Viewing 52 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #30074
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      264 Winchester Magnum
      Case: Winchester Twist: 1:8″ Primer: Winchester LRM, Large Rifle Magnum Barrel Length: 26″ Trim Length: 2.490″
      120 GR. SPR SPStarting LoadMaximum Loads
      ManufacturerPowderBullet Diam.C.O.L.Grs.Vel. (ft/s)PressureGrs.Vel. (ft/s)Pressure
      HodgdonH4350.264″3.260″54.5304553,000 PSI58318561,200 PSI
      HodgdonHybrid 100V.264″3.260″56.4308053,500 PSI60323260,600 PSI
      IMRIMR 4350.264″3.260″56.5307554,700 PSI60322661,900 PSI
      IMRIMR 4831.264″3.260″58310556,400 PSI60.7321261,600 PSI
      HodgdonH4831.264″3.260″60.6302749,100 PSI64.5325462,000 PSI
      WinchesterSupreme 780.264″3.260″61.1307954,300 PSI65323561,700 PSI
      HodgdonH1000.264″3.260″65.5305049,100 PSI69.7326762,100 PSI
      HodgdonRetumbo.264″3.260″66.3309150,400 PSI70.5329961,700 PSI

      The .264 Winchester Magnum gained a reputation as a very flat shooting cartridge. When introduced (1959/1960), it was first chambered in the Winchester Model 70 Westerner rifle, which was intended for longer range shooting more common in the Western United States.While readily available factory ammunition for the cartridge is for the most part fairly basic, the handloaders can gain a step up in performance with bullets with better ballistic coefficients and weights to extend to performance of the cartridge. For this reason, this cartridge is better suited for shooters who are willing to make their own ammunition rather than those who purchase over the counter ammunition.

      6.5mm Remington Magnum
      Case: Remington Twist: 1:9″ Primer: Remington 9 1/2 M, Large Rifle Magnum Barrel Length: 26″ Trim Length: 2.160″
      120 GR. SPR SPStarting LoadMaximum Loads
      ManufacturerPowderBullet Diam.C.O.L.Grs.Vel. (ft/s)PressureGrs.Vel. (ft/s)Pressure
      IMRSR 4759.264″2.790″32257552,900 CUP
      IMRIMR 4895.264″2.790″42.5287242,000 CUP45296053,000 CUP
      IMRIMR 4320.264″2.790″46.5296552,500 CUP
      IMRIMR 4064.264″2.790″46.5297552,000 CUP
      IMRIMR 4350.264″2.790″51300052,200 CUP
      HodgdonH380.264″2.790″45284345,900 CUP49305950,900 CUP
      IMRIMR 4831.264″2.790″54306052,900 CUP
      HodgdonH4350.264″2.790″49278043,700 CUP52308051,200 CUP
      HodgdonH4895.264″2.790″46308150,900 CUP
      HodgdonH414.264″2.790″47279240,800 CUP51309951,700 CUP
      HodgdonH4831.264″2.790″54298542,600 CUP59328651,000 CUP

      In 1966 Remington introduced the 6.5 Remington Magnum, which was based upon the previous years’ .350 Remington Magnum (which in turn is based on a shortened, necked down, blown out .375 H&H case), in the 18.5 inch barrel Model 600 series carbine. This was a failure on account of the case capacity of the cartridge. A barrel with a minimum length of 24 inches is necessary to realize the potential of this cartridge. Attempts have been made to revive the cartridge by Ruger and by Remington in 2004 in the Model 673 Guide Rifle. Currently Remington no longer produces ammunition or rifles for the cartridge. Cases can be reformed from 7mm Remington Mag, 264 Win Mag, 300 Win Mag.

      Performance is slightly above the 6.5-06 / 6.5×55 (27-2800 @46,000CUP) and slightly below the 264 Win Mag.
      Barrel life should be greater than the .243 win because of a larger bore, and on par with the 6.5×284 (68.3grs of H2O) as the case capacities are extremely close. Powder choices are compatible with the 30-06, 6mm Remington family a added plus to what I normally stock.
      Case capacity of some 6.5 cartridges in grs H2O:

      6.5x70R 39
      6.5 Jap. 48
      6.5×52 Carcano 49
      6.5x53R 49
      6.5×54 M-S(.256) 50
      .260 Rem 53
      6.5×55 57
      6.5×57(R) 58
      6.5×57 59
      6.5-284 66
      6.5-06 67
      6.5 Rem Mag 68
      .264 Win Mag 82

      6.5mm Sierria 123 MatchKing

      Dia. (inches)Weight (grains)Sectional DensityBallistic Coefficients and Velocity Ranges
      0.264123.252.510 @ 1,635 fps and above
      .477 between 1,635 and 1,400 fps
      .450 between 1,400 and 1,250 fps
      .420 @ 1,250 fps and below

      6.5mm Sierria 142gr MatchKing

      Dia. (inches)Weight (grains)Sectional DensityBallistic Coefficients and Velocity Ranges
      0.264142.291.626 @ 2850 fps and above
      .611 between 2400 and 2850 fps
      .606 between 2050 and 2400 fps
      .581 @ 2050 and below

      Why consider these cartridges?? Well they can delivering 300 Win mag performance with less than half recoil depending on how the gun is setup. Added benifit is less kick equals better shot placement all day evry day.

      The High SD of the bullets (6.5mm) allow a high BC which translate to less velocity loss as the bullet travels. This makes sense for that old 7mm Mag or 300 Win Mag with the shot out barrel without changing the bolt face to a less kicking firearm that can deliver the goods. (yes I have one of those LOL)

      Ballistics with a 123gr Sierria calculating a 2900 fps MV Regardless of 6.5mm Rem Mag or 264 Win Mag although the .264 can generate a faster MV than I used here. The 142 gr Sierria is impressive which the 1-8 twist is the obvious choice.

      RangeDrop (in)Drop (MOA)Vel. (ft/s)Energy(ftlbs)Time of Flight
      0-1.5***2906.42306.60
      100002719.12018.90.107
      200-3.2-1.52539.517610.221
      300-11.8-3.82366.91529.80.343
      400-26.6-6.42201.11322.90.475
      500-48.6-9.32041.81138.40.616
      600-79-12.61889.69750.769
      700-119.1-16.31745831.50.934
      800-170.7-20.41607.1705.21.113
      900-235.8-251472.45921.308
      1000-316.9-30.31347.84961.521

      Below is a 300 Win Mag with a 200gr Sierria

      RangeDrop (in)Drop (MOA)Vel. (ft/s)Energy(ftlbs)Time of Flight
      0-1.5***2805.63495.10
      1000026403094.70.11
      200-3.5-1.72480.42731.80.227
      300-12.6-42326.42403.10.352
      400-28.2-6.72177.821060.486
      500-51.1-9.82034.11837.20.628
      600-82.5-13.11895.51595.30.781
      700-123.5-16.81763.21380.40.945
      800-175.7-211637.811911.122
      900-241-25.61520.21026.21.312
      1000-321.2-30.71411.5884.61.517
    • #30075
      lar45
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 21
      • Comments: 224
      • Overall: 245

      Oh come on Sarge, we all know what you really need is a 30-378wby . I should have the reamer around here someplace.

      Wasn’t the 264 Win mag plagued with barrel life problems?
      What about the 6.5-06? It seems to have the longest neck of the 6.5s, and should still be able to break 3200fps with the 123gn Sierra. Converting brass would be much easier than chopping down 300Win cases, forming and reaming necks to end up with 6.5 Rem Mag.

    • #30078
      JPHolla
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 120
      • Overall: 121

      Don’t for get the 26 Nosler. I’ve thought about it from time to time, and I keep coming to the conclusion that any case bigger than the 6.5×55 is too far past the point of diminishing returns for me. It is big enough to utilize the cheap surplus .50 or 20mm powder. It even burns Imr5010 cleanly. 6.5-06 would have the added bonus of more readily available cases to convert. That said, if I ran across a magnum at a cheap price, I’d buy it in a heartbeat. I even have some 264 Win Mag ammo just in case.:)

    • #30079
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      Brass becomes an issue with most of those older calibers.

      I am lucky enough to have seen the future and bought up .350 rem mag brass as well as .30/40 Krag brass.

      I always liked the 6.5 rem mag cartridge.

      Nowdays if I buy any 6.5 it will be a long range target rifle.

      A .260 rem , a 6.5 X47 Lapua, or a 6.5 Creedmoor.

      I have heard the .260 rem is the most finicky on loading different bullet weights.

      As far as a long range hunting round, I like the Weatherby calibers best.

    • #30080
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      260 Remington. Duplicate 300 Win Mag trajectory at a fraction of the recoil.
      Another is 6.5X55

      An AI variant of either would be very nice. No flies on that at all, and the 260 has the supreme advantage of being able to get brass ANYWHERE.

