Has anyone shot these or have good info on them?
They seem to be a perfect match to the 30 Sherman Magnum I'm building.
They seem to be a perfect match to the 30 Sherman Magnum I'm building.
- Thread starter b6graham
- Start date
no experience with them because my barrels don't have the twist for them (and they are 1:8.7 .30cal barrels). If you are building a rifle, I would ask PVA/Josh what twist barrel he recommends.
Building a 32" 8twist 30 Sherman Magnum
Just waiting to see if anyone has experience
I'll be ordering some as soon as they're back on the website regardless
Just waiting to see if anyone has experience
I'll be ordering some as soon as they're back on the website regardless
How did the Seneca bullets work for you? And could you confirm BC from your drop data?
Got a box of 50 recently (‘pointiest’ bullet i have ever handled), and planning to build a 7 twist 300 WSM later this year….
Considering Cutting Edge, Badlands, Lehigh, PVA, and Peregrine. Looks like Cutting Edge is the most popular in ELR these days.
Got a box of 50 recently (‘pointiest’ bullet i have ever handled), and planning to build a 7 twist 300 WSM later this year….
Considering Cutting Edge, Badlands, Lehigh, PVA, and Peregrine. Looks like Cutting Edge is the most popular in ELR these days.
Nah gun still in progress. Had some delays
Same here! Delivery time on barrels have gone way way up…
What twist rate have you picked?
@THEIS
I think he was shooting these or some other PVA solid out of a 300NM or comparable cartridge.
Or you could try @bohem
the bulletsmith on these. Josh is smart dude and always willing to help.
Please post up any results from the field. I used to play around with the 198s in a 308. Truly a beast of a setup, easily capable of consistent first round impacts at >1mile.
I think he was shooting these or some other PVA solid out of a 300NM or comparable cartridge.
Or you could try @bohem
the bulletsmith on these. Josh is smart dude and always willing to help.
Please post up any results from the field. I used to play around with the 198s in a 308. Truly a beast of a setup, easily capable of consistent first round impacts at >1mile.
I did some pressure testing last weekend with them in a .300NM - 88.5gr N565 pushed them over 3100fps with no pressure signs. More to follow...
Thanks for the info, much appreciated!
Josh sent me a PM and recommended a 7.0 twist. That is also what he is using in his 300 WSM.
I noticed on the CEB web site that they recommend a twist rate “1.0 faster than needed” (presumably “needed” means enough twist for an SG of 1.5) - IF you intend to shoot their monos into the subsonic zone. That would imply a 6.0 twist 30 cal barrel, which sounds a little crazy….
Any experience on this topic?
Last edited:
Have also been told by folks who use long heavy mono bullets and compete in ELR, that the reamer used for cutting the freebore needs to be no less than 0.8 thou and no more than 1.2 thou over bullet diameter. Is this a proven concept, or just one of many ways to make mono bullets work?
Just curious to know what is best practice here.
Just curious to know what is best practice here.
Last edited:
There’s talk of wanting an SG of 1.9-2.2ish for trans/ subsonic performance with monos
A 7 twist gives an SG of 1.65 according to Strelok Pro, and the Berger stability calculator is very close to that nr. That is just above marginal stability (at 1.4). Jost indicated his rifle shoots well with this twist rate out to 1,500, the max range he has access to, if i recall correctly. [I am hoping for good stability out to 2,500…. Perhaps a bit over-ambitious?]. A 6 twist gives an SG of 2.24 at 2860 fps.
I re-read the @Jim Boatright posts on hyper-stabilization: He recommends a twist rate of 20 caliber diameters for mono projectiles to maximize BC (by suppressing the “coning” action / wobble of the bullet as it comes out of a (perhaps) less than perfect muzzle brake. For a 30 cal, that would be 20*0.308=6.16.
Presumably a custom barrel maker like Bartlein can handle that with their programmable CNC machine (single cut point rifling). Button rifling shops told me they can handle 7 twist, but not 6 twist.
Last edited:
I noticed that the top 15 ELR competitors at the Knob Creek event use SGs between 1.9 and 3.1! Typical nr is about 2.3…. [See SG column below.]
Do they have a real reason for running that high? Hyper-stability benefits helping to improve the BC? Better transition behavior?
Do they have a real reason for running that high? Hyper-stability benefits helping to improve the BC? Better transition behavior?
Last edited:
I have a 1:10-1:6 left hand gain twist I’m going to chamber when I have a reloading setup. Thanks Bartlein!
I just ordered a new 338 barrel
A 1-7, boatright’s number would be 6.76.
Close enough for me.
My Badlands 265 have an 2.12 stability and last Sunday they kicked ass at 3300 yards
With a conventional bullet (Berger 190LRHT) a 1.72 proved to be plenty stable to two miles last year.
Last edited:
Hi,
We are messing with the 198gr for the pure reasoning of pushing mag length concepts.
Since we can run higher pressures than normal; we can make up any looses in BC with ramping up the MV.
Notice the 3 on bottom left, lol...That is N570. Had slight ejector swipes but bolt lift and extraction was no different than factory ammo.
We are running a 7 twist in the 300NM test gun.
Sincerely,
Theis
We are messing with the 198gr for the pure reasoning of pushing mag length concepts.
Since we can run higher pressures than normal; we can make up any looses in BC with ramping up the MV.
Notice the 3 on bottom left, lol...That is N570. Had slight ejector swipes but bolt lift and extraction was no different than factory ammo.
We are running a 7 twist in the 300NM test gun.
Sincerely,
Theis
Nice! How long do you have to wait for the new barrel? Curious about lead time….
I'm testing the 212s in a 1:8 twist, and while it looks like they should be stable, the promise of these bullets has me thinking it's time to order up a 1:7 twist.
Nice looking projectile that 198 [Edit:] Seneca.
Do you have a +P chamber, is that what allows you to run higher pressure? That is something i am considering. Or is the Seneca a bore rider design, producing higher speed?
Curious what speed you are getting from that rather large case!
For budget reasons, I’m limited to using an existing short action MPA rifle, and 300 WSM is the largest case i can get in there. It won’t feed from the mag, but have tested it and it works fine as a single feed setup. Not ideal, but something i can live with.
Smaller case capacity of the 300 WSM will limit speed to about 2800 fps. I will try HBN coated bullets, might yield another 50-70 fps.
We run a set of Blaser rifles in Namibia for our hunting trips, and their barrels are all melonited. Rock hard surface finish, and problematic when you want to cut threads for a suppressor! They do seem to give slightly better speed, and barrel life has been superb, even the 243 Win has had no discernible movement in the lands, so far.
Would you recommend meloniting a barrel, and who is best at it?
Last edited:
Hi,
Those are 198gr Seneca.
I can run higher pressures in normal chambers due to my rifle design and its' alloys being stronger than any other alloys used in firearm manufacturing.
Sincerely,
Theis
Those are 198gr Seneca.
I can run higher pressures in normal chambers due to my rifle design and its' alloys being stronger than any other alloys used in firearm manufacturing.
Sincerely,
Theis
I got that one in ~5 months a couple years ago. I’m currently 6 months into a LHGT 6.5 blank and expect to see it around Christmas.
So the current wait time is 12-13 months for new special order barrels… ouch!
Apologies, i misunderstood. Made an edit to correct the mistake.
Interesting comment about the new alloys you use. How much more speed do you typically get over conventional rifle designs?
92 grains is getting after it.
Not too far from my 338 edge with a good bit more volume.
That’s creeping on 338 lapua loads. In 30cal and 198 I’m thinking 3150ish. Sounds like a blast
with my 300wm I’ll be starting load work after a box of juggernaut break in the barrel with 205gr super bulldozer 2’s from bad lands.
with my 300wm I’ll be starting load work after a box of juggernaut break in the barrel with 205gr super bulldozer 2’s from bad lands.
Back from further testing 212s in .300NM - man, my simple 28” 1:8 just friggin loves these bullets. And this is after a long drawn out battle trying to make it shoot Berger 220 LRs at a high level. After pressure testing a couple weeks ago, today I tested 3-shot strings within 87.5 - 88.5gr N565 in virgin Lapua brass (only prep was neck uniforming with mandrel). All shot with an ES under 10 and groups were surprisingly consistent just under 1MOA, which made charge weight selection easy. And the crazy thing is that this barrel is pretty long throated, so I can’t even get these 212s to kiss the lands. I’m jumping close to 0.1”!
Last edited:
As I’m getting my feet wet in solids
when you say your surprised /happy with under 1 moa.
is that what’s expected more or less, so if I’m around .75 or so stop looking for a .5 load
thanks
For this round of testing, 1MOA is good enough - I can shrink them with some seating depth tests. Normally I use this stage to identify a charge weight that's giving me consistent velocity and a decent group, and the surprise for me was that all strings shot really well.
Where your group size cutoff is really is up to you. Usually when I've found a good charge weight and seating depth, I'll sometimes do some neck tension tests which can be totally inconclusive or further shrink things. Honestly, I think neck tension consistency is more important than actual neck tension values. For some setups 1 MOA is fine (ex. my run-n-gun 5.56mm & 7.62mm rigs), but most precision rigs I try to get down to 0.5MOA and call it a day. But there are sometimes surprises, like when I thought I had a great 6.5x47L load at 0.5MOA and just decided to try some different primers and all of a sudden the groups just collapsed on top of each other. But that's not something you can plan for and shouldn't expect. Those are happy accidents.
Good to know. When I did my initial COAL check with the old Stoney Point gauge the bullet was pushed completely out of the case before touching the lands, so that was a clue. And like other solids, I’ve found that expanding the neck a bit more than normal is helpful.
I like them.
I’m just running the 265’s now because my barrel just likes them better.
They shoot impressively flat.
I’ll be shooting the 205gr super bulldozer 2’s in an 8 twist 300wm hopefully end of the month
About to get going with a 7 twist 300 WSM barrel soon, so have to ask: Is an 8 twist enough to get the long 205 gn Bulldozer 2 bullet through the transonic zone?
I have noticed that Cutting Edge says “go 1.0 higher on twist rate if you intend to shoot through the transonic zone”. Is that a bullet specific recommendation, or is it generally applicable to all mono bullets? Trying to learn more about the monolithics…
I’m thinking it’s a a possible consideration for all the high BC solids.
If I can get 2900fps (28”)I’ll be super sonic to a mile. If they don’t transition well I’ll drop down to 185’s. Got 150 of the 205’s to play with before I decide
Strelok says SG will be 1.53 for your 205 mono at 2900 fps. For “normal” distances, that should be adequate.
My read of the theory is that below 1.4 there is some chance of a minor BC reduction as the bullet might not fly perfectly straight, but it will likely still be stable for well over 1,500 yards, and it won’t keyhole through paper targets.
I think Litz wrote in one of his books that spin rate decays in a predictably way, and the idea is to have enough rpm’s on the bullet when it transitions to maintain good accuracy (due to BC consistency). This is just a guess, but maybe that is the reason why folks who competed and did ok at Clark’s Knob used SGs in the range 1.9 to 3.4 (except for one competitor who was at 1.7). Most were between 2 and 3, which implies a very fast twist rate. I think they see inconsistent BC as bullets with SGs below 2 transition at say 1,800 yards, with some bullets flying straight and some getting knocked into a slight wobble, even though they would have all shot adequately small groups at say 1,000.
One competitor at Clark’s Knob was running a 390 gn 375 Atip at an SG of 3.4, which (assuming i calculated correctly) implies a twist rate of 6.5! [How that lead core bullet did not blow up i really don’t know!] To achieve an SG of 1.5 for this bullet at say 2850 fps (just a guess), the barrel needed to have a 9.5 twist rate. So he used a twist rate that is 3.0 faster than you would expect. Wow!
If anybody here has a good grasp of the applicable science (beyond my amateur efforts), please jump in!
My read of the theory is that below 1.4 there is some chance of a minor BC reduction as the bullet might not fly perfectly straight, but it will likely still be stable for well over 1,500 yards, and it won’t keyhole through paper targets.
I think Litz wrote in one of his books that spin rate decays in a predictably way, and the idea is to have enough rpm’s on the bullet when it transitions to maintain good accuracy (due to BC consistency). This is just a guess, but maybe that is the reason why folks who competed and did ok at Clark’s Knob used SGs in the range 1.9 to 3.4 (except for one competitor who was at 1.7). Most were between 2 and 3, which implies a very fast twist rate. I think they see inconsistent BC as bullets with SGs below 2 transition at say 1,800 yards, with some bullets flying straight and some getting knocked into a slight wobble, even though they would have all shot adequately small groups at say 1,000.
One competitor at Clark’s Knob was running a 390 gn 375 Atip at an SG of 3.4, which (assuming i calculated correctly) implies a twist rate of 6.5! [How that lead core bullet did not blow up i really don’t know!] To achieve an SG of 1.5 for this bullet at say 2850 fps (just a guess), the barrel needed to have a 9.5 twist rate. So he used a twist rate that is 3.0 faster than you would expect. Wow!
If anybody here has a good grasp of the applicable science (beyond my amateur efforts), please jump in!
Last edited:
AB says I’ll be at 1.6 sg at 2900. I like closer to 2 for most my shooting. This 300wm will mostly be a hunting rifle so transitioning isn’t a main goal. But it will definitely be tested at those distances for fun.
with my 338 lapua I’m shooting 300gr EH with sg 2.25 and those transition very well for me
with my 338 lapua I’m shooting 300gr EH with sg 2.25 and those transition very well for me
Thanks Jason, that is helpful.
My understanding appears to be in line with your experience: Mono bullets do well with high rpm’s. I believe folks who shoot lead core bullets aim for much lower SG (around 1.4 to 1.5) as they know their copper jackets are not perfectly consistent, and that lack of bullet concentricity will make the bullet veer off at an angle. The exact amount of the “miss” depends on bullet spin rate (rpm’s) and just how far off the centre of gravity is from the centerline of the bullet when in the bore. Of course, monos are made in a CNC machine and are far more concentric, so they can be spun at very high rpm’s and remain accurate - and they can survive the high rpm’s without blowing up! As long as you don’t damage the very sharp and very fragile tips.
Short range BR shooters prefer light and short flat base lead core bullets with lower BC, so they can use the slowest possible twist rate (a high nr like 14), so concentricity problems have minimal effect. They don’t need high BC as wind drift is small at short range. High spin rate amplifies concentricity problems, so they avoid that. [I guess they get their BC (moderate as it is) less from shape factor (pointedness of the bullet) and more from the high density of lead, which is much better than copper.]
ELR folks i shoot with when i visit Namibia and South Africa have done an interesting test: They set up one of Adam MacDonald’s electronic target at 500 and got a descent group and a good ES, then moved the target to something like 1,400 yards, just before entering the transition zone, a point where the bullet spin rate has slowed down a lot but it is still flying supersonic, and measured the group size and ES. They all performed relatively well at short range. But: For some mono bullets the ES and group size at 1,400 was much higher.
They concluded that some monos are good and others are bad, and they switched brand, but that is probably over-simplifying things: Some high BC mono bullets have longer bearing surface (and different geometry) than others and probably need an SG of 2.3 to adequately preserve rpm’s, prevent wobble and preserve BC, while others may lose less spin rate and need perhaps 1.7 SG to perform well at distance.
It would be fascinating to repeat this test with multiple electronic targets, but all the way out beyond the subsonic transition, with rifles that have way different twist rate.
My understanding appears to be in line with your experience: Mono bullets do well with high rpm’s. I believe folks who shoot lead core bullets aim for much lower SG (around 1.4 to 1.5) as they know their copper jackets are not perfectly consistent, and that lack of bullet concentricity will make the bullet veer off at an angle. The exact amount of the “miss” depends on bullet spin rate (rpm’s) and just how far off the centre of gravity is from the centerline of the bullet when in the bore. Of course, monos are made in a CNC machine and are far more concentric, so they can be spun at very high rpm’s and remain accurate - and they can survive the high rpm’s without blowing up! As long as you don’t damage the very sharp and very fragile tips.
Short range BR shooters prefer light and short flat base lead core bullets with lower BC, so they can use the slowest possible twist rate (a high nr like 14), so concentricity problems have minimal effect. They don’t need high BC as wind drift is small at short range. High spin rate amplifies concentricity problems, so they avoid that. [I guess they get their BC (moderate as it is) less from shape factor (pointedness of the bullet) and more from the high density of lead, which is much better than copper.]
ELR folks i shoot with when i visit Namibia and South Africa have done an interesting test: They set up one of Adam MacDonald’s electronic target at 500 and got a descent group and a good ES, then moved the target to something like 1,400 yards, just before entering the transition zone, a point where the bullet spin rate has slowed down a lot but it is still flying supersonic, and measured the group size and ES. They all performed relatively well at short range. But: For some mono bullets the ES and group size at 1,400 was much higher.
They concluded that some monos are good and others are bad, and they switched brand, but that is probably over-simplifying things: Some high BC mono bullets have longer bearing surface (and different geometry) than others and probably need an SG of 2.3 to adequately preserve rpm’s, prevent wobble and preserve BC, while others may lose less spin rate and need perhaps 1.7 SG to perform well at distance.
It would be fascinating to repeat this test with multiple electronic targets, but all the way out beyond the subsonic transition, with rifles that have way different twist rate.
Last edited:
I’ve seen the 2.0+ perform better than 1.65 with long solids in my 338.
I really want to run the 285’s but the 265 is noticeably more consistent at realistic pressures.
When I was really pushing the speeds the 285’s were working.
My 7mm running 190LRHT has proven to be plenty stable well in subsonic with a 1.6
Very interesting. So you really do need TWO dedicated barrels, one barrel running an SG of 1.6 for lead core bullets, and another barrel with an SG of 2 plus for the solids.
Good thing i got a switch barrel rifle… can change barrels in 60 seconds, 1 or two clicks off on the prior zero.
Good thing i got a switch barrel rifle… can change barrels in 60 seconds, 1 or two clicks off on the prior zero.
Last edited:
It kinda seems that way so far in my solids journey.
Mark n Sam said he prefers to run minimal twist but I’m not sure of his twist rate for barrels running solids.
He seems to be running mostly cup/core bullets lately.
For me the 285 is awesome but a bit inconsistent at 3000+ now that I’m not running it thermonuclear, it’s at about 1.65
The 265’s kick ass everywhere regardless of speed and is at 2.06 I think.
My next 338 barrel on order is a 1-7.
This is just the trend I’m seeing and hearing from others.
Solids are new to me it’s a interesting learning process.
Mark n Sam said he prefers to run minimal twist but I’m not sure of his twist rate for barrels running solids.
He seems to be running mostly cup/core bullets lately.
For me the 285 is awesome but a bit inconsistent at 3000+ now that I’m not running it thermonuclear, it’s at about 1.65
The 265’s kick ass everywhere regardless of speed and is at 2.06 I think.
My next 338 barrel on order is a 1-7.
This is just the trend I’m seeing and hearing from others.
Solids are new to me it’s a interesting learning process.
From my experience from solids not alot but have shot them is over spinning is better. The cup and core bullets sometimes dont handle that. But i quickly moved away from solids they seem to pressure out quicker in my testing and they do seem to be a little harder to find the sweet spot on loads compared to cup and core. Just my .2. The solids i used were a few hammers and pva.
Have also heard the same from others.
What was the typical 100 yard group size you managed to get with the Hammer and PVA bullets? I realize you don’t need 0.2” group size at 100 to get shots on plate at 3,000…. But just curious, when should you stop messing with a load?
Hammers shot great .5 or so but pressured out on me really fast. The 151 pva hunting bullets were better gained speed shot at .75 to .85. Great hunting bullet by the way. I played with the 170 pva not much but shot 1 moa all for hunting. The target ones i never really could get them fine tuned and speed was lacking so gave up fast.
When you say pressured out do you mean:
you were getting lower velocity that what you expected?
lower velocity than the “internet” said you should
lower velocity than cup core of same weight class?
lower velocity so the cup core equaled or bested the solid past 1000 (even with its higher bc)
Thanks.
Also curious if anybody has used HBN to speed up the solids.
Just lower velocity than planned, thought and what others said. When i tried the hammers my local smith did to and he was 150 slower with a light bullet before pressure but his sons rifle did great with speed. Seems hit or miss. Im not saying im a pro just thought id throw out my experience. I would still run solids if i needed too. On other forums they talk about badlands bullets pressure out with way light charges havent tried them yet.
This is probably relevant:
www.snipershide.com
The trick seems to be to treat these mono bullets (with short bearing surface) as if they are HBN coated, so load higher (if you have spare case capacity when the bullet sits that deep), or use a powder with a slightly faster burn rate.
So try the powders that give good speed for bullets 10 or 15 grains lighter?
Tips for loading PVA solids.
Good evening hide, I've been struggling trying to find a good load with the 120gr seneca bullets from PVA. I heard that solids are a different kind animal and like a lot of jump to the lands. My problem is seating the boat tail in the case deeper. How deep is too deep? I have always tried...
www.snipershide.com The trick seems to be to treat these mono bullets (with short bearing surface) as if they are HBN coated, so load higher (if you have spare case capacity when the bullet sits that deep), or use a powder with a slightly faster burn rate.
So try the powders that give good speed for bullets 10 or 15 grains lighter?
