Revised BC Assessment
For unknown reasons, the original BC test produced results that were not repeatable for this bullet. Upon releasing these bullets to the public, we started to hear that trajectories predicted with the advertised BC’s were not matching the observed drop. We took this feedback seriously, and performed several more careful BC tests. The results of each of these tests have produced a repeatable BC, but it’s lower than the original value by about 7%.

The revised BC’s for the 300 grain .338 Hybrid are:
G7 BC = 0.419
G1 BC = 0.818

The above BC’s have been measured in multiple tests in multiple barrels, and produce calculated trajectories that match the observations of some credible shooters.

We’re grateful for the feedback of the shooters who brought this matter to our attention and allowed us to correct the inaccurate information. Greater care will be taken with future tests in an effort to prevent this from happening again.

Limitations to the Bullet’s Structural Integrity
Another thing that happened when we released these bullets to the public is that they were fired in cartridges that are more energetic than the .338 Edge which I used for the initial evaluations. Upon exposure to the extreme pressures and accelerations produced by some of the larger cartridges, some negative results were observed; poor groups, and lower observed BC (even lower than the revised values above). Our current working theory is that the poor precision and reduced BC are a result of nose slump. Nose slump is when the bullet is accelerated so fast that the base of the nose can’t support its own weight, and bulges out to fill the barrel. This produces a bullet with a longer bearing surface and a shorter nose which explains the compromised BC. Since this deformation doesn’t occur exactly the same every time, poor precision also results.

The exact threshold of pressure/acceleration that will cause nose slump with this bullet is not known. There are a number of small to medium capacity cartridges that shoot these bullets very well, with extremely good precision and a repeatable BC. So far there have been no reported cases of nose slump with cartridges in the following class: .338 Winchester Mag, .338 Norma Mag, .338 RUM, and .338 Edge, etc.

The .338 Lapua Mag seems to be a borderline case which may or may not produce nose slump. Factors that affect pressure/acceleration will affect the likeliness of nose slump occurring. For example, ball powders are typically faster burning than stick powders, so they produce higher peak pressures, and are more likely to produce nose slump. Tighter bores can also cause elevated pressures and tip the scales toward nose slump.

Cartridges like the .338 Lapua Mag Improved and larger are virtually assured of producing nose slump when loaded to their potential pressures.

If you’re working up a load with these bullets and having difficulty finding a precise load, it’s likely that you’re exceeding the pressure threshold where nose slump happens. In small to medium cartridges, the hybrid ogive design makes it quite easy to find an accurate load. The bullet is quite insensitive to seating depth. If you’re working with a large capacity case and having poor results, you should consider reducing the powder charge until good groups are achieved.

When designing a bullet for use in hunting applications, the toughness of the bullet is always a trade-off. Terminally, you want a bullet that is capable of reliable expansion/fragmentation at low impact velocities. However, the bullet can’t be so thin-skinned that it doesn’t survive being launched at very high speeds. This being our first time working with a bullet this large, a construction was selected which we felt would strike the best balance between toughness and terminal performance. Simply put, we erred too much on the side of terminal performance. The result is a bullet that’s perfectly suited for small to medium capacity cases, but simply isn’t tough enough to survive being fired from the more energetic magnums.

The good news is that the situation has been identified and several solutions are already being worked on. We know the design needs to be ‘toughened up’ for successful use in larger cartridges, and we’re considering the best way to do this.

In Summary
The Berger .338 caliber 300 grain Hybrid bullet is still the highest BC bullet in its class. The performance gap just isn’t as big as originally thought.

In its current form, the bullet is perfectly suitable for many popular small to medium capacity cartridges. From my .338 Edge test rifle, I’ve shot multiple 10 shot groups at 1000 yards under 10” and the bullets performed with a very repeatable BC. For the time being, those with larger capacity cartridges will have to wait for the bullet to be toughened up in order to achieve good performance. We don’t have an anticipated timeline for this revision, but it is a top priority.

On a personal note, I want to express my gratitude for the shooters who’ve provided the critical feedback which helped us to understand the situation enough to take action. Having an open dialogue and exchange of information is the best way to ensure we’re doing everything we can to make the best bullets possible.

http://02b0516.netsolhost.com/blog1/?p=133

MISSOULA, Mont.—Science-based field research, funded in part by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, is yielding solid data on why gray wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming should be managed by state wildlife agencies.

Wolves have been on and off endangered species lists in recent months. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has repeatedly announced at least partial delisting and state-based management via regulated wolf hunting. But, each time, anti-hunting groups have blocked the effort with lawsuits.

“List, delist, repeat. It’s become an endless cycle driven by those who profit from legal uncertainty over gray wolves,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. “Tying up this issue in courts defies a proven conservation system that is extremely successful at balancing predatory species within biological and social tolerances.”

The Elk Foundation has long funded scientific research on topics surrounding elk and habitat. Universities and state and federal agencies apply for RMEF research grants and conduct the projects. Researchers present results to peers at professional conferences. New understanding leads to better management strategies for all wildlife in elk country.

Here’s a sample of findings, from many different research projects, that support the Elk Foundation’s position that wolves should be managed this fall via state-regulated hunting.

1. In the northern Rockies, original wolf recovery goals for population size and breeding pair
estimates are now exceeded by over 500 percent and 333 percent, respectively.

2. Wolf populations in Montana are increasing 10-34 percent annually.

3. Wolves are the top predator on adult elk, especially bulls. Bears take more calves, but at least black bears can be scientifically managed via hunting.

4. Cow-calf ratios are commonly lower in areas with both bears and wolves.

5. Between November and April, wolf packs in Montana kill 7-23 elk per wolf.

6. Since 2000, elk numbers across non-wolf western states have held relatively stable, while elk populations across Idaho, Montana and Wyoming have dropped a combined 4.2 percent. In
many local areas, elk reductions have been dramatic and significant. Wolves are a factor, affecting not only elk numbers, but also their distribution, movement and behavior.

