7.62X40.... A 300BLK on Steroids

Michael458

Well-Known Member
Life Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2019
Messages
1,453
Location
Conway
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
For those not familiar with 7.62X40 it really is just a slightly longer 300 BLK. I forget the chaps name that developed the cartridge, but it really is pretty decent, and pretty serious little cartridge. It has slightly more case capacity than a 300 BLK, and on average you can get 150-200 fps more velocity with it over the BLK.

On the left, 7.62X40 and on the right 300 BLK................. Both loaded with the 100 Raptor from CEB.

DSCN8119.jpg


My buddy Sam Rose got me interested in the 7.62X40, and pointed out that Wilson was building rifles, uppers and had barrels available as well. Sam is talented, he just got a barrel and put one together. I have no such talents, so I bought the more expensive complete Upper, and put it on a PSA Lower I had.

I was not happy with the choice of barrel twist that Wilson offered, 1:12. I asked if they would change the barrel to a 1:8, or at most 1:10, which they refused. I should have went with my first instinct and had Brian at SSK get a reamer, but no, I wanted one so ordered it anyway.........

Got the upper, it was nice, looked good, like you would expect anything that cost that much and come from Wilson.

DSCN0142.jpg


I had no intention of using much of the Wilson load data, I decided to create my own. Since WW 296 was top powder for the 300 BLK for me, I figured it would do well with the 100 Raptor in 7.62X40, and it did, except that it would not function the action. I sent the gun to Brian at SSK, and he did whatever magic you do to one to get it to function. Gas system was not set proper......... So Brian sorted that out, sent the gun back.

Now to the range with different bullets and loads.........Well, the damn thing would not shoot 2 inch groups at 50 yards, no matter what I did. I tried other powders, bullets, the works. And I can tell you from experience, if a rifle won't shoot a CNC Machined bullet, such as the 100 Raptor from CEB, then the damn thing won't shoot anything, and it would not. It was awful. I put it off to the side. After a few weeks I was fed up with it, called Brian and told him to get us a Reamer.

When the reamer came in, sent the upper back up to Brian at SSK again, and he put a 1:8 twist barrel on and sent it back. Now it would shoot, almost everything in a hole at 50 yards. Brian said the barrel from Wilson was rough as hell and no wonder it would not shoot. CHEAP CRAP. I imagine there are some Wilson fans out there, and I will only use Wilson magazines in my 1911 guns, but I won't be getting many more things from Wilson in the future, not after this. With the "exception of".... Wilson has ready made 7.62X40 brass, 100 to the bag, I think about $40. It is well formed and ready to load. Well worth the $40 or so per 100 to me. So yeah, I get the 1911 magazines and the 7.62X40 brass from Wilson! HEH....

So now, the gun is shooting good, and with 22.5 gr/WW 296 I get a tad over 2700 fps with the 100 Raptor at 55000 PSI. I loaded several hundred up, and put them away.

I decided since we had a reamer, it was a good idea to have a bolt gun done too. I search around, found a Winchester M70 in 223 and snatched it up, had Brian build it into a 7.62X40 as well. I thought I might try a 18 inc barrel on the bolt gun, but it did not help at all with the WW 296 load. It was burning out at 16 inches and very little to no gain at 18. But I was very happy with the bolt gun regardless, and set up it to do pressures too........

DSCN0305.jpg


DSCN0308.jpg


The Winchester would shoot.............If I did my part..........

DSCN0665.jpg


Got it sighted in proper, but not quite as good a group, I can assure you that is me, not the gun or load.

DSCN0666.jpg


So I rocked along for a couple of years and did not mess much with 7.62X40..... A few months ago I decided to re-visit the cartridge, loads and powders.......... I had noticed that I had some decent results with LilGun, but did not pursue at the time. I decided to give it a more thorough look.

I hooked the bolt gun up to the Oehler to do pressures and went to work....... I was very pleased with the results as well................also found some anomalies with the cartridge........

With New Formed brass from Wilson I could run 26/Lilgun with the 100 FB Raptor and get 2829 fps at 51500 PSI. With FIRED and Formed brass I needed to drop to 25.5/Lilgun for 2857 fps at 52500 PSI. This is odd, because normally the Formed new brass gives higher pressures than the Fire Formed brass. But Lilgun does strange things anyway. Why? Don't know, just is and not worth the effort to investigate the why, at least not now.

Would this hold in the 16 inch gun as well? Yes, the same 26/LilGun gives a steady 2740 fps in the 16 inch Wilson gun. This is an increase of around 70-80 fps on average, and at lower pressures to boot. Feed/Function no issues at all.

With this information I now made the LilGun the official 7.62X40 powder, but how would it do with other bullets, like the 110 Barnes TTSX? All Wilsons data runs AA 1680 and gives 2500 fps with the 110s. I ran again WW 296 for a little better than 2500, but not by much.

I tried 24/LilGun and the 110 Barnes TTSX with Formed New brass for 2622 fps and 50600 PSI. Fired brass then we drop to 23.5/LilGun for 2601 fps and 51700 PSI to keep things fairly equal.

Yes, I could push that on up a bit, approaching or getting closer to 55000 PSI, but everything is working properly and shooting good. not to mention, that 26/LilGun leaves a pretty full case. LilGun does strange things when compressed, most of the time moves "backwards" less pressure and less velocity when compressed too much. So I don't want to go there either........ I will hang tight with these loads for now anyway........... I am sure I will investigate some of these things later............

For now, load'em up and shoot..................

DSCN8111.jpg


DSCN8115.jpg


DSCN8124.jpg
 
Somehow over the last few years I found myself with too many 16 inch 300 BLKs. I surmised that the 7.62X40 reamer we had just might clean up the chamber, and 7.62X40 is more attractive in 16 inches of gun than 300 BLK. I had a dandy shooting PSA gun at 16 inches that I first sent to Brian. Huge problem, the barrel was bonded to the receiver, and to get it out, we were going to break or damage the upper receiver. Brian tried everything, but we decided no go on that.

I had two CMMG guns at 16 inches, so I sent one of those to try. Zero issues there, took the barrel out, reamed it to 7.62X40 and it shoots better than the Wilson upper, even with the new barrel. I have a Vortex Spitfire on it and can't ask for better..........I love the Green Tape Brian put on too so we know its 7.62X40... LOL............

DSCN7927.jpg


DSCN7936.jpg


DSCN7929.jpg


DSCN7938.jpg


Then I tried the NEW LOAD with 25.5/LilGun for 2785 fps in the 16 inch barrel

DSCN7940.jpg


I can live with that, mind you this is a big circle, little circle and small dot in the middle. Can be black, which is what I was shooting with no power at 1X…. Or Green or Red…………….
 
I personally do not care much for 7.62X39, nor an AK.... Not much of a fan of that......... Not only that, but most important, .308 caliber, and the 100 FB Raptor.......... After all, the Bullet does all the Heavy Lifting......... plus a pile of other good bullets are available.

7.62X40 is a cut back 223 case, up to .308 caliber............. Just a long 300 BLK........... Fits regular magazines........
 
Looks like a fun round & my .300BLK 10.5" SBR'd AR is very accurate with supersonics, but it's fixin' to get a 8" barrel & suppressor & will become a dedicated subsonic HD/PDW-ish gun. For my higher velocity needs I'm loving my 6.8SPC.

Truth be told, if I were to do a wildcat, I'd look hard at the .357AR. It's one of the simpler, less expensive ones to do. I'm just discovering the .357Maximum & thinkin' a rimless .357Max at AR-appropriate pressures would be a hammer in a 16" AR.
 
Last edited:
Truth be told, if I were to do a wildcat, I'd look hard at the .357AR. It's one of the simpler, less expensive ones to do. I'm just discovering the .357Maximum & thinkin' a rimless .357Max at AR-appropriate pressures would be a hammer in a 16" AR.

I can tell you a good bit about a 358 MGP or MPG, whatever it is.... Friend of mine and myself have a couple of these, mine I have set up to do pressures and load data......... Interesting, but just have not had time to post any of it here.
 
I've read quite a bit on the .358 MGP & would love to build one. Definitely a beast. A guy I used to BS with on a motorcycle forum built one a couple of years ago & his loads & chrony data were right in line with all the published numbers. I read something online a few years ago. Apparently someone fired a .358 MGP & a .458 SOCOM side by over the chronograph & did all the calculations for retained energy, velocity & trajectory at 100, 200 & 300 yards. The gist was that the .458 had the edge in energy at 100 yards, but that the .358 hit harder at 200 & 300 yards & a good bit flatter trajectory than the .458.

I do love the idea of a .35Rem in an AR15 platform, but I honestly have no need for one & it is one of the pricier 'cats to get into.
 
I have a pretty good data workup for the 358 MGP, along with real pressures to go with it. Surprised the fellow that designed it, finding out his loads were way over pressure too............. I will try and get a thread on it this week..
 
All these weird cartridges lately. To each his own, but I'll stick with my 5.56 AR and my x39 AR. Cool stuff if you roll your own though!
 
With the .300BLK becoming a dedicated subsonic/suppressed gun & my 18" 6.8SPC, I've pretty much got my AR needs covered. A .35 cal thumper would be a lot of fun, but I think my next AR will be a pinned 14.5" midlength 5.56 with either a LPVO or a fixed 3x optic. Wife's got a 16" midlength 5.56 she's fond of, so a little more AR commonality would be a good thing & make stocking ammo & mags easier.
 
All these weird cartridges lately


Yes, there is a bunch of them these days. But, a good thing too, makes the platform more versatile than it has ever been. There are many I would not waste my time on, but a few that are viable and have value in different areas of shooting and or hunting.

I have a very good friend, Sam Rose. He and I share a passion for experimenting with different and new things. We have done a lot of this sort of thing, especially with big bore bullets and cartridges. Things that most people would rather just not know about. One of my Friends here, Billy can tell you, made a statement once, it goes something like this "With all the science and experimenting Michael does, he has taken every bit of the FUN out of shooting", heh, to which I reply we all have different views of what FUN IS. I enjoy very much working with and developing new cartridges, bullets, load data, pressures and so forth.

Sam came to me with both the 7.62X40 and the 358 MGP. The 7.62X40 I liked so much I adopted it into the family. Its still .308 caliber, it loves that 100 Raptor and does well with other bullets too. On average it is 150 fps to 200 fps faster than top end 300 BLK. So I found a good fit for it. Still a big fan of the 300 BLK, and have way more 300 BLKs than 7.62 X40. As for the 358 MGP, it is a one off deal, and not bad at all, especially if you like the fact it shoots common bullets, easy available, larger caliber, and works on standard AR 15 platform.

It's just plain fun to us to do new, different things, and make new discoveries..........
 
Yes, there is a bunch of them these days.

It's just plain fun to us to do new, different things, and make new discoveries..........

Absolutely! I would love to get into reloading and custom loads, but I can't put the funds towards it. Sad. Anyway, I do enjoy reading about what you guys do with this stuff.

It's especially interesting to see that the x40 can be loaded in a standard magazine! That's the only thing that irks me about my x39 AR. The special mags. Of course I can stuff 10 or so in a .223/5.56 mag and it will work in a pinch.
 
Last edited:
I'm resurrecting this thread to have a polite discussion on the 7.62x40 WT and their newer iteration the 300 HAM'R. If I have interpreted the drawings correctly there is only a 0.03in case length difference between the two cartridges yielding ~1.0gr more case capacity?

300HAMR.jpg7.62x40_WT.gif


Both can be formed from .223Rem/5.56 NATO brass and sling .30cal projectiles ranging from 95gr to 150gr, dependent on the overall length of bullet and base to ogive measurements. A bullet length of less than ~1.25in appears to be optimal for the 300 HAM'R which unfortunately does eliminate the Barnes 120gr TAC-TX though not the 110gr. This may also eliminate the usage of CEB's Raptors.

I've always found the 300BLK a touch on the anemic side and I was actively looking for a "beefed up" Blackout when I stumbled across WC's super slick marketing of the 300 HAM'R. It intrigued me greatly and I thought it would make an excellent 2021 project despite the component shortages. I had plenty of AA1680 on hand from dabbling with sub & super .300BLK as well as a variety of .308 projectiles. Since 7.62x40 and .300 HAM'R are just a simple barrel swap in the AR-15 platform....it was nearly a no brainer for me to order a barrel, some RCBS dies and Starline brass to make this happen! :) I did and overall I have been extremely happy with with just about everything about the cartridge. Just about every bullet I have tried has produced good accuracy (1.5MOA or less) with two bullets yielding outstanding accuracy (Lehigh Defense 110gr CHAOS & Hornady 135gr FTX). I was fortunate enough to find 20lbs of the same Lot# of CFE BLK and have had good success acquiring additional .30cal projectiles for hunting & plinking.

Ballistic-X-Export-2021-03-22 21_27_45.393393.JPGBallistic-X-Export-2021-02-21 21_43_19.671347.JPG
IMG_3477.jpg
 
For some damn reason it won't let me edit the above post to include this:

Full disclosure I was damn near the one to step on the landmine in the Pressure Works Thread, however that instance did lead to greater knowledge of the 7.62x40. Prior to stumbling onto the 300 HAM'R my knowledge of Wilson Combat was limited to their 1911 magazines decades ago and only more recently I had gotten a Sig P320 grip module of theirs that I do quite like.

I fully understand that your more recent experiences that have been less than favorable, and I too am a little confused on why the preference of WC of the 300 HAM'R over the 7.62x40 TC. Other than a little bit more velocity, with traditional bullet, I don't think the 300 HAM'R can do much more than the 7.62x40. I'l add more load and accuracy data as I work through it.
 
I'm resurrecting this thread to have a polite discussion on the 7.62x40 WT and their newer iteration the 300 HAM'R. If I have interpreted the drawings correctly there is only a 0.03in case length difference between the two cartridges yielding ~1.0gr more case capacity?

A bullet length of less than ~1.25in appears to be optimal for the 300 HAM'R which unfortunately does eliminate the Barnes 120gr TAC-TX though not the 110gr. This may also eliminate the usage of CEB's Raptors.

Good Morning Mr. @Bunsen ................. I think we can have a great discussion since basically these two cartridges are the same..... one a tad longer than the other and that is it.......Basic nearly nothing distinction so it can be called something else. I personally don't buy the fact that the tiny extra length and the 1 gr more capacity now makes it a "Hammer" of a cartridge, over the 7.62X40. I see this morning on Wilson the 7.62X40 is not offered, and of course in its place the 300 Hmr. I think that is the purpose of the Ham'r from the beginning, something Wilson could say is "Wilson"........ A far better choice would have been to work with the 6.8 case. It is a hammer over either the 7.62X40 or 300 Ham'r. Work we did with one gave us over 3000 fps in a 16 inch gun with the 100 Raptor.

I have mentioned several times to this point the issues I had with the 7.62X40 I bought from Wilson, briefly they refused to put it together with a faster twist barrel, which I requested. "No, we won't do that".......... I went along, knowing better. Received the upper, it would not function with any powder other than AA 1680 I believe at the time. I wanted to try and use WW 296 and LilGun... Sent to SSK to have it adjusted. Finally got it to function, and then accuracy was real crap, and totally useless and unacceptable. I mean 2-3 inches BEST at 50 yards. Tired of screwing around with it, I bought a Reamer, had SSK make a new barrel in 1:8 twist and at least it will shoot better now. Was told by SSK the barrel was rough, and basically a crap barrel...... I suppose that is what I get for requesting a faster twist...... screwed.......... What I should have done to begin with is get SSK to get a Reamer, and make our own gun, forget Wilson, would have been way ahead of the game...........

No doubt, some of my issues with Wilson has carried over some prejudices to the 300 Ham'r. I admit that.

Really the only cartridge issue I have with the Ham'r is its limited by the magazine length and various bullets it may or may not work with because of that. Even the 7.62X40 has some issues in this area. I made a number of 7.62X40 out of basic Starline 223 not long ago, I actually cut it a bit short of spec so it would work better with the 100 FB Raptors.

In the beginning Wilson data for 7.62X40 was dismal to say the least, no imagination, only a few bullets and I believe only working with AA `1680 at that time. At least with the Ham'r they have expanded their bullet selection from 95 gr Lehigh up to various 150s........Their powder selection is not so imaginative however, AA 1680--CFE BLK and Shooters World. There is very little difference in these powders, and in any given cartridge if you use AA1680, you can use CFE Black and Shooters World Socom. I use CFE BLK instead of AA 1680 simply because of Muzzle blast in various cartridges, they are very nearly interchangeable and very close to the same burn rates.

7.62X40 and 300 Ham'r are close to borderline cartridges, they have too much capacity for WW296 to be optimum, and not enough for AA 1680/CFE Black. LilGun has been able to give me some extra velocity, 100 fps + with the 100 Raptors and have lower pressure than the WW 296. AA 1680 is a no go for the 100 Raptor and 7.62X40, at 26 gr it gave a serious bulge in the case and would not chamber, max out at 24/AA 1680 for 2475 fps with no bulge, at 38000 PSI. So it is not up to velocity. 26/LilGun will compress enough without bulge or issue, give 2848 fps with the 100 Raptor at 48000 PSI, very low pressure. But that is max case capacity. MilSpec brass gives 2829 at 51000 PSI with the same load.

In the 7.62X40 I primarily only run the 100 FB Raptors, the Terminals of the 100 FB Raptor exceed all other bullets in 308 caliber inflicting trauma and maximum penetration. I run a 110 Barnes TTSX at times running 2655 fps with 24/LilGun at 51000 PSI.

LilGun is optimum with bullets less than 115 gr in 7.62X40, and would be the same in 300 Ham'r.

In January this year I played very very briefly with a 125 Hornady something or other in 7.62X40. 22/LilGun gave me 2453 fps at 55000 PSI. 26/CFE BLK gave me 2425 fps at 48800 PSI. But the POI (Point of Impact) was off from my Primary load with the 100 Raptors, so I did not pursue this any further. I ended up using this bullet in 308 Winchester, since POI was close or the same with my 100 FB Raptor load in 308 Win.

I believe these cartridges are at their very best with the 100 FB Raptor of course, and then 110 Barnes. The Lehigh Controlled Chaos is very good as well, the remaining base is less, blades are bigger than the Raptor, just as much trauma, but penetration of the base is not as good, yet, a very good bullet and better than any of the heavier conventional bullets for Terminal Performance. Accuracy of CNC machined bullets is superior in most all cases to conventional bullets. If I had a .308 caliber rifle that would not shoot 100 Raptors, it would hit the streets, or get a barrel change.
Full disclosure I was damn near the one to step on the landmine in the Pressure Works Thread, however that instance did lead to greater knowledge of the 7.62x40. Prior to stumbling onto the 300 HAM'R my knowledge of Wilson Combat was limited to their 1911 magazines decades ago
HEH....... You were LUCKY not to step into that one. I like the 1911 magazines as well............. but since the BS with the 7.62X40, I am done with Wilson... good thing I have lots and lots of 1911 Wilson magazines on hand, will never have to purchase anymore the rest of my days...............
I fully understand that your more recent experiences that have been less than favorable, and I too am a little confused on why the preference of WC of the 300 HAM'R over the 7.62x40 TC. Other than a little bit more velocity, with traditional bullet, I don't think the 300 HAM'R can do much more than the 7.62x40. I'l add more load and accuracy data as I work through it.
Thanks Mr. @Bunsen I appreciate your understanding, and we can leave it at that....... any data for 300 Ham'r would interchange easy with 7.62X40 and the other way as well. I have not dived much in heavier bullets in 7.62X40 because there is nothing to gain there with Terminal Performance over the 100 Raptors. For shooting, plinking and cheaper ammo, they would be fine I think. My small experience with 125s indicate you might be better with CFE BLK than LilGun, and most certainly WW 296, but dropping weight to 115s and less, then LilGun may rule at that point.

Something else to consider, any particular bullet that might be too long in 300 Ham'r and the magazine, and you want to try it, just trim the Ham'r back to where it works, it won't make any difference to amount to anything.......I've done that for years in all sorts of cartridges to make things work better............

I had two bolt guns built in 7.62X40 on Winchester M70s chambered in 223 Remington. Yeah, they are push feed, but they work extremely well, and are great to do test work, pressure work and tote around. My daughter decided she was going to hunt with her Brother, deer and such, I had one built for her, and its about as perfect as you can get............ 100 FB Raptors at 2850 fps "literally hammer deer" DRT on the spot, no running and chasing and followup. And, no recoil for the girls and kids.................. About as good as it gets, and 300 Ham'r would be the same, might even be a little better in the bolt guns, maybe has a little more magazine length? Not sure about that 100%..... will have to look...... I have to load all the ammo the same, as it might need to fit a AR magazine too.............

Anyway, good chat, think sharing data and info is great....................

At one time I had my 7.62X40 in a Accurate Innovations Bastogne stock, it looked spiffy, I went back to the Winchester Ultimate stock mostly because of weight........ but it did look good.........

DSCN5833-X3.jpg


DSCN5817-X3.jpg


DSCN5809-X3.jpg
 
Great post as always @Michael458, I appreciate your input and sharing of your knowledge of things. The more I dig into the 7.62x40 WT the more intriguing things become to me. According to what I've found via the Internet (which is always 100% correct right?) it started life as a wildcat designed by Ken Buchert and it has a rather extensive thread over on A15.com that was started April 2008.


It appears that WC dubbed it the 7.62x40 WT and debuted it during the Spring of 2011 with very favorable reviews being published late 2011 to 2012:


Only six years later the 300 HAM'R was introduced in September 2018.


To me that seems somewhat of a short commercial life cycle before bringing out it's replacement. You are correct that there are barely any references to 7.62x40 WT on Wilson's website, although searching for it does pull up some items including dies and some load data with more than just AA1680 powder listed:



I'm certainly intrigued about the 100gr CEB Raptors and am also looking at their 125gr Maximus, at an OAL = 1.034in is within the length range that typically works in the HAM'R. I'm most definitely going to have to trim the case neck back some to use any of the Raptors at mag length.
I had two bolt guns built in 7.62X40 on Winchester M70s chambered in 223 Remington. Yeah, they are push feed, but they work extremely well, and are great to do test work, pressure work and tote around. My daughter decided she was going to hunt with her Brother, deer and such, I had one built for her, and its about as perfect as you can get............ 100 FB Raptors at 2850 fps "literally hammer deer" DRT on the spot, no running and chasing and followup. And, no recoil for the girls and kids.................. About as good as it gets, and 300 Ham'r would be the same, might even be a little better in the bolt guns, maybe has a little more magazine length? Not sure about that 100%..... will have to look...... I have to load all the ammo the same, as it might need to fit a AR magazine too.............

That is a VERY fine looking Winchester you have built for your Daughter, combining the minimal recoil of the cartridge with a nice lightweight rifle makes for an awesome critter getter indeed. Velocity of 2850fps is also quite zippy. Running numbers in JBM (they have CEB bullets but NOT the 100gr Raptor for some reason?) that's a nice little laser beam out to 300yds (sighted in a little high at 100yds) with excellent energy.

I've just procured some 110gr Nosler bullets so I will start development to see if I can replicate the lone box of factory ammo I purchased to function check my rifle initially, that also happened to shoot under half MOA. Then report back.

I've been working on a load for the Speer 130gr FNHC, but it's being a bit persnickety. ;)
 
@Bunsen that is some good research, thanks for getting us updated with some things. That 100 FB Raptor was redesigned in 2015 I believe. Dan had a 100 ESP Raptor, Enhanced System Projectile, Solid on one side, Raptor on the other. We shot it for some years, but the 100 ESP as a solid was not much to it because of the very overly short Nose Projection. So I asked Dan to change it to a Flat Base Raptor, not a ESP. I gave him the parameters so it would work in 300 BLK, 308 Winchester, 300 Winchester, and of course 7.62X40. The 7.62.40 is the hardest one, because of the shorter OAL for magazines. But we got it right to fit all those cartridges, so it probably works with most others, except I think 300 Ham'r would have an issue, until you shortened the case to 7.62X40 length.......in effect, making it a 7.62X40.... LOL........................ One can take the Talon Tip out, and use them in 30/30 as well......... This 100 Raptor is what makes 300 BLK, 7.62X40, and 30/30 totally different animals.............It is also extremely effective in 308 Winchester, wickedly so....... Deer/Pigs, and black bear are all DRT with the bullet, regardless of cartridge......... I would estimate easily that our group has shot well over 150 deer/pigs and bear with the bullet loaded in these cartridges. Now the guys don't want anything else to hunt with. Last fall I had 3 of my guys go to Texas on a big time expensive deer hunt. All three carried 308 Winchesters and 100 FB Raptors I had loaded for them. They all shot their big trophy deer, then proceeded to shoot some does as well. I think they shot 12-15 deer total, every one was DRT, Bang Flop, no running off.......... One of them decided to hunt javelina at a
feeding spot. Javelina are maybe 75 lbs or so piggy type things. He lined up 4 of them broadside, and took the shot. All 4 of them dropped at the shot on the spot. 1 Bullet--4 javelina down and out. LOL.......

Regardless of the fancy cartridges, fancy rifles we must always always keep in mind........... "The Bullet does all the Heavy Lifting" in any cartridge. Load the finest cartridge and rifle with a crap bullet and you will get crap results.............

Not too long ago, a few months I suppose, I ordered a 1000 pieces of 7.62X40 brass from Wilson. Wilson has been having someone process the brass the same as they do 300 BLK. It was always great brass, and ready to load right out of the bag at $40 per 100. They only had 400 pieces of the 1000 I ordered. I also had 3000 100 FB Raptors ordered and received those about a month ago now. I loaded the 400 7.62 X40s with the Raptors, added those to my stockpile of 7.62X40 loads.

The bullet is so good it would be worth your efforts to shorten some brass and try them in your gun, especially if you wanted to hunt with it this fall...............

As for the Barnes load data, I am not sure Wilson had that posted when I did 7.62X40 a couple or so years ago. ?? I don't recall it.

Someone from here brought out a 300 Ham'r in January 2020 and we ran the loads he had with the LabRadar. I can't believe its been that long ago. I recorded the data we got and it was pretty much spot on or close to what the factory numbers were.....

110 Factory Wilson 2679 2657 22 Average 2665 X3
125 TNT Factory 2511 2480 31 2498 X3
130 Factory 2419 2388 31 2403 X3

This was a 20 inch barrel Wilson Ham'r.
 
NOTE: I just realized I forgot to list the powder correctly as CFE BLK in the Ballistic-X images. I will have to redo them later.

Well, I had some good results this past weekend working on the 110gr Varmagedon load and I think I've gotten the Speer 130gr FNHC about as good as I'm going to get them.

Of the three powder charges used the lowest charge weight yielded the best overall group although the higher weights were all still around 1 MOA. Velocities were 2540 up to 2620fps.
Ballistic-X-Export-2021-05-03 23_11_29.136045.JPG
The Speer 130gr FNHC has been a persnickety bugger to get to shoot and this is about the best I think it is going to get. I've easily tested ten different charge weights incrementally working my way up from below published MAX to as far over max as I am willing to go. I've consumed an entire 100 round box during this development. I've seen no pressure signs at all even with a compressed over MAX load and the velocity has steadily crept up towards that "magic" 2490-2500fps BW states this bullets needs to achieve for proper accuracy. Maybe I got a bad lot# of bullets, but no matter what I've tried there are always flyers with this bullet. There were four with this ten shot group. It could be me, but I've had more WTF shots with this bullet than any other I've tested so far in the 300 HAM'R. I have not bothered to weight or measure any of the bullets as these are meant to be cheapish porcine eradication and plinking fodder where 1.5MOA is good enough.

Ballistic-X-Export-2021-05-03 23_16_47.053745.JPG
 
Personally I would concentrate efforts on the 110s in these cartridges. Assuming you are staying with conventional bullets from Barnes, Hornady, ++++............. Terminals (which is the top of my list) assuming reasonable accuracy, are more than good enough with the 100s--110s to override any advantage a heavier bullet will give. The 100 Raptor of course will outperform Terminally even up to and beyond 200 gr .308 calibers even in 300 Winchester. The various 110 Barnes are superb, and the 110-115 Lehighs perform as advertised. Cheap shooting goes to the various 110 Hornady but the terminals expire on those much above 2350 fps from the muzzle. So even if you can run higher velocity, its a moot point. With some conventional bullets more is less. Velocity is not always your friend. All depends on your mission and objectives. Mine have always been Terminal Performance, assuming reasonable accuracy.

Many times working with various bullets in any given caliber, I would test the bullet first before spending time on anything else. I would understand the parameters of how that bullet performed terminally.

Now I am sure that there are other objectives that one might wish to achieve, and I am just injecting my own objectives on any cartridge or bullet, and I am speaking to the masses, not anyone in particular as well.

Back to @Bunsen .....concerning nothing but terminals, don't get caught up on the highest velocity with these conventional bullets, you may very well and most likely will find that lower velocities the bullet may perform better......? The real magic velocity is where the bullet performs the best during terminal penetration.
 
@Michael458 as always you make a fine point that terminal performance is a VERY important, if not the most important, aspect for determining bullet selection when evaluating components for a hunting application. I do much more shooting than hunting though these days, thus my criteria for component selection and usage will vary from yours. Although I am hoping to get back into whitetail deer this year and possibly pig eradication hunts with the 300 HAM'R. Time will tell.

That's good to know about the 110gr V-series terminals and the 2350fps muzzle limit. I assume they basically fragment with minimal penetration? I do imagine they do quite a number on rodent sized game though (red mist)!

I can actually push them almost up to 2700fps, but I backed them down to a more reasonable 2550fps to maximize accuracy and save some powder. They do make great range fodder though along with the 125gr FMJ's.

Heading into 2021, most of my .308 dia bullets were 155gr and up so it has been an adventure acquiring (good) components to feed the new 300 HAMR. So far I have been lucky with what components I have been able to acquire.
 
That's good to know about the 110gr V-series terminals and the 2350fps muzzle limit. I assume they basically fragment with minimal penetration?

The various Hornady's hold together pretty good starting at the muzzle around 2350 or so...... They really do pretty good for themselves in short barrel 300 BLKs........I think much more velocity and they would be separating.....They do make good range fodder, I was buying the yellow tip Zombies by the 500 packs and really good prices. Terminals were good enough for my purposes and POI matched in most guns with the Primary load of 100 Raptors. So makes a really good load to shoot and play around with, and not cost $1 per bullet.....I concur.......But, I only use them in 300 BLK, they are not worthy of much more......

DSCN2008-XL.jpg


DSCN2007-XL.jpg


DSC04513-M.jpg


DSC04511-M.jpg


By comparison;

DSC04517-S.jpg


DSC04518_1-M.jpg


DSC04718-M.jpg
 
Well that is some very interesting data @Michael458. A few quick questions for clarity, then I must ponder it some more. In you notation in the photos what does "X" stand for? Also, I'm curious were you shooting ballistic gel or a more naturally occurring medium?

I haven't mentioned it previously but in addition to my 16.2" HAM'R rifle I also built a 11.3" HAM'R pistol. I seem to recall that the stated velocity loss per 1" of barrel was ~20fps for the HAM'R, thus ~100fps difference from the 16.2" rifle data. I will have to test this working theory this weekend. My current Vmax/Varmagedon load would likely fragment and separate when shot from the 16.2" (2540fps), but may actually work well in the 11.3" pistol (~2440fps).
 
Mike is on the boat I think. We have a "trap" that exactly duplicates 100s of field autopsies..

I know he does not use Gel in the trap. I've tested in the lab and shot into it several times.

Mike's recipe is far more representative of "real world" ballistics in tissues. I'm sure he will be along at some point and give some very good info on his bullet trap method(s).
 
In you notation in the photos what does "X" stand for?
X2 or X4 is just the number of bullets tested......

I'm curious were you shooting ballistic gel or a more naturally occurring medium?
I have been working with a test medium of wet print. Mixed with 1.5 inches of catalog material every 10 inches. It is amazing how much tougher the addition of the catalog material is. Rule of thumb around 35% tougher than just plain newspaper print. Medium is soaked through and through before testing. Bullet "Behavior" is 100% equal to what you get in animal tissue, with the exception of field variables, such as bone. Penetration however is not exact, since the test medium is far denser than animal tissue. Rule of thumb comparisons are that with conventional expanding bullets you will get 70% more penetration in animal tissue than the test medium, with NonConventional Trauma inflicting bullets 90%-100% more penetration in animal tissue, and with Solids 35% more penetration in animal tissue. This medium has been consistent now for 20 years. Ballistic gel is good for handguns and smaller caliber rifles, and does a good job
showing bullet behavior in most cases. Not so good with big bore rifle bullets. Just can't get enough of it in play to be efficient.

I seem to recall that the stated velocity loss per 1" of barrel was ~20fps for the HAM'R, thus

I have two lengths of 7.62X40 from 16 inches to 18 inches...... On average 40 fps per inch loss from 18 to 16.

In 300 BLK it runs from 30-40 fps per inch.

With the big bore rifles, and in particular working with the solids, you need a lot of test medium, I run two boxes, both have 65 inches of test medium in them. When testing some of the big bore solids, I put both of them together. You will only need one box for testing any conventional expanding, or other trauma inflicting bullets.

DSC04190-L.jpg


DSC04283-X2.jpg


For example testing bullets such as these, ballistic gel just don't work so good, and you have to have a hell of a lot of it, Most BG is 6 inch blocks, that does not do so good with big bore.

DSC02924-XL.jpg
 
Every time you post @Michael458 I get an information overload (good thing) to process. That is a fascinating trap you have designed and the fact that you can stop those large solids is impressive!

I have two lengths of 7.62X40 from 16 inches to 18 inches...... On average 40 fps per inch loss from 18 to 16.

In 300 BLK it runs from 30-40 fps per inch.

That is typically the number I use also, but I recall BW posting something in the THF thread about 300 HAM'R not loosing as much velocity per inch. It was some oddball value like 12fps or 24fps. I went to the range yestereday to test this between my 16.2" and 11.3" rifles. I got all set up and reached for the ammo I had loaded for the test, and I had left it on the bench at Home. :oops:

Oh well another range trip this afternoon is no bother!
 
thread about 300 HAM'R not loosing as much velocity per inch. It was some oddball value like 12fps or 24fps.

Naturally different powders can give different results..... I had just glanced through the LilGun load differences in 7.62X40, in looking at the WW 296 loads they came to 30 fps per inch. Since you are using CFE BLK, which is slower, that might be interesting. Logically we would think with slower powder burn, it would take more barrel to reach peak efficiency, and maybe more velocity loss per inch. At some point you reach diminishing returns, powder has completely burned. I have no idea what that might be in these cartridges, guessing maybe 22 inches. And again the powder plays a major role in this, faster powders will burn out in shorter length barrels, but also may reach peak pressures quicker than peak velocity. Example in 7.62X40 is when I discovered how good LilGun worked, I gained over 100 fps, and had even less pressure than with WW296, which in the smaller 300 BLK is perfect, and LilGun too slow......All good stuff........

Normally such a low drop in velocity per inch is when you have reached peak efficiency in a cartridge, I have seen this in some larger bore cartridges, not so much in small bore.
 
In my next life I want to come back as Michael458's adopted son, with no brothers and sisters. Maybe have dual adoption with Bunsen..................😆😆😆😆
 
Naturally different powders can give different results..... I had just glanced through the LilGun load differences in 7.62X40, in looking at the WW 296 loads they came to 30 fps per inch. Since you are using CFE BLK, which is slower, that might be interesting. Logically we would think with slower powder burn, it would take more barrel to reach peak efficiency, and maybe more velocity loss per inch. At some point you reach diminishing returns, powder has completely burned. I have no idea what that might be in these cartridges, guessing maybe 22 inches. And again the powder plays a major role in this, faster powders will burn out in shorter length barrels, but also may reach peak pressures quicker than peak velocity. Example in 7.62X40 is when I discovered how good LilGun worked, I gained over 100 fps, and had even less pressure than with WW296, which in the smaller 300 BLK is perfect, and LilGun too slow......All good stuff........

Normally such a low drop in velocity per inch is when you have reached peak efficiency in a cartridge, I have seen this in some larger bore cartridges, not so much in small bore.
So I found the reference I was thinking of, it's a statement in the 300 HAM'R load data:


NOTE: All velocities from a 16.25" barrel using a conventional chronograph at 75 degrees F and rounded to the nearest 25fps. Approximately 20fps higher velocity is normally recorded when using a LabRadar and 12fps per inch for other barrel lengths.


I don't know if this may be true when going from 16" up to 18" and 20" because it is certainly NOT the case going shorter. My test load yesterday was a 110gr Varmagedon over 28.34gr of CFE BLK, which is a slightly compressed load, lit by a CCI41:

11.3" barrel and 16.2" barrel data
IMG_3730.jpgIMG_3731.jpg


That's a 206fps drop for 4.9" of barrel length which equals 42 fps/in.

It also showed that the 110gr load from the 11.3" barrel is pretty close to that 2350fps launch limit you previously mentioned for the bullet.
 
@Bunsen ..........Yeah, I told you they were full of S$*T...... HEH HEH...................

Around 40 fps per inch is about what I expected, and what I got with the 7.62X40........ Could not be that much different, they are basically the same............

The good news is, your 110s are falling right into max velocity for Terminals in your shorter gun....... That is a good thing............At least for the short gun. Those bullets even work better at 2100-2200 fps.......
 
@Bunsen ..........Yeah, I told you they were full of S$*T...... HEH HEH...................

Around 40 fps per inch is about what I expected, and what I got with the 7.62X40........ Could not be that much different, they are basically the same............

The good news is, your 110s are falling right into max velocity for Terminals in your shorter gun....... That is a good thing............At least for the short gun. Those bullets even work better at 2100-2200 fps.......
Yes, I was very pleased with the velocity numbers for the short rifle as it's my PDW I keep close at hand around the house. It's currently loaded with Lehigh Defense 110gr Controlled Chaos doing 2550fps out of the 16", thus closer to ~2350fps out of the 11" build.

It looks like I'll be backtracking a little bit and next working on a 300 BLK load for the 110gr and my 16" rifle. Considering the three powders I have on hand I should be right in that terminal sweet spot for the bullet if I stick on the lower end. I just need to find a good accuracy node.
1620748770113.png
 
It's currently loaded with Lehigh Defense 110gr Controlled Chaos doing 2550fps out of the 16"

I picked up some 115 Lehighs at some point, and was actually pleased with the test results...... Trauma inflicted was very good, and was a bit surprised at the depth of penetration of the tiny left over solid bullet. This is why you test before banking on anything. Also, keep in mind, these are not conventional bullets, more velocity, gets more, just like the Raptors......

DSCN7990-XL.jpg



It looks like I'll be backtracking a little bit and next working on a 300 BLK load for the 110gr and my 16" rifle. Considering the three powders I have on hand I should be right in that terminal sweet spot for the bullet if I stick on the lower end.
No WW296? In 300 BLK I use exclusively WW 296. Although, H-110 is supposed to be right next door to WW 296, what very few I have tested from other people using H-110 it gave just slightly higher pressures. But not having direct comparisons that is only an uneducated thought at this point. Of those powders I would go with the H-110.
 
This thread was such a ride geez Louise haha
Are you not being entertained and educated? I'm personally learning a lot, I hope others are too. :)

I picked up some 115 Lehighs at some point, and was actually pleased with the test results...... Trauma inflicted was very good, and was a bit surprised at the depth of penetration of the tiny left over solid bullet. This is why you test before banking on anything. Also, keep in mind, these are not conventional bullets, more velocity, gets more, just like the Raptors......


No WW296? In 300 BLK I use exclusively WW 296. Although, H-110 is supposed to be right next door to WW 296, what very few I have tested from other people using H-110 it gave just slightly higher pressures. But not having direct comparisons that is only an uneducated thought at this point. Of those powders I would go with the H-110.
That's good to hear and see the results of the Lehigh bullets. They have an excellent reputation based on their subsonic 300 BLK offerings, or is that Discreet Ballistics? I get them confused sometimes. Either way WC happened to have them in stock when I was ordering dies and I wanted a bullet for a PDW self defense round. :) They have excellent accuracy over a pretty wide node in the 300 HAM'R. I thought I had chrono data for them but realized I do not. Granted it is the same weight projectile as the Nosler Varmagedon I just tested with the same powder charge, thus velocity should be very similar, yes? Although the Lehigh may have more bearing surface and slightly more drag, but not too significant I would think.

Back to the 300BLK loading: unfortunately no WW296 on the powder shelf to test out. I never have used it in any previous calibers, and powder is a little bit of a challenge to get right now. Although I did luck into some H110 about a month ago...and 2k of the 110gr projectiles. ;) I'll keep my eyes open though and see if I can find any or trade for some.
 
Back to the 300BLK loading: unfortunately no WW296 on the powder shelf to test out. I never have used it in any previous calibers, and powder is a little bit of a challenge to get right now. Although I did luck into some H110 about a month ago...and 2k of the 110gr projectiles. ;) I'll keep my eyes open though and see if I can find any or trade for some.
Yeah, well don't get too hung up on the WW 296, while I much rather use it, I am sure the H-110 will get you by. Its always been a favorite of 300 BLK shooters and it will suffice with the 110s you have no issues I am sure. I normally keep large stocks of things I use on a regular basis, and have large stocks of WW 296......... By all information, they are the same powder, but I am not so sure about that. What I tested was loaded by others, so I did not have direct control of those, differences could have been something unknown to me, or it could have been a variance in powders....... Follow the book and carry on...........
 
Back
Top Bottom