Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Guns & Ammo Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #301  
Old 12-09-2018, 07:21 AM
chuck's Avatar
chuck chuck is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,847
Default

Just like brain science and rocket surgery, be careful of whoís advice you take on the internet.
__________________
"All rifle mechanisms are not the same when it comes to reliability in the field."
-Bob F.
  #302  
Old 12-09-2018, 08:10 AM
Xbolt7mm Xbolt7mm is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: south calgary
Posts: 1,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
Just like brain science and rocket surgery, be careful of whoís advice you take on the internet.
Very good advice, the one that always concerns me is when people ask for load data and are willing to follow it, scares me
  #303  
Old 12-09-2018, 08:20 AM
Don_Parsons Don_Parsons is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,586
Default

After reading alot of the different threads over the years, it brings 1 question to the fore front.

If "I" was to choose 1 rifle & cartrage for the majority of "my" hunting needs along with plinking and competion shooting sports ? ,,, what would it be !

This could be challanging since 1 factor is missing from the equation.
  #304  
Old 12-09-2018, 08:23 AM
chuck's Avatar
chuck chuck is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,847
Default

Arenít you a one gun man already?
__________________
"All rifle mechanisms are not the same when it comes to reliability in the field."
-Bob F.
  #305  
Old 12-09-2018, 09:39 AM
Don_Parsons Don_Parsons is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,586
Default

Yes, that is correct, but if I was to consider changing things up from what I I've learned now over the last 2 years,,, purhaps there is room for one last kick at the can.

I'm deffinatly not interested in owning 2 or more loading dies,,, or having firearms in my safe that don't match the same cartrage.

The 1 Gun thing was the original plan 2 or 3 years ago,,, but I changed it to the 1 cartrage instead,,, that way it allows me to own a few back-up rifles for my needs.

As time passes by, the one rifle thing will happen.

A few things on the list is 24" to 25 inches of standard tapper barrel, left hand bolt, 8 to 10 lbs max,,, and the smoothest trigger known to human kind. Ha Nothing wrong with being selfish.

Jewel Match Grade triggers has that stuff sorted out.

That's the reason I ask,,, eventually the only 2 categories that will remain in my shooting sports will be limited up close bush hunting 8 to 10% over the 2 or 3 months,,, then lots of casual plinking from 50 to 5 or 600 meters with the odd 1 km shoots.

Probilibly 9 or 11 months of the year,,, cost of reloading supplies is not a factor so long as the 5 gallon pales of powder don't exceed the $1 or $2 per year. Ha.

Burning gas and powder are the rewards of my hard / wize work practices,,, that and traveling of course.
  #306  
Old 12-09-2018, 10:03 AM
Kurt505's Avatar
Kurt505 Kurt505 is online now
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: edmonton
Posts: 10,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Parsons View Post
After reading alot of the different threads over the years, it brings 1 question to the fore front.

If "I" was to choose 1 rifle & cartrage for the majority of "my" hunting needs along with plinking and competion shooting sports ? ,,, what would it be !

This could be challanging since 1 factor is missing from the equation.
Simple. You reload, a 280ai.

Load erí up with some of these:


http://www.bergerbullets.com/7mm-195...-elite-hunter/

Youíd need a fast twist barrel like a 1:8 though.


Stinky will love the numbers on this bullet
__________________
History has shown a slicktrick is no substitute for an intelligent action.

Last edited by Kurt505; 12-09-2018 at 10:13 AM.
  #307  
Old 12-09-2018, 10:17 AM
Nyksta Nyksta is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,012
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Parsons View Post
After reading alot of the different threads over the years, it brings 1 question to the fore front.

If "I" was to choose 1 rifle & cartrage for the majority of "my" hunting needs along with plinking and competion shooting sports ? ,,, what would it be !

This could be challanging since 1 factor is missing from the equation.
Im not sure what 1 missing factor you mean, but i definately agree on the 1 ammunition idea. Loading equipment, dies, powder, primers, bullets, brass, ammunition storage. These take up way more room that even an entire gunsafe. Multiple same cartridge rifles is awesome and peaceful. Backup guns, different length and weights, different optics, different actions. Multiple guns in the same cartridge still give you all the different performance angles you may desire, but having the same ammo for all of them sure is nice and easy. It takes some time finding a load that works well simultaneously in all of them, but once you find it, mmmm awesomeness. Memorize the drop and wind drift and be done with the calculator. And then laugh at yourself for all your hard work load development and distance memorization because every year the hunting distances are always under 200m anyway.

One ammo is nice.
  #308  
Old 12-09-2018, 11:42 AM
catnthehat's Avatar
catnthehat catnthehat is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ft. McMurray
Posts: 32,977
Talking

Don I am not sure what kind of competition you participate in but for me the only title I would consider as dual purpose for hunting big game and competing in
would be hunter class silhouette .
Anything else neither the hunting rifle nor the match rifle would be able to cross over and be competitive regardless of the cartridge .
Cat
__________________
what power? FFP--SFP?paralax? Heck with it, I'm screwing on the Centrals and diopter- pass me my single point sling!
  #309  
Old 12-09-2018, 11:48 AM
lclund1946 lclund1946 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
These threads have titles. People arenít reading them surprised at the content. But I have found over the years that the truth makes people really angry at times.
The truth does make people angry at times especially when it goes against everything that they have become to believe over a lifetime of misinformation. In the gun world we have become conditioned to believe that the speed of a bullet gives us a much greater Point Blank Range (PBR) or Effective Terminal Energy (TE) Range than a heavier, slower bullet. They believe this to be especially true if the cartridge case is bigger or the bullet is larger in diameter in spite of what the terminal ballistics show. Instead of accepting them and learning from the facts presented to them they resort to accusing one of twisting the facts to make ones self look better or other bullying tactics. Unfortunately all of the facts in the world are not going to change the minds of some but hopefully the rest, especially young people just starting out, will benefit.

I have been the brunt of a lot of this kind of bullying behavior on more than this site for a lot of years since I began posting about the efficient wildcat cartridges that I designed along the same lines that Dave Emary designed the 30 TC and the 6.5 CM. I got a lot of flack over my 6.5 EXTREME design, just like we have seen over the 6.5 CM and likely will still see about the 6.5 PRC. Who would have thought that the 6.5 PRC design would be so close to my 6.5 EXTREME that I can use Hornadys Match Grade PRC dies as "shoulder bump" dies. In fact when the 6.5 PRC was first introduced it was said to have been on the 300 RCM case and the dimensions given were for my 300 RCM/6.5EXTREME PT&G reamer dated 12/09. I am happy to see that the Hornady version was improved by reducing the body length by about 0.070", to 338 RCM length, as my version actually has about 2-3 grains unusable powder capacity although it works better in a Remington LA. The 6.5 PRC really works best in an "intermediate length action like the Winchester/Montana Rifle Co./Kimber WSM actions. Imagine the flack I get when I point out that my 20 EXTREME is a very efficient design that rivals the 204 Ruger/ 20 Tactical with 32-40 grain bullets and the 22-250 Factory Ammunition, to 500 yards with the 55 Berger, all seated properly in the neck and fitting in Saami 223 length (2.26") magazines. Talk about efficiency when you consider that this is accomplished with less than 22.2 grains of powder!!

Stinky Coyote has come under much the same bullying tactics on every thread that he started trying to point out the efficiency of the 6.5 Grendel and 6.5 CM as hunting rifles. This is largely because many seem to think he is running down their pet cartridge or they believe that these cartridges are not up to the task. He is using the method commonly used by manufacturers to determine what type of game and at what distance their ammunition is suited for which is SD under/over 2.5 x recommended Minimum Impact Velocity (IV). He is right yet the Nay Sayers insist that you need a bigger cartridge/caliber to get enough Muzzle Velocity/energy to do the job. Well they are right in that the bullet, not cartridge, with the most Terminal Energy (TE) will do more damage than one with less TE even if it don't penetrate as deeply. I think it is about time we realize that energy is included in SC's/industry's method only not used as proper SD and IV are all that is needed to give enough penetration and energy to do the job intended.

For many more years than I care to remember I have relied on the old method of determining Effective Range of a Cartridge/Bullet combination which is Terminal Energy (TE). I believe that MV, BC, SD and IV are all taken into consideration when determining Terminal Energy so all I have to do is determine what TE is need too kill a moose with a bullet designed to do the job. Someone posted earlier that Elmer Keith wrote that 800 ft. lbs. was minimum for big game and I believe that is pretty close. Have personally seen 4 moose taken, with one shot, at 600 yards with three different Caliber/ Bullet combinations. The 3006 with Win 180 PPP bullets had 1415 f/s IV and 1106 ft.lbs. TE and the perfectly mushromed bullet came to rest "under the hide on the other side" and the moose fell over on the spot. Two shot with the 270 Win using Win 130 PPP ammunition were hit with 1747 ft.lbs. IV and 881 ft. lbs. TE and they both died on the spot but the bullets were not recovered as they spent their remaining Momentum/Energy on mother earth. The fourth was shot with My 7mm08 running a 140 Nosler SB bullet at 3000 fps MV and the moose walked about 10 steps before falling dead (perhaps 10 seconds). The 1891 f/s IV was greater than both the 270 and 3006 as was the 1112 ft.lbs TE. Surprisingly the 140 grain bullet exited after entering between the 3rd & 4th rib, ripping through both lungs and the off shoulder blade due of the fairly large bull moose. As I like to add a little, in case the bullet hits a rib, I have settled on 1200 ft.lbs TE as minimum for moose/elk and have taken 1900 f/s IV which is about mid range for industry standard.

The following chart compares the Effective Range of Various Factory (F) and handloaded (HL) ammunition as per the above parameters. I have included MV, ME, RE and PBR so one can make comparisons to help in making an informed decision of which caliber that is best suited for its intended use. If needed a light rifle with minimal recoil and chose to limit my shots to under 300 yards the 6.5 Grendel would top my list. I chose the 7mm08 as I had trouble with Rheumatoid Shoulder Joints and it was proven to be effective to 600 yards which has always been my maximum. Looking over this chart I can see that the 6.5 CM, 143 ELD-X, Factory round is just as effective as my 145 Speer BTSP handload so would likely be my choice today in spite of my love for the 7mm08. If I wanted to stretch it out to 750-800 yards I would likely go with the 6.5 PRC even over my 6.5 EXTREME. On second thought if I stick to handloads maybe Alberta Al's 6.5X47 L may be the winner s it will fit in a 2.8" magazine and performs nearly as well, or perhaps better as someone's pet load in the 308 with the 168LRAB. Will likely come as a big surprise to someone who would perhaps whish I had manipulated the facts. Perhaps we can get some constructive conversations going instead of the rubbish that seems to be the norm.

[IMG][/IMG]
  #310  
Old 12-09-2018, 12:35 PM
Kurt505's Avatar
Kurt505 Kurt505 is online now
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: edmonton
Posts: 10,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lclund1946 View Post
The truth does make people angry at times especially when it goes against everything that they have become to believe over a lifetime of misinformation. In the gun world we have become conditioned to believe that the speed of a bullet gives us a much greater Point Blank Range (PBR) or Effective Terminal Energy (TE) Range than a heavier, slower bullet. They believe this to be especially true if the cartridge case is bigger or the bullet is larger in diameter in spite of what the terminal ballistics show. Instead of accepting them and learning from the facts presented to them they resort to accusing one of twisting the facts to make ones self look better or other bullying tactics. Unfortunately all of the facts in the world are not going to change the minds of some but hopefully the rest, especially young people just starting out, will benefit.

I have been the brunt of a lot of this kind of bullying behavior on more than this site for a lot of years since I began posting about the efficient wildcat cartridges that I designed along the same lines that Dave Emary designed the 30 TC and the 6.5 CM. I got a lot of flack over my 6.5 EXTREME design, just like we have seen over the 6.5 CM and likely will still see about the 6.5 PRC. Who would have thought that the 6.5 PRC design would be so close to my 6.5 EXTREME that I can use Hornadys Match Grade PRC dies as "shoulder bump" dies. In fact when the 6.5 PRC was first introduced it was said to have been on the 300 RCM case and the dimensions given were for my 300 RCM/6.5EXTREME PT&G reamer dated 12/09. I am happy to see that the Hornady version was improved by reducing the body length by about 0.070", to 338 RCM length, as my version actually has about 2-3 grains unusable powder capacity although it works better in a Remington LA. The 6.5 PRC really works best in an "intermediate length action like the Winchester/Montana Rifle Co./Kimber WSM actions. Imagine the flack I get when I point out that my 20 EXTREME is a very efficient design that rivals the 204 Ruger/ 20 Tactical with 32-40 grain bullets and the 22-250 Factory Ammunition, to 500 yards with the 55 Berger, all seated properly in the neck and fitting in Saami 223 length (2.26") magazines. Talk about efficiency when you consider that this is accomplished with less than 22.2 grains of powder!!

Stinky Coyote has come under much the same bullying tactics on every thread that he started trying to point out the efficiency of the 6.5 Grendel and 6.5 CM as hunting rifles. This is largely because many seem to think he is running down their pet cartridge or they believe that these cartridges are not up to the task. He is using the method commonly used by manufacturers to determine what type of game and at what distance their ammunition is suited for which is SD under/over 2.5 x recommended Minimum Impact Velocity (IV). He is right yet the Nay Sayers insist that you need a bigger cartridge/caliber to get enough Muzzle Velocity/energy to do the job. Well they are right in that the bullet, not cartridge, with the most Terminal Energy (TE) will do more damage than one with less TE even if it don't penetrate as deeply. I think it is about time we realize that energy is included in SC's/industry's method only not used as proper SD and IV are all that is needed to give enough penetration and energy to do the job intended.

For many more years than I care to remember I have relied on the old method of determining Effective Range of a Cartridge/Bullet combination which is Terminal Energy (TE). I believe that MV, BC, SD and IV are all taken into consideration when determining Terminal Energy so all I have to do is determine what TE is need too kill a moose with a bullet designed to do the job. Someone posted earlier that Elmer Keith wrote that 800 ft. lbs. was minimum for big game and I believe that is pretty close. Have personally seen 4 moose taken, with one shot, at 600 yards with three different Caliber/ Bullet combinations. The 3006 with Win 180 PPP bullets had 1415 f/s IV and 1106 ft.lbs. TE and the perfectly mushromed bullet came to rest "under the hide on the other side" and the moose fell over on the spot. Two shot with the 270 Win using Win 130 PPP ammunition were hit with 1747 ft.lbs. IV and 881 ft. lbs. TE and they both died on the spot but the bullets were not recovered as they spent their remaining Momentum/Energy on mother earth. The fourth was shot with My 7mm08 running a 140 Nosler SB bullet at 3000 fps MV and the moose walked about 10 steps before falling dead (perhaps 10 seconds). The 1891 f/s IV was greater than both the 270 and 3006 as was the 1112 ft.lbs TE. Surprisingly the 140 grain bullet exited after entering between the 3rd & 4th rib, ripping through both lungs and the off shoulder blade due of the fairly large bull moose. As I like to add a little, in case the bullet hits a rib, I have settled on 1200 ft.lbs TE as minimum for moose/elk and have taken 1900 f/s IV which is about mid range for industry standard.

The following chart compares the Effective Range of Various Factory (F) and handloaded (HL) ammunition as per the above parameters. I have included MV, ME, RE and PBR so one can make comparisons to help in making an informed decision of which caliber that is best suited for its intended use. If needed a light rifle with minimal recoil and chose to limit my shots to under 300 yards the 6.5 Grendel would top my list. I chose the 7mm08 as I had trouble with Rheumatoid Shoulder Joints and it was proven to be effective to 600 yards which has always been my maximum. Looking over this chart I can see that the 6.5 CM, 143 ELD-X, Factory round is just as effective as my 145 Speer BTSP handload so would likely be my choice today in spite of my love for the 7mm08. If I wanted to stretch it out to 750-800 yards I would likely go with the 6.5 PRC even over my 6.5 EXTREME. On second thought if I stick to handloads maybe Alberta Al's 6.5X47 L may be the winner s it will fit in a 2.8" magazine and performs nearly as well, or perhaps better as someone's pet load in the 308 with the 168LRAB. Will likely come as a big surprise to someone who would perhaps whish I had manipulated the facts. Perhaps we can get some constructive conversations going instead of the rubbish that seems to be the norm.

[IMG][/IMG]
Iím glad youíre able to put together a chart like this, it basically summarizes what took me 2 months to research.

Like you and Chuck said, it will make some people angry, but for those that choose to learn from it, itís going to be very beneficial.
__________________
History has shown a slicktrick is no substitute for an intelligent action.
  #311  
Old 12-09-2018, 12:39 PM
Nyksta Nyksta is online now
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 1,012
Default

Its nice to see the handloaded cartridges included for older chamberings that factory stuff holds back from loading to full potential.
  #312  
Old 12-09-2018, 01:04 PM
bdub's Avatar
bdub bdub is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,744
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
These threads have titles. People arenít reading them surprised at the content. But I have found over the years that the truth makes people really angry at times.
No need for anger lol. These threads are great sources of info. The titles of these threads do lead to multiple questions, on multiple topics. Not surprising there's lot's of opinions, some truth, some B.S.

Perhaps folks wouldn't get so riled up if we would just ask one question at a time.
__________________
There are some who can live without wild things, and some who cannot. Aldo Leopold
  #313  
Old 12-09-2018, 01:05 PM
6.5 shooter's Avatar
6.5 shooter 6.5 shooter is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 1,811
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 303carbine View Post
If you like putting gophers in the freezer, use the 6.5, if you would rather put large game in the freezer, use the 300.
SOOOoooo??? I guess all them moose in them Scandinavian countries just die from laughter every year.....give your head a shake
__________________
.
Trades I would interested in:

-.22 Hornet or K Hornet
- light weight walking rifle in .204
- Anything in 6.5mm.
- Sightron rifle scopes, 4.5x14x42mm or 4x16x42mm especially! with the HHR reticule.
  #314  
Old 12-09-2018, 01:33 PM
chuck's Avatar
chuck chuck is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,847
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lclund1946 View Post
The truth does make people angry at times especially when it goes against everything that they have become to believe over a lifetime of misinformation. In the gun world we have become conditioned to believe that the speed of a bullet gives us a much greater Point Blank Range (PBR) or Effective Terminal Energy (TE) Range than a heavier, slower bullet. They believe this to be especially true if the cartridge case is bigger or the bullet is larger in diameter in spite of what the terminal ballistics show. Instead of accepting them and learning from the facts presented to them they resort to accusing one of twisting the facts to make ones self look better or other bullying tactics. Unfortunately all of the facts in the world are not going to change the minds of some but hopefully the rest, especially young people just starting out, will benefit.

I have been the brunt of a lot of this kind of bullying behavior on more than this site for a lot of years since I began posting about the efficient wildcat cartridges that I designed along the same lines that Dave Emary designed the 30 TC and the 6.5 CM. I got a lot of flack over my 6.5 EXTREME design, just like we have seen over the 6.5 CM and likely will still see about the 6.5 PRC. Who would have thought that the 6.5 PRC design would be so close to my 6.5 EXTREME that I can use Hornadys Match Grade PRC dies as "shoulder bump" dies. In fact when the 6.5 PRC was first introduced it was said to have been on the 300 RCM case and the dimensions given were for my 300 RCM/6.5EXTREME PT&G reamer dated 12/09. I am happy to see that the Hornady version was improved by reducing the body length by about 0.070", to 338 RCM length, as my version actually has about 2-3 grains unusable powder capacity although it works better in a Remington LA. The 6.5 PRC really works best in an "intermediate length action like the Winchester/Montana Rifle Co./Kimber WSM actions. Imagine the flack I get when I point out that my 20 EXTREME is a very efficient design that rivals the 204 Ruger/ 20 Tactical with 32-40 grain bullets and the 22-250 Factory Ammunition, to 500 yards with the 55 Berger, all seated properly in the neck and fitting in Saami 223 length (2.26") magazines. Talk about efficiency when you consider that this is accomplished with less than 22.2 grains of powder!!

Stinky Coyote has come under much the same bullying tactics on every thread that he started trying to point out the efficiency of the 6.5 Grendel and 6.5 CM as hunting rifles. This is largely because many seem to think he is running down their pet cartridge or they believe that these cartridges are not up to the task. He is using the method commonly used by manufacturers to determine what type of game and at what distance their ammunition is suited for which is SD under/over 2.5 x recommended Minimum Impact Velocity (IV). He is right yet the Nay Sayers insist that you need a bigger cartridge/caliber to get enough Muzzle Velocity/energy to do the job. Well they are right in that the bullet, not cartridge, with the most Terminal Energy (TE) will do more damage than one with less TE even if it don't penetrate as deeply. I think it is about time we realize that energy is included in SC's/industry's method only not used as proper SD and IV are all that is needed to give enough penetration and energy to do the job intended.

For many more years than I care to remember I have relied on the old method of determining Effective Range of a Cartridge/Bullet combination which is Terminal Energy (TE). I believe that MV, BC, SD and IV are all taken into consideration when determining Terminal Energy so all I have to do is determine what TE is need too kill a moose with a bullet designed to do the job. Someone posted earlier that Elmer Keith wrote that 800 ft. lbs. was minimum for big game and I believe that is pretty close. Have personally seen 4 moose taken, with one shot, at 600 yards with three different Caliber/ Bullet combinations. The 3006 with Win 180 PPP bullets had 1415 f/s IV and 1106 ft.lbs. TE and the perfectly mushromed bullet came to rest "under the hide on the other side" and the moose fell over on the spot. Two shot with the 270 Win using Win 130 PPP ammunition were hit with 1747 ft.lbs. IV and 881 ft. lbs. TE and they both died on the spot but the bullets were not recovered as they spent their remaining Momentum/Energy on mother earth. The fourth was shot with My 7mm08 running a 140 Nosler SB bullet at 3000 fps MV and the moose walked about 10 steps before falling dead (perhaps 10 seconds). The 1891 f/s IV was greater than both the 270 and 3006 as was the 1112 ft.lbs TE. Surprisingly the 140 grain bullet exited after entering between the 3rd & 4th rib, ripping through both lungs and the off shoulder blade due of the fairly large bull moose. As I like to add a little, in case the bullet hits a rib, I have settled on 1200 ft.lbs TE as minimum for moose/elk and have taken 1900 f/s IV which is about mid range for industry standard.

The following chart compares the Effective Range of Various Factory (F) and handloaded (HL) ammunition as per the above parameters. I have included MV, ME, RE and PBR so one can make comparisons to help in making an informed decision of which caliber that is best suited for its intended use. If needed a light rifle with minimal recoil and chose to limit my shots to under 300 yards the 6.5 Grendel would top my list. I chose the 7mm08 as I had trouble with Rheumatoid Shoulder Joints and it was proven to be effective to 600 yards which has always been my maximum. Looking over this chart I can see that the 6.5 CM, 143 ELD-X, Factory round is just as effective as my 145 Speer BTSP handload so would likely be my choice today in spite of my love for the 7mm08. If I wanted to stretch it out to 750-800 yards I would likely go with the 6.5 PRC even over my 6.5 EXTREME. On second thought if I stick to handloads maybe Alberta Al's 6.5X47 L may be the winner s it will fit in a 2.8" magazine and performs nearly as well, or perhaps better as someone's pet load in the 308 with the 168LRAB. Will likely come as a big surprise to someone who would perhaps whish I had manipulated the facts. Perhaps we can get some constructive conversations going instead of the rubbish that seems to be the norm.

[IMG][/IMG]
This is what makes the 6.5 CM so exciting. All this and it is extremely prolific. Leave it to a bunch of shooters to get mad about that.
__________________
"All rifle mechanisms are not the same when it comes to reliability in the field."
-Bob F.
  #315  
Old 12-09-2018, 02:09 PM
Salavee Salavee is online now
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 2,907
Default

Why is it that modern velocities for the 6.5 x55 are always omitted? .. there's gotta be a reason when these comparisons are made.

Try running the pressures up to 58K psi with the same bullet (147 ELD-M) and lets see what it really does .
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
  #316  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:38 PM
Flight01's Avatar
Flight01 Flight01 is online now
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Fort McMurray, AB
Posts: 1,978
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee View Post
Why is it that modern velocities for the 6.5 x55 are always omitted? .. there's gotta be a reason when these comparisons are made.

Try running the pressures up to 58K psi with the same bullet (147 ELD-M) and lets see what it really does .
Anyone have data on the above mentioned offering? I know modern velocities are quite better than original due to previous pressure constraints
__________________
Be sure of your target and what lies beyond.
  #317  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:39 PM
lclund1946 lclund1946 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee View Post
Why is it that modern velocities for the 6.5 x55 are always omitted? .. there's gotta be a reason when these comparisons are made.

Try running the pressures up to 58K psi with the same bullet (147 ELD-M) and lets see what it really does .
I would like to point out to you that the 6.5x55 Modern Sako 139 HPBTM factory ammo at 2990 MV was the best Factory ammo I could find and the 142 SHPBT was the Max load, 46,100 CUP or likely near 58K, in the Hodgdon Manual. All of the other factory loads I could find were closer to Grendel Performance than 6.5CM. That is the reason and if you actually look at the chart the 6.5x55 Sako load actually performs very similar to the 147 ELD-M Factory round in 6.5CM.

Let's see if you are happy with a comparison of the 6.5 x55 and 6.5 CM with the 143 ELDX seated out to maximum magazine length, 3.150", which is about a 0.150-0.200" jump to the lands according to one fellow who did it. I will post a drawing to show how he set it up. As you will see he reported a compressed load of H-1000 yielding 2601. H 4831 Ladder had no velocities but 47.0 grains began to get stiff bolt and at 47.5 accuracy fell off. RL 23 yielded him 2860 with 1/2 MOA accuracy and a full load of RL 26 at 51 grains gave him 2990 with 1-1.25 MOA. Perhaps someone will post more favorable results. I have also included a drawing of the Military 156 RN bullet that was pushed by 37.4 grains of some sort of flake powder. Surprisingly it set up ahead of the neck shoulder junction with bout the same length as the 143 ELD-X without the Boat Tail. It seems that the pressures were kept down by having only 0.135" bearing surface at 0263" diameter instead of about 0.350" at 0.264" like the regular 6.5 bullets. the bearing surface then tapered up to 0.261" at about 0.350". This is how the old military round was able to keep pressures down as the Bearing surface barely toughed the lands.
[IMG][/IMG]

Drawing of the 6.5 CM with the 143 ELD-X seated to the lands points out the only flaw in its design which is that it could have had another 0.050" free bore to accommodate the 143 ELD-X or a 0.050" longer Boat Tail to keep Bearing Surface in the Neck. Ironically the Berger 140 VLD and Sierra 150 MK are a perfect fit if one had an intermediate length magazine like the 6.5X 55. If you look closely at the RL 26 ladder that I found posted on another site you will see that a full case, or slightly compressed load of 48 grains gave 2999f/s and a Compressed 49 grains ran 3050 with likely about the same pressure as the 51 grains in the 6.5X55. I really like the ES and SD through out the ladder but would like to see how it shoots at 46.5 grains giving over 2900 fps. Guess I should have added this to the chart as we did no handloads for the 6.5CM. However we can just use the Factory 143 ELD-X loads for the 6.5 PRC!!!!

[IMG][/IMG]

I hope that this satisfies your mind to the fact that we are not trying to run your pet cartridge down and that your pre-conceived notions are just that. At least the best comparison that I could come up with shows that the CM gets the 143 ELD-X to the same max velocity as the "Old Swede or Norwegian", with about 3 grains less powder much the same as the 7x57 versus the 7mm08. This is likely due to the fact that the CM is able to run to the lands in the same length magazine and the slightly smaller case capacity gets more pressure with less powder. I know it goes against everything we have been conditioned to believe but slight differences in case design do make a difference and a lot of times smaller is better. I think that you will find the same to be true for the 147 ELDM and 150 SMK as well.

Last edited by lclund1946; 12-09-2018 at 03:46 PM.
  #318  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:46 PM
claykuch claykuch is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 187
Default

Comparing these two cartridges is like saying, "What is better, a 16oz ball peen hammer or a 24oz ball peen hammer"?
  #319  
Old 12-09-2018, 03:51 PM
lclund1946 lclund1946 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by claykuch View Post
Comparing these two cartridges is like saying, "What is better, a 16oz ball peen hammer or a 24oz ball peen hammer"?
I thought perhaps we had gotten past this kind of rubbish. Go back and really look at the comparison I made with the 143 ELD-X and RL 26 and ask some pertinent questions if you need clarification.
  #320  
Old 12-09-2018, 04:05 PM
Salavee Salavee is online now
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Parkland County, AB
Posts: 2,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flight01 View Post
Anyone have data on the above mentioned offering? I know modern velocities are quite better than original due to previous pressure constraints

These are from Quickload. Burn rates have been adjusted to actual MV's with my rifles. COAL is 3.150. BBl 24" Pressure- 57 884 psi 147 gr ELD-X

MV ME V 1900 fps ME 1200 Ft/lbs

2866 2681 734 yds 737 yds
__________________
When applied by competent people with the right intent, common sense goes a long way.
  #321  
Old 12-09-2018, 04:13 PM
Flight01's Avatar
Flight01 Flight01 is online now
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Fort McMurray, AB
Posts: 1,978
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Salavee View Post
These are from Quickload. Burn rates have been adjusted to actual MV's with my rifles. COAL is 3.150. BBl 24" Pressure- 57 884 psi 147 gr ELD-X

MV ME V 1900 fps ME 1200 Ft/lbs

2866 2681 734 yds 737 yds
Excellent. Thank you.
__________________
Be sure of your target and what lies beyond.
  #322  
Old 12-09-2018, 04:56 PM
Stinky Coyote's Avatar
Stinky Coyote Stinky Coyote is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,269
Default

Nice to see you back Inclund, great data as usual.👍
__________________
Grendel Grendel bo bendel, banana fanna...

****1000 Club****
The Unofficially Official DEER CLUB for BOWHUNTERS.
Any combination of deer species
P&Y measuring standards, Net Inches Only
Meeting the P&Y minimums to qualify
Up to 7 deer totalling 1000" or higher
1k, 2k, 3k levels attainable.

1000 Club w/6, also 700 Muley Club(w/bow), 1 deer away from 2000 Club!
  #323  
Old 12-09-2018, 05:33 PM
claykuch claykuch is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lclund1946 View Post
I thought perhaps we had gotten past this kind of rubbish. Go back and really look at the comparison I made with the 143 ELD-X and RL 26 and ask some pertinent questions if you need clarification.
Rubbish, Not quite. Again. This is comparing apples to oranges. Bottom line the 300 Win Mag is a more powerful cartridge, regardless of how you want to try to spin the numbers.
  #324  
Old 12-09-2018, 05:37 PM
Don_Parsons Don_Parsons is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,586
Default

Me 2, I always like your posts,,, lots to learn for sure.

Yes Cat, my land canon ain't the best hunting hunting rifle,,, but it sure is fun to use on those long distance targets.

I agree with Iclund's idea as well,,, a little bit extra is nice, a zone that gets things done, I set mine a little bit higher on the thick skins.
Of course I have to since the diameter of bullet in use needs a bit more Wack to work it's way into Wrapper as I hope it finds it way to the vitals.

Yuppers, those ribs are one thing little lone the front shoulder shots,,, if the front A-Arm is busted off,,, the tractor ain't going no where.

And a yes, I'm guilty of old school thinking, it was hard for me to not believe that horse power was on my side,,, Two magnum units proved their weight in gold for years to follow. This is not saying that felt recoil was not there,,, and that it didn't take a toll on young bones as they aged fast. Ha.

The gel shooting pad and a little tamer cartrage was deffinatly the plan, so far so good.

I apologize to everyone if any of my post got off track, I hope that I have not said that the smaller cartrages "can't" harvest game,,, my stubborn mind sometimes prevents me from expanding into the ideas of new things like innovation and modernisation.

Probilibly because I don't spend alot of time around it,,, or that I don't see it for what it is.

Blinded by the light at times
  #325  
Old 12-09-2018, 05:46 PM
sns2's Avatar
sns2 sns2 is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: My House
Posts: 6,964
Default

Enough of the 6.5 drama. Tired of dealing with the complaints. Tired of the professional trolls. If you want to learn about 6.5s, go buy one and shoot the thing. Closed.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.