Max load for 300 win mag?

[Thebigbaby]

I have h1000. I was reading 74 gr as minimum and 79 gr as maximum. So my thoughts were ladder test of 76, 76.5, 77, 77.5, 78, 78.5 and 79. Then reading through different forums, I read people getting into the 80’s grain.

Any other advice off topic would be appreciated. 200 gr ELD-X. 24 inch barrel. 1:10 twist.

 

[PRC_GUY]

H1000 doesn’t give you the velocity, IMR 7828 or H4831 ssc gives me 32xx fps .

 

[Pickettpuncher]

H1000 doesn’t give you the velocity, IMR 7828 or H4831 ssc gives me 32xx fps .

With a 200 gr projectile?

 

[bdan68]

I'd be really careful going over 79 grains. Hodgdon has 77.0 as max with the 200 grain Accubond, and 79.0 as max with the 200 grain Partition, and both of those are compressed loads. 80 grains might not be too much pressure but I'm just not a fan of compressed loads. Looks to me like a good powder to try if you really want the most velocity would be Ramshot Magnum. They show 84.4 grains max with a 200 grain Partition for 3,011 fps.

 

[Northpark]

asking a bunch of internet strangers for load data is a good way to get to a bad ending. Look at Hornadys load data for that powder and bullet combo and use that.

 

[DakotaBPNW]

Book data is simply a starting point. Your rifle/components/process determine the rest. Sometimes you find pressure before book max, sometimes you go past book max without finding pressure.

 

[Conrad101st]

I load 77.5 grains H1000 with 200 grain accubonds and FGMM primers for my Havak:

I also load 80.5 grains H1000 with 175 Barnes LRX and FGMM primers for my sendero:

 

[Conrad101st]

Two other H1000 loads I was playing with for my Havak.

All four of these loads will kill elk at 700 yards and are accurate enough for my purposes.

They are not super hot but I went with H1000 b/c I shoot over a broad temperature range.

200 LRX with 77 grains of H1000:


212 ELD-X with 76.5 grains of H1000:

 

[Thebigbaby]

Thanks. I reloaded and shot today. Started at 74.7 and worked in half grain increments up to 76.7. Seemed to do best with 74.7.

 

[PRC_GUY]

With a 200 gr projectile?

I use 180 grain accubond or hammer.

 

[Pickettpuncher]

I use 180 grain accubond or hammer.

I was gonna say, I’ve hit 3200+ with rl22 and 180s, but with 200s that’s HOT!

 

[A382DWDZQ]

I am just going off what’s in the post, so making some assumptions. My Hornady manual says 76.2 is max for H1000 and a 200gr ELD-X. 79max appears to be for Nosler Partition or Swift A-Frame. Going to assume that the load data referenced was not for the ELD-X. The ELD-X is 1.53” and the Partion is 1.35”, so that .18” is why the difference in pressure and lower max load. ELD-X takes up more room in the case. 77gr on the ELD-X runs ~59,866psi, 77gr on the Partition runs ~55,444 for a difference of 4,422psi. Then with 79gr, it would be at ~60,884 & 66,023 respectively, and 108% vs 112% case capacity. Now granted, this is based on 3.340 COAL, so an increase of COAL to 3.520 or longer will bring the pressure back down to where 80gr is under max pressure, *in theory*. Now whether or not that works/feeds in a particular rifle is a different story, and for all that, it is probably a net of a bit over 100fps, which might be more easily achieved with a different powder. Trade offs I suppose.

 

[Thebigbaby]

To wrap this all up and hopefully be helpful to someone else searching for similar circumstances as I.

Other than “200 gr ELD-X. 24 inch barrel. 1:10 twist.” And “started at 74.7 and worked in half grain increments up to 76.7. Seemed to do best with 74.7.”

I went back and loaded 74.7 grains of h1000 in Hornady brass and chronod. Ended up with average muzzle velocity of 2912, which I’m happy with. Other basic info is large rifle magnum primers, COL of 3.36-3.37 and rifle is Savage 111 LRH.

Grouped really well. First two shots were great and I super rushed the third shot (barrel was very hot) and in general I was rushed, so not surprised by third shot.

If I have more time I will go through again and check grouping and take my time but ultimately I am pleased with the results.

