New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

TomS308

Sergeant
Minuteman
Oct 12, 2008
93
0
0
With this new and improved load.. Our Military doesn`t need to invest in a new, and costly .338 rifle platform and cartridge. This load extends the range to 1500 yards. According to the Defense Industry Daily, the US Army has ordered 38.4 million rounds of 300 Win Mag sniper ammo and is in the process of converting the M24 over to 300 Win Mag. It appears that the US Army will deploy both the 300 Win Mag M24 SWS in conjunction with the 7.62 NATO M110 SASS. This will provide a formidable duo and make the sniper teams very effective in many environments and Afghanistan.

https://www.neco.navy.mil/upload/N00164/N0016409RJN30000209RJN30_0002_att.pdf Safe to click on.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/tuesdaysessioniii8524.pdf

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/USA-Orders-499M-in-300-Winchester-Magnum-Ammo-05493/
 

JFComfort

Vegas Long Range OG
Belligerents
Mar 19, 2009
2,043
553
219
Las Vegas, Nevada
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

I shot a lot of the mk 284 mod 0, It been great brass for handloading. I'll have to look up the new round!

I've never been able to find anymore of that ammo
 

TomS308

Sergeant
Minuteman
Oct 12, 2008
93
0
0
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Sorry JFComfort.. I hit the wrong key and posted before i completed my post. Check out the links. The first link has more info and is recent.. The second post has been posted here before.. But i reposted it for any one who may have missed it.
 

:X2:

Sergeant
Belligerents
Jul 10, 2007
89
0
0
Lipscomb, Texas
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

I shot a bunch of this new stuff about 2 weeks ago, it shot well. The biggest improvement was the switch to H1000 powder, hot and cold test showed a dramatic improvement over the 190's that were loaded with temperature sensitive powder that they were shooting before the change.
 

jaxx1671

Private
Minuteman
Aug 10, 2009
71
0
8
43
Florida
www.ositactical.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

With the info provided that round will still be supersonic with approx 1300lbs energy at 1900 yards.... Thats nice! May get a 300WM next.... Sure would like a GAP 22" .300 in a AI 2.0. With thoughts like this I will never be able to leave the sandbox :-(
 

SANDRAT

Private
Belligerents
Jul 4, 2008
7
0
2
59
Kasilof,AK
www.youtube.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

I did the research on this,decided to go with the 338 EDGE instead,a 240 30cal vs. a 300 338?What is not to like,just had to do the EDGE.Loyal 300WM shooter for a long time,but.......
 

TomS308

Sergeant
Minuteman
Oct 12, 2008
93
0
0
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

SANDRAT.. Not trying to be rude.. but this thread is about the US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1 cartridge. Other cartridges belong in a different thread. Please stay on topic.
 

Texar2

Sergeant
Belligerents
Aug 9, 2008
445
2
22
Texas
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Any information on what twist rate they use or would be best for 220gr MK 300 Win Mag.
 

MountainRogue

Private
Belligerents
Apr 23, 2009
69
0
0
47
Hunt, IL, USA
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

I have been told by Hodgdon that Retumbo was the best for the 300wm. Why is H1000 better? All I can figure (read: guess) is the temp stability but not sure. Please advise.
 

9H_Cracka

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Mar 15, 2005
2,804
2
0
WAY off base (COS CO)
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD

The ballistics are impressive on that bullet. A faster twist and longer throat barrel needs to be done up to work with this bullet versus a 190 or 200 but the effort seems well worth it. If you compare it to a 338 LM running a 250, the 300WM and the 240 are a no brainer if you have to rebarrel anyway. The 338LM really needs to be launching a 300 gr pill for it to come into its own.

EDITED to add:

I see from reading the tech info the 248 mk 1 is a 220 gr load. Another pub I read from Crane also had a 240 gr variant. I forget the designation.
 

JFComfort

Vegas Long Range OG
Belligerents
Mar 19, 2009
2,043
553
219
Las Vegas, Nevada
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Isn't Retumbo a part of the same "exteme" line as Varget and H-1000? So it shouldn't be very temp. sensitive. I've heard of Retumbo being pretty spiky as far as pressure goes once you start to increase a charge.

I use Retumbo in my 208 A-Max load and it shoots great! 3,000 fps with no pressure signs!

I plugged it into JBM and my round will stay supersonic to 1700 yards.

That has me thinking they are getting that 220 SMK moving!!
 

ChadTRG42

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Jan 22, 2007
3,345
2
0
53
Dallas, Texas
www.dallasreloads.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Does anyone know what charge weight of H1000 they are running with the 220 SMK?
The standard (SAMMI) 300WM is 62K PSI, and this new spec calls for 68K PSI, so it will be a little hotter round.
This cartridge set up will be top-notch for our military! I'm glad to see this!
 

ChadTRG42

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Jan 22, 2007
3,345
2
0
53
Dallas, Texas
www.dallasreloads.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jaxson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With the info provided that round will still be supersonic with approx 1300lbs energy at 1900 yards.... Thats nice! May get a 300WM next.... Sure would like a GAP 22" .300 in a AI 2.0. With thoughts like this I will never be able to leave the sandbox :-( </div></div>
Jax- this isn't 300WM ballistics. What caliber and bullet are you running to get this data? The specs call for a 220 SMK at 2850 fps +/- 50 fps. Just curious.
 

TresMon

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Dec 3, 2007
1,238
75
154
NW USA
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1


So please clarify.. is the new load using 220grianers which will work with a common .308 10-twist barrel, or is it using the new SMK 240, which requires a totally custom .308 9-twist. ??

And is H1000 THE powder of this load or is that speculation??

Thanks.
Tres
 

TresMon

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Dec 3, 2007
1,238
75
154
NW USA
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1



Found the info...missed it on the first run.
 

2bfarming

Sergeant
Belligerents
Dec 24, 2007
131
0
0
Oregon
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

This is the exact load I was running. I was at 74.5 grains and fed 215's pushing 2870 out of my 26" bbl.
 

MontanaMarine

MGySgt, Ret.
Belligerents
Dec 9, 2001
2,167
229
169
58
Canyon Ferry, MT
www.svmatch.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Interesting stuff.

This sorta validates the 30-06 as a 1500-yard round with the right load.

We are getting a consistent 2800 fps with the 208 AMax with the 26" 30-06. That combo retains more velocity at 1500 yards than this 300 WinMag load that starts a 220 SMK at 2870 fps.
 

MontanaMarine

MGySgt, Ret.
Belligerents
Dec 9, 2001
2,167
229
169
58
Canyon Ferry, MT
www.svmatch.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

In a way I think it's a shame that Sierra/Federal are about as far as they looked.

I guess Federal's 30 years experience with FGMM impresses R&D desk jockeys more than trigger pullers who research and load for themselves.
 

JFComfort

Vegas Long Range OG
Belligerents
Mar 19, 2009
2,043
553
219
Las Vegas, Nevada
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MontanaMarine</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Interesting stuff.

This sorta validates the 30-06 as a 1500-yard round with the right load.

We are getting a consistent 2800 fps with the 208 AMax with the 26" 30-06. That combo retains more velocity at 1500 yards than this 300 WinMag load that starts a 220 SMK at 2870 fps. </div></div>

Can the military even use an A-Max bullet? I've heard of them using .50 cal A-Max's but isn't their something preventing them from using certain projectials?

If they could use 208 A-Max bullets they can get it going a lot faster than 2800 fps out of a 30-06. My .300 WM is at 80 grs (Retumbo) with no pressure signs and an average MV of 3k fps

What twist are you using on that 30-06? 208 @ 2800 fps!! I didnt even know you could get a 30-06 doing that!!!

Your right about the R&D guys.
 

lrs50bmg

Sergeant
Belligerents
May 26, 2007
281
1
0
66
Orland Park, IL
www.OrlandPT.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

FWIW........

The field testing for this round (and comparing the 210 SMK & 220 SMK) was performed by a retired operator who is currently still working in the NSW community. The decision to go with this round came from the end user up, not the normal R&D deciding what the end user should have.
 

MontanaMarine

MGySgt, Ret.
Belligerents
Dec 9, 2001
2,167
229
169
58
Canyon Ferry, MT
www.svmatch.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Oh I'm not suggesting the 30-06/208 AMax would be better for the military, just making some obsevations about what is possible with the 30-06 with select loads.

I understand The military ammo needs to work is some pretty severe temp extremes.

Most of us are using 1/10 twist with the 30-06. 60gr RL22 yields about 2800 fps for most everyone who's tried it, with a 26" 30-06.
 

Mo_Zam_Beek

Private
Minuteman
Jan 21, 2002
0
1
0
OR_GUN
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Did they look at any other bullet manufacturers?


Hornady 208s?
Berger 210 VLDs?
 

Arcangel8654

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 11, 2007
174
0
18
hudson
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

And based on your experiences Shane with the 240's in your 30'06, I stuck with the 1-10 twist for my 300wm with great results..Thanks
 

ChadTRG42

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Jan 22, 2007
3,345
2
0
53
Dallas, Texas
www.dallasreloads.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

The spec called for an OTM (open tip match) bullet, which the A-max doesn't qualify. The 220 SMK is not a bad choice at all. It is better than the 190 SMK, and the 190 is an awesome round (and I still personally use it). But, there are better bullets out there like the 208 A-max and 210 VLD. The problem is getting these "better" bullets to shoot well in all the 300WM rifles this ammo will be used in. It would be very difficult.
The SMK line of bullets are more forgiving on seating depth and are more accurate without a lot of load work up in given rifles. So, I am very happy to see this spec. I think whoever was part of the decisions did their homework and made a great choice.
 

Arcangel8654

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 11, 2007
174
0
18
hudson
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

From what i understand the choice was based also on which bullet was best during transonic transition.
 

badkarma1985

Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 27, 2008
251
2
22
34
Fort Lauderdale,FL USA
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChadTRG42</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Does anyone know what charge weight of H1000 they are running with the 220 SMK?
The standard (SAMMI) 300WM is 62K PSI, and this new spec calls for 68K PSI, so it will be a little hotter round.
This cartridge set up will be top-notch for our military! I'm glad to see this! </div></div>

Would you be able to make me some loads like that 220 grain they were testing?
 

sandwarrior

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 21, 2007
5,228
807
219
in yooperland
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TomS308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With this new and improved load.. Our Military doesn`t need to invest in a new, and costly .338 rifle platform and cartridge. This load extends the range to 1500 yards. According to the Defense Industry Daily, the US Army has ordered 38.4 million rounds of 300 Win Mag sniper ammo and is in the process of converting the M24 over to 300 Win Mag. It appears that the US Army will deploy both the 300 Win Mag M24 SWS in conjunction with the 7.62 NATO M110 SASS. This will provide a formidable duo and make the sniper teams very effective in many environments and Afghanistan.

https://www.neco.navy.mil/upload/N00164/N0016409RJN30000209RJN30_0002_att.pdf Safe to click on.

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/tuesdaysessioniii8524.pdf

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/USA-Orders-499M-in-300-Winchester-Magnum-Ammo-05493/</div></div>

So the target shooters win again! There almost really isn't any point in showing our ordnance people THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE DOING!!! I had a .300 Mag once. I specifically got 350 pieces of A191 to reload for it. It was great...but my 7x57 stayed right up with it. Bullet efficiency will be ignored until Hell freezes over I guess. They had the better round in the .338 Why the hell not use it. Spec ops will just continue on with it. This is just another O-type ignoramus deciding something that can clearly be seen inferior from the sidelines. Thats the big reason it wasn't adopted as far back as '83. I wish I knew who it was so I could knock the dumbass across two counties.
 

ChadTRG42

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Jan 22, 2007
3,345
2
0
53
Dallas, Texas
www.dallasreloads.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD

An exact copy of it. The charge weight is all I would need, and I should be able to figure that part out based on the velocity. I have some 220 SMK, so I may play with them and some H1000.
 

ChadTRG42

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Jan 22, 2007
3,345
2
0
53
Dallas, Texas
www.dallasreloads.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So the target shooters win again! There almost really isn't any point in showing our ordnance people THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL THEY ARE DOING!!! I had a .300 Mag once. I specifically got 350 pieces of A191 to reload for it. It was great...but my 7x57 stayed right up with it. Bullet efficiency will be ignored until Hell freezes over I guess. They had the better round in the .338 Why the hell not use it. Spec ops will just continue on with it. This is just another O-type ignoramus deciding something that can clearly be seen inferior from the sidelines. Thats the big reason it wasn't adopted as far back as '83. I wish I knew who it was so I could knock the dumbass across two counties. </div></div>
Can you elaborate some on why this is a bad choice then- specifically?
 

badkarma1985

Sergeant
Belligerents
Nov 27, 2008
251
2
22
34
Fort Lauderdale,FL USA
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChadTRG42</div><div class="ubbcode-body">An exact copy of it. The charge weight is all I would need, and I should be able to figure that part out based on the velocity. I have some 220 SMK, so I may play with them and some H1000. </div></div>

Please let me know when you do. I would be interested in some.
 

sandwarrior

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 21, 2007
5,228
807
219
in yooperland
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Chad,

Because there are more efficient bullets in 6.5, 7mm, and .338. As MontanaMarine noted, "I wish they would have looked past somebody besides Federal and Sierra." There are several designs out there that are far better than the 220 gr. Sierra bullet they specify. Berger 180's for example pushed at the same muzzle velocity get 150 more yds. of supersonic travel. And, FWIW, they do stabilize better I think than Sierra past supersonic range. I shot both at 4000 ft. elevation not sea level or where I'm at here at just under 1000 ft. But they went truer in flight and truer into the target.

I dunno, I should just be happy they decided to go with more potent 1k+ medicine than the 7.62x51.
 

MontanaMarine

MGySgt, Ret.
Belligerents
Dec 9, 2001
2,167
229
169
58
Canyon Ferry, MT
www.svmatch.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

I just noted in the download ( http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2009infantrysmallarms/tuesdaysessioniii8524.pdf ) that the only bullets compared were Sierra.

Berger and JLK both should pass for OTM. I didn't see any mention of them. Either would be able to be driven faster at equal pressure, drift less, and deliver longer supersonic range.

It's easy to claim one bullet shoots better, but a side by side comparison is generally more convincing.
 

Graham

Generalissimo
Belligerents
Oct 30, 2007
49,820
16
142
Michigan
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

The new load extends the time-line of the current platform, saves money in the short term, and is designed to make conversion of the existing equipment easier; it's likely a stop-gap measure until a decision is made regarding the funding and implementation of some kind of .338.
 

sandwarrior

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 21, 2007
5,228
807
219
in yooperland
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Super Bee 950</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I dont believe Berger has the Mfg capacity to supply the military.</div></div>

...But they have the design and there is manufacturing capacity for that design to this level(contract) in this country.
 

esorensen

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 13, 2008
738
2
22
50
Broomfield, CO
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Dan Lilja once told me of his load recommendations for the 300 ultra. He said, "I have no experience with the RUM case but I have used many others like it." "The secret recipe is... a whole bunch of H1000 topped off by the heaviest match king they make and light it with a 215M." "There's your load."

I think they have made a fine choice. I'm glad they even went with the 220 as they could have redone the 190 thing once again. I'd take one in a second over the 7.62x51.

The Sierras in my experience have been far kinder in relation to seating depth as opposed to the VLD type bullets. I wouldn't want VLD's in a battle rifle. You could never judge where the lands were, and have ammo to match.
 

Casey Simpson

Private
Belligerents
Jan 2, 2008
28
1
0
56
Louisiana
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

This is a step in the right direction, but a 6.5 130 gr bullet at @2900 exhibits superior ballistic performance and produces less recoil than the chosen caliber. I wonder if they considered .260 Remington? Seems more taxpayer and user friendly to me. Am I missing something, really?
 

Graham

Generalissimo
Belligerents
Oct 30, 2007
49,820
16
142
Michigan
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Casey Simpson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Am I missing something, really?</div></div>Maybe barrier penetration; the same reason they are considering a .338 instead of a 6.5x55.
 

Casey Simpson

Private
Belligerents
Jan 2, 2008
28
1
0
56
Louisiana
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Graham</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Casey Simpson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Am I missing something, really?</div></div>Maybe barrier penetration; the same reason they are considering a .338 instead of a 6.5x55.
</div></div>

Yeah, may be.
 

sinister

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 16, 2002
1,665
100
169
College Station, Texas
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Long story.

The civilian contractor who wrote the Infantry's 2005 Requirement Document for the Semi-Auto Sniper System ignored the input of the divisions, Sniper School, SF Sniper School, and the AMU and wrote and staffed the M110 would REPLACE the M24.

Once the M-110 was fielded units were directed to turn in their bolt guns. Special Operations Command and the divisions told the equipment folks to pound sand.

USASOC wrote their requirements documents long ago and solicited for an entire series of sniper weapons -- light, medium, heavy, and anti-materiel. Latest requirement is for a Long Range Precision System in 33-caliber.

Leg Army was caught flat-footed. They have since modified their fielding plan retaining the M24 with the 300 as the "Bridge" to the LRPS. They will strap-hang on whatever USASOC buys. Because they had no original document to up-gun to 300 (which was always an SF M24 requirement) they plain adopted the newest 220 Match King load to give a leap-ahead capability with some overlapping of both 300 Win mag and 338 Lapua-like capability.

Once again Leg Army is relying on SOCOM modernization to drag them into the 21st century.
 

ChadTRG42

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Jan 22, 2007
3,345
2
0
53
Dallas, Texas
www.dallasreloads.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Chad,

Because there are more efficient bullets in 6.5, 7mm, and .338. As MontanaMarine noted, "I wish they would have looked past somebody besides Federal and Sierra." There are several designs out there that are far better than the 220 gr. Sierra bullet they specify. Berger 180's for example pushed at the same muzzle velocity get 150 more yds. of supersonic travel. And, FWIW, they do stabilize better I think than Sierra past supersonic range. I shot both at 4000 ft. elevation not sea level or where I'm at here at just under 1000 ft. But they went truer in flight and truer into the target.

I dunno, I should just be happy they decided to go with more potent 1k+ medicine than the 7.62x51. </div></div>
Sand,
I would agree, but we are talking an across the board caliber/load for many rifles. And all the rifles will need to shoot this load well. If you have ever played with the VLD's in multiple rifles, you will see they are very sensitive to seating depth, and are very finicky from rifle to rifle. The SMK is fairly predictable on how to load it and get good results. The secant ogive bullets, like the VLD, can take a lot of work to get to shoot well. They are not near as easy to get to shoot as the SMK, which has a tangent ogive. Once you find the sweet spot for the VLD in "your" rifle, it will out shoot any SMK, period. But for an across the board bullet, the SMK (IMO) is a great way to go.
And, again, cost is a factor. The VLD bullets will run about 10%-11% more in cost. Factor that over the millions of rounds of ammo, and it's a lot of dough.

I shoot a 260 Rem now, but shot my 300WM for several years in competition. The energy the 300WM offers over any of the 6.5 calibers (and almost all of the 7mm loads) is huge. When you see it hit steel at extended ranges, you understand this energy. The .338 is a good option, but not in the 338 Win Mag. You have to go to the 338 Lapua or bigger to improve over the 300WM. And one of the goals of this venture was to reduce the cost of ammo. The 338 Lapua is a much more expensive option.
 

sinister

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 16, 2002
1,665
100
169
College Station, Texas
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Re-barreling the M24 to 300 Win Mag was the fastest and cheapest option that outperforms 7.62 while also meeting certain target-killing performance requirements.

Guns in hand (check).
Replace barrel and bolt (check).
Buy military specification ammo already tested and approved -- exercise the option and put more money into the purchase run (check).

Where new costs start racking up:

New scope (higher/variable magnification);
folding stock;
rails for night sighting and fighting gear;
muzzle brake and suppressor.
 

sandwarrior

Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 21, 2007
5,228
807
219
in yooperland
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ChadTRG42</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Chad,

Because there are more efficient bullets in 6.5, 7mm, and .338. As MontanaMarine noted, "I wish they would have looked past somebody besides Federal and Sierra." There are several designs out there that are far better than the 220 gr. Sierra bullet they specify. Berger 180's for example pushed at the same muzzle velocity get 150 more yds. of supersonic travel. And, FWIW, they do stabilize better I think than Sierra past supersonic range. I shot both at 4000 ft. elevation not sea level or where I'm at here at just under 1000 ft. But they went truer in flight and truer into the target.

I dunno, I should just be happy they decided to go with more potent 1k+ medicine than the 7.62x51. </div></div>
Sand,
I would agree, but we are talking an across the board caliber/load for many rifles. And all the rifles will need to shoot this load well. If you have ever played with the VLD's in multiple rifles, you will see they are very sensitive to seating depth, and are very finicky from rifle to rifle. The SMK is fairly predictable on how to load it and get good results. The secant ogive bullets, like the VLD, can take a lot of work to get to shoot well. They are not near as easy to get to shoot as the SMK, which has a tangent ogive. Once you find the sweet spot for the VLD in "your" rifle, it will out shoot any SMK, period. But for an across the board bullet, the SMK (IMO) is a great way to go.
And, again, cost is a factor. The VLD bullets will run about 10%-11% more in cost. Factor that over the millions of rounds of ammo, and it's a lot of dough.

I shoot a 260 Rem now, but shot my 300WM for several years in competition. The energy the 300WM offers over any of the 6.5 calibers (and almost all of the 7mm loads) is huge. When you see it hit steel at extended ranges, you understand this energy. The .338 is a good option, but not in the 338 Win Mag. You have to go to the 338 Lapua or bigger to improve over the 300WM. And one of the goals of this venture was to reduce the cost of ammo. The 338 Lapua is a much more expensive option. </div></div>

Chad,

I would agree except we've been banging this drum since the early-eighties. I will agree there is more cost involved, but at what cost to the soldier when that attitude permeates the purchasing process. If the best (by a reasonable margin) is out there, and is reliable, we need to be looking to get it in place.

As far as ringing steel at long distance I will say my 7x57 shooting 168 Bergers hits with authority but not as much as my .300 WM did. However, my 7mm WSM shooting the 180 Bergers hit with more authority than the .300 WM did (at extended ranges) In fairness though, I only shot .208 A-max's and 210 Bergers and Sierra's.

Also, I will agree the Sierra's are easier to fine tune with seating depth. But with VLD's loaded standard off the lands 0.100" I've shot many .5 {edit: MOA} groups of 5 @ 300-600. Now I realize that isn't shooting them past 1k but the inherent accuracy is there. Also, I noted with the Sierra's 210 in my previous post that didn't stay true past supersonic range. We had a number of sideways hits when they hit the target. Note: I missed with 7mm and .308 Bergers and the Hornady as well. But not as much. Again, in fairness, I wasn't shooting the 220 gr. bullet they went to. But in many calibers I've shot, .223, .243, .257, .264, 7mm, .308, .312, .323 using Sierra's higher/est BC bullets for that caliber, I've found that they tend to remain unstable once they pass transonic stage. In many instances I've found the longer Berger VLD's stabilized better than shorter Sierra's. Same rifle, therefore obviously, equal twist.

Sinister,

I agree USASOC is dragging the leg Army into the future. The problem with each Administration change, both military and civilian, the leg Army is allowed to hold us back as much as they can. That's the frustrating part.

Anyhow, it's better than dragging their feet for ten more years when we need it now. And, it is an improvement.
 

dj70

Sergeant
Belligerents
Minuteman
Nov 28, 2008
145
0
0
Ligonier, PA
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

I've only been loading with H1000 since I got My 700P 300 win mag last year. I will admit that the rifle, H1000 and the MK190's and Amax 208's are must better than me. This cartridge shines with 98% and up case volume.
 

Downzero

-
Belligerents
Oct 15, 2006
2,224
3
142
Las Cruces, NM
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

I personally think that a 7mm cartridge would have been a much better choice. .300WM offers very little that 7mm mag does not.

They have long action 700s already. Any chambering that will fly straight and kill a person at extreme distances without killing a barrel in 1000 rounds should have been considered.
 

sinister

Gunny Sergeant
Belligerents
Apr 16, 2002
1,665
100
169
College Station, Texas
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

If it didn't already have a DOD Ammunition Code it wasn't considered.

Perfect in 20 years is the enemy of buy now and issue off the shelf today.
 

laylowlong

Private
Belligerents
Sep 25, 2009
73
0
8
56
Los Angeles, Ca.
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

Sand hit the nail on the head. This process has been ongoing since the 80's. Now, in 2009, the EME (entrenched military establishment) still wants to play .30 cal. when the reality of our current conflicts dictates that distance is your friend. So once again we are constrained by the rule that existing equipment must be maintained as the platform. Well Gee,,,, didn't that make it easy. I hope this is just a stopgap measure
as the previous poster speculated, and that an intelligent step into the present
state of the art will be adopted sooner, rather than later.
 

Super Bee 950

Sergeant
Belligerents
Jan 17, 2008
595
2
0
56
Austin Texas
www.bikesolutionsllc.com
Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1

You guys keep putting a lot of faith on the majic bullet. If the troop cant hit the target, it doesnt matter what he shot. Training is more important that the bullet, and the 300WM is more than than capable of being better than most troops shooting long range.