    • #30084
      JPHolla
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 120
      • Overall: 121

      Goodsteel;n9722 wrote: 260 Remington. Duplicate 300 Win Mag trajectory at a fraction of the recoil.
      Another is 6.5X55

      An AI variant of either would be very nice. No flies on that at all, and the 260 has the supreme advantage of being able to get brass ANYWHERE.

      It will often exceed the 300WM in everything except retained energy and it really amazes me. With the DPMS, i could probably have three on the way before most could recover from the recoil from the first shot of a 300. Even the little 6.5 Grendel is no slouch downrange. If you compare the bigger cases to the smaller, most of that extra energy is gone in 500 yards anyway. That’s my reason for not buying the magnum 6.5’s. But i still kinda want one.

    • #30086
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      Guilty as charged . The factory ammo is certainly a detriment to the 264 WM @ $2.40 a shot .
      As for flat shooting I haven’t had a chance to shoot it beyond a 20″ steel plate at 400 yd . That load was a patched NOE 260-120 placed 3″ high @100 was easily on the steel . Even with the swirling wind .
      A full bore 140 Win PP held to 2800 fps ,because 3 hit touching from the pencil bbl FN 98, were hitting 1″ below POH .

      Based on 60 yd hog wreckage I would suggest it for a rifle that you don’t plan on shooting anything edible under 150yd with . Maybe a modern bullet like a TTSX would be better in it .
      It is capable of digesting 12ga sized gulps of Unique with cast GC bullets also .

      Recoil is nil considering the authority on the business end . I would gauge the 140 loading above as on par with a 7×57 120 gr before I would a 150 gr 308/06′ load. Of course that stock fits me well and I was prepared to shoot a magnum rifle.

    • #30090
      seaboltm
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 8
      • Comments: 64
      • Overall: 72

      6.5×55 AI is a beast. Mine will launch a 140 Accubond at 2800fps. Thats from a 21 inch barrel on a 96 action. I actually took the same bullet to almost 2900 fps but pressure signs were showing at that level. Do the ballistics on that load. Flat shooting. I have yet to try the load in my 98 action with a 24 inch Shilen barrel. Would be near 3000 fps I would guess.

    • #30100
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Gentlemen,
      all fine worthy cartridges and great recommendations BUT NONE share the 7mm Mag/ 300 Win mag/ .375 H&H bolt face hence they don’t have mag in there name.

      The 264 win mag is a barrel burner for sure, the 6.5 rem mag less so. The 30-378 would still require a slight bolt face modification, but a highly interesting cartridge, that can teach you to flinch (LMAO).

      For less than the cost of a standard bolt face before fitting, or paying someone to modify the bolt face ( PTG $197.00, ebay seen them go higher, a reamer cost 169.50 PTG) .
      I can own a reamer and sell it after chambering, instead of buying a reamer and a bolt (yes the bolt body is cheaper but you still have to pay somebody to time it)
      The 6.5 Rem mag can be loaded down to the 6.5-06 or 6.5×55 level further allowing longer barrel life, with plenty of case capacity giving the ability to run faster.

      The dust has not settled yet and all the recommendations are NOT IGNORED the 6.5×55 is high on my preferred list, the 30-378 weatherby wellll I don’t think I would quit grinning after touching one off. I probably missed a 6.5mm that is on the .375 H&H bolt face wished Lapua made a belted mag but Norma does (264 Win Mag)

    • #30103
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      Why not Cat 1 of the WSM or WSSMs seems like the 25 or 270 would work . Just have a 270 cut .006 small on the leade,throat and neck or use the 25 as is and finish it with a 6.5 of your choice. Best of all they fit in a 308 length action or shorter.
      Savage has a 1bolt fits all bolt head also .

    • #30104
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Harter length is not a issue LOL as the rifle that I am pondering on, is a Remington 700 7mm Magnum (BTW the barrel is toast kinda), but yeah the WSM and WSSM I thought of and did consider those cartridges.
      I have not really kicked them out either even though feeding might be a issue in the mag box without alteration.

      I also kicked about putting a new bolt (std face) and then the available cartridges open up 30-06, 6.5-06, 270, 280, 7×57, 6mm rem, 6.5×55 etc etc.
      I like the 6.5mm bore as I have a Grendel as well, I like the ability to share components across different rifle.

      If this was a savage 110 heck no brainer just order the bolt head needed and go

    • #30105
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      Pity it’s not a 98′ . I’m in a mood and would make you an incredible deal .
      I have a barrel, Lee 2 die sets, 50 Hornady 7mm brass necked to 264 a box of moly coated and 70 Win PP and I think 50 WW 1-2x brass the barrel has about 50 rd through it as described above . Of course it’s a pencil barrel and of dubious origins marked interarms screwed to an FM action.
      ​​​​​​

    • #30106
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Durn my luck…………….. maybe Tim needs to jump in here I think he has a 98 or two floating around.
      what is the length on that barrel

    • #30107
      JPHolla
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 120
      • Overall: 121

      Also, 6.5 STW and 6.5 Allen Mag if you’re really serious and want more than the 26 Nosler.

    • #30110
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      Sgt. Mike;n9755 wrote: Durn my luck…………….. maybe Tim needs to jump in here I think he has a 98 or two floating around.
      what is the length on that barrel

      23.5″ muzzle to the outside of the action. Reasonably 24.25 .

    • #30113
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      What’s a 98 Sarge?
      LOL!
      Yeah, I might have a Mauser or ten around here…….

    • #30117
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      LOL yep figured so Tim.
      Like I said earlier in the thread I do prefer the 6.5×55 (even though I know I sound like a proponent of .264 Win or 6.5 Rem Mag both fine cartridges).
      Then again I might shift all of a sudden to the 6mm or 30 caliber bore.

      Thanks for all the input guys, like I said earlier not ignoring ya’ll input the easy on bore cartridges are a big plus. At some point I’ll decide which way to go.

      Think I need to just put this (subject) to rest ponder it a bit more silently. And concentrate on Mo Chuslia and doing the 722 rebarrel back to original caliber.

    • #30121
      WCM
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 30
      • Comments: 368
      • Overall: 398

      I have owned 7mm mags and 300 mags,
      I currently shoot a .270 Weatherby mag.

      I like it best for hunting deer sized game at long ranges.

      I still own a .338 win mag,and a .375 H&H just in case I get to missing recoil.

    • #30593
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      I did not post the 142grs ballistic table earlier so here it is :

      6.5mm Sierria 142gr MV 2800fps
      RangeDrop inDrop MOAVelocityEnergyTime
      0-1.5***2805.52481.20
      100002644.122040.11
      200-3.5-1.72488.41952.10.227
      300-12.6-42337.51722.50.351
      400-28-6.72191.11513.50.484
      500-50.8-9.72049.91324.70.626
      600-81.8-131908.11147.80.777
      700-122.4-16.71772.9990.80.94
      800-174-20.81644.7852.81.116
      900-238.5-25.31524.6732.71.306
      1000-318.1-30.41413.6629.91.51

    • #30605
      uber7mm
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 17
      • Comments: 288
      • Overall: 305

      Is 6.5×284 on the menu? I’ve read interesting things about that cartridge.

    • #30612
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      6.5X284. Janky cartridge, eh Sarge? LOL!

    • #30623
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      6.5-284 is a fine cartridge . Uber7mm.. However the Remington 700 I have has the 375 H&H bolt face… hence no 6.5-284 is not on the menu…

      But do I admire the cartridge? oh yes, it is a fine choice. ( Tim is laughing because I fired one of his customer’s builds to get a velocity reading, and relayed to the customer that it was a fine cartridge lord that was a sweet shooter for sure).

      The reason I’m leaning so hard to the 6.5 RM is it has a bit better record for barrel life, yet will stay within 100 fps of the .264 WM.
      The brass can easily be formed from .264 WM as that case is longer. The other aspect is that CA Dude and I was discussing doing this but lengthening the neck thinking it would assist in barrel life. another thought is to melonite the barrel after break in than see how she runs from there. So unless I have a free Remington 700 bolt find it’s way to me yeah I’ll continue to look at the 375 H&H bolt face in a 6.5 caliber because of it ballistics and lighter recoil.

      On a side note and drift I have seen some fine reports from the 30-350 Remington Magnum ( basically a belted 30-06, the 350 RM and 6.5 RM is the same case just necked up and down)

      It maybe two years before I really pull the trigger on this build (maybe) as right now the 7mm Remington Magnum is serving as a loaner.

      Like I said a fine cartridge it’s not lacking at all on a standard bolt face.

    • #30629
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      here is the .264 WM for a reference to the 6.5 RM and the 6.5-284 Norma:

      Not really a lot of difference

    • #30631
      ZmanWakeForest
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 20
      • Comments: 115
      • Overall: 135

      Won’t go wrong with the 6.5 Rem Mag! Been on my bucket list for quite some time! WCM mentioned the 270 WBY MAG…..I am a fan!

    • #30654
      uber7mm
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 17
      • Comments: 288
      