• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Load Development for 1k yard supersonic 308 - 168GR TMK - 20 inch barrel

Dylan4570

Private
Minuteman
Jan 30, 2024
8
3
Canada
Hello,

I thought I would document my journey of developing a supersonic to 1k+ load for my B14 HMR. A key consideration was the limited barrel length of 20". Limiting at least in the context of meeting my goal with some of the lower BC bullets I had on hand. I initially started target shooting about 4 years ago. My first target rifle was a savage 10T-SR with a 24x DBT I barely shot it. I then got a fantastic deal on a B14 HMR in 308. which in the past year I have really enjoyed.

My initial shooting was with a batch of 100x Hornady 178GR BTHP match factory ammo. It was around 1.5 MOA (5 shot groups unless noted otherwise).

I loaded some 168 GR A-max's after that which were accurate at 0.6MOA at 2628 FPS on 43.7GR of Varget. However the commonality between most of the 308 factory ammo and bullets I found was they were not supersonic out to 1k. So I began load development based on the 168gr TMK. I have shot the 77gr TMK before in my 223 bolt gun and was pleasantly surprised. Further to this the BC's were very high.

Rifle: Bergara B14 HMR in 308 20"
Optic: 24x DBT

I was not feeling particularly stable. Below were my initial results.

1706626250779.png



1706626428369.png
1706626454008.png
1706626518849.png


0.75 MOA is good enough for me. My goal is to hit a 10inch gong at 1k yards. So that gets me in the ballpark. My velocity goal was 2600 and was hoping for near single digit SD's. So both of those goals were met. SD of 7 is great by my standards.

I have started doing larger increments with my initial load development than in the past and it has become a preference. I also do not believe there is much reason to go below 0.2GR increments with the sample size of 5 shot groups. I would expect a 10 shot group minimum to yield repeatable results.

With a ballpark figure of 44.2 GR and COAL of 2.870 feel I have a great starting point. I am beyond fortunate having access to a farm to shoot on 50% of the year when the corn isn't too high, I probably shoot 20 weekends per year, or more. hopefully within a couple weeks I can get out and do this load dev. Below is my next loading table.

1706627091025.png


I usually am unable to hit the rifling using the standard magazine since I primarily reload 223 and 308 for AR length mags. However in the case of this bullet at 2.887 I am still a long way from the rifling. I like fabricating unnecessary problems for myself, and worrying about things that don't actually matter. so the change in COAL is probably not needed. They will fit in a steel MDT magazine, but not a standard plastic magazine. but that was the primary change this time around. seating the bullets out 0.015 longer.

Within my next update I intend to include; testing results of the second table, a measured distance of jump, And hopefully a final selection on what to load for my 1000 yards goal. Also note I am using nickel plated brass because it makes me feel fancy.
 

Attachments

  • 1706627062147.png
    1706627062147.png
    17.6 KB · Views: 38
  • Sad
Reactions: 1911hombre
Well. I have some more results. The weather was a little on the cold side, around 0 Celsius. The primary focus this trip was hitting steel, but I managed to squeeze this bit of load dev in. My Labradar wasn't having a great day though, so we lost some data.

1707745315424.png



1707745602899.png
1707745699382.png


Both groups were around 0.8 MOA. The SD's were still single digit. Overall I am satisfied. I still wish I could squeeze a little more overall accuracy out of this load. Being 0.100"+ off the rifling probably doesn't help. Given that there was a sporadic 5-10MPH crosswind I am electing to go with #4 as it shows very little vertical spread. I have since loaded up my 35 remaining pieces of brass to 44.4 GR of Varget and next opportunity I get to shoot long range I will try my luck. The 1 MOA at 1k yards challenge that youtuber Texas plinking does is fascinating to me. That is what we have been doing. Picking up the additional velocity from 44.2 to 44.4 grain is an added benefit.

Next post I hope to have results on steel at 1000 yards.
 