7. Elk hunting adds nearly $1 billion per year to the U.S. economy.

8. Hunter opportunity is being reduced to counter declining elk populations in Idaho.

9. A fully restored—but still federally protected—population of keystone predators is complicating and hindering elk management, as well as conservation itself.

10. In 1907, only 41,000 elk could be counted in the U.S. Leadership, stewardship and funding from hunters restored elk to their current population of more than 1 million. It’s this resource that made wolf recovery possible. Yet hunters and state conservation agencies are being victimized by continuous delays in wolf management.

Allen encouraged Wyoming and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to work together on a mutually agreeable wolf management plan. This would remove one of the obstacles that conservationists can actually control, enabling regulated wolf hunting alongside Idaho and Montana, he said.

Sgt G. Roberts

For over three hundred years man has endeavored to find his target with the first shot from his rifle, whether it be man or beast, in conflict or at peacetime. This skill in the art of marksmanship is one of the most pondered and talked about subjects in the Military & Law Enforcement communities today. There are facts, opinions and myths covering a wide range of elements in the gap between the point at which the firing pin strikes the cartridge primer, to when the projectile strikes its target.

There is no escaping the simple fact that this subject is scientifically founded. However, this mathematics and physics soaked area can be explained and broken down into understandable segments that allow the Sniper, Marksman and Precision Shooter to dramatically increase the probability of achieving the ‘First Shot Hit’ whether it be from 200 metres or 2,000 metres.

This paper examines the effect that temperature has on bullet placement from a rifle. More to the point, it examines the effect variations in barrel temperature has on the rifle itself, not the ambient air temperature/air density relationship, and not the ambient temperature/powder burning rate relationship, but purely the effect that barrel temperature may have on rifle-zero.

1. Introduction

The rifle used was an expensive, high-grade sniper rifle utilizing a match grade barrel and an inert pillar bedded or ‘bedding blocked’ stock. The trigger has near zero Lock Time and the telescopic sight is arguably the best that money can buy. The ammunition was either precision hand-loaded or marked match grade by a reputable company and line. The ammunition has been chronographed at specific velocities over a wide temperature range. The rifle was zeroed from the 100yd mound at the local rifle range and consistently prints tight groups. The average ambient temperature was 30 °C (86 °F).

At the rifle range three weeks later, when the same rifle/scope/ammo configuration was used at the same distance, using exactly the same shooting position, the first round struck the target low by about 36mm (1.42 inches). The second round printed roughly in the same place and the third a little higher. The barrel had not been cleaned between shots.

When this happens, it can be very easily written off by the shooter as the result of one or more causal factors, such as, the sights must have been knocked, it must have been a bad shot or my shooting position must have been off.

However, what if the scope wasn’t knocked, and it was a technically fine shot and the shooting position was exactly the same. After several years of this type of erratic shot placement, one would have to start questioning the weapon and ammunition rather than the shooter.

In this day and age of increasing technology, many urban myths are now able to be confirmed as either having significant underlying truth, or simply debunked as random opinion. People are now starting to ask questions such as, ‘I hear you telling us that your first shot from a cold, clean barrel prints low on the target, but what have you done to demonstrate that this is really the case?’

The most common answer is ‘Every time I come out to the range, the first shot I fire is at 100 yards from a clean/cold barrel and it shoots somewhere here. The second shot goes closer to the bull, and the rest of them go straight through the bull from then on’. Does this sound familiar? This person probably hasn’t recorded, to the millimeter, every cold shot for the previous 50 shots, recorded the ambient temperature each and every time that shot was made, nor chronographed the same batch of ammunition at various temperatures to be able to interpolate a powder burning rate.

2. Temperature and Trajectory

A change in temperature can affect the trajectory or ‘flight path’ of the bullet in two well-known ways:

So long as altitude, barometric pressure and humidity remain constant, an increase in air temperature will cause a flatter trajectory due to a lower air density (less collisions with ‘air particles’ per unit length of flight path).

The same increase in temperature also causes the nitro cellulose based powder inside the cartridge to burn at a higher rate, producing approximately four times the Point of Impact (POI) shift than just air temperature alone.

Just how much does an increase in temperature affect the powder burning-rate? Some powders are more susceptible to temperature effects than others and will burn faster than others. Some powders will experience a burning-rate

increase of 3.5 feet per second (fps) for every 1 °C (1.8 °F) increase. Others will be more resistant to heat and may only have an increase of 1.5 fps/1 °C.

The .308 Win. Federal Premium cartridge with a 175 grain (gn) Sierra Matchking (Gold Medal Match) fired from a Blaser R93 Tactical 2 Sniper Rifle will show a muzzle velocity increase of approximately 2.5 fps for every 1 °C

increase in cartridge temperature. If there is a 10 °C (18 °F) temperature increase, this will equate to a muzzle velocity increase of 25 fps. This increase in velocity will change the POI at 100 yds by approx 3 – 4mm (1/6 inch), not counting the lower air density.

Notwithstanding these observations, there are also other factors that cause a much greater change in the POI at this range with changes in ambient temperature.

3. Factors

Two of these possible factors were eliminated from the equation by means of field trials involving three different rifles (chambered in .308 Win.) held in May 2007 at the WA Police Forensic Ballistics Section, Midland Western Australia.

The first factor to be addressed was the belief in some quarters that ambient temperature variations caused changes in the internal diameter of the bore of the weapon and therefore caused changes in in-bore friction, back-pressure and burning-rate, all of which impact upon muzzle velocity.

The second factor concerned possible velocity changes between a clean bore and a fouled bore.

An Accuracy International AWP, Blaser R93 Tactical 2 and a Remington 700, all chambered in .308 Win. were subjected to a series of tests.

4. Measuring Equipment

Equipment used in these trials for determination of muzzle velocity as well as the temperature of air, weapons and ammunition were as follows:

4.1 Kestrel 4000

The US made Nielsen-Kellerman Kestral 4000 weather station (S/N 499206) was used for measuring the ambient air temperature and also the temperature of the environment that the test items were placed in.

4.2 LiMiT T90 Infrared Thermometer

The Scandinavian made LiMiT T90 infrared thermometer (S/N 7058160) was also used for measuring the weapon systems and ammunition. This device was used in a

manner whereby several readings were taken from a weapon system to avoid incorrect readings from shiny surfaces.

The Kestral 4000 and the LiMiT T90 can be seen in Fig. 1 below. The Kestral has an accuracy of +/- 1 °C and the T90 has an accuracy of +/- 2 °C.

4.3 Oehler 35P Chronograph

The Oehler 35P was used in a 50m indoor test tunnel and was placed 8m in front of the muzzle of each weapon when tested. Muzzle velocities were calculated to the muzzle using Sierra Factory Ballistic Coefficients and JBM Small Arms Calculation tables from the web. (http://www.eskimo.com/~jbm/ballistics/traj/traj.html).

The Oehler 35P can be seen in Fig. 2 below.

5. Hot/Cold Test

All three test rifles were heated in a calibrated Forensic oven for 45 minutes to reach a temperature of 50 °C (122 °F). Three rounds of the same ammunition type were

fired through each weapon and their velocities recorded by the Oehler 35P Chronograph.

This test was then repeated with all three weapons at room

temperature (21 °C/70 °F) and again at -20 °C/-4 °F. The lower temperatures were achieved by using ‘dry ice’ and these temperatures ranged +/- 5 °C.

All ammunition used in this range of tests was kept at room temperature, which ranged from 19 – 21 °C. The ammunition was fired within a 3 second period after being chambered to avoid heat transfer between rifle and powder charge.

The results showed virtually no change in muzzle velocity with the same room temperature conditioned ammunition fired through these weapons, at three very different temperatures. The velocity changes were +/- 6 fps, sometimes in the opposite direction. This change could only be absorbed by the error allowed in the Oehler 35P Chronograph and the variance within the same batch of ammunition.

6. Clean Bore/Fouled Bore

Due to time constraints, only the Remington 700 in .308 Win. was used in this test. This rifle had been fitted with a custom Stainless Steel Heavy profile Diamond Lapped barrel from a reputable Australia company.

This rifle was first cleaned thoroughly using Hoppes Number 9 Solvent before the test. Ten rounds were then fired through the weapon in order to foul the barrel.

Ten more rounds were then fired through the Oehler Chronograph and logged. This rifle was then cleaned for approximately 25 minutes in order to remove all powder and copper residues from the throat, grooves and lands.

A further five rounds from the same batch of ammunition were then fired through this weapon at the same temperature, utilizing a bore scrub and two solvent patches between each shot.

The results show a difference of 6 fps on average. This would equate to a 1mm change in POI at most at 100 yds.

The results from these two tests indicate that there is no appreciable change in muzzle velocity when the weapon has either been cleaned, or subjected to a massive change in temperature.

From this we can now deduce that a change in weapon temperature itself does not affect the velocity of a projectile enough to warrant a significant change in the POI at 100yds. Neither does the clean barrel versus a fouled barrel.

Figure 3 Results recorded from the Oehler 35P Chronograph at a distance of 8m from the weapon muzzle.

7. Final Test

7.1 Temperature Conditioning

On May 17, 2007 in Perth Western Australia a series of tests were done in order to find out the reason for unexpected changes in the POI shift from zero with temperature changes.

To facilitate this test on a day measuring 18 °C (64 °F), a mobile freezer truck was hired. On this particular day, all test ammunition was held at ambient air temperature (17 ­19 °C). The same Kestral 4000 weather station as mentioned above was used for measuring the air temperature, as was the same LiMiT T90 Infrared Thermometer for weapon temperature. A motor vehicle with the heater set on the ‘recycle’ mode was used to heat weapons to 45 °C (113 °F).

All weapons, when either heated or cooled, remained in the controlled environment for 30 – 40- minutes to ensure thermal equilibrium.

The three weapons used in this test were the Accuracy International AWP and AWF Series in .308 Win. and the Blaser R93 Tactical 2 Rifle in .338 Lapua Magnum (LM).

All three rifles were fired at -5 °C, 7 °C, 21 °C and 45 °C respectively.

Each time the rifles were removed from the vehicle’s freezer, one round was fired from a steady rest (no bipod) within 3 seconds of the round being chambered. This was to avoid heat transfer issues between the chamber and the propellant charge.

7.2 Accuracy International AWF Sniper Rifle 7.3 Accuracy International AWP Sniper Rifle Manufactured: 2003 Manufactured: 1997

This illustrated a significant change in the POI at 100 yards using ammunition of the same batch at the same temperature. The circle used in the target above is 50mm (2 inches) in diameter. The vertical stringing effect is not caused by a change in velocity, but by another factor as shown.

Total POI change of 2.75 Minute of Angle (MOA) or

0.77 Milliradians (USMC) at 100 yds.

This illustrated that the AWP Sniper Rifle also has a significant change in the POI at 100 yards using ammunition of the same batch at the same temperature. The magnitude of the distance between the groups was slightly less, although still very significant. To accurately display this, Figure 7 was constructed as shown below.

Total POI change of 2.40 Minute of Angle (MOA) or

0.67 Milliradians (USMC) at 100 yds.

7.4 SIGARMS Blaser R93 Tactical 2 Sniper Rifle Manufactured: 2006

This also shows the .338 LM Blaser Tactical 2 also has a noticeable change in the POI at 100 yards when using ammunition of the same batch, at the same temperature. The distance between the groups was significantly less than that observed for the AI series rifles. However, the POI

zones from hot to cold weapon was completely reversed. Rounds fired from a hot weapon printed low whilst those fired from a cold weapon printed high.

0.45 Milliradians (USMC) at 100 yds.

Total POI change of 1.75 Minute of Angle (MOA) or

8. Discussion

8.1 Weapon Differences

Before any deductions can be drawn from this testing, some facts should be revealed about the differences between each weapon.

8.2 Accuracy International AWP

The AI AWP Sniper Rifle used in this test was manufactured in the South of England in 1997 and this particular weapon exhibited the following characteristics;

Stock: AI issued Polymer Barrel: 24″ Stainless heavy profile Cut-Rifled Receiver: Standard AI alloy Scope: Nightforce NXS 3.5-15 x 50 Mounts: Leupold Mk4 Ultra

8.3 Accuracy International AWF

The AI AWF Sniper Rifle used in this test was manufactured in the South of England in 2003 and this particular weapon exhibited the following characteristics;

Stock: AI issued Polymer – Folding Butt Barrel: 26″ Stainless medium profile Cut-Rifled Receiver: Standard AI alloy Scope: Nightforce NXS 3.5-15 x 50 Mounts: Leupold Mk4 Ultra

8.4 .338 LM Blaser Tactical 2

The Blaser R93 Tactical 2 Sniper Rifle used in this test was manufactured in the Germany in 2006 and this particular weapon exhibited the following characteristics;

Stock: Injection moulded Polyamide Barrel: 23 ½” Fluted Chrome Molybdenum

Hammer forged Receiver: Barrel extension acts as the receiver Scope: Schmidt & Bender PMII LP 4-16 x 42 Mounts: Custom XTEK Ltd one-piece bridge.

8.5 Telescopic Sights

To discount the theory that telescopic sights may have played a part in the shift in rifle zero, a further testing was conducted on this day.

Each of the test rifles was used to fire a three shot group at 100 yds when initially cooled to -5 °C. These rifles were then fired to the side of the target using 10 rounds of ammunition as quick as the firer could load the weapon. This was done to heat the barrel and receiver up to in excess of 50 °C.

A three shot group was then fired from each weapon. The resulting groups printed in their respective ‘hot weapon’ areas, however, the scopes on each of these weapons were still cold from the freezer truck.

9. Temperature Change Prediction

The resulting data collected from the three rifles tested, was mapped on a temperature scale. To complete these scales, POI shifts were interpolated between the recorded temperatures according to the trends of each weapon.

Zero change for the AI series of rifles was not constant between the hottest and coldest recorded temperatures. In fact, between 26 °C and 45 °C, the POI change was approximately ¼ MOA for every 6 °C (11 °F) increment. Once temperatures dropped below 26 °C, the POI dropped

off quicker. Below the 15 – 20 °C mark, there was a ¼ MOA shift for every 3 °C change.

However, zero change for the .338LM Blaser Tactical 2 rifle appeared to be constant. Although the other way around, the interpolated data showed a 1/3 MOA shift (ca. 10mm) for every 10 °C (18 °F) temperature changes. This equated to 1cm click for every 10 °C.

Temperature/Rifle Zero prediction charts were drawn up for threes three weapon systems based on the observed data.

Blaser Tactical 2 with S&B Scope (1cm/Click)

10. Confirmation

On February 29, 2008, nine further rifles were tested for temperature zero variation at the Holsworthy 300m classification range, Sydney Australia, using the same methodology outline above.

The rifles consisted of two Accuracy International AWP models, six Blaser Tactical 2 models and 1 custom Remington action with a fluted stainless barrel fitted to an

AI stock. All rifles were chambered in either .308 Win. or

7.62 NATO.

The AI rifles displayed exactly the same results as shown in the May 2007 testing and so did the Blaser Tactical 2 Rifles, even though they were chambered in .308 Win. rather than .338 LM.

The custom Remington Rifle displayed similar results to the AI’s (Hot high and Cold low), however not as much spread was recorded.

11. Conclusions

The primary aim of the tests conducted between 2007 and 2008 on the effects of temperature on rifle zero was not so much focused on why this effect happens, but whether an effect exists in the first place.

There could be any number of reasons as to why temperature variations on the rifle body would change the POI on the target, however, a further time consuming series of tests would be required for the actual mechanism(s) to be elucidated. Taking into account the small variation in trajectory with ammunition temperature variation (powder burning-rate), there is a larger and more noticeable POI variation that affects the precision shooter in today’s Military and Law Enforcement Sniper community. The fact is that temperature variations do cause POI variations, and that to some degree, these variations can be interpolated and mapped.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, there is currently no portable ballistics calculation system that takes this factor into account. At the moment, it is entirely up to the shooter to compensate for these variations. It is precisely because of this type of variation that the ‘cold barrel zero’ is practiced by some of the most elite elements.

For the seasonal shooter, or the special operations sniper operating in extreme environments, this can not only eliminate a section of doubt in himself or his weapon, but can also improve his chances of achieving that all important ‘First Shot Hit’.

Acknowledgments

Would like to thank Sgt G. Roberts Western Australia Police TRG Sniper Cell Maylands WA 6051(Author), Senior Constable Clive Roberts of the Western Australia Police Forensic Ballistics Section, members of the Western Australia Police Tactical Response Group Sniper Cell and finally Dr Alexander Krstic MD, Spectre Ballistic Solutions Pty Ltd, Adelaide, South Australia.

 
When getting involved in long range shooting, rifle selection can be difficult. There are so many different manufactures, cartridges, and configurations available. Many would like a custom built rifle, but wonder if it’s worth the extra time and cost. The answer depends mostly on your priorities, and needs. There are advantages for each. Here’s a quick overview.

Factory Rifles

Factory rifles can be anything from the awesome Sako TRG to the cheap Savage Stevens. Factory rifles can be purchased in many different cartridges and calibers. The accuracy ranges from excellent to unacceptable (for long range). If you have the ability to do a little research, you can avoid any that have a high probability of poor accuracy. You can also find some where good accuracy is the rule rather than the exception. Factory rifles come ready to fire. You can get them from a local shop in minuets or have one shipped in days. You’ll have little down time especially if you have optics ready to go. There are custom rifles that will take over a year to get once you order!

A reasonably priced factory rifle can have good accuracy even for long range. I’ve  owned a factory rifle that shot with accuracy above the level of many customs. This is the exception and not the rule, but it’s a joy to find and shoot such a rifle. Some factory rifles come with accuracy guarantees, but most do not. If you purchase a rifle that shoots poorly there are modifications (at relatively little cost) that you can make to increase accuracy. It is possible to get one that cannot be made to shoot with acceptable accuracy. The worst case scenario, would have you ordering a new barrel and action work from your gun smith. This extreme would be very rare, and one should not be worried. I’ve heard of plenty who get the factory to fix rifles that shot poorly  even when no guarantee of accuracy was made.

There are many options available for factory rifles. They will often have different magazine configurations (or lack thereof). Different barrel contours and lengths… heavy barrels for varmint and tactical models, helping dissipate heat and maintain accuracy for extended strings of shooting. Light barrels are most popular for hunting models, keeping weight to a minimum. They can be made  from different materials including chromoly, stainless, even titanium. Some will have synthetic stocks, some wood. Even factory rifles designed for accuracy will often have aluminum pillars or bedding blocks. Some will have stocks that are adjustable, but most will not. The choices you will have to make for selecting a factory rifle are generally very straight forward.

Factory rifles are generally less expensive than customs. Good shooting rifles will sell for as little as $400. The used market can be great way to save even more. Make sure you know what a rifle goes for new. Just because it’s at a pawn shop doesn’t mean it’s a good deal. If you order a rifle off the internet keep in mind you’ll have to pay a local FFL for transfer. This usually runs about $40 in my area. A budget minded shooter will often purchase a factory rifle and slowly make modifications over time. Doing this can be enjoyable especially if you see better accuracy as a result of your own work. When a barrel is shot out on a factory rifle, a custom can be built from it.

Custom Rifles

Custom rifles can be had in every configuration imaginable. Any cartridge can be used from a standard 308 to a custom wild cat. You can build a single shot or repeater. Left hand, Right hand, left port, right port. It can be built from a factory action you are familiar with, or a custom action of extremely close tolerances. It can take a great deal of time and research to decide what suits you.

The accuracy of custom rifles is generally much better than factory. Accuracy guarantees are not uncommon. Not all custom rifles are created equally. If you’re going to spend the money, make sure you know what you’re getting. Find out what experiences others are having with customs from the same smith or company. Amazingly there are custom rifle makers who consider MOA accuracy to be excellent.

Custom rifles will require some decision making not necessary with factory rifles. Perhaps you will be selecting each component individually and paying a smith you know is good to assemble a rifle you’ve designed. If you allow your smith to decide what’s best, make sure you know what you’re getting. If you have any concerns let them know before your rifle is built. If you have questions….ask, this is part of what you’re paying for. With the advise of your smith, it’s probably best that you make most of the decisions. You’ll have to decide what cartridge, action, barrel, stock, trigger, etc. It’s best to keep in mind the purposes of this rifle.

When you decide what cartridge and caliber best suit your purposes it would also be good to decide what bullets you would be using. Find out what twist rate is required to stabilize the bullets you plan to use and order your barrel accordingly. If your rifle will be a repeater make sure the reamer is throated so you can seat the bullets into the lands without exceeding the   mag length. By the same token if you have room in the mag, a reamer that allows you to seat the bullets near maximum mag length will give maximum capacity for powder. This can net a little more muzzle velocity which is generally a good thing!

Length of barrel is another consideration. For large magnums shooting heavy bullets long barrels will allow best velocities with slow burning powders. Some cartridges suffer little loss of velocity when used with short barrels, particularly those using relatively fast burning powders. Of course, if you will be dragging this rifle through the hills a long barrel may be out of the question. How about your trigger? Even a good rifle’s accuracy can be spoiled by a poor trigger. The trigger on a custom rifle should be tuned for a crisp brake and minimal over-travel. The weight of the trigger is up to the shooter. If the cross-hairs routinely move when you pull the trigger it may be to heavy (or poor shooting technique).Only you can decide whats best for you… that’s why you’re building a custom in first place.

Make sure the components come together in a rifle that will be comfortable for you. You’ll likely be spending more money than most “off the shelf” rifles require and you want to get your money’s worth. If at all possible handle the stock you want to use before you purchase. If the stock does not fit you correctly (and cannot be adjusted), shooting your rifle could be frustrating. Don’t leave anything out. With careful research and consideration you can build a custom rifle that will meet your needs and expectations. Such a rifle is always a pleasure to shoot.

There are a lot of powder out there to choose from. But one thing you can use to help get you on the right track is the burning rate. There is a rule of thumb for most rifles that you can use to help you decide. Slower burning powders work good for bigger magnums and faster burning powders work good for some of your smaller rifles. Here is a list from Hodgdons on there powder burning rate from fastest to slowest.

1 NORMA R1
2 Winchester WAALite
3 Vihtavouri N310
4 Alliant e3
5 Hodgdon TITEWAD
6 Alliant Red Dot
7 Hodgdon CLAYS
8 IMR, Co Hi-Skor 700-X
9 Alliant Bullseye
10 Hodgdon TITEGROUP
11 Alliant American Select
12 Accurate Arms Solo 1000
13 Alliant Green Dot
14 IMR, Co Trial Boss
15 Winchester Super Handicap
16 Hodgdon INTERNATIONAL
17 IMR, Co PB
18 Vihtavouri N320
19 Winchester WST
20 Accurate Arms No. 2
21 IMR, Co SR 7625
22 Hodgdon HP-38
23 Winchester 231
24 Alliant 20/28
25 Alliant Unique
26 Hodgdon UNIVERSAL
27 Alliant Power Pistol
28 Vihtavouri N330
29 Alliant Herco
30 Winchester WSF
31 Vihtavouri N340
32 IMR, Co Hi-Skor 800-X
33 IMR, Co SR4756
34 Accurate Arms No. 5
35 Hodgdon HS-6
36 Vihtavouri 3N37
37 Vihtavouri N350
38 Hodgdon HS-7
39 Vihtavouri 3N38
40 Alliant Blue Dot
41 Accurate Arms No. 7
42 Hodgdon LONGSHOT
43 Alliant 410
44 Alliant 2400
45 Accurate Arms No. 9
46 NORMA R123
47 Vihtavouri N110
48 Hodgdon LIL’ GUN
49 Hodgdon H110
50 Winchester 296
51 IMR, Co IMR 4227
52 Hodgdon H4227
53 IMR, Co SR4759
54 Accurate Arms 1680
55 NORMA 200
56 Alliant Reloder 7
57 IMR, Co IMR4198
58 Hodgdon H4198
59 Vihtavouri N120
60 Hodgdon H322
61 Accurate Arms 2015BR
62 Vihtavouri N130
63 IMR, Co IMR3
64 Vihtavouri N133
65 Hodgdon BENCHMARK
66 Hodgdon H335
67 Accurate Arms 2230
68 Accurate Arms 2460
69 Hodgdon H4895
70 Vihtavouri N530
71 IMR, Co IMR4895
72 Vihtavouri N135
73 Alliant Reloder 12
74 IMR, Co IMR4320
75 Accurate Arms 2495BR
76 IMR, Co IMR4064
77 NORMA 202
78 Accurate Arms 2520
79 Alliant Reloder 15
80 Vihtavouri N140
81 Hodgdon VARGET
82 Winchester 748
83 Hodgdon BL-C(2)
84 Hodgdon H380
85 IMR, Co IMR4007SSC
86 Vihtavouri N540
87 Winchester 760
88 Hodgdon H414
89 Vihtavouri N150
90 Accurate Arms 2700
91 IMR, Co IMR4350
92 Hodgdon H4350
93 Accurate Arms 4350
94 NORMA 204
95 Hodgdon HYBRID 100V
96 Vihtavouri N550
97 Alliant Reloder 19
98 IMR, Co IMR4831
99 Accurate Arms 3100
100 Vihtavouri N160
101 Hodgdon H4831 & H4831SC
102 Winchester Supreme 780
103 NORMA MRP
104 Alliant Reloder 22
105 Vihtavouri N560
106 Vihtavouri N165
107 IMR, Co IMR7828
108 Vihtavouri N17
109 Hodgdon H1000
110 Hodgdon RETUMBO
111 Vihtavouri N570
112 Accurate Arms 8700
113 Hodgdon H87
114 Vihtavouri 24N41
115 Hodgdon H50BMG
116 Hodgdon US869
117 Vihtavouri 20N29

On September 30, Denny Austad of Ammon, Idaho, downed the monster bull while hunting on public land in the Fishlake National Forest in south-central Utah.

According to a press release from the Club, Austad hunted for 13 days before getting a shot at the trophy, which has been dubbed the “spider bull” for its unique antler configuration.

A special judges panel convened by the Club determined a final score of 478-5/8 B&C non-typical points, an incredible 93-plus inches above the minimum score of 385 for non-typical American elk, and more than 13 inches larger than the previous world record.

It is the only elk on record with a gross score approaching the 500-inch mark, at 499-3/8. Official data dates back to 1830.

The giant bull has 9 points on the left antler and 14 points on the right. The larger antler has a base circumference topping 9 inches.

The Boone and Crockett scoring system, long used to measure the success of wildlife conservation and management programs across North America, rewards antler size and symmetry, but also recognizes nature’s imperfections with non-typical categories for most antlered game. The bull’s final score of 478-5/8 inches includes an amazing 140 inches of abnormal points.

“Along with measurements that honor the quality of the animal, Boone and Crockett Club records also honor fair-chase hunting,” said Eldon Buckner, chairman of the Club’s Records of North American Big Game committee, in the release. “Through our entry process, signed affidavits and follow-up interviews with the hunter, his guides, and state and federal officials, we were satisfied that this bull was indeed a wild, free-ranging trophy and that the tenets of fair chase were used in the harvest.”

The previous world record for non-typical American elk was 465-2/8 B&C points. That bull was found dead, frozen in Upper Arrow Lake, B.C., in 1994, and was entered into Boone and Crockett Club records by the provincial Ministry of Environment on behalf of the citizens of British Columbia.

For hunter-taken non-typical American elk, the previous top bull scored 450-6/8 B&C points, taken in 1998 in Apache County, Ariz., by Alan Hamberlin.

Founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887, the Missoula-based Boone and Crockett Club promotes guardianship and visionary management of big game and associated wildlife in North America. The Club maintains the highest standards of fair-chase sportsmanship and habitat stewardship, and is the universally recognized keeper of the records of native North American big game.

There is a great deal of interest in .338″ caliber cartridges for long range shooting. This is specifically due to high BC mass produced bullets available. While it takes a great deal of powder to push a 250gr to 300gr bullet at acceptable velocities for long range shooting, the performance has trumped the cost in the minds of many shooters (not to mention military and law enforcement world-wide). Recently, the most popular long range 338′s are the 338 Remington Ultra Mag, 338 Lapua mag, and 338 Edge. The first two are self explanatory, the Edge is a 338×300 Remington Ultra Mag. It is most commonly referred to as the 338″Edge” due to Shawn Carlock of Defensive Edge who is the biggest proponent of the cartridge and has, by far, the most experience with it. There are some other 338′s for long range, but I’ll mostly focus one these three for the sake of keeping this brief. These cartridges can be used in factory long actions and make a repeater. Even when using long, high BC bullets, like the 300gr SMK!

