|
|
06-02-2018, 10:24 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 38,860
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainTi
A 6.5 leopard should be super amazing then. Requires a short action to boot. Figure with the name Leopard, it would be a sure fire marketing sell. Maybe rename it as the 6.5 Claymore?
|
Of course the "Leopard" was being enjoyed by a great many wildcatters long before someone hung that name on it about as soon as the cases were made
Cat
__________________
Anytime I figure I've got this long range thing figured out, I just strap into the sling and irons and remind myself that I don't!
|
06-02-2018, 10:41 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 4,278
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat
Of course the "Leopard" was being enjoyed by a great many wildcatters long before someone hung that name on it about as soon as the cases were made
Cat
|
Exactly . I built one on a .270 WSM Super Shadow platform and a Pac-Nor barrel about the same time as Jim Carmichael hung that name on it.
It was a good combo and could really fling the 140's but it did have some
inefficiencies.
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
|
06-02-2018, 11:47 AM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyksta
140 grains going 2700 fps isnt anything amazing. Its pretty close to the bottom of the barrel. A lot of people try and articulate using 7.62x39 ammo in their sks as a fine hunting tool too. We all know better. 6.5cm is fine as a low recoil cartridge if used within its limitations. 270 beats the snot out of it. 280AI even more.
|
We were comparing various 6.5 cartridges as per their recoil and effective range on light game by the parameters set out by the author of an article. The author set am 1800 fps minimum velocity, 1200 ft. lbs retained energy for light game and 1500 ft. lbs for heavy game. The object was not to see which cartridge beat the snot out of the other as you seem bent on doing. If you want to compare a 6.5 cartridge to a 270 or280AI then the new 6.5 PRC will likely beat the snot out them by a wide margin with close to the same amount of recoil and powder burnt.
As I had pointed out on another thread, that got shut down by ignorance, I have shot more than one moose at 600 yards with a 270 using Winchester 130PPP ammunition. At 600 yards that bullet went right through moose and killed them on the spot with 1751 fps and 885 ft lbs retained energy. From my experience I determined years ago, on my own, that I would like to see at least 1200 ft lbs retained energy in a bullet of sufficient SD when shooting moose. That put my 270's effective range at 455 so I was pushing things and was lucky enough to not have hit a rib on the way through.
By the authors criteria the 130 Win PPP is effective to 455 yards on light game and 354 yards on heavy game. The 6.5 CM with the Hornady 143 ELDX factory ammo is effective to 570 yards/385 yards respectively. In this instance the CM beats the snot out of the 270 but if you Load the 270 with Federal Premium 150 GK BTSP factory ammo it will be effective to 625/480 yards so it comes out the winner. If your object is to have a pleasant shooting rifle and limiting your shots to 550/350 yards, which most hunter so, or 1000 yards on paper then the 6.5CM is likely the clear winner and all you need.
Those are the facts and no amount of chest pounding , strutting around or jaw flapping is going to change that.
As I pointed out earlier my 6.5 EXTREME, which I designed before even the 6.5 SAUM, is basically a 6.5 PRC based on the 300 RCM case. I designed to run the 140 Berger to 3000-3100 fps with very little vertical which is desired by the 1000 yard PRC type shooters before PRC became popular. To do that I determined that I would need a cartridge design that allowed near Zero stretch of the brass which eliminated fire forming and allowed the brass to be formed back to near its original shape as I illustrated. It was very successful in my prototype LRHunter rifle with the 140 VLd and worked great with the 120/130 grain bullets as well. If you go back through my posts on AOF you will see that it was met with the same rhetoric that you and others keep disrupting good threads with regarding the 6.5 CM and 6.5 PRC. Here is the first targets I shot with it at 400 and 500M with the two targets pasted together. I messed up and elevated for 500 yards instead of 500M so I was a bit low but my first bullet nearly cut the little dot in the center of the 400M target. I was a little disappointed that my best groups with the 143 ELD-X bullets were at 2832 but my goal of Minimal case stretch and low SD were met so that is where I stopped. When I ran the numbers I found that RE was manageable at 18.0 ft.lbs, MPBR was 289 yards and effective range is 660/475 which is right in there with the 270/280 AI.
First target with 6.5 EXTREME (two bullet holes top right 300 Win Mag/21Berger):
[IMG] [/IMG]
120 Nosler BT:
[IMG] [/IMG]
130 TSX:
[IMG] [/IMG]
130 Swift Sirocco II:
[IMG] [/IMG]
If the 6.5 PRC performs as good as the 6.5 EXTREME it will eventually take over where the 6.5 CM maxes out. Better start saving up Check!
|
06-02-2018, 01:06 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 16,255
|
|
What I’m finding with the Creedmoor is the ridiculous simplicity in load development. Pick a powder, a bullet and it shoots it. I went out trying RL26 today.
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”
-Billy Molls
|
06-02-2018, 01:21 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,243
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck
What I’m finding with the Creedmoor is the ridiculous simplicity in load development. Pick a powder, a bullet and it shoots it. I went out trying RL26 today.
|
Great shooting Chuck, but is your oal really 3.830 or is that a typo?
|
06-02-2018, 01:23 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 16,255
|
|
Laughing. Yep a typo. 2.830
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”
-Billy Molls
|
06-02-2018, 02:18 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
|
|
Looking forward to seeing what you can do with the 140 Berger Hybrid with RL 26 Chuck. Should be a real paper puncher.
|
06-02-2018, 04:26 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,189
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxwell78
I am shooting my 160gr ppsn woodleighs at 2650 fps from my swede using H4831sc. (sako 85 action with a rks 25"bbl, Mcmillian stock). Combine the .509 bc and the 328 sd and you get one heck of a combo.
"That cartridge design plays second fiddle to a good barrel chambered by a good gunsmith when shot by a good shooter who makes good handloads. "
This couldn't be said any better
|
Love your choice! Pinnacle over achiever stuff right there.
Hornady lists the 147 gr eldm factory ammo for 6.5 creedmoor at 2695 fps out of a 24" barrel with a b.c. of .697 and s.d. Of .301...
To me that is absolutely the 'go to' for the creedmoor and factory choices, and truly amazing we can grab that off the shelf now!!! The 143 gr looks good too as does the 140 eldm but I think that 147 is the sleeper hunting round! It isn't marketed as a hunting round and by all accounts they are amax equivalents so at the slower speeds of the cm should perform like an eldx at a couple hundred fps faster.
Very few bullets get over .3 in s.d.! And look at that b.c.....that's going to a major over achiever in both the creed and prc. I'd be choosing it over the eldx every time but I like more frangible but with how long and skinny these things are there will be deep penetration regardless.
Last edited by Stinky Coyote; 06-02-2018 at 04:38 PM.
|
06-02-2018, 04:49 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,189
|
|
Inclund I'm with you. I have the 270 win as a 600 yard cartridge with 140's.
I believe more in impact velocity than ft/lbs to the point ft/lbs don't even make my list of criteria. I include them for so many who do.
My current 270 win blazer k95 is set up to take advantage of that and you'd not want to see if I'll kill it or not at 600 with money on the line.
You can probably see my attraction to the Grendel, few can.😉
It will over achieve also and do the normal ranges we typically kill just fine.
|
06-03-2018, 09:28 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: W5
Posts: 1,093
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote
Inclund I'm with you. I have the 270 win as a 600 yard cartridge with 140's.
I believe more in impact velocity than ft/lbs to the point ft/lbs don't even make my list of criteria. I include them for so many who do.
My current 270 win blazer k95 is set up to take advantage of that and you'd not want to see if I'll kill it or not at 600 with money on the line.
You can probably see my attraction to the Grendel, few can.😉
It will over achieve also and do the normal ranges we typically kill just fine.
|
Agree,the whole minimum ft/lbs criteria is just nonsense.Gun writers have been telling us for decades that we "need" X amount of ft/lbs for this game or that game.....1000 ft/lbs seem to be often touted as the widely accepted minimum for deer size game yada yada yada......the author of the 6.5 Shootout presumably took it upon himself to up that minimum to 1200,and 1500 for elk/moose?
Hmmmmm ....I guess everybody should boycott and protest any and all bowhunting immediately if that is the case?
You don't "need" 1500 ft/lbs to kill a moose/elk,nor do you need 1000-1200 ft/lbs to kill a deer reliably....you just "need" to let the air out of his lungs...period.....and that can be and is repeatedly accomplished tens of thousands of times annually with arrows delivering well under 100ft/lbs on target.
The average WT hunter is probably flinging arrow/broad head combos that deliver 40-60 ft/lbs on target at 30yards,a dedicated moose/elk setup with heavy for length arrow shafts and heavier then average broadheads maybe 60-80 ft/lbs on target??
__________________
The toughest thing about waiting for the zombie apocalypse is pretending that I'm not excited.
|
06-03-2018, 11:34 AM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by West O'5
Agree,the whole minimum ft/lbs criteria is just nonsense.Gun writers have been telling us for decades that we "need" X amount of ft/lbs for this game or that game.....1000 ft/lbs seem to be often touted as the widely accepted minimum for deer size game yada yada yada......the author of the 6.5 Shootout presumably took it upon himself to up that minimum to 1200,and 1500 for elk/moose?
Hmmmmm ....I guess everybody should boycott and protest any and all bowhunting immediately if that is the case?
You don't "need" 1500 ft/lbs to kill a moose/elk,nor do you need 1000-1200 ft/lbs to kill a deer reliably....you just "need" to let the air out of his lungs...period.....and that can be and is repeatedly accomplished tens of thousands of times annually with arrows delivering well under 100ft/lbs on target.
The average WT hunter is probably flinging arrow/broad head combos that deliver 40-60 ft/lbs on target at 30yards,a dedicated moose/elk setup with heavy for length arrow shafts and heavier then average broadheads maybe 60-80 ft/lbs on target??
|
I wonder how well the bow hunter would fare if he was shooting a blunt arrow, shaped like a bullet, with no blades like on a broadhead. I know that impact velocity has become tool that manufacturers use to determine the effectiveness of their bullets on Light and heavy game. However they also take SD into consideration and if they used Pi x d they would have lbs/sq inch as SD. They arrive at a different figure for terminal energy but I believe that nearly every bullet that has sufficient SD will have 1200 ft. lbs. retained energy at minimum recommended impact velocity. In reality I believe we are just using two methods to arrive at the same conclusion and I know that the 1200 ft. lbs. retained energy is enough to kill a moose, even if a rib is hit. This method has worked for many years for those of us who still use it in spite of what you believe. I actually killed around 50 moose in northern Alberta, West 0' 5 and West 0'6 and never knew a thing about minimum impact velocity.
Last edited by lclund1946; 06-03-2018 at 11:44 AM.
|
06-03-2018, 11:47 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 4,278
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by West O'5
Agree,the whole minimum ft/lbs criteria is just nonsense.Gun writers have been telling us for decades that we "need" X amount of ft/lbs for this game or that game.....1000 ft/lbs seem to be often touted as the widely accepted minimum for deer size game yada yada yada......the author of the 6.5 Shootout presumably took it upon himself to up that minimum to 1200,and 1500 for elk/moose?
Hmmmmm ....I guess everybody should boycott and protest any and all bowhunting immediately if that is the case?
You don't "need" 1500 ft/lbs to kill a moose/elk,nor do you need 1000-1200 ft/lbs to kill a deer reliably....you just "need" to let the air out of his lungs...period.....and that can be and is repeatedly accomplished tens of thousands of times annually with arrows delivering well under 100ft/lbs on target.
The average WT hunter is probably flinging arrow/broad head combos that deliver 40-60 ft/lbs on target at 30yards,a dedicated moose/elk setup with heavy for length arrow shafts and heavier then average broadheads maybe 60-80 ft/lbs on target??
|
Icelund ..Are you familiar with the term momentum ?
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
|
06-03-2018, 12:21 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 967
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck
What I’m finding with the Creedmoor is the ridiculous simplicity in load development. Pick a powder, a bullet and it shoots it. I went out trying RL26 today.
|
It appears as though you and that rifle are doing alright.
|
06-03-2018, 01:11 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee
Icelund ..Are you familiar with the term momentum ?
|
I do know that Momentum=Mass (KG/lbs) x Velocity (M/s or ft./s). I also know that momentum of an object is lost when in collision with another object. I suspect that if the momentum of a bullet is equal to that lost penetrating the hide and rib of a moose that it will wind up with Zero Momentum and Zero ft. lbs. energy so will not penetrate any further? I believe that if the bullet had more ft. lbs. energy it would likely have retained more momentum and passed through the moose. Likely you will correct me if I am wrong!
|
06-03-2018, 01:13 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,243
|
|
Comparing a 450gr arrow with a razor tip broadhead to a 140gr piece of lead is like doing a comparison between a Hummer and a corvette.
|
06-03-2018, 01:25 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Cowtown, agian
Posts: 2,818
|
|
All this pitter patter and I'm still enjoying the 6.5x47 Lapua. Been shooting 130gr VLDs and 123 Scenars near 2900fps since 2008 and it kills very well.
The Creedmore is just more the same.
__________________
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
- Sir Winston Churchill
A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.
-Thomas Paine
|
06-03-2018, 01:33 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,243
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee
Icelund ..Are you familiar with the term momentum ?
|
After all you've said on this thread about how great the Swede is and how inadequate the Creedmoor is only to post a speed out of your Swede of 2800fps with a 140gr bullet I figured you would have conceded that the difference between the two is negligible but nope..... you just keep digging
|
06-03-2018, 01:38 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,546
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505
Comparing a 450gr arrow with a razor tip broadhead to a 140gr piece of lead is like doing a comparison between a Hummer and a corvette.
|
Not really a comparison. A quick read of terminal ballistics definitions would clear things up. Arrows cut and cause "permanent cavity" type injury. Bullets kinetic energy causes most of its damage through the shockwave damage of the "temporary wound cavity". Thats why bullets need high energy vs arrows do it with momentum.
Last edited by Nyksta; 06-03-2018 at 01:43 PM.
|
06-03-2018, 01:38 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 4,278
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lclund1946
I do know that Momentum=Mass (KG/lbs) x Velocity (M/s or ft./s). I also know that momentum of an object is lost when in collision with another object. I suspect that if the momentum of a bullet is equal to that lost penetrating the hide and rib of a moose that it will wind up with Zero Momentum and Zero ft. lbs. energy so will not penetrate any further? I believe that if the bullet had more ft. lbs. energy it would likely have retained more momentum and passed through the moose. Likely you will correct me if I am wrong!
|
I have no intention of trying to correct you. It makes sense that when all forward motion has depleted, momentum would be zero as would KE . My question to you would be , which is depleted most rapidly .. KE, or momentum ?
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
|
06-03-2018, 01:49 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,243
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyksta
Not really a comparison. A quick read of terminal ballistics definitions would clear things up. Arrows cut and cause "permanent cavity" type injury. Bullets kinetic energy causes most of its damage through the shockwave damage of the "temporary wound cavity". Thats why bullets need high energy vs arrows do it with momentum.
|
That's the point I was making.
Would you rather get hit by a Hummer doing 60 or a vette doing 220?
|
06-03-2018, 02:12 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 4,278
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505
After all you've said on this thread about how great the Swede is and how inadequate the Creedmoor is only to post a speed out of your Swede of 2800fps with a 140gr bullet I figured you would have conceded that the difference between the two is negligible but nope..... you just keep digging
|
Give it a break Kurt. Never, ever, did I say the CM was inadequate .It certainly is not. What I refer to, and always have, is guys like you that try and morph it in to something it isn't , nor was intended to be... particularily as a versatile hunting cartridge. Get it now?
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
|
06-03-2018, 02:16 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 16,255
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rem338win
All this pitter patter and I'm still enjoying the 6.5x47 Lapua. Been shooting 130gr VLDs and 123 Scenars near 2900fps since 2008 and it kills very well.
The Creedmore is just more the same.
|
This is exactly what I like about the Creedmoor. Just like x47 with more brass options! Not that that is the be all end all either.
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”
-Billy Molls
|
06-03-2018, 02:22 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 16,255
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee
Give it a break Kurt. Never, ever, did I say the CM was inadequate .It certainly is not. What I refer to, and always have, is guys like you that try and morph it in to something it isn't , nor was intended to be... particularily as a versatile hunting cartridge. Get it now?
|
It’s not a versatile hunting round?
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”
-Billy Molls
|
06-03-2018, 02:33 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 4,278
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck
It’s not a versatile hunting round?
|
..not compared to a Swede, until it can handle a 150 -160 grainers. Apart from that, the Swede can do anything else the CM can do.. and a bit more.
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
|
06-03-2018, 02:50 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,546
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505
That's the point I was making.
Would you rather get hit by a Hummer doing 60 or a vette doing 220?
|
Neither. Both are far more lethan than the creedmore id say.... since you asked.
|
06-03-2018, 02:52 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 16,255
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee
..not compared to a Swede, until it can handle a 150 -160 grainers. Apart from that, the Swede can do anything else the CM can do.. and a bit more.
|
So if I shoot a 140gr controlled expansion bullet in the 6.5 Creedmoor, what wont it kill that your 160gr bullet will?
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”
-Billy Molls
|
06-03-2018, 02:55 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,243
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee
..not compared to a Swede, until it can handle a 150 -160 grainers. Apart from that, the Swede can do anything else the CM can do.. and a bit more.
|
BAHAHAHA!
I'd like to see you cram that Swede into a short action..... but you probably could do that.
And I'm not sure if you're putting words in my mouth to try and save face or if it's a comprehension thing but I've never said the Creedmoor is any better than the Swede for hunting, I said it's every bit as good though.
You figure the 160's are too fat to fit in a Creedmoor? Lol!
PS, I only use 140's in my 280, is your Swede a better hunting rifle than my 280?
|
06-03-2018, 02:57 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,243
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyksta
Neither. Both are far more lethan than the creedmore id say.... since you asked.
|
A creedmore?
|
06-03-2018, 03:17 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 4,278
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505
BAHAHAHA!
I'd like to see you cram that Swede into a short action..... but you probably could do that.
And I'm not sure if you're putting words in my mouth to try and save face or if it's a comprehension thing but I've never said the Creedmoor is any better than the Swede for hunting, I said it's every bit as good though.
You figure the 160's are too fat to fit in a Creedmoor? Lol!
PS, I only use 140's in my 280, is your Swede a better hunting rifle than my 280?
|
Your skidding off course again. Yes, I figure the CM won't handle any where near a 160. Does your research tell you different ? I know a Swede will readily run them to 2670 . A short action means Dick to me, nor does recoil for that matter, nor does cheap ammo, nor does the CM Kool Aid. The CM does what it does quite well, but that's all it does.
Maybe you can pick up one of those 3.9" mags for your CM that Icelund was referring to. lol
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
|
06-03-2018, 03:20 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 16,255
|
|
While on the topic, the Swede is a lousy fit in a long action as well. If using a long action why not go with the 6.5-06?
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”
-Billy Molls
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:11 AM.
|