Post by: splitshot on April 09, 2016, 09:15:07 PM
Post by: JKEEN33 on April 09, 2016, 09:30:33 PM
Post by: JoeE on April 09, 2016, 09:36:52 PM
Post by: 7mmfan on April 09, 2016, 10:14:44 PM
Post by: yorketransport on April 10, 2016, 09:06:36 AM
Post by: MountainWalk on April 10, 2016, 09:18:04 AM
I really like the over 30's.
Post by: SkookumHntr on April 10, 2016, 09:22:50 AM
Post by: superdown on April 10, 2016, 09:34:45 AM
Post by: Magnum_Willys on April 10, 2016, 09:40:22 AM
Post by: j_h_nimrod on April 10, 2016, 10:08:42 AM
Post by: splitshot on April 10, 2016, 11:44:39 AM
Post by: AWS on April 10, 2016, 12:21:27 PM
In conversion from metric to inch conversion there are no set sizes. Much depends on the manfactures designation. In Euro cartridges, 5.6mm run from.222 to .228, 6.5mm run from .257 to .268, 8mm runs from .318 to .323 only the 6mm at .243, the 7mm at .284 and 10mm at .400 run very close to the same size in all cartridges.
I even gets more interesting when you get to caliber designations on the rifle itself You will see 8.7, 8.8, 8.9 x72 and they all wll fire the 9.3x72R cartridge as they used to designate by bore size instead of groove size. Because there are so many different sizes in the 9.3x72R they had to create a bullet that could be fired in all of them and not create pressure problems.
The front half of the bullet designed to barely engage the lands and the larger base to easily swage down to the groove size without raising pressures significantly.
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy222%2FBrowndaug%2F93bullet_zps5d2c2f72.jpg&hash=484367df55ed87aec35b3deb3b3705e3e96050aa) (http://s6.photobucket.com/user/Browndaug/media/93bullet_zps5d2c2f72.jpg.html)
L to R 243 Win , 6.5x58R Sauer(.260 groove diameter), 9'3x72R (.364 groove diameter and a .344 bore diameter)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy222%2FBrowndaug%2F65x58rangeday004_zps994a3831.jpg&hash=a63200ef74f1a3af61addc8cbdeafad536e7eb14) (http://s6.photobucket.com/user/Browndaug/media/65x58rangeday004_zps994a3831.jpg.html)
Post by: RadSav on April 10, 2016, 01:39:49 PM
It is the only gun where I have not been able to handload as accurately as the factory Winchester ammo. Still sub-MOA with handloads, but I haven't yet found that magic spot where the Winchester AccuBond load reigns. I have found a 160 Barnes load that comes close. And the recoil is much less. I loaned that setup to a guy a year ago and he experienced very good results on a cow.
The Partition groups well if loaded one at a time. But the in-magazine damage to the lead point is rather severe. Sometimes breaking the lead point completely loose. So I have kept with the Accubonds. Even those will get damaged if I have #2 in the magazine for more than a few shots.
I haven't shot much with it yet. One deer and two bear is all. So far nothing has taken a step after impact. The friends cow was also a zero yard recovery. Hard to complain about that!
Post by: TVHunts on April 10, 2016, 02:07:41 PM
Post by: Buzz2401 on April 10, 2016, 02:15:00 PM
Post by: jpharcher on April 10, 2016, 03:40:43 PM
My handloads are partition 200's over H4350- 1/2 groups easily at 100 yards.
Post by: fisheral87 on April 10, 2016, 05:00:37 PM
It's a great round and it's cool if you like large and unique calibers.
Snappy out of the Kimber Montana.
Al
Post by: beaslayer6 on April 10, 2016, 08:09:05 PM
Post by: Bob33 on April 10, 2016, 09:14:07 PM
I'd take the 325 over the 300 wsm any day as a hunting rifle. I'm a huge fan of the medium bores in hunting rifles..15 inches difference between the two. Why is that significant?
Post by: JoeE on April 10, 2016, 09:29:58 PM
I'd take the 325 over the 300 wsm any day as a hunting rifle. I'm a huge fan of the medium bores in hunting rifles..15 inches difference between the two. Why is that significant?
Exactly. I literally spent weeks reading everything I could about these two calibers. The difference in bullet diameter is so insignificant that it didn't justify the difficulty in finding ammo and bullet selection for me so I went with the 300.
Post by: RadSav on April 11, 2016, 03:11:33 AM
I'd take the 325 over the 300 wsm any day as a hunting rifle. I'm a huge fan of the medium bores in hunting rifles..15 inches difference between the two. Why is that significant?
I don't know why a 5% increase in diameter makes a difference. That diameter does equate to a 10% increase in frontal area. And between the two 200 grain projectiles there is a reduction of SD which does have the potential to increase energy transfer on more solid framed animals. On paper that does seem insignificant, doesn't it? However, after personally witnessing bear and elk taken with both the results sure don't seem insignificant to me.
Sure, my experience leaves little for a base line of comparison. As an amateur ballistician I can't explain to what percentage the advantage truly is. It may very well be a lesser advantage, percentage wise, than jumping from .284 to .308. But so far, my eyes keep telling my brain that we've broken a threshold that the .308 never did over the 7mm's of similar velocities. Maybe time and additional experience will paint a different picture, who knows? :dunno: In the meantime...color me impressed with the 325. It's a winner!!
Post by: yorketransport on April 11, 2016, 05:40:30 AM
I'd take the 325 over the 300 wsm any day as a hunting rifle. I'm a huge fan of the medium bores in hunting rifles..15 inches difference between the two. Why is that significant?
To be fair, a .15" difference is HUGE! I'll assume that you meant .015".
That's the pretty standard step up in bore diameter between popular cartridges. Why use a .257 over a .243? Why go 7mm over .277? Like many things in life this is a case where just looking at the numbers doesn't tell the whole story.
Post by: paguy on April 11, 2016, 08:43:08 AM
Post by: Bob33 on April 11, 2016, 08:51:07 AM
If it weren’t for “the best” caliber and bullet discussions, what would hunters talk about around the campfire or on Hunt WA? :chuckle:I'd take the 325 over the 300 wsm any day as a hunting rifle. I'm a huge fan of the medium bores in hunting rifles..15 inches difference between the two. Why is that significant?
To be fair, a .15" difference is HUGE! I'll assume that you meant .015".
That's the pretty standard step up in bore diameter between popular cartridges. Why use a .257 over a .243? Why go 7mm over .277? Like many things in life this is a case where just looking at the numbers doesn't tell the whole story.
There are the two extreme viewpoints: (1) bullet placement is all that matters, and (2) bigger is always better. If bullet placement were all that matters, elephant and Cape buffalo hunters would use .243s. If bigger were always better, prairie dogs would be hunted with .416s.
With the “bigger is better” concept, somewhere in the mix is the idea of “good enough”. With a large sample (100 elk), and with everything else being equal, how many more elk would a .323 bullet kill than a .308 bullet? We’ll never know, since everything is never equal and every situation is unique.
I love the fact that we have so many choices and options.
Post by: fisheral87 on April 11, 2016, 08:24:51 PM
Al
Post by: splitshot on April 12, 2016, 10:09:24 AM
Post by: beaslayer6 on April 12, 2016, 08:37:04 PM
Post by: Caretaker on April 27, 2016, 10:37:23 AM
Post by: Buzz2401 on April 27, 2016, 03:59:07 PM