Thread: Factory ammo fliers every 3 shots

If your barrel is a 1 in 10 twist the chances of it being accurate with 100 gn boat tails is not good . trying a lighter projectile would be a better test ,however the beding does not look flash either so giving it a bedding job isn't a bad idea .
Realy one swallow does not a summer make i.e it pays to try changing the simplist thing to see if it makes a change before you throw the baby out with the bath water .

Also Danny when you do sort a load after the bedding, my experience in 243's is I have never had one that shoots as tight with 100gr as they both did with the 85/87gr, I also used a 90 or 95gr [can't quite remember] targex that shot well, for memory the Hornady 87gr soft/spire point was the best in both rifles , not sure if they make it anymore though, there is bound to be an equivalent or tipped similar
Just my experience over two different rifles, Browning Abolt and Ruger MK11, it may have no bearing here.

I was looking at loading 90g eldx however, I'm beginning to wonder if a lighter flat base projectile might be better.
Am I trying to make it do something it's not well suited for ? I'm probably unlikely to shoot it out past 300yds so do I need a super flash hi bc projectile ????
I think it was @Flyblown that suggested sierra hpbt 87g ????

This will do it

https://www.gunworks.co.nz/shop/item...ady-soft-point

Originally Posted by stug

This will do it

https://www.gunworks.co.nz/shop/item...ady-soft-point

That looks the story.

Originally Posted by stug

This will do it

https://www.gunworks.co.nz/shop/item...ady-soft-point

If they are the same Hornady 87gr SP I use they are actually varmint bullets - but I have them recorded as code 2240 in my spreadsheet rather than 2440 so need to check the box out in the shed, might be a typo on my part or might be a different bullet.
Personally I refuse to use varmint or match bullets on deer, and load Sierra 1530 (85gr gameking hpbt) and 1540 (100gr Prohunter sp flatbase) in my 243 for deer loads

Ive setteled on game kings in mine,they shoot mean as

@Micky Duck sorry about that - I must have been feeling grumpy. I didn't know any manufacturer literally used hot glue as bedding. But I guess the Forbes is supposed to be glued in place somehow. Perhaps its not soft as hot glue sticks like I get from the warehourse.

@Cordite , I think people really need to be able to shoot 3 shot groups, if not 5 at a string, to be able to sight in their rifle.

Note that in quality assurance terminology, precision is how close shots are to each other ie group size.
Accuracy is how close shots are to the intended point of impact, which determines how effective you are hitting and killing animals. Quite large groups like 2-3" at 100yd can be completely OK. It's accuracy you need.
To get good accuracy, you need to be able to sight in well and have some idea of trajectory but most importantly, not have a wandering zero from one day to the next. First shot of the day is what you need.

I'll bet your problems disappear now you've got it bedded.

Originally Posted by Bagheera

@Cordite, I think people really need to be able to shoot 3 shot groups, if not 5 at a string, to be able to sight in their rifle.

Agree. All I am saying is, EACH shot in your group of five would have to be a "first shot", i.e. from a COLD gun. Sighting in this way takes more time, to allow for more complete cooling between shots, and one might even take the time to boresnake the barrel in between also ... but this will produce a more relevant group for hunting purposes. You only want a hunting rifle to be sighted in for where its first, "cold" shot will go.

https://www.gunworks.co.nz/shop/item...-gameking-1530
thinking these might do the job and be more suited to the type of shooting I do and better suited to the rifle too.

use the same target over 3 sessions at range....even 3 shot groups then become 9 LOL.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

use the same target over 3 sessions at range....even 3 shot groups then become 9 LOL.

He heh, yes, who would not want to shoot a few more than three once you've driven all the way up the hill to the range and then walked 10mins including through a stream to get there (in the case of the Dunedin NZDA range). Therein lies the trouble. You don't go to the range to do sighters, you go there for a shooting session and forget that it's only the first 2-3 that are sighters and the rest are just for fun and not to get worried over.

Maybe, bringing a second heavy barrel rifle for the sustained shooting bit is the answer here.

By the way @dannyb, for free floating, I looked at some of Peter Laidler's postings elsewhere on stocking the Lee Enfield No 4. I worked out that you can check the free floating is within that spec by being able to pass at least 5 layers of 80GSM paper between barrel and stock (=standard A4 printer paper), but that's only once the receiver is bedded.

Regarding bullets for hunting use in the .243 Win. Settle in with a mug of something nice and hot, as this is another post-op essay.

Its up to the shooter to find something that works. We can make suggestions all day long, and most will never be tried. Some will not shoot that well and others that we don’t mention at all might be perfect!

A lot of you reading this will know all of it already so all good. But for those of you that don’t.... There’s always been a lot of confusion about “100gr” bullets in the 1:10” twist .243 Winchester rifle.

As we know, it is not the weight of the bullet that affects stability, the length is the primary factor that affects stability, the weight is a secondary factor.

A bullet is regarded as stable above a Miller value of 1.3, but the military threshold is 1.5 to ensure downrange accuracy. The Miller factor should be considered in conjunction with the bullet ballistic coefficient.

A lot of the .243 stability confusion comes from the direct translation of 100gr to mean a longer bullet like the Sierra GameKing (1560). This bullet is a boat tailed bullet at 1.078” in length. This bullet is "technically" stable, with a Miller factor of around 1.35. They actually group pretty well in my Howa at 100m.

The one I use is the sSierra ProHunter (1540), which is the 100gr flat base bullet, length 1.041” and Miller factor of 1.5. This bullet has been outstanding for me and my wife, its killing capabilities are excellent due to its near perfect design and construction (which is identical to the GameKing with the exception of the tail).

So if you were in the military you would be required to select the ProHunter over the GameKing as the stability factor meets their accuracy threshold. I find that in largely meaningless 100m accuracy tests with my Howa, that the 100gr ProHunter is only marginally more accurate than the 100m GameKing.

The other bullet which is commonly used, and also regarded as an excellent killer of deer, is the Sierra GameKing 85gr hollow point boat tail (1530). Being shorter still (0.934”) it had a Miller stability factor of >1.75.

What I have found over many years is that the relatively low BC ProHunter flies extremely well out to about 350m, whereupon velocity starts to drop and windage becomes more of an issue. I’ve got lots of records here of the 300m drop tests I’ve done with the ProHunter for every batch of reloads, with accuracy typically measured in the 0.6-0.7MOA range at that distance.

Interestingly the higher BC 100gr GameKing, which one would expect to fly better at longer range then its flat base sibling due to the higher BC, actually does quite a lot worse at 300m. I had a look through some of my load notes last night, and photos from the target boards, and I cannot find a 300 meter group that is better than 1.5MOA. This I put down to its marginal stability, which trumps the ballistic coefficient downrange.

So in my rifle at least (and its predecessor, a Tikka M595, and before that a CZ ZKK), the question of stability and BC combined must translate to downrange accuracy, which is what is important to me, because typically I am shooting deer in the 150-250m+ range and often up to a little over 300m, this due to terrain constraints.

Now for the interesting part. The lighter 85gr GameKing I have found to be much more fickle with downrange accuracy, despite it having a perfectly acceptable Miller stability factor. Now the caveat to that statement is of course that is in my rifle, with my shooting skills and the conditions in which I typically shoot. Which I might add is rarely in the strong wind conditions, and if it is windy then I will go to a lot of effort to shoot either with or straight into the wind.

My load notes show acceptable 100 and 200 meter accuracy for the 85gr HPBT, but unacceptable 300m accuracy, there is a big drop off in accuracy around ~250 m. What I think is happening is that the slight drop in weight and significantly lower BC (compared to the 100gr bullets) is really counting against this bullet downrange. As a short range killer it is right up there with the very best but I won't use it for my application.

So I come back to the statement earlier about the “largely meaningless 100m accuracy tests”. Obviously we like to test our loads at this range, often for convenience, but I really do think it is a massive mistake for field hunters to only test their loads' accuracy at this range. I also think the default value of 100m for a zero is often a mistake, once you have established a velocity it is a really interesting exercise to look at the trajectory of your round because sometimes picking a 50m or 150m zero or whatever makes a lot more sense.

