Thread: Educate me on bushpigs

I ran some numbers through quickload last night as I was working up some loads for a 16" barreled .308.
Its only a prediction of course, but I ran the numbers using a 175gr sierra matchking at max loads with both AR2206 and AR2208 powder. It was predicted that the AR2208 although a slower powder, still pushed a higher velocity than the faster burning 2206 through the 16" barrel.
You could of course fit more of the 2206 in the case so could potentially run a charge above the max published load and get more velocity then you could with the slower burning powder - as you can only fit so much of the slower powder in the case.

Originally Posted by ChrisW

I ran some numbers through quickload last night as I was working up some loads for a 16" barreled .308.
Its only a prediction of course, but I ran the numbers using a 175gr sierra matchking at max loads with both AR2206 and AR2208 powder. It was predicted that the AR2208 although a slower powder, still pushed a higher velocity than the faster burning 2206 through the 16" barrel.
You could of course fit more of the 2206 in the case so could potentially run a charge above the max published load and get more velocity then you could with the slower burning powder - as you can only fit so much of the slower powder in the case.

Hey Chris,
What would be the figures with a 125/130 grain bullet? as a lot of guys are using that weight class for the short distances in bush shooting.

Originally Posted by Friwi

Hey Chris,
What would be the figures with a 125/130 grain bullet? as a lot of guys are using that weight class for the short distances in bush shooting.

Sierra 125gr, 16" barrel vs 24" barrel with a variety of different powders.

ADI lists max charge as 50gr of 2208, which quickload predicts will go at 2869fps with 16" barrel. QL suggests same load will do 3152 with a 24" barrel

2206H, max charge listed as 49gr, which quickload predicsts will go at 2896fps. QL suggests same load will do 3186 with a 24" barrel
2219 max charge listed as 45gr, QL predicts 2851fps. QL suggests same load will do 3126 with a 24" barrel
2207 max charge = 39.5, QL predicts 2778fps. QL suggests same load will do 3023 with a 24" barrel

So we can conclude that QL predicts that the powder that will produce the most FPS from a long barrel, will also produce the most FPS in a short barrel for a given projectile weight.
I cant comment on if this would translate into real world or not but those are the predictions nonetheless.

I would think that real world FPS would be slightly higher than above as I kept the COAL the same as when I was messing with the 175gr load -- in reality the COAL would be shorter with the 125gr load, which will produce a bit more pressure and a bit more FPS. The general conclusion remains the same though.

Originally Posted by Friwi

Hey Chris,
What would be the figures with a 125/130 grain bullet? as a lot of guys are using that weight class for the short distances in bush shooting.

I was thinking about this and then I read @ChrisW’s numbers (thanks Chris)... I would have thought that those kinds of velocities (~2900fps) would be too messy with frangible bullets, lot of meat damage, big holes, at close range?
@Shearer, what do you see with the Accubonds? Being a tough bullet I expect they fly straight through the animal?


When I was a kid my Grandpa always went the ‘slow and heavy’ route for carbines at close range for woodland deer, so that’s what I’ve always done since with good outcomes, especially on big reds. I was planning on 165-180gr in my .308 18” that I’m getting done soon at DPT.


Any comments on why light for calibre is better other than just being faster?


The 170gr flat nose ProHunters go bloody well on deer out of a short 308 at close-ish range, say sub 150m. The 150gr round nose ProHunters likewise.