I'd definitely use G7 over G1, AB has the 168 TMK @ 0.257 G7
I typically use the AB custom profiles. If that's not an option then I will go to G7. The G1 on the spreadsheet isn't overly relevant to me anymore. Its just the format I've been using since I started reloading. now that I know slightly more then nothing, I would agree with you for this dimension of bullet.

Cheers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: straightshooter1
The fact is a 20" barrel 308 is not a good candidate for a 1000 yd rifle. You give up about 100 fps versus a 24" barrel. Not sure where you are but if you look at the ballistics on the 168 TMK at 20F and 1000' elevation you need in the neighborhood of 2700 fps to stay supersonic. That isn't likely if you stay within SAAMI pressure limits. You can probably get there but your brass will take a beating.

If you are at higher elevation you may be able to do OK at a lower pressure/velocity. Based on GRT your 44.4 gr load is about SAAMI max.
 
The fact is a 20" barrel 308 is not a good candidate for a 1000 yd rifle. You give up about 100 fps versus a 24" barrel. Not sure where you are but if you look at the ballistics on the 168 TMK at 20F and 1000' elevation you need in the neighborhood of 2700 fps to stay supersonic. That isn't likely if you stay within SAAMI pressure limits. You can probably get there but your brass will take a beating.

If you are at higher elevation you may be able to do OK at a lower pressure/velocity. Based on GRT your 44.4 gr load is about SAAMI max.
Yeah, a 20" .308 barrel getting projectiles out to 1000 yds is like this ;):

shot put distance.jpg
 
The fact is a 20" barrel 308 is not a good candidate for a 1000 yd rifle. You give up about 100 fps versus a 24" barrel. Not sure where you are but if you look at the ballistics on the 168 TMK at 20F and 1000' elevation you need in the neighborhood of 2700 fps to stay supersonic. That isn't likely if you stay within SAAMI pressure limits. You can probably get there but your brass will take a beating.

If you are at higher elevation you may be able to do OK at a lower pressure/velocity. Based on GRT your 44.4 gr load is about SAAMI max.


Fascinating stuff; I've not used GRT before, but it is seemingly a very useful tool. My elevation is around 1250'. In my current atmosphere this load is supersonic out to ~1050 yards.

I'm not seeing any pressure signs, although 44.4 is the limit of my comfort zone.

I have capable options like 6mm CM or 300WM. This is just a fun little project. A 308 was my first target rifle and I always wanted to do 1k yards. Now having met that goal with other calibers I want to try it with the 308. My original 308 was a Savage 10T-SR which ironically had a 24" barrel 😐.

Realistically this is an ~750 yard gun for me. Any further and I'm grabbing something more suited and/or bigger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doom
I played around years ago with the 178 AMAX and 2000-MR but didn't finish the work up but I think that powder could get over 2700 fps. The only drawback is the amount of muzzle flash and it only get about 90% burn. I will say it did show promise if you were looking for velocity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dylan4570
Likewise, it's been a few years now since I played around with 2000-MR. Below is Aliant's powder reload recipes for .308 and the data I recorded for 168 SMK's and 175 SMK's:

Alliant Powder Reload Recipes for .308.jpg


Pro 2000-MR.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Doom
Looking like this weekend I will have a chance to try for 1k yards. Hoping for good conditions.

by good conditions I mean will I be able to make it out to 1k and back with the ATV to setup steel. It might be too muddy.
 
175 smk may be a better option they seem to handle transition from super to sub better than 168s in my experience but I have no experience with the tmk only the smk at those distances
 
I thought I would share this information from Sierra as it pertains to the use of the 168 TMKs to push beyond 1,000 yards (and out of 20" barrel in my case):

Our #7768 168gr TMK was introduced in 2015, and as far as I know, the bullet has never had a design change since that introduction. It is a 9 degree (Sierra is referring to the boat tail angle, implying it is flight stable - Chris), and the trajectory here shows it super sonic out past 1,000 yards easily, even in a standard atmosphere.



Selected bullet​
.308 dia. 168 gr. Tipped MatchKing (TMK)​
Sound Range​
The bullet drops below the speed of sound (1120.27 ft/s) on the trajectory at: 1182 Yards​
Range​
Velocity​
Energy​
Path​
Wind Drift​
Yards​
ft/s​
Ft/Lbs​
Inches​
Inches​
0​
2680.00​
2678.83​
-1.75​
0.00​
100​
2514.23​
2357.69​
0.00​
0.64​
200​
2354.29​
2067.27​
-3.76​
2.64​
300​
2200.22​
1805.54​
-13.79​
6.14​
400​
2051.88​
1570.29​
-31.02​
11.29​
500​
1905.95​
1354.88​
-56.53​
18.29​
600​
1766.79​
1164.25​
-91.62​
27.36​
700​
1634.12​
995.97​
-137.87​
38.73​
800​
1501.35​
840.70​
-197.19​
52.76​
900​
1380.41​
710.71​
-271.96​
69.76​
1000​
1273.10​
604.51​
-365.02​
89.93​
1100​
1181.72​
520.84​
-479.55​
113.34​
1200​
1107.53​
457.50​
-619.00​
139.88​

- Sierra Rep.


Note: With the 168 TMKs I am getting good accuracy with 2680 FPS out of an XCRM 20" mil spec. barrel using 42.3 gr. of H4895 in a new Lapua case, COAL was 2.810" (had to order the powder and wait 2 years for it; in the future I will try to replicate that load with AR-comp which is more readily available and temp. stable).

Hope this is encouraging to some you trying to develop a 1,000 yard load out of a 20" barrel - Chris
 
Last edited:
I played around years ago with the 178 AMAX and 2000-MR but didn't finish the work up but I think that powder could get over 2700 fps. The only drawback is the amount of muzzle flash and it only get about 90% burn. I will say it did show promise if you were looking for velocity.
If you are looking for maximum velocity in a 308 with heavier bullets, the best options are either 2000-MR or N540. These are very dense, high energy powders. They are more temperature sensitive than Varget though, and I think you may struggle with consistency across seasons.
 
I thought I would share this information from Sierra as it pertains to the use of the 168 TMKs to push beyond 1,000 yards (and out of 20" barrel in my case):

Our #7768 168gr TMK was introduced in 2015, and as far as I know, the bullet has never had a design change since that introduction. It is a 9 degree (Sierra is referring to the boat tail angle, implying it is flight stable - Chris), and the trajectory here shows it super sonic out past 1,000 yards easily, even in a standard atmosphere.



Selected bullet​
.308 dia. 168 gr. Tipped MatchKing (TMK)​
Sound Range​
The bullet drops below the speed of sound (1120.27 ft/s) on the trajectory at: 1182 Yards​
Range​
Velocity​
Energy​
Path​
Wind Drift​
Yards​
ft/s​
Ft/Lbs​
Inches​
Inches​
0​
2680.00​
2678.83​
-1.75​
0.00​
100​
2514.23​
2357.69​
0.00​
0.64​
200​
2354.29​
2067.27​
-3.76​
2.64​
300​
2200.22​
1805.54​
-13.79​
6.14​
400​
2051.88​
1570.29​
-31.02​
11.29​
500​
1905.95​
1354.88​
-56.53​
18.29​
600​
1766.79​
1164.25​
-91.62​
27.36​
700​
1634.12​
995.97​
-137.87​
38.73​
800​
1501.35​
840.70​
-197.19​
52.76​
900​
1380.41​
710.71​
-271.96​
69.76​
1000​
1273.10​
604.51​
-365.02​
89.93​
1100​
1181.72​
520.84​
-479.55​
113.34​
1200​
1107.53​
457.50​
-619.00​
139.88​

- Sierra Rep.


Note: With the 168 TMKs I am getting good accuracy with 2680 FPS out of an XCRM 20" mil spec. barrel using 42.3 gr. of H4895 (had to order the powder and wait 2 years for it; in the future I will try to replicate that load with AR-comp which is more readily available and temp. stable).