Just because a certain bullet performs well at 100m does not always translate to downrange performance. All three of the Sierra bullets discussed here are proven effective killers, timeless bullet designs originating from the 1960s. Obviously the killing capability is driven by the shooters ability to put the bullet in the correct place, something which all too frequently is overlooked.

The Sierra designs, being frangible bullets, are extremely effective in spreading a cloud of fragments in quite a wide radius around the point of impact. This is why despite 6mm being a relatively small calibre for the size of target animal we're talking about, they have always punched about their weight. This is also the reason why I am so beflummoxed and a bit concerned about the change in design with the Sierra GameChanger, early reports are saying quite clearly is too hard and highly likely to punch through with a narrow wound channel.

Obviously I've only been talking about Sierra bullets here and I could go on and on about Hornady too. I told @dannyb the other day that I grew up shooting Speer 105gr round nose bullets at roe and fallow deer, man were they effective. But even though it was a long time ago I cannot remember a shot that would have been longer than 120m or so, small fields, hedgerows, copses etc.

So at the end of this long waffle what I would like to say is do test bullets your thoroughly. Don't just be guided by the group size at 100m. And in 6mm make sure that your bullet choice is a proven design that combines fragmentation with enough retained weight to penetrate to the opposite side, or exit.

All of this is shooting 101 but over the years I have been asked most of these questions rather a lot of times by blokes starting out, or new to the cartridge, maybe it will help someone make an informed decision. The common and understandable perception that the 80-90gr bullets shooter better in the .243 Win might not translate to success as the shooter starts to stretch things out a little bit.

The other topic to talk about is the reputation of the .243 Win as a meat destroyer. Maybe later on I'll post some ideas about how to avoid this as it is really rather straightforward.

The reason the .243 performs better (accuracy wise) with the lighter bullets is because it was designed for shooting rabbit-sized groundhogs out to 300 metres or so, not for deer shooting. The 100 grain (CAC even loaded 105 grain which were a bloody disaster) load was added as an afterthought. I had a .243 BSA Majestic in 1967 when I was working at West Arm on the Manapouri power project. I owned it about two weeks before I sold it and got my father to throw my old sporterised .30/06 M1 Garand on the Road Services bus to me. With the .243 I shot three deer (all chest shots) in a week at ranges less than 100 metres and never found one as the blood trails never went more than a few metres. That problem went away instantly with the .30/06, the caliber I still use. On reflection, I suspect the poor .243 performance may have been attributable to the 100 grain steel jacketed Norma tri-clad ammo I was using, not giving enough expansion. One of my old hunting mates uses nothing but a BSA Majestic .243 (I rebarrelled it twice over 25 years) and has shot an awful lot of animals with it, although I have witnessed him having similar experiences that I had with mine.

Originally Posted by gundoc

The reason the .243 performs better (accuracy wise) with the lighter bullets is because it was designed for shooting rabbit-sized groundhogs out to 300 metres or so, not for deer shooting. The 100 grain (CAC even loaded 105 grain which were a bloody disaster) load was added as an afterthought. I had a .243 BSA Majestic in 1967 when I was working at West Arm on the Manapouri power project. I owned it about two weeks before I sold it and got my father to throw my old sporterised .30/06 M1 Garand on the Road Services bus to me. With the .243 I shot three deer (all chest shots) in a week at ranges less than 100 metres and never found one as the blood trails never went more than a few metres. That problem went away instantly with the .30/06, the caliber I still use. On reflection, I suspect the poor .243 performance may have been attributable to the 100 grain steel jacketed Norma tri-clad ammo I was using, not giving enough expansion. One of my old hunting mates uses nothing but a BSA Majestic .243 (I rebarrelled it twice over 25 years) and has shot an awful lot of animals with it, although I have witnessed him having similar experiences that I had with mine.

I used a 243 late 80s early 90s meat shooting. As did another mate of mine.

We both had a horror run with them using multiple projectiles. Both rifles shot like demons tho. We were to young and dumb to think it was anything to do with our choices.


I do think projectiles have got better in time and know some guys now, doing well with a 243.

I will however, always loath them and the 270 and doubt I will ever change.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk