Why Not? and his RL17 loads....

1899

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Location
West
in .308 Win convinced me, quite some time ago, to buy a pound of the stuff. Just in case. I figured that since it worked so well in the .308, it ought to work fairly well in the .30-06 with heavier bullets too - especially given the .30-06's like for H4350 and IMR4350.

I also needed a bunch of "ready to go with little testing" ammo, so I loaded some 60.0gr of H4831SC under a 180 grain Partition.

There isn't much info out there on RL17 plus the .30-06, so I did some figuring based on H4350, IMR4350 and Barnes 180gr TSX data. I also considered SAAMI's relatively low pressure limits on the .30-06. The 175gr LRX is obviously a bit lighter, plus it has one less groove. I have some data that was pressure tested (found on the internet so who knows?) with 180gr TSX and RL17, but that was with Lapua brass and I had R-P brass.

I decided to give 55.5gr and 56.0gr a try.

The 180 Partitions shot well, printing 3 shot groups in the 0.625" range. More than "good enough". The Oehler 35P said the velocities were hovering around 2630 fps. A bit slow, but hardly an issue. Interestingly the primers were flatening but there was no ejector mark and the bolt lift was very easy. That was probably the quickest and easiest 'load developement" ever!

So I grab the 175 LRX and 55.5gr RL17 load. I shoot and whoa...very obviously heavier recoil. I don't see a hole on the target. Darn. I look at the read-out.... 2990fps. Holy smokes. I lift the bolt - very easy and not a hint of sticking. The primer is flattened a bit, just like with the 4831SC, and no ejector mark. Was it a erroneous reading? I hold at the bottom of the target, which is a haywire way of doing things and shoot again - 2929 fps and the bullet hole is 5" higher than the point of aim. The third shot is 3013fps and the hole is 1" from the second shot.

The mean velocity was 2977fps. For those of you who enjoy energy numbers, that is 3444 ft-lb of energy at the muzzle. I decided against trying the 56.0gr load. Velocity wise this is, imo, very high and even though there were no signs such as sticky bolt or ejector mark I decided to let it be. Of course I can't say much about accuracy for the obvious reasons noted above.

At any rate I am going to drop down to 54.0gr, 54.5gr and 55.0gr and take another look at this combo as it does appear to have some promise. I am pretty confident I can work up an accurate +2900 fps load with this powder and bullet. That is, imo, amazing performance for a .30-06. And out of a 22.5" barrel!

I was using R-P brass, F210 primers and COAL was 3.370"


Rifle is an Ithaca LSA 65 (Tikka) which has a 1:10 twist 22.5" barrel. Altitude is approximately 2200' ASL and it was a very warm day at 29 C .


Just for information's sake, my friend's .300 Wby + 84gr of RL25 + 200gr Partition out of a 24" barrel was averaging 2930 fps today.
 
Very interesting results, and I'll be damned if that isn't some impressive velocity! Please keep us posted on your next outing --- looking forward to seeing the accuracy you'll be able to get.
 
RL17 has provided me with some incredible velocities but only mediocre accuracy. Still more than accurate enough for most hunting purposes, but you know how we all like to see cloverleafs with our big game rifles! :)
 
Guys that shoot competition have been using R17 and 200g bullets in the 308 and getting high velocities. Tried it myself in custom action 308 I built with a 26" bbl. I did get very high velocities but make no mistake the pressure is up there too. Talked to one guy at the range that had a primer blow out with it. Lapua brass (308) in a hot load with no "pressure signs" in the few hundred rounds of ammo he had shot up until that point.

I do remember seeing some pressure tested data for the 308 and 30-06 and it was a top performer in some bullet weights but only beat out other powders by no more than 50fps. That was a few years ago, might be more info out there on it now.
 
RL17 has provided me with some incredible velocities but only mediocre accuracy. Still more than accurate enough for most hunting purposes, but you know how we all like to see cloverleafs with our big game rifles! :)

I too like cloverleafs, but in many ways it is just OCD combined with hype. I figure a 1" group is very good - if you are going to be honest about it. That will be WAY more than adequate for big game hunting.
 
RL17 has provided me with some incredible velocities but only mediocre accuracy. :)

That also was my experience with the 300 WSM that I bought the powder to try in. Same with the 30-06 & 270.

I finally tried it in my .25 wssm under a 100 gain Scirocco and it was magic. 3300 fps & 3 shots into one ragged hole @ 100 meters.
 
Well, you have seen my report on Re17 in the 308, with 180s at 2800 fps and 200s at 2650, so I am not at all surprised that the 30-06 gets over 100 fps higher velocity. Good stuff! Keep us posted as you do more work.

The really amazing thing about the 308 load development, was that the cases showed no measurable head expansion after five loads each, and primer pockets were still tight. In fact, I am still using the same cases.

Completely agree on the OCD around tiny groups. I well remember when three inch groups at 100 yd was considered acceptable hunting accuracy, and if you found a rifle that would shoot one inch groups, you wouldn't dare sell it! Even the dean of outdoor writers, Jack O'Connor, wrote that three inches was acceptable hunting accuracy. So did Warren Page.

Amazingly, everyone still brought home lots of game..........

Ted
 
Completely agree on the OCD around tiny groups. I well remember when three inch groups at 100 yd was considered acceptable hunting accuracy, and if you found a rifle that would shoot one inch groups, you wouldn't dare sell it! Even the dean of outdoor writers, Jack O'Connor, wrote that three inches was acceptable hunting accuracy. So did Warren Page.

Amazingly, everyone still brought home lots of game..........

Ted

Ted it is so funny that you mention JOC, because I was talking about this exact thing with my friend tonight! I mentioned that I was reading one of his books last night and he was talking about one of his very accurate hunting rifle. It was "only" 8 lbs scoped and would consistanly group shots within 1.5" at 100 yards.
 
I wish everyone would just stop and think for a moment what even a four inch group really means.... that every bullet in the group hit less than two inches from the spot you were aiming at!

Now, tell me that that is not acceptable hunting accuracy. :)
Ted
 
At one point in my reloading for my Nemesis, my pet load from my 20 inch barrel was right on @ 2600 fps with 208 Amax and 48 gr of R-17, quite accurate but very hot, since then i have discovered the 155 gr Lapua Scenar and still use the R-15 as my best powder... JP.
 
For the sake of discussion .......

What is the benefit of high velocity if accuracy is not top shelf, considering that the real benefits of increased velocity are seen at longer ranges?
 
For the sake of discussion .......

What is the benefit of high velocity if accuracy is not top shelf, considering that the real benefits of increased velocity are seen at longer ranges?

Very right, accuracy max is the real satisfaction... JP.
 
For the sake of discussion .......

What is the benefit of high velocity if accuracy is not top shelf, considering that the real benefits of increased velocity are seen at longer ranges?

The point, imo, is that most shots are made at under 300 yards. The difference between a 3/4" load and a 1 1/4" load at that distance won't make any practical difference while hunting. In fact, I'd be curious to take 10 random hunters, with two sets of loads. One a 3/4" load and the other a 1 1/4" load. Then have them shoot from field positions at 200 and 300 yards and compare the results. I'd bet it wouldn't matter which load they are using.

Now that I wrote that I started thinking a bit more about your question. What is top shelf for moose hunting - which is what this load/rifle will be used for?
 
You beat me to it. That's it exactly. Furthermore, I am convinced that at least 95% of hunters cannot reliably hit game in the vitals at ranges beyond 300 yd. More than likely the reliable range is 250.

For those who think this is nonsense, I have a standing offer for anyone who wants to try. You pay $5 per shot at balloons or paper plates set at random, unknown, distances between 350 and 550 yd, and I will pay you $20 for every one you hit from field positions. The money goes to buy ammo for kids learning to shoot.

Everybody wins, and I am still looking for someone to take me to the cleaners. :)

Ted
 
The average hunting joe cant shoot that great and the average hunting gun is not that accurate either. Of all the guns I have helped people with I bet 95% of them have loose stock screws, that's on top of other problems. I will also say only 1 was a MOA shooter with the ammo I was given to shoot. Most hunting guns are shooting true groups (including wandering zeros from bad bedding, crap scopes, jumpy inconsistent forend pressure pads and loose stock screws) of 3MOA at best with a good shooter.
 
I really like RL-17 and use it in a number of chamberings, but I have not done so well with .308.

I only tried it in one rifle, mind you, but with both 180 grain and 210 grain bullets, I was getting clear signs of over-pressure well before I reached velocities you other fellows have been getting.

Seems like I'll have to load up a few more and try another rifle.
 
The point, imo, is that most shots are made at under 300 yards. The difference between a 3/4" load and a 1 1/4" load at that distance won't make any practical difference while hunting. In fact, I'd be curious to take 10 random hunters, with two sets of loads. One a 3/4" load and the other a 1 1/4" load. Then have them shoot from field positions at 200 and 300 yards and compare the results. I'd bet it wouldn't matter which load they are using.

Now that I wrote that I started thinking a bit more about your question. What is top shelf for moose hunting - which is what this load/rifle will be used for?

1899 - Top shelf for moose hunting may very well depend on your calling abilities more than your rifle. It's been 20+ years since I shot one notably past 100 yards myself. But that's cheating a bit, and not asking much at all from your rifle. I think a guy would have to be hunting proghorns on the prarie or something for 1/4 MOA to really matter in his .308.
 
Last edited:
You beat me to it. That's it exactly. Furthermore, I am convinced that at least 95% of hunters cannot reliably hit game in the vitals at ranges beyond 300 yd. More than likely the reliable range is 250.

For those who think this is nonsense, I have a standing offer for anyone who wants to try. You pay $5 per shot at balloons or paper plates set at random, unknown, distances between 350 and 550 yd, and I will pay you $20 for every one you hit from field positions. The money goes to buy ammo for kids learning to shoot.

Everybody wins, and I am still looking for someone to take me to the cleaners. :)

Ted

That's not much of a challenge anymore. I'd show up with my rifle and LRF, range the paper plates, spin the turret and shoot. At 350 + yards I'm going to be shooting from a stable position (most likely prone over a backpack) so much of the human error can be reduced, too.

A few years ago it would have been much more challenging. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom