# 1000 yard loads.



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

For some reason I want to put together a 1000 yard rifle. My question, should I use the .243 or .280 platform I currently have? Thoughts?

Option #1. Remington 700 in .243 (synthetic stock). 
Option #2. Ruger M77 in .280 with bull barrel (wood stock).

Both rifles have been glass bedded. Both have Timney Triggers. It is basically a matter of which one gets new glass and gets extra special attention paid to the hand loads for extreme long range.

When I move to Hibbing, MN. There is a 600 yard range just down the road. I am looking forward to buring some powder.

QUESTION: I have never built loads for these ranges. How does one go about it? Do they start with making a tight 500 yard load and then try to stretch that out to 1000 yards? Advice please.


----------



## liljoe (Jan 25, 2008)

First of all, to reach 1000 yds you are going to have better and more consistant results using the heavier for caliber bullets. To get the heavier bullets to stabilize you are going to need a faster twist in your barrel. Both of these calibers will reach to 1000 yds..

Let's take your .243
I would want to shoot at least 105 gr. bullets on up to the 115 DTAC type bullet. You would probably be best with a 1-8" twist on your barrel for the 115. The .243 is going to be MUCH MORE sensitive to wind drift, but it is also light recoiling and pleasant to shoot.

Now - your .280
If you had a 1-10" twist in your barrel you should be able to handle up to around the 168 grain bullets. That will get you to 1000 yds quite adequately.
If I were to build a 280 (I shoot a 280AI) I would put a 1-9" twist barrel on it and that would handle up around the 180 gr bullets.

No matter what rifle you choose, you are going to be far better off using bullets with the higher BC (Ballistic coeffient).

There is nothing magical to shooting to the 1000 yd mark. It is an art to do it when you have more than 6-10 mph cross wind. The really good long range shooters are very talented "wind readers".

It is quite easy to measure the twist in your barrel if you do not know what it is. Be more than happy to explain if need be.

I have a 243 and a 280AI that I use and practice with on a regular basis at the longer yardages so if you have any questions I would be more than happy to give you my 2 cent opinion.

TAKE CARE

PS: Your scope is really going to come into play when you start reaching out to the longer yardages.


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

Looking at the factory specs I am assuming the .243 is a 1/10" twist and the .280 is a 1/9.25" twist. I will confirm when I can get home. So, assuming that. Can these rifles pull off 1000 yards? They supposedly won't handle the heavier bullets well.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I agree with everything liljoe said. I'll only add get the highest ballistic coefficient you can stabilize, at the highest velocity, that will group under 1/2 inch at 100 yards. Add good glass and practice. There is no real trick. Get your velocity from your rifle and run a ballistic program. That will get you started. Like liljoe we are all more than happy to help. 
Start with a slow bulky powder for your load. Try to stabilize one of the heavy Berger VLD bullets.


----------



## liljoe (Jan 25, 2008)

ruger1 said:


> Looking at the factory specs I am assuming the .243 is a 1/10" twist and the .280 is a 1/9.25" twist. I will confirm when I can get home. So, assuming that. Can these rifles pull off 1000 yards? They supposedly won't handle the heavier bullets well.


If the above holds true and they were mine, I'd go with the 280 and personally I'd vote for a Fed 210M primer, H4831sc for a powder, and Berger 168 VLD bullets to start with. See how your rifle likes that setup and adjust as needed. I personally don't use the Hornady A-Max bullets but have shot side by side with guys that do and I really can't knock the results. They use the 162 gr. You will be fine with your 280 if you can get the accuracy out of it needed to get to 1000. Theoretically, if you can get 1" at 100, 2" at 200, you'll get 10" at 1000. That is what you should try for. As Plainsman said 1/2" is better. After that it becomes the Nut behind the bolt. You also need to be honest with yourself. By this I mean what group can you shoot your rifle at EVERY time or better not the one time you had 5 rounds @ 1/2" but 2 other groups at 1-1/2. Then you have a 1-1/2" rifle/capability IMO.

Keep in mind I'm a hunter, not a bench rest shooter. I do not go looking for the LR shot but am very comfortable in taking it "if the situation and conditions" are as such that I am relatively positive of a clean kill.

I shot a straight 280 rem for many many years and took a train load of game with it. When the barrel went south on me I took it in to get it re-barreled and my gunsmith convinced me with the amount of hunting I do and the distance I felt comfortable at, that I should go with an AI barrel to gain a little velocity. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a 280 Rem for anything in the lower 48 States if you use a quality bullet and put it where it belongs. My personal opinion is that way too many people are way over gunned for their ability and spend more time reading hunting and shooting magazines than they do actually burning powder. Today's writers have got to come up with something new to write about and that in turn usually translates into writing about bigger and faster is better. Why someone would need a 338 Lapua to kill an elk totally escapes me.


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

liljoe said:


> ruger1 said:
> 
> 
> > My personal opinion is that way too many people are way over gunned for their ability and spend more time reading hunting and shooting magazines than they do actually burning powder. Today's writers have got to come up with something new to write about and that in turn usually translates into writing about bigger and faster is better. Why someone would need a 338 Lapua to kill an elk totally escapes me.


Oh, I would agree 110%. Every year we get someone who shows up to our cabin in NE MN for deer hunting with a 7mm Mag, 325 WSM or something of the like. We are in the Superior National Forest and BWCA (boreal forest). A long shot is 100 yards.

I constantly get into debates as I am a huge proponent for the 30-30, 45-70 and slug gun for deer hunting in our area.


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

liljoe said:


> ruger1 said:
> 
> 
> > Keep in mind I'm a hunter, not a bench rest shooter. I do not go looking for the LR shot but am very comfortable in taking it "if the situation and conditions" are as such that I am relatively positive of a clean kill.


That is all I am as well. A hunter who strives for precision.

However I just thought it would be fun to know I can make a 1000 yard shot.


----------



## liljoe (Jan 25, 2008)

ruger1 said:


> liljoe said:
> 
> 
> > ruger1 said:
> ...


It is fun and very satisfying. As well as frustrating at times. It's a lot like golf, if you stay with it, continually practice, always try to improve, and learn from the bad days it can be a lot of fun.

As a side note. Best and most practicing I do is with a very accurate 
22LR with a scope/turret. I try to get 1-2000 round in a year. Most of my shooting with the 
22lR I do between 2-300 yds. Very inexpensive to shoot, gives you a lot of trigger time, you can work on breathing, various rests as well as very humbling in the wind.

Out here in the west I shoot a lot of rocks with the 243 and 280Ai for practice at various ranges and terrain. Never run out of targets and it is satisfying when one explodes.

Get your 280 up and running and go for it.


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

liljoe said:


> Why someone would need a 338 Lapua to kill an elk totally escapes me.


It does it better at longer distances than most other rounds. Why fight to get really close when you can just practice and then take those longer shots? If you are close great but sometimes the critters do not want you to get close.

If you gave Chuck Norris a typewriter and 0.000000000000000000001th of a second he can write the Complete Works of Shakespeare


----------



## liljoe (Jan 25, 2008)

People said:


> liljoe said:
> 
> 
> > Why someone would need a 338 Lapua to kill an elk totally escapes me.
> ...


Bang flop - dead is dead. 280 or 338 Lapua - same result, half the powder. Hey if you like shooting gophers with a 270, go for it. Whatever trips a guys trigger.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

i would run the 105 amax in the 243 and the 162 amax in the 280 but i am kind of a hornady fan boy. either one will get to 1000 you just need to be able to guide them there


----------



## People (Jan 17, 2005)

liljoe said:


> People said:
> 
> 
> > liljoe said:
> ...


So you would take a 1,300 or 1,500yd shot with your 280 on an elk?


----------



## liljoe (Jan 25, 2008)

Nope. Wouldn't take that shot with a 50 bmg either. I only trip a trigger when I am sure of the results. Them shots are for idiots or pro's - I'm neither.


----------



## xdeano (Jan 14, 2005)

I use to shoot a 90g Berger, varget, Fed210M primers and Lapua brass out of a 243. It was around 3100fps if i remember right. It would hold at 1K, but the wind would usually push me around quite a bit.

Higher the BC the less wind deflection you're going to have at those ranges. Also drop will be less due to gravity. Keep the velocities up and gravity will have a lot less time to act upon the bullet.

Now i'm running 105 Bergers or 105amax and I actually just shot out to 1330 today with a 14mph cross wind and it held up very well considering the small round. I was in that trans-sonic state out at the target, i was darn close to going subsonic. The group size was roughly <10". I was pushing 47.5MOA drop and 14.25MOA wind out of the 6SLR.

The 162 amax is a good bullet.

A 338LM is an awesome performer. More then 1000ft/lbs of energy at over 1700 yards. That's impressive. I'm actually thinking about putting together a 338 Norma Mag maybe sometime in the future. Hard to find components now though. So i'll sit back and wait.

xdeano


----------



## spitfire_er (Jan 23, 2010)

I have a 280 Improved for a 1,000 yard F-class rifle. Why? Shooting higher BC bullets minimized wind drift at these ranges. I am currently waiting for a barrel to build a 6mm (of some sort) to shoot at 600 and closer with ether the 105 amax, or the 115 dtac's, which ever bullet shoots better. The 6's will shoot just as good as the 7's when you are shooting in dead calm conditions, sometimes the 6's even shoot better, it becomes the shooters capability to hold then. When the wind starts gusting, you'll notice the difference between the two day after day. The 7's just make life easier when the wind picks up.

If I were you I would go with the 280 hands down. I have gotten those 162 A-max's to shoot extremely well, and some guys choose those over the 180 bergers, which your gun prob won't stabilize. My smallest group to date shot out of a hunting rifle was my 7 mag with the 162's. 5 shot @ 100 just over 0.200", although the shooting gods were smiling down on me that day!


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

So if the .284 dia bullets offer higher BC than the 6 and 6.5 why wouldn't a person opt for the even higher BC of the .338 dia bullets? I am sure my 300gr smk and bergers will move less in the wind than my 180gr bergers in my 7STW.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

since he was talking fclass i would not want to be behind a 338 for 20 shots in short order and i think there is a max cal also. i would also think that most people not all but most would practice more with a gun that is enjoyable to shoot as you can have the best every thing but with out the practice it is just a gun.


----------



## Savage260 (Oct 21, 2007)

I understand that, but it carries over to any long distance shooting. There will be give and take for any chambering, but higher BC will always be better than lower BC.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Savage260 said:


> I understand that, but it carries over to any long distance shooting. There will be give and take for any chambering, but higher BC will always be better than lower BC.


I grew up pushing for all the speed I could get out of a rifle. However, as time went on I became more interested in high ballistic coefficient. The only way to get that is heavy bullets. I have gone from 165 gr in my 300 Win mag to 210 gr Berger VLD. In the 6.5mm the 140 VLD perform very well. I can see where a person would get hooked on a 338 Lapua or similar cartridge.

I don't like recoil either, but if a rifle shoots well I can't stay away from it. I had to rebarrel my 300 mag because it was to much fun. I suppose shooting prairie dogs with a 300 mag would be considered over-guned, but darn it was fun. I bought a 308 so I wouldn't wear out a new 300 mag, and I bought the 6.5 Creedmoor so I wouldn't wear out my 6.5X284. I think my guns will last this time because that little Creedmoor does everything I want to 1200 yards.


----------

