can with the most amazing view.

With that said, I've been doing more shooting this summer than I have in the last 10 years, loading piles of ammo weekly, for sometimes 4 visits a week to this spot. We've hit the elk at 1 mile with .22 ARC, 6CM, 6.5CM, 6.5x47, .260, 6.5 PRC, .308, .300 PRC and .338 Lapua. The 6.5 PRC is the comfortable 1 mile round, the .300 PRC eats the .338 believe it or not. I've had new shooters out, and my GF and niece both had first shot hits after I set up the .300 PRC with 3.8 mils of wind and 15.8 mils elevation, 225 ELDM.

I've built and shot a LOT of .338 Lapua, and thought it was the best thing ever, then I tried the PRC. Don't get me wrong, I like the splash from a 300 gr bullet, but ballistically, the PRC is better. The 300 will fit on a 'normal' action, I don't think the lapua case belongs in a 1.062" thread tenon, that's why I went 1.162" on the Timberwolf. Brass for the PRC is a lot less than .338, 10 or so less grains of powder, bullets are cheaper too. Less recoil, less wind drift, flatter trajectory, farther transonic distance. The .300 PRC is a great long range round for the average person.

Now, that 6.5 PRC, my buddy absolutely slays on the KYL's, and has shot a 10" group on the 1890 bear. He's come a long way in the last year with his shooting ability, not to mention wind reading and kestrel operation. I've been coaching/spotting and talking with him a lot. We're pushing each other, and we'll be adding some longer targets to further stretch things out.

Watch the 'La Perla Challenge' series on youtube, and see what rifles and calibres guys are using. There's longish targets as well at the 1 mile yeti that some guys go for. Also note how some of them absolutely drop the ball with zero/dope as well as feeding issues. Learn from their mistakes, and see all the different things that guys get right and what they get wrong.
 
PGW Steve said:
I'm fortunate to have a buddy that has a pile of land, and a hunger for long range shooting. He supplied the space, I donated the steel. We've got a Cortina deer, and blackjack rack at 500Y along with a permanent Shotmarker frame. There's a KYL rack at 750Y, targets from 4" to 16", KYL at 1061Y with 6" to 18" plates and a Shotmarker frame. A full size steel bear at 1472Y, 24" plate at 1595Y and a full size elk at 1762Y. The elk has an 18" or 1moa hole in it, with a separate impact plate behind it. If you hit the body/head/legs of the elk, you get a red flasher. Thread the needle and hit the .97moa, you get a green flasher. Then lastly there is another bear at 1890Y. There's other random steel scattered around, and more targets will be added in the spring. All of this is 17 minutes from my door, a covered 10'x20' deck on top of a sea can with the most amazing view.

With that said, I've been doing more shooting this summer than I have in the last 10 years, loading piles of ammo weekly, for sometimes 4 visits a week to this spot. We've hit the elk at 1 mile with .22 ARC, 6CM, 6.5CM, 6.5x47, .260, 6.5 PRC, .308, .300 PRC and .338 Lapua. The 6.5 PRC is the comfortable 1 mile round, the .300 PRC eats the .338 believe it or not. I've had new shooters out, and my GF and niece both had first shot hits after I set up the .300 PRC with 3.8 mils of wind and 15.8 mils elevation, 225 ELDM.

I've built and shot a LOT of .338 Lapua, and thought it was the best thing ever, then I tried the PRC. Don't get me wrong, I like the splash from a 300 gr bullet, but ballistically, the PRC is better. The 300 will fit on a 'normal' action, I don't think the lapua case belongs in a 1.062" thread tenon, that's why I went 1.162" on the Timberwolf. Brass for the PRC is a lot less than .338, 10 or so less grains of powder, bullets are cheaper too. Less recoil, less wind drift, flatter trajectory, farther transonic distance. The .300 PRC is a great long range round for the average person.

Now, that 6.5 PRC, my buddy absolutely slays on the KYL's, and has shot a 10" group on the 1890 bear. He's come a long way in the last year with his shooting ability, not to mention wind reading and kestrel operation. I've been coaching/spotting and talking with him a lot. We're pushing each other, and we'll be adding some longer targets to further stretch things out.

Watch the 'La Perla Challenge' series on youtube, and see what rifles and calibres guys are using. There's longish targets as well at the 1 mile yeti that some guys go for. Also note how some of them absolutely drop the ball with zero/dope as well as feeding issues. Learn from their mistakes, and see all the different things that guys get right and what they get wrong.
Click to expand...
what are barrel lengths and twists on .22 ARC, 6CM, 6.5CM, 6.5x47, .260, 6.5 PRC?
 
PGW Steve said:
I've built and shot a LOT of .338 Lapua, and thought it was the best thing ever, then I tried the PRC. Don't get me wrong, I like the splash from a 300 gr bullet, but ballistically, the PRC is better. The 300 will fit on a 'normal' action, I don't think the lapua case belongs in a 1.062" thread tenon, that's why I went 1.162" on the Timberwolf. Brass for the PRC is a lot less than .338, 10 or so less grains of powder, bullets are cheaper too. Less recoil, less wind drift, flatter trajectory, farther transonic distance. The .300 PRC is a great long range round for the average person.
Click to expand...
I didn't gel with the 338 LM. I am loving the 300 Norma Mag though. It is much nicer to shoot and ridiculously capable at long ranges. The Norma Mag produces just a bit more velocity than the PRC does. It only consumes 4 or 5 grains more of powder in the process.

IMO a shorter, fatter case will produce better accuracy than a long, thin case. The most accurate bench rest cases are short and fat for their caliber.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
I didn't gel with the 338 LM. I am loving the 300 Norma Mag though. It is much nicer to shoot and ridiculously capable at long ranges. The Norma Mag produces just a bit more velocity than the PRC does. It only consumes 4 or 5 grains more of powder in the process.

IMO a shorter, fatter case will produce better accuracy than a long, thin case. The most accurate bench rest cases are short and fat for their caliber.
Click to expand...
Interesting point on case geometry, but it sounds like you are copy-and-pasting short-range, 100-to-300-yard point-blank benchrest theories (like the 6mm PPC or 6mm BR) and trying to force them onto an extreme, mile-plus ELR magnum setup.

Microscopic powder ignition uniformity matters when you're shooting tiny groups at 100 yards, but out past a full mile (1,760+ yards), the atmosphere only cares about the golden rules of ballistics;
Velocity needs powder!
&
Distance needs weight!

When you place the two side-by-side under heavy-for-caliber, high 245gr.30-calibers), the 300 Norma-Mag holds 104 to 105 grains of water capacity and the 300 PRC holds 113 to 115 grains.
That's a MASSIVE ~10% shortfall in volume deficit in the tinier Norma-Mag!

Furthermore, because the Norma case is shorter, seating those ultra-long, high-BC match bullets forces the projectile tail deep into the main body, physically displacing even more of your remaining powder room and tanking your muzzle velocity runway.

So the question for the room is simple:
How exactly is that 10% deficit in raw chemical powder energy being mechanically compensated for over a full mile without pushing chamber pressures into a volatile, high-pressure case-head expansion danger zone, or turning that aggressive 30-degree case shoulder into a concentrated plasma torch that melts the rifling lands right out of the barrel throat?"
 
adamthebad said:
Interesting point on case geometry, but it sounds like you are copy-and-pasting short-range, 100-to-300-yard point-blank benchrest theories (like the 6mm PPC or 6mm BR) and trying to force them onto an extreme, mile-plus ELR magnum setup.

Microscopic powder ignition uniformity matters when you're shooting tiny groups at 100 yards, but out past a full mile (1,760+ yards), the atmosphere only cares about the golden rules of ballistics;
Velocity needs powder!
&
Distance needs weight!

When you place the two side-by-side under heavy-for-caliber, high 245gr.30-calibers), the 300 Norma-Mag holds 104 to 105 grains of water capacity and the 300 PRC holds 113 to 115 grains.
That's a MASSIVE ~10% shortfall in volume deficit in the tinier Norma-Mag!

Furthermore, because the Norma case is shorter, seating those ultra-long, high-BC match bullets forces the projectile tail deep into the main body, physically displacing even more of your remaining powder room and tanking your muzzle velocity runway.

So the question for the room is simple:
How exactly is that 10% deficit in raw chemical powder energy being mechanically compensated for over a full mile without pushing chamber pressures into a volatile, high-pressure case-head expansion danger zone, or turning that aggressive 30-degree case shoulder into a concentrated plasma torch that melts the rifling lands right out of the barrel throat?"
Click to expand...
I think you're confusing 300 PRC and 300 RUM. 300 PRC has a case capacity capacity of about 96gr, 300 Norma is about 104-105 and 300 RUM is about 110. There really isn't any situation where a 300 PRC has more horsepower than a 300 NM.
 
adamthebad said:
Interesting point on case geometry, but it sounds like you are copy-and-pasting short-range, 100-to-300-yard point-blank benchrest theories (like the 6mm PPC or 6mm BR) and trying to force them onto an extreme, mile-plus ELR magnum setup.
Click to expand...
While I would agree that at ELR distances, velocity is more important than accuracy, consistent ignition and burn of the powder column is needed to minimize SD / ES to minimize vertical spread.

