As stubby as the Nosler BSB bullets are I assumed they would be stable in any common barrel twist. For my edification where did you find the 10" twist recommendation?
As stubby as the Nosler BSB bullets are I assumed they would be stable in any common barrel twist. For my edification where did you find the 10" twist recommendation?
Velocities out of a 16" 308 call for some thought provoking trade-offs in bullet selection for terminal effects and penetration.
I shoot a 16" FAL and typical reports of chronograph muzzle velocities are about 2550 fps for a 150 gr bullet. So at 200 yards, velocity is about 2150. At 300 yds, 1960 fps. And at 500 yds, 1600 fps. Would think a 16" Gallil is similar.
So for terminal effects, bullet construction is a big consideration. I have been shooting 150 gr Nosler Accubonds. I am giving this choice of bullet some hard thought.
Something I have recently focused on is the velocity thresholds for expansion. And moreover, take for instance the photos of Accubond bullets expansion at different velocities on the Nosler website. Just looking at those photos, on the surface this bullet is good down to 1800 fps. However if those expansion examples are after penetration of ballistic gel (as I assume they are), then what we are seeing is expansion after penetration of "meat" (which gel simulates). Lung for example is nowhere as dense as meat, so I think passage through lung would not open expansion as quickly.
So in regard to terminal effects, a lighter construction bullet like the 155 AMAX might be appropriate for longer range. The 155 AMAX is noted for its accuracy.
And a lighter weight bullet, like a 130 gr cup & core bullet or the 319, with faster velocities are probably better for short and intermediate range (say up to 200 yds). And if I understand the objectives that drove the design of the 319, it was for terminal effects out of a 16" 308 at short and intermediate range.
I am starting to lean toward the lighter, faster bullet approach as 200 yards covers my particular needs.
The 155 AMAX might (?) be a good compromise between long and intermediate.
I am still puzzling over this in my mind, so will be interested in comments and critique.
That's what I have been mulling over too. 600m isn't "long range" per se, so at a minimum I'd like to have a round that would be A) accurate and B) have relatively decent terminal effectiveness at that range. Yes, the 16" barrel must be factored in when deciding on bullet weight, as the 168gr weights on up would be too slow out of that short of a barrel to have terminal effects at that range like I'd prefer.
While I am sold on Mk318 for 5.56mm, I think I'm leaning towards the 155gr AMAX TAP load in .308.
11C2P '83-'87
Airborne Infantry
F**k China!
I think it important to understand projectiles like the Amax work different than something like Accubond or other bonded bullets designed for 100% weight retention. The Amax sheds some of its weight in a fragmenting fashion. However it does this down to a fairly low velocity, which helps ensure good tissue damage even without hydrostatic shock. The problem is that unless it has adequate sectional density penetration is lacking. The 155 and 168 in my mind strike a pretty good balance for the 308, especially shorter barrel variants.
I am fairly sure the Amax has a fair amount better BC than the SOST too. I also shot some of the 130's out my 300 BLK - while it was only able to make ~2200 fps, even at point blank range expansion was highly underwhelming.
since we are talking about 308 ammo, i found this stuff...
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/64...oint-box-of-40
it printed decent groups, as good as 155gr TAP AMAX for me at 50 yards. i know its light but seems like it would make a decent short range defense load if barriers arent a concern.
11C2P '83-'87
Airborne Infantry
F**k China!
Bookmarks