One common misconception is that these cartridges are end all, be all, 1000yd lasers. While the 1000yd performance is excellent, there are much more efficient ways of getting equal and in some cases better ballistic performance at 1000yds and less. For example you could fire a 168gr Berger VLD from a 7mm mag at 3100fps and have an expected drop of 22.25 MOA and drift of 5.25 MOA for a 10mph cross-wind at 1000yds. A 338 Lapua mag firing a 250gr Scenar at 2960 would have a drop of 24.25 MOA and 5.25 MOA windage for the same range/conditions. A Lapua mag firing a 300gr SMK at 2850fps would have a drop of 25 MOA and 4.75 MOA windage for the same range/conditions. If you want to see how these 338′s stack up to other cartridges, run the numbers through a ballistic calculator. For those who take large game at or near 1000yds the energy provided by these cartridges is ideal. Where the 338′s really shine  ballistically is well beyond the 1000yd mark. They have been used effectively and with accuracy out to 1 mile (1760yds) and beyond. Two of the major obstacles to shooting at extreme range are going sub-sonic (or even trans-sonic) and wind drift. A major part of the solution to both of these, is a higher than usual BC’s. Let’s consider some of the long range bullets available for the 338′s…

250gr Sierra Match king BC: .587 (above 2150fps) .606 (between 2149 and 1700fps)

250gr Lapua Lock Base BC: .662

250gr Lapua Scenar BC: .675

300gr Sierra Match king BC: .768

The popularity of this caliber will only insure that more high BC bullets will be developed in the future. Berger will be releasing two new bullets for the .338″, one of which is rumored to weigh 300gr and have a BC of around .855!

There is great debate about the velocities these cartridges can produce in relation to each other. I do not have the resources available to build and compare each of these cartridges with identical components so we’re left to speculate on what info is available. My Sierra Reloading Manual uses a 26″ test barrel for both the 338 RUM and the 338 Lapua. It gives essentially identical maximum velocities for the bullets in question, although the RUM was reaching them with a higher percentage of the powders tested. This seems counter intuitive because the capacities of these cartridges are virtually the same and the Lapua is rated at a maximum pressure of 69,000 psi, while the RUM is rated at a maximum of 64,500 psi (Vihta Vuori Reloading manual). I can’t confirm what pressures Sierra used to test these cartridges, but the data is scientifically acquired. The respective velocities of factory loaded ammo for these two cartridges would suggest that the Lapua has the velocity advantage. There is much debate in internet forums of how these cartridges stack up. The most popular consensus (from what I’ve gathered) is the 338 Edge is the fastest followed by the Lapua mag, with the 338 RUM not too far behind. I would argue that this is the most sensible conclusion since it follows the general capacity/pressure model (please do not take this to mean I view forum opinions as scientific data). The debate is somewhat irrelevant, since we’re talking about a spread of less than 100fps between them. The barrel’s design and length could possibly have a greater impact of MV than the cartridge itself. If you’re like me, the fastest load you test for a particular cartridge may not be the one you use. Other factors weigh in like accuracy (low ES and SD) as well as temperature sensitivity etc. It would be difficult to speculate what cartridge would provide the highest velocity while remaining “accurate”.

Many  wonder about how long a barrel should be for these cartridges. From what I can gather 28″-30″ is about optimal. This gives you the MV’s you expect and allows you to keep the weight manageable. Some have used up to 34″ barrels and are claim higher MV’s and better ballistic performance. I’ve heard that going from 28″ to 30″ only nets and extra 50fps. It may not seem like much for the weight of two inches of barrel. For some it may be worth it. Depending on how far you want to shoot your rifle, an extra 50fps could be just what you need. If 28″ barrels and the weight that comes with them is unattractive to you, I’d recommend looking into other cartridges (or re-evaluate your long range goals). There is no point in wasting powder in the form of muzzle blast. These are large cartridges that use slow burning powders and require long barrels.

The biggest difference in my opinion between these cartridges is reloading cost. They’ll use around the same amount of powder, and the bullets are the same, but the brass is another story. Brass for the Lapua is commonly found for around $195 for 100pc. The 338 RUM, and 338 Edge (wich uses 300 RUM brass) can be had for around $80 for 100pc. This is a big difference in reloading cost, although a straight across comparison would probably not be fair to the Lapua. It’s quite likely that the Lapua brand brass (one of only two brands currently available for the 338 Lapua) would last a couple more firings compared to the others. It’s also notable that to build a rifle in 338 lapua a standard magnum bolt face would not work, requiring a little more work by your gun smith (my smith only charged me around $30 for this, but your mileage may vary). The 338 Edge definitely gives the most bang for your buck. Some claim the Lapua is more accurate. If this has any merritt, it’s likely due to higher brass quality available for the Lapua. If one does a quick search you’ll quickly find excellent long range accuracy can be had by the RUM and Edge. It is my opinion that the smith you select to build your rifle, will by far have the greatest influence of the accuracy potential. That being said, I personally use Lapua brass when it’s available for a cartridge I’m loading.

Some other 338 cartridges that may catch your attention and deserve your consideration include: 338×378 Wby mag, 338 Kahn, 338×416 Rigby Improved, 338 Snipe Tac, 338 Allen Magnum, 338 Titan, and others. Any of these will ballistically outperform the RUM, Lapua, and Edge.

There is one word that every rifle shooter should know: BRASS. If you learn this word and what each letter in the acronym means, and then apply them to every shot, you can’t miss.

BRASS stands for five words: Breath, Relax, Aim, Slack and Squeeze. Basically, used in the order presented above, you do each step prior to making your shot. Here is what you do:

Breathe: You are in position; you have your target selected and in range and you raise your rifle to your eye. You take a fairly deep breath, exhale it, then take in a half breath and hold it. This does two things: it enriches your blood with oxygen which helps steady your aim, and it gives you more of a steady rest since you are not breathing while taking the shot.

Relax: Perhaps one of the more difficult parts of the sequence, especially if it’s that big buck or predator that you’ve been waiting for all morning. This is the part where adrenalin is beginning to affect your hold, position, and timing—and might make you rush the shot. By concentrating on relaxing, you will notice your sights or crosshairs begin to settle down and not do the “figure eight dance” so much.

As soon as you are as relaxed as the situation allows, you concentrate on sight alignment. If you are shooting iron sights, you know that you have to have that front sight blade locked on the six 0′clock position of your target and your rear sight positioned correctly with equal light on both sides of the front sight blade. Your rear sight should be a bit blurry, with a good clear and crisp front sight blade. Do NOT try to focus on the front sight and the target at the same time. The target should also be a bit blurry. It’s the front sight that counts in accuracy. When shooting a scoped rifle, make sure you have a clear view of the target and the crosshairs with no half-moon shadows on the sides or top of your scope lens. The scope picture should be round and clear and bright. If you have an AO—an adjustable objective lens—you can adjust your parallax and your focus ring so that your crosshairs are clear and sharp and so is your target. And make sure you have the proper eye relief behind the scope so that if your rifle recoils you do not end up with half-circle cuts in your forehead! Part of aiming is also proper grip. There are different schools of thought, but when I shoot from a rest or bipod position, I use my left (non-trigger) hand to support the heel of the stock in my shoulder and pull slightly back into my shoulder with my right hand at the small of the stock. Do not “over grip” as this will produce shaking or unsteadiness due to fatigue.

Slack: This is where you take up the slack on the trigger. Be sure you are very familiar with the feel of your rifle. Every rifle is different, and each one has a different trigger feel and pull. Use the pad on the tip of your finger only. As a old instructors would say, “pull it gently feel the slack taken up—then stop.”
Once you know your trigger feel and how much slack there is, you are ready for the hardest part of the shot sequence, the “squeeze.”

Squeeze: The most critical part of your shot is the last ½ second. It is the part when you launch that projectile down range and will either hit your target—or miss. Most of the instructing I do with shooters focuses on the last bit of trigger squeeze, and that’s where most make their mistakes. The bottom line is that the shot must be a surprise. You should not know exactly when it is going to happen, or try to anticipate it. If you do, you may flinch, jerk, or buck. Flinching normally causes the shooter to close his or her eyes at the last second—a sure miss. Bucking is shoving your shoulder into the rifle unconsciously in anticipation of the recoil. Jerking is “pulling” the trigger instead of squeezing it. Bucking will throw a shot to the left, while jerking will throw it to the right. If you are lining up a prairie dog at 800 yards, you have no room to buck, jerk, or flinch. You’ll miss the guy by a yard! Remember BRASS, practice it, and you’re shots will find their target.

There are many excellent actions that one can use to build accurate long range rifles. Mauser, Winchester, Sako, Tikka, Weatherby, and many others have been used with excellent results. Action selection is a personal choice. The two that seem to be the most popular are Remington and Savage. Both these actions have excellent aftermarket support, the Remington 700 is by far the most popular. The Savages have been gaining momentum over the last few years. What are the key differences in these actions with regard to long range accuracy, and which is best for you?
The Remington 700

The great variety of stocks, triggers, floor plates, scope bases, speed lock kits, and any other replaceable part, available for the Remington 700 is a testament to its following. When you look into aftermarket actions you’ll find a great deal that are built with the same bolt spacing and outside diameter as the 700. This is not only because the its of sound design, but also to take advantage of the aftermarket support. The 700 has one of the faster lock times, from factory actions. This is an advantage when accuracy is the goal. Any gunsmith will be familiar with the 700, this may also result in lower costs for work. The 700 comes from the factory with an adjustable trigger that when tuned properly can result in a light pull, crisp brake, and no over-travel. A good trigger can be the difference between a rifle that is a joy to shoot and one you must struggle with to shoot accurately. It is generally agreed that the new X-mark pro trigger available from Remington are inferior to the original. It is a joy to cycle a well used 700 bolt. The feel is smooth and solid. The action can be worked fast without issue. Excellent detachable magazine systems are available. Accuracy from the factory is generally very good.
The Savage 10/110

Savage definitely has less aftermarket support but it’s getting better all the time. Lock times are slower because the sear must drag across the trigger, instead of a dropping free. There are aftermarket triggers like Sharp Shooter’s which help alleviate this problem. One can also replace the firing pin spring with a heavier one, but this will increase trigger pull weight. Older factory triggers all but non adjustable. Lightening the trigger requires removal of material from the sear and trigger itself. I don’t recommend trying this unless you’re prepared to replace the trigger or have experience modifying the factory triggers. The new accu-trigger is a better design than the original and it’s adjustable. The accu-trigger is adequate for long range accuracy but I would still recommend replacement. Cycling a Savage bolt is not as nice as the 700 in my opinion. It has a heavy bolt lift and feels cheaper when operating (Some are better than others). There are solutions to the heavy bolt lift available from Stockade. The Savage action works just fine. The bolt face is replaceable on Savage bolts. This makes changing from small, standard, and magnum, bolt faces possible (without paying a smith or ordering a new bolt). Head spacing on Savage actions is done with a “barrel nut” rather than an indexed shoulder like Remington. Having a barrel nut allows one to change a barrel themselves. Barrel makers can make chambered and threaded barrels ready to install. One needs only to have a barrel wrench, action vise, and head-space gauges (there are other ways if an action vise is not available). This allows one to save money while experimenting with different cartridges and calibers. Accuracy from the factory is very good.

A book could be written on these actions, the above is only a quick overview. There are many aspects  of these actions that  don’t impact  long range shooting (and accuracy in general).  I’m partial to the Remington 700 although I have both. I grew up shooting Remington and will continue to do so. The Savage’s have allowed me the satisfaction of building my own rifles (as much as possible). If you like to work on rifles and don’t have a lathe, Savage may be a good choice for you. The ability to change from magnum to standard cartridges (and back again), is a definite plus. Part of Remington’s popularity is the fact that it has remained essentially unchanged. This allows the aftermarket to design a part that can be used by many. Savage seems less content with their design and changes have been made, causing a scramble to design parts that will work with the new design.   Both actions can provide outstanding long range accuracy. Like anything else the action you choose is a personal choice. I know one x-professional marksmen (sniper) that grew up shooting Savages and will not buy anything else. You’ll find most tend to go the other way, but there is no wrong choice. If you are more comfortable with one, you’ll likely shoot better with it.