The physics of powder column ignition and burn should be pretty consistent regardless of how large the powder column is.


adamthebad said:
Furthermore, because the Norma case is shorter, seating those ultra-long, high-BC match bullets forces the projectile tail deep into the main body, physically displacing even more of your remaining powder room and tanking your muzzle velocity runway.
Click to expand...
Seating depth is a function of the throat and one would assume chambers like the 300 PRC and 300 Norma are designed for very long VLD bullets.


adamthebad said:
When you place the two side-by-side under heavy-for-caliber, high 245gr.30-calibers), the 300 Norma-Mag holds 104 to 105 grains of water capacity and the 300 PRC holds 113 to 115 grains.
That's a MASSIVE ~10% shortfall in volume deficit in the tinier Norma-Mag!

So the question for the room is simple:
How exactly is that 10% deficit in raw chemical powder energy being mechanically compensated for over a full mile without pushing chamber pressures into a volatile, high-pressure case-head expansion danger zone
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with the difference in the two case volumes but this doesn't seem correct.

Comparing the load data on the Hodgdon website shows the Norma uses more powder and produces more velocity than the PRC. The differences are not huge but the Norma loads are all heavier than the PRC loads for the same bullet weight.
 
I play around with a 300 PRC and a 338 lapua, one thing I quickly learned was that the heaviest highest BC bullets aren't necessarily the best.
My 338 lapua has a 31" tube, pushing 300gr Bergers at 2870 and 285gr eldms at 2950fps. The 300 bergers have same wind drift as my 26" PRC with 215s at 2950, the 285s shoot flatter and have less drift but eldms never seem to be as consistent as Bergers past 800y for me. The PRC is easier to shoot well, and is quite a bit cheaper to load for. Right in the goldilocks zone for ballistics, recoil and cost.
The 338 is alot of fun in a heavy gun but the 300 PRC is what I'd grab to shoot a mile.
 
Last edited:
rugbydave said:
I think you're confusing 300 PRC and 300 RUM. 300 PRC has a case capacity capacity of about 96gr, 300 Norma is about 104-105 and 300 RUM is about 110. There really isn't any situation where a 300 PRC has more horsepower than a 300 NM.
Click to expand...
You are quoting empty, unseated water-capacity metrics straight off a basic spec sheet, but you completely missed the boat on how projectile displacement physics dictates actual usable powder volume in an ELR system.

When you place the 300 Norma Mag and the 300 PRC side-by-side at the workbench under the heavy-for-caliber, ultra-long, high-BC match projectiles actually required to shoot a mile (like a 225gr ELD-M or 245gr Berger), the Norma's length restriction hits a hard mechanical wall.

Beacause the Norma hull is significantly shorter, seating those massive projectiles to standard magazine lengths forces the massive boat-tail of the bullet deep down into the body of the case.

That bullet intrusion physically displaces a massive chunk of your powder room, drastically tanking your net usable capacity.

The 300 PRC was explicitly engineered to solve this exact geometric flaw. Hornady built it with a longer case neck and optimized chamber throat geometry so that those heavy, streamlined, high-BC bullets seat completely out of the powder column. The bullet tail doesn't steal your combustion room, meaning a 30" or 29" match barrel gets 100% efficiency from the powder column.

To try and force that smaller, net-usable Norma room to match the muzzle velocity runway of the PRC under a 245-grain bullet, you have to pack specialized propellants right up to a volatile, case-stretching, high-pressure boundary well past standard safe limits. So no, a spec-sheet comparison of an empty case doesn't hold water once the bullet actually sits on the bench. Real shop-floor physics always beats catalog copy-pasting.

The old 300 RUM is an entirely different animal;
a long, heavily tapered, old-school belted-style parent case that holds roughly 110 to 112 of water weight and requires a massive full-length magnum receiver.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
While I would agree that at ELR distances, velocity is more important than accuracy, consistent ignition and burn of the powder column is needed to minimize SD / ES to minimize vertical spread.

The physics of powder column ignition and burn should be pretty consistent regardless of how large the powder column is.



Seating depth is a function of the throat and one would assume chambers like the 300 PRC and 300 Norma are designed for very long VLD bullets.



I'm not familiar with the difference in the two case volumes but this doesn't seem correct.

Comparing the load data on the Hodgdon website shows the Norma uses more powder and produces more velocity than the PRC. The differences are not huge but the Norma loads are all heavier than the PRC loads for the same bullet weight.
Click to expand...
Internal ballistics operates on fixed blueprints rather than assumptions!

Comparing SAAMI/CIP case dimensions shows the 300 Norma Magnum at 2.492 inches versus the longer 300 PRC at 2.580 inches.

Seating long, high-BC bullets in the shorter 300 Norma forces the boat-tail deep into the case body, displacing powder and reducing net usable capacity, whereas the 300 PRC keeps the bearing surface forward of the shoulder.

Relying on static water-capacity or volatile 68,000-+ PSI specs ignores real field logistics!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom