Reloading




THE OPTIMAL CHARGE WEIGHT METHOD 

I got into reloading in January of 2014. It has been a long learning process to get to this point, and I want to make it very clear that I am in no ways an expert at reloading. The first complete rounds that I made up were for my father’s .30-06. I made up a batch of rounds with graduated powder charges and headed off to the range. I settled in at the range only to find that about two thirds of the rounds I had made would not chamber. I returned home to do more learning. When I acquired my reloading equipment I asked my grandfather for a quick lesson on how to do everything and he simply smiled and handed me a pair of old Hornady and Hodgdon reloading manuals and told me that I should learn the way he did... from the manuals and from good old trial and error. I wasn't sure about his counsel then, but I'm grateful now because I have been able to develop my own rhythm.
Along the way I was directed to the Optimal Charge Weight (OCW) Method of load development. You can link here to Dan Newberry’s OCW comprehensive description of this method so I won’t go into it further… but suffice it to say that I will use this method exclusively for my load development moving forward.
The first load that I worked up was for the .30-06 Springfield that my father has let me borrow on a couple of elk hunts.
- First I determined the components that I would use:
- Hornady 180gr Interlock bullets
- Hodgdon H4831 powder
- Remington 9 1/2 (Large Rifle) primers
- Once-fired brass (actually who knows how many times it has been fired)

Second, I consulted a number of different reloading manuals both in print and online. I used referenced sources online that I would consider reputable, namely the bullet and powder manufacturers only. I noticed discrepancies in the various maximum loads listed so I did what I felt was logical in this situation and decided that my max load would be the average of all published loads that I had found.
With my components in place and my max load determined I followed Dan's instructions to the "T" and set up a spreadsheet to calculate the graduated powder charges for the ten sets of rounds I would create. Set #1 was an 8% reduction from my predetermined max load of 60.0gr and was my starting point for the incremental increases. Sets 2 and 3 were 2% increases, respectively. And sets 4 through 10 were 0.7% increases, respectively. An image below shows the table I created with the exact powder measurements.
I did my best to be completely uniform and consistent in all the phases of reloading: cases were cleaned, resized using an RCBS full length sizing die, trimmed to the same length, deburred, primed, charged, and bullets seated to the same depth. Each round had the same overall cartridge length of 3.30”.
At the range I followed the OCW instructions and posted eight separate targets at 100 yards. Each target was a simple ¾” black square that I figured would be appropriate for my 4-12x rifle scope. I proceeded with the round robin test firing and retreated to my home to evaluate the results. I decided to break up the load development into two range session because I found that after about an hour and a half of intense focus and concentration during the test firing phase I was simply exhausted. I knew that with my rifle set up I had addressed all the variables except for one… me! So I was intent on minimizing any of my own influence on the result with each shot and it was physically draining to mentally go through what I figured was the perfect shot routine and ensure that I had proper shooting form every single time. Here are the round robin targets that I shot:

At home I transferred the results of each target into PointBlank Ballistics, an online ballistics calculator that can be downloaded for free at www.huntingnut.com. This program automatically calculated the group size and the center of each group, or point of impact (POI). With that information I turned to an Excel spreadsheet to see the results graphically. I found that sets 6, 7, 8, and 9 all shared a POI within about 0.2”.

I chose to deviate from Dan’s OCW instructions here and decided to consider the individual group sizes as a way to further narrow down to my optimum load, and therefore threw out the results for set 6 since that happened to be the widest grouping overall.
So, through my testing I found that my optimum charge was between 59.1 and 60.3 grains and I was very much pleased to find that the 59.5gr results also produced the tightest grouping of the test.

I decided to purchase some brand new brass to make up the remaining 180gr bullets. I again ensured that all the brass was trimmed to the same length, deburred, and primed exactly as I had done for the test rounds. I also deviated from the OCW instructions in that I did not make up rounds of 59.1 and 59.9 grains to test fire at 200 yards, the components that were remaining were limited and I have been unable to locate the same bullets on the shelf in stores or online recently so I decided to conserve components and simply go to the range to sight in my rifle using the 59.5gr load at 200 yards.
I shot a couple rounds to get my scope near the bullseye on the target, then proceeded to shoot my first three shot group with my new OCW rounds. I did not check where I was hitting between each shot because I did not want to potentially influence my aimpoint in any way… so I shot three rounds and walked out to the 200 yard bunker to see my results up close. I was shocked… stunned… amazed… thrilled at the result. Here is my 200 yard group (right).

With all the confidence in the world I placed a target at 300 yards and took three shots. Here is my 300 yard group (left):
Through the OCW method I have developed a round that gives me a ton of confidence. I know that it is a load that performs exceptionally well out of my rifle and I look forward to the chance to use this load in the field on deer or elk.


CHOOSING THE RIGHT BULLET 

What is the most critical part of rifle ammunition? Of all the components that make up a rifle cartridge (brass, primer, powder, and bullet) the bullet has to be the most critical of those components. The reasoning behind this is because the bullet is the only one of those components that physically contacts the game animal. In short, the bullet actually does the killing. That is not to neglect or diminish the importance of the brass, primer, and powder… but if you go back to Physics 101, the bullet does the work.
Questions regarding which powder, primer, and brass to use can be discussed at a later time… and it is my opinion that a satisfactory hunting load should be able to be generated using just about any combination of bullet, powder, primer, and brass using a proven load workup technique. So the key question to creating a worthwhile hunting load is which bullet should I use? The bullet options are virtually limitless.

BASIC BULLET DESIGN
Let’s address these questions, and to arrive at a decision we need to investigate bullet design. Bullets are not created equal and are designed to function in very specific ways across common ranges of velocities. The design of the bullet determines how it behaves upon impact and the type of wound imparted to the animal. From my research, there are five different types of bullets with some manufacturers “double dipping” and creating hybrid type bullets that contain attributes of more than one of the following categories:
- Cup & Core
- Bonded Core
- Frangible
- Partitioned
- Monolithic


Cup and core bullets are typically found in the inexpensive off the shelf ammunition like the Winchester SuperX and Hornady Superformance. For the handloader, traditional cup and core bullets available are Hornady Interlock, Hornady SST, and Sierra GameKing. The cup and core design is a tried and true design where the copper jacket peels back upon impact and the lead mushrooms to provide expansion. This design is especially effective at moderate velocities. It is probable that more game animals have been killed with a cup and core bullet than all other types of bullets combined. The popularity of this type of bullet is likely due to their economy, for both off the shelf and handloaders these types of bullets often provide the cheapest options. In spite of their overwhelming popularity, cup and core bullets are not without their limitations. Extreme velocities can cause cup and core bullets to separate. Many shooters have encountered this and claimed that the bullet has failed. This is not the case, the bullet has done its job within the parameters it was designed to function. As mentioned before, these bullets truly shine at moderate velocities (e.g. below 3000fps) and have even shown very good expansion at lower velocities as well.

Bonded core bullets are a simple improvement upon the traditional cup and core bullet where the lead core is chemically bonded to the copper jacket. This allows for improved performance at higher velocities and except for at the most extreme velocities eliminates the cup and core separation. An additional benefit is an increase in weight retention as the chemically bonded core tends to fragment less than the traditional cup and core bullet. Bonded bullets are considered “premium” bullets and available offerings include the Hornady InterBond (not to be confused with the Interlock), Nosler Accubond, and Swift Scirroco. Cost is greatly increased, in some cases more than double the price tag of the traditional cup and core bullets, but many shooters find the design improvements worth the additional cost.

Frangible bullets are a cup and core bullet but are specifically designed to penetrate the target for several inches, often 3 to 4 inches, and then “explode” or fragment. These bullets typically function well across a wide range of velocities, with high velocity loads creating a large quantity of small fragments within the body cavity and a lower velocity load resulting in fewer pieces of shrapnel which are slightly larger in size. The key limitation to this bullet design lies with shot selection. This bullet is not designed for direct bone hits. “Busting” through the front shoulder of a bull elk would be outside of the design of this particular bullet and manufacturer literature suggests limiting shots to broadside shots to the lung area on calm animals. Which in my opinion really limits the in-field effectiveness of this type bullet as I have personally experienced very few perfectly broadside shots on calm animals! That being said, when the “perfect shot” is presented the resulting wound channel can be absolutely devastating. This bullet is most highly recommended for thin skinned animals like deer & antelope with available offerings including the Berger VLD and Nosler Ballistic Tip. Additionally, most bullets designed for varmint hunting fall within this category. At very high velocities the traditional cup and core bullet can perform much like a frangible bullet, and as mentioned above, many hunters have experienced this and attributed the extreme fragmenting and core separation as a failure of the cup and core bullet design.


Partitioned bullets are again another simple improvement on the standard cup and core bullet where the core is divided into two separate pieces. The front half of the bullet is a traditional cup and core bullet that expands upon impact back to a copper “cross brace” bisecting the bullet. The rear portion of the bullet is a second cup and core that retains mass and provides an increased measure of penetration. There are two primary offerings in this category with the Nosler Partition widely considered the gold standard in hunting bullets used on all types of game from dangerous game in Africa to eastern whitetails to prairie antelope. The Nosler Partition is sponsored by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) with a portion of proceeds from sales of many of the popular elk hunting bullet calibers and weights being donated to RMEF. The second offering is a hybrid from Swift called the A-Frame which is both partitioned and bonded, the literature claiming superior weight retention than any other copper and lead bullet on the market of up to 97%.


Monolothic bullets do not contain a lead core at all and are made entirely of a solid gilded copper material. Many state agencies are encouraging the use of these bullets due to concerns with lead poisoning in scavengers that feed on gut piles from hunter killed animals. Agencies in Utah and Arizona have provided coupons for the purchase of monolithic bullets if a hunter draws certain units within those states to protect the endangered condor species. These bullets provide the most weight retention of all bullets with many manufacturers reporting 99% weight retention. These bullets are designed not to expand like a mushroom, but to open up with the tip of the bullet peeling out like petals on a flower. Penetration is fantastic in all scenarios and these bullets have become extremely popular over the last 10 years or so. Monolithic bullets offered are the Hornady GMX, Nosler E-Tip, and the Barnes TSX and TTSX.

GAME SPECIES
Now let’s go back and answer the questions of what game will I be hunting. Across the internet you will see all sorts of recommendations. I have seen box after box of off the shelf ammunition with sleek looking labeling on their boxes indicated the species for which that particular ammunition is best suited for. I have also visited the major bullet manufacturer websites in my investigation of the different bullet designs and found specific recommendations from each manufacturer.
Most of the recommendations I have seen follow this pattern:
For medium, thin skinned game like mule deer, whitetail deer, blacktail deer, antelope, etc. any bullet design would suffice with special attention paid to shot selection if a frangible bullet is selected.
For large, thick skinned game like elk, moose, bear, etc. there is a tendency towards the premium bullets more so than the traditional cup and core. In my opinion this is largely a marketing strategy to increase the premium bullet sales. The premium bullets do offer some pretty distinct advantages when it comes to taking what some hunters would consider marginal shots, but even the largest North American game animals have fallen dead to a properly placed cup and core bullet.

SHOT SELECTION
There are really just five basic types of shots presented to the hunter and I would rank them in terms of which shots are “best” or “most ideal” as follows: broadside, quartering away, quartering to, straight on, straight away.

The broadside shot is largely considered the most ideal shot on any game animal. The animal is standing at a 90° angle to the hunter and presents a clear, unobstructed target of the vital area. This is the shot that we all dream of, neatly tucking the bullet just behind the front shoulder for a quick, clean, and highly ethical double lung and heart kill. There are many proponents of shooting through front shoulder, thus immobilizing the animal as well as attempting a more direct shot at the heart. There is some unfortunate meat loss when shooting through the shoulder when compared to aiming behind the shoulder for a lung shot. The broadside shot the animal presents itself as the largest possible target. My first bull elk, a spike, was taken in 2012 at 357 yards with 180gr Winchester Super-X PowerPoint (traditional cup and core bullet) as it stood nearly perfectly broadside feeding across the canyon from me. A small buck deer also standing broadside fell to a 300gr Hornady XTP-MAG from my muzzleloader at a distance of about 20 yards also in 2012. Bullet selection is pretty easy if you plan to limit yourself to only broadside shots, any bullet will work. The only caveat that I would caution is that the frangible bullets would not be suitable for those who prefer to shoot through the front shoulder. The frangible bullet should be placed behind the front shoulder in all cases avoiding any large muscle masses or bone structure.


The quartering away shot is every bit as effective as the broadside shot and there are many hunters and shooters out there that would consider this type of shot as desirable or even superior to the broadside shot. With the animal quartering away, more of the vital area is directly exposed, specifically the heart since it is not somewhat obstructed by the front shoulder. The first two deer that I had ever killed were both quartering away from me. In both instances my aim point was about the last third of the ribcage with the buck’s body angle causing the path of my bullet to pass through both lungs and heart before entering the opposite side shoulder. A bullet was recovered from one of those bucks that had passed through the opposite front shoulder and appeared as a small lump just under the skin. This type of shot has resulted in meat loss from the opposite shoulder, but it has been minimal in my experiences. Much like the broadside shot, all bullets will get the job done on a quartering away shot. The same caveat applies to the quartering away shot with the frangible bullet to avoid large muscle masses and bone structure and aim strictly for vulnerable soft tissue of the vital area.


The quartering to shot presents some challenges as now the most vital areas are blocked by large masses of bone and muscle. A good premium bullet reduces the risk on this type of shot by providing increased penetration. This is the type of shot that is just the ticket for hunters and shooters that like to take out the front shoulder to immobilize the animal along with hoping that the bullet has enough energy to penetrate through the muscle and bone to then enter the vital area and pass through the heart and lungs. This is largely the job for the premium bullet, with bonded bullets performing very well but the partitioned and monolithic bullets proving the gold standard in penetration in this application. Traditional cup and core bullets can definitely get the job done as well as long as the velocity at impact is moderate and within the range that the bullet is designed to function properly.

The straight on shot and the straight away shot are both considered questionable by many out there. There are opportunities to make successful kills with either shot, however the margin for error is quite large and the possibility of imparting a non-fatal wound or a wound that would result in a slow and painful death is high. Urban legend runs deep of spectacular head shots or the infamous “Texas Heart Shot.” No hunting circle is complete without a member who is a proponent of one or the other! Personally, my grandfather considers the head shot an ideal shot because there is zero meat loss. I’ll not pass judgement as to what is right or wrong, but I’ll just say that if either of these shots are attempted a premium bonded, partitioned, or monolithic bullet will give you the best chance to make the kill.




The key to selecting the appropriate bullet is to consider the types of animals you will be hunting, the types of shots that could be presented and willing to take. Lastly consider your budget and do not be afraid to stay with the old tried and true!!! Unfortunately the world today seems to make you think that you have to use the best in order to be successful. That is not the case. What premium bullets do provide is an increased amount of confidence when taking shots that are often considered less than ideal.

EXPLORATION OF IDEAL BULLET WIEGHTS FOR COMMON HUNTING CARTIRDGES
Once the type of bullet is decided upon, a second decision needs to be made which leads us to a discussion on ballistics because each of the bullets available is offered in multiple bullet weights. I originally thought that I could attack this subject and arbitrarily group cartridges of the same caliber together, lumping .308 caliber cartridges like the .308WIN, .30-06, .300WM, etc. together and making a blanket evaluation. However, the diversity between those cartridges does not make a direct comparison appropriate… there is considerable difference between the .308WIN and the .300WM ballistically speaking!
I have selected a number of the common big game hunting cartridges to perform this evaluation (CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE DATA PAGE). I will investigate each cartridge individually and assess the various common bullet weights for hunting the big game species that most western hunters have in mind... mule deer and elk. My hope is that the information is presented in a way that is clear to understand and helpful to the hunter/shooter in selecting the weight bullet that would fit their hunting scenario and also their hunting goals best. I will share my own personal opinion and perhaps some situations where I would find one bullet weight to be advantageous. Ballistics will be calculated using the Strelok+ app that I have found to be very easy to use and accurate. This ballistics calculator does not take into consideration some influential parameters of individual guns like the barrel or rifling twist rate that can have significant impact on accuracy across different bullet weights. Regardless of the data presented here, it is expected that the hunter/shooter perform his or her due diligence in spending some time at the shooting bench.
When hunting ballistics is considered it primarily boils down to two general topics: trajectory and energy. Trajectory is the relationship between the velocity of the bullet, the mass of the bullet, and gravity. By simple logic one would imagine a lighter bullet should have a flatter trajectory while a heavier bullet should have a more “rainbow” like trajectory. But you might be surprised with some of the results! Energy is also a factor of the velocity and mass of the bullet. Again, simple logic would lead us to believe that the heaviest bullets would pack more of a punch.
There is a give and take when considering which bullet weight to go with. On the surface you could simply say that lighter bullets go faster and larger bullets go slower, but when you consider the physics of ballistics there is so much more at play than simply one going faster than the other.
For each evaluation I scoured the offerings made across multiple manufacturers and attempted to select a single brand and style of bullet that has offerings across a wide variety of common hunting weights. The velocity data will come from the Hodgdon “Take Aim at Rifle Reloading Data” database. It may not be possible to evaluate each load with the same powder, but I will evaluate each cartridge with each bullet weight using the same powder. For example, the .300WM data will include 150, 165, 180, and 200 grain bullets with each load using Hodgdon H4831 powder.
Click here to proceed to the cartidge specific data page.


LOAD RECIPES 
Rifle Cal. Bullet Powder Charge (gr) Primer COAL (inches) Velocity (ft/s) Target (100yd) Target (200yd)Target (300yd)
.243 Win 85gr Sierra Varmint SP RL 15 40.5 Rem 9 1/2 2.63"
.243 Win 100gr Hornady Interlock BTSP Power Pro 4000-MR 41.7 Rem 9 1/2 2.64"
.30-06 Spfd 165gr Hornady Interlock BTSP RL 22 60.0 Rem 9 1/2 3.30"
.30-06 Spfd 180gr Hornady Interlock SP H4831 59.5 Rem 9 1/2 3.30" 2688
.308 Norma Magnum 200gr Sierra GameKing SBT RL 22 64.5 CCI 250M 3.35"
.300 Win Mag 180gr Nosler Accubond RL 22 75.0 CCI 250M 3.31"
.50 Muzzleloader 300gr Hornady XTP-MAG Pyrodex 100gr (2 pellets) Win 209 1839
CAUTION: These are loads that have been worked up in my specific rifles/handguns. Reference these loads at your own risk. It is good practice to reference multiple reputable publications containing well tested and SAAMI safe loads for starting loads.

Popular Posts