.300 PRC put 'em in the salt

TNPshooter

New member
Joined
Mar 13, 2020
Messages
5
Reaction score
12
I just returned from my Eastern Cape adventure hunting a variety of plains game with my Proof Research .300 PRC shooting 190 grain Hornady Outfitter ammo (CX Bullet). The rilfe and ammo performed flawlessly. Shots ranged from 460 yards to inside of 150 yards. Game taken were Eland, Kudu, Nyala, Bushbuck, Gemsbok, Zebra, Blesbuk, and Impala. All animals but two went down with one shot. The two that needed an extra round were my fault due to poor shot placement, but those two didn't make it 50 yards. The Zebra, Gemsbok, Nyala, Bushbuck and Blesbuck all dropped in their tracks with one shot. The Eland stumbled 15 yards and went down with one shot. The Zebra and Eland bullets lodged just under the skin on the opoosite shoulder. I estimate 95% mass retention of the bullet. I'll post a few photos when I get a chance of the bullets recovered.

All in all, I'm very pleased with this particular caliber/bullet combo.
 
Last edited:
I am doing a Montana elk rifle hunt later this year and the outfitter is now providing Best of the West 300 PRC rifles. I believe they are using 212 gr ELD-X. I am looking forward to trying them out.
 
I’m headed to Idaho for elk in October…. Christensen Mesa Titanium in 300 PRC loaded with Hornady Outfitter 190gr CX…

I’m getting roughly .75” groups at 100 with the CX… for whatever reason I couldn’t get sub moa out of the 212gr ELD-X load… so I’ve decided CX will be what this rifle shoots (bought 5 boxes)…

I’m hoping I have similar results as the OP and we put a couple of elk in the salt… (buddy that’s going with also shoots a Christensen in 300 prc… his is a Ridgeline FFT though…).. he’s also shooting the 190gr CX load…
 
I absolutely love the cartridge and used it in Africa as well. There I was using Barnes 190 LRX and it was complete pass through on everything including Eland.

I recently finished a build with 1:8 twist so I can shoot the Barnes 212 Bore rider. I am also shooting the newer 208 LRX factory load that is showing great promise. I just need to shoot some stuff other than paper to see how they perform. Watch out pigs!
 
Im typically an "old and proven" sorta guy over "new and innovative"... For example, historically I would have always favored a 300 H&H or 300 WM over a 300 PRC...

My wife talked me into picking up the Christensen though.. and I have to say.. Ive quickly fallen in love with the rifle and the caliber..

Mine easily holds MOA even if Im not working very hard at it.. and is slinging 190gr 30 caliber projectiles over 3000 FPS.. the rifle itself is extremely ergo dynamic and just fits well in every possible way.. and while I am also not typically a fan of brakes, with the factory cylindrical brake, its reasonably mild to shoot.... I dont have any problem hitting the range and putting a full box through the gun (shot close to 50 rounds in one sitting a few weeks back.. that ended up being a little much.. but Ive done 20 on 2 other occasions and its really been no big deal at all)...

Im seriously thinking the next PG hunt I do.. or potentially when I hunt NZ next year.. that the 300 PRC is what will go with..
 
Congrats on a successful hunt. What was your longest shot on? Zebra are tough but I'm a little surprised you didn't get an exit...maybe it was a longer shot. I recovered no bullets on a recent hunt with 300 win mag on waterbuck, big sable, etc
 
I love my 300PRC, I have taken to Africa and it performed excellent. 220gr ELD-X has been great for me. I have no concerns about it for thin skinned stuff. It killed Eland, Kudu and Elk with mine, no issues at all.
 
I'm glad to hear the CX bullet performed. I'm thinking of taking my 7mm PRC on the next safari and it shoots the 160 CX factory loads so well that I haven't bothered with loading my own yet. I am very interested in seeing the recovered bullets and to hear what range they were shot. I'd like to know what they do at what speeds. I used my 7 PRC with the CX on whitail but no recovered bullets yet......which I'm good with!
 
I'm glad to hear the CX bullet performed. I'm thinking of taking my 7mm PRC on the next safari and it shoots the 160 CX factory loads so well that I haven't bothered with loading my own yet. I am very interested in seeing the recovered bullets and to hear what range they were shot. I'd like to know what they do at what speeds. I used my 7 PRC with the CX on whitail but no recovered bullets yet......which I'm good with!
Try a box of Federal 7 PRC 170gr Terminal Ascent. Absolutely hammered everything I shot in South Africa.
 
Not sold on the nickel coating on the ascent bullets. No solvent I'm aware of will attack that. May shoot well but long term barrel cleaning and life is still up in the air.
 
It seems like the heavy bullets for the .30 magnums have made them into absolutely ideal PG rifles. I am very interested to hear more on the 212 and 200 ELDX as mine is a .300 WSM with a 2.950" max OAL, so the longer copper bullets are out for me.
 
Taking a Browning XBolt in 300PRC to Wyoming for elk in October. I’m be shooting 208gr Barnes LRX bullets
 
Good for Browning going 1:8 twist allowing you to shoot that bullet. I am surprised with so many others going 1:9.
 
I'd say i have been well served with my 300 PRC, its about the perfect LR hunting cartridge in my opinion.
It is the new and improved 300 WM, and it will replace it as America's 30 cal magnum.

I've loaded one for a friend and its pretty impressive/ easy to tune, recoil with 212 eldx bullets is nothing with the factory brake.
With Lapua brass its an absolute no brainer, it was built a custom so I decided on 30 Nosler because I like the case design a little more.
 
If anyone wants to chime in with velocity numbers on 250 grain ATIPs or 212 ELDXs, I am very curious. I looked long and hard at a .300 PRC, but running numbers in Quickload and looking at published data, I couldn't justify moving on from a .300 WSM even in a ground up rifle build (which I already have quite a bit invested into, so I was biased).

The .300 WSM will push 225 AMAX bullets at 2800 from a 29" barrel at short action AICS mag length (2.950" with the thinnest stainless magazines you can get). That requires that a lot of the shank be inside the case, which means that trimming the neck/shoulder junction is required. I actually use .300 PRC length (3.8") MDT magazines for my long action .300 WSM which is built around 250 ATIPs, but I do not have velocity numbers for that yet as I am 1) working too much and 2) bulk fireforming cases first. Predicted is between 2700-2750, thought Quickload is more of a safety tool than a velocity predictor. When I have actual chrono data for my the long action length 250s (IIRC 3.3" OAL to keep the start of the boattail JUST above the neck/shoulder junction) I can post it here for any who are interested.
I have no interest in starting a cartridge war as I am of the opinion that NEARLY ALL cartridges that area available today are pretty darn good, but we have an embarrassment of riches in .300 magnums these days. While I was very excited that the .300 PRC got rid of the .300 WM belt, I was genuinely frustrated at the OAL. Specifically, the whole idea with the 6.5 CM was to build a .260 Remington that would fit long bullets in a standard short action. A .300 PRC built to allow a 250 ATIP to be seated with the shank above the neck/shoulder junction with a 3.34' or 3.6" OAL still would've had a TON going for it over the .300 WM. NO belt, a fair increase in case capacity given the blown out case, slightly longer body and sharper shoulder, and a more efficient short/fat design which really does reduce recoil. But more than that, it would've allowed standard long action or magnum length rifles to become competitive again in the same way that the 6.5 CM resurrected the short action. It is possible that dropping the bullet diameter to 7mm might've been necessary to fit a 3.34" max OAL, but .308 probably would've been fine in a 3.6" max OAL.

I guess my critique is that if you are clean sheet designing something, and you decide that the only way to meet your targets is to exceed a dimension that has been a standard for over a century, then you need to GET a lot of concrete benefit in return for breaking compatibility. If you built a laptop with no USB ports in favor of a new cable standard that is faster, it needs to be more than 110% as fast. People with .300 WMs criticized the .300 WSM for the same thing 23 years ago: It is insufficiently better to justify a new case, BUT the .300 WSM had the benefit of fitting into a bog standard short action with only a blown out bolt face. A lot of my .300 WSM magazines are .308 magazines that were converted using a aerospace grade tools wielded by a skilled artisan (actually me using a pair of pliers and 3 dummy rounds in about 10 minutes per magazine). The point being, the .300 WSM uses a magnum bolt face in a short action, but doesn't break any big standard dimensions.

The point of my comparison is twofold: 1) a direct velocity comparison helps folks to decide what is best for them and 2) to vent about Hornady's decision to deliberately break action length compatibility standards with the .300 PRC. Rather than calling Hornady names (I have family that works there and I use almost exclusively Hornady components and tools), the more mature criticism/learning experience is a simple comparison of performance numbers. Thus my initial request for .300 PRC velocity numbers so that we can compare them with real world .300 WSM numbers. I think that objective comparison would allow folks to make their own subjective decision "Was this gain worth creating an entirely new category of rifle action length?".
 
Last edited:
If anyone wants to chime in with velocity numbers on 250 grain ATIPs or 212 ELDXs, I am very curious. I looked long and hard at a .300 PRC, but running numbers in Quickload and looking at published data, I couldn't justify moving on from a .300 WSM even in a ground up rifle build (which I already have quite a bit invested into, so I was biased).

The .300 WSM will push 225 AMAX bullets at 2800 from a 29" barrel at short action AICS mag length (2.950" with the thinnest stainless magazines you can get). That requires that a lot of the shank be inside the case, which means that trimming the neck/shoulder junction is required. I actually use .300 PRC length (3.8") MDT magazines for my long action .300 WSM which is built around 250 ATIPs, but I do not have velocity numbers for that yet as I am 1) working too much and 2) bulk fireforming cases first. Predicted is between 2700-2750, thought Quickload is more of a safety tool than a velocity predictor. When I have actual chrono data for my the long action length 250s (IIRC 3.3" OAL to keep the start of the boattail JUST above the neck/shoulder junction) I can post it here for any who are interested.
I have no interest in starting a cartridge war as I am of the opinion that NEARLY ALL cartridges that area available today are pretty darn good, but we have an embarrassment of riches in .300 magnums these days. While I was very excited that the .300 PRC got rid of the .300 WM belt, I was genuinely frustrated at the OAL. Specifically, the whole idea with the 6.5 CM was to build a .260 Remington that would fit long bullets in a standard short action. A .300 PRC built to allow a 250 ATIP to be seated with the shank above the neck/shoulder junction with a 3.34' or 3.6" OAL still would've had a TON going for it over the .300 WM. NO belt, a fair increase in case capacity given the blown out case, slightly longer body and sharper shoulder, and a more efficient short/fat design which really does reduce recoil. But more than that, it would've allowed standard long action or magnum length rifles to become competitive again in the same way that the 6.5 CM resurrected the short action. It is possible that dropping the bullet diameter to 7mm might've been necessary to fit a 3.34" max OAL, but .308 probably would've been fine in a 3.6" max OAL.

I guess my critique is that if you are clean sheet designing something, and you decide that the only way to meet your targets is to exceed a dimension that has been a standard for over a century, then you need to GET a lot of concrete benefit in return for breaking compatibility. If you built a laptop with no USB ports in favor of a new cable standard that is faster, it needs to be more than 110% as fast. People with .300 WMs criticized the .300 WSM for the same thing 23 years ago: It is insufficiently better to justify a new case, BUT the .300 WSM had the benefit of fitting into a bog standard short action with only a blown out bolt face. A lot of my .300 WSM magazines are .308 magazines that were converted using a aerospace grade tools wielded by a skilled artisan (actually me using a pair of pliers and 3 dummy rounds in about 10 minutes per magazine). The point being, the .300 WSM uses a magnum bolt face in a short action, but doesn't break any big standard dimensions.

The point of my comparison is twofold: 1) a direct velocity comparison helps folks to decide what is best for them and 2) to vent about Hornady's decision to deliberately break action length compatibility standards with the .300 PRC. Rather than calling Hornady names (I have family that works there and I use almost exclusively Hornady components and tools), the more mature criticism/learning experience is a simple comparison of performance numbers. Thus my initial request for .300 PRC velocity numbers so that we can compare them with real world .300 WSM numbers. I think that objective comparison would allow folks to make their own subjective decision "Was this gain worth creating an entirely new category of rifle action length?".
I stopped reading that novel at 29” inch barrel on your WSM

You would go hunt with that?
 
I stopped reading that novel at 29” inch barrel on your WSM

You would go hunt with that?
My original plan for 28" but the gunsmith left it at 29" because carbon Proof blanks are a little confusing as to what goes and what stays. I was worried too, but 1) it's a short action which gets you an inch back and 2) carbon fiber is magical. You can shoot that rifle from the shoulder, and it is handier than a heavy sporter or varmint contour 24-26" barrel. I also live in East Texas, where a TON of hunting is from cramped box stands. That means that a 20" barrel is functionally just as unwieldy as a 28". I wound up addressing that problem with an K&M M17S converted to fire .300 HAM'R from an 18" barrel (whole rifle is 27.5" to avoid an SBR stamp and 31.5" with a can).
 

Forum statistics

Threads
57,090
Messages
1,222,267
Members
100,106
Latest member
mksportcasa
 

 

 

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

EC HUNTING SAFARIS wrote on MarcoPani's profile.
Happy Birthday, from Grahamstown, South Africa.
I hope your day is great!
Cheers
Marius
EC HUNTING SAFARIS wrote on Ilkay Taskin's profile.
Happy Birthday from Grahamstown, South Africa! I hope you have a great day!
Cheers, Marius
idjeffp wrote on Jon R15's profile.
Hi Jon,
I saw your post for the .500 NE cases. Are these all brass or are they nickel plated? Hard for me to tell... sorry.
Thanks,
Jeff [redacted]
Boise, ID
[redacted]
 
Top