 

[Thebigbaby]

I am just going off what’s in the post, so making some assumptions. My Hornady manual says 76.2 is max for H1000 and a 200gr ELD-X. 79max appears to be for Nosler Partition or Swift A-Frame. Going to assume that the load data referenced was not for the ELD-X. The ELD-X is 1.53” and the Partion is 1.35”, so that .18” is why the difference in pressure and lower max load. ELD-X takes up more room in the case. 77gr on the ELD-X runs ~59,866psi, 77gr on the Partition runs ~55,444 for a difference of 4,422psi. Then with 79gr, it would be at ~60,884 & 66,023 respectively, and 108% vs 112% case capacity. Now granted, this is based on 3.340 COAL, so an increase of COAL to 3.520 or longer will bring the pressure back down to where 80gr is under max pressure, *in theory*. Now whether or not that works/feeds in a particular rifle is a different story, and for all that, it is probably a net of a bit over 100fps, which might be more easily achieved with a different powder. Trade offs I suppose.

Your assumptions are correct. Initially I figured a bullet is a bullet and if x manual says 79 gr max load, and y manual says 76.2 gr max load, why can I not follow the 79 gr max load. I have since gained knowledge on such topics. I do appreciate your thoughtful, informative and constructive response.

 

[49ereric]

Reload for accuracy not velocity. backoff powder as the groups open up.

 

[Rock-o]

My load is 76.5 gr H1000 with a 212 gr ELDX, like @Conrad101st.

 

[ID_Matt]

I use 180 grain accubond or hammer.

Why would you comment your velocity and not list your projectile weight? 180 gr bullet is going to be quite a bit different than a 200 gr. Are you implying that the powders you use will be the same for heavier projectiles?

 

[koller1]

I load 77.5 grains H1000 with 200 grain accubonds and FGMM primers for my Havak:View attachment 448384

I also load 80.5 grains H1000 with 175 Barnes LRX and FGMM primers for my sendero:

View attachment 448385

Conrad,

I saw your post with this group from 2019 - same objective - elk at longer ranges. Your groups speak for themselves and hoping my Bergara B-14 can come close to replicating.

Searching for the manual you referenced in you post but have been unsuccessful - would you happen to have the page? (The new Barnes data does not have H1000 for the 175gr LRX)

 

[35WhelenAI]

Book data is simply a starting point. Your rifle/components/process determine the rest. Sometimes you find pressure before book max, sometimes you go past book max without finding pressure.

Book data is a starting point because it has starting loads, and max loads. Do what you want. I would never recommend on a forum in public for anyone to push past book max with data available from a specific manufacturer about a specific bullet.

 

[A382DWDZQ]

Conrad,

I saw your post with this group from 2019 - same objective - elk at longer ranges. Your groups speak for themselves and hoping my Bergara B-14 can come close to replicating.

Searching for the manual you referenced in you post but have been unsuccessful - would you happen to have the page? (The new Barnes data does not have H1000 for the 175gr LRX)

Take this for what it's worth...
Barnes recommend to me, that I use the starting load data for a JSP and work up from there if they didn't have the specific combo published, so if you're trying to find a starting point for H1000 and 175gr LRX, that is where I would start. Try and find as many sources as you can for the powder for equivilanent or similar bullet weights.

With regard to the older book data, I would go with the most current data you can find.

The 2017 300 Win Mag Barnes data for the 175 LRX / 300WM was using hotter loads than the May 2020 load data. For example, RL 22 was 68.9 - 76.5, and changed to 62.0 - 72.7. Every powder listed in the 2017 they reduced the starting and max loads, except for PPro 4000MR which they only reduced the max load.
They also increased the COAL from 3.34 to 3.36.

I ran those through QL (so this is theoretical, not real world) and 72.7 of RL22 is pretty close to the mark where a 10% variance would put it into the "!DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!" warning with 65,003 PSI.

76.5 of RL shows as "!DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!" at 63,557 PSI, and with 10% variance, its at 77,206 PSI.

So that makes a lot of sense to me why they would reduce the charges from just looking at that on paper. Hodgdon's manual, which shows the pressures, has some of their max loads pushing up to 63,900 PSI. If you look at that 76.5 load above, you will note that the 10% variance resulted in a 21.4% increase in pressure.