Hope this is encouraging to some you trying to develop a 1,000 yard load out of a 20" barrel - Chris
Yep. The 169 SMK will also make it to 1000yds and may be an easier bullet to tune depending on the rifle. Ultimately though, in terms of expected accuracy a lower charge weight in a longer barrel will like be more accurate based on lower recoil.
 
Yep. The 169 SMK will also make it to 1000yds and may be an easier bullet to tune depending on the rifle. Ultimately though, in terms of expected accuracy a lower charge weight in a longer barrel will like be more accurate based on lower recoil.
This has been my exp as well, 169 is as easy to tune as the 175s; the TMK bullets arent that difficult either and the 168 TMKs drops to 1000m are within .1 or so of the 169smk. Both are significantly flatter than the 175 with markedly less drift in the wind.
 
Well I did it...

I managed 2/10 at 1k yards on the 10 inch plate.

Velocity was ~2660 on the 10 shot string. SD of 6.0

1711373389596.png
1711373498040.png


There was a fair bit of mirage from the snow and sun combination. I didn't really have any trouble spotting impacts and misses. But my main takeaway was this is much more challenging then I expected. I found that shots in quick succession to adjust for windage worked well. I also wonder how much the mirage affected me. it was pretty extreme, and not something I have a lot of experience shooting with at such a distance.

Shots 1-5 were finding windage. 6 was a 2 MOA elevation adjustment, which wasn't enough. 7 and 8 were the hits. 9 and 10 were same hold but missed.

I ended up around 39 MOA. i should have properly ranged the target as it was actually at ~1010, which with this caliber mattered more then the previous calibers I've attempted this with(300 WM, 6 creed).

This comes down to familiarity with the round, and good data in your ballistic calculator. if you are 5 feet off to the side on your first shot, you have a lot more ground to pickup versus slightly missing. I really need to shoot my 308 more at distance. I have an accurate A-max load, and a relatively long legged TMK load now. It's definitely a fun caliber. I just wonder about switching to something like 6 ARC and having similar ballistics with way less recoil...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chris M.
The SMK 168 is subpar compared to the 169s in BC. Someone correct me if I am wrong but the data from Sierra does not match with what the Kestrel data spits out or the 4DOF Ballistic Calculator data.


Screenshot 2024-03-27 at 11.03.39 AM.png

 
The SMK 168 is subpar compared to the 169s in BC. Someone correct me if I am wrong but the data from Sierra does not match with what the Kestrel data spits out or the 4DOF Ballistic Calculator data.


View attachment 8382685

I haven't shot the 168 SMK past 500 yet. it seemed to match my AB calculations well enough.

I don't know if its just me or not. but I have trouble with the 4dof app sometimes. I am familiar enough with AB that I can usually figure out what I'm screwing up. therefore I use it.

With 4DOF I will get the odd value that just straight up doesn't make sense. I feel like it could be a bug with the app or something? IDK.
 
The SMK 168 is subpar compared to the 169s in BC. Someone correct me if I am wrong but the data from Sierra does not match with what the Kestrel data spits out or the 4DOF Ballistic Calculator data.


View attachment 8382685

Thank you for pointing this out. I haven't shot this bullet past 500 meters either but as the BC seems to be changing as bullet's velocity decreases, the Kestrel may be providing a more accurate BC for getting past 1,000 meters? Could the tips on the 168 TMKs be degrading due to heat at distance?

From the Sierra data for the 168 TMKs the G-1 BC is: .535 @ 2050 fps and above .521 between 2050 fps and 1650 fps .480 @ 1650 fps and below.
On Kestrel, the listed G1 BC for the 168 SMKs is 0.417 and 0.214 for G7 BC.
On Kestrel, the listed G1 BC for the 169 SMKs is 0.501 and with 0.257 for G7 BC.

Quite a bit of divergence between the OEM data and the Applied balistic data, if anyone from Sierra or Applied Ballistic reads this thread, pleased provide us with some clarification? Thanks - Chris
 

Attachments

  • 1711564766575.png
    1711564766575.png
    3.3 KB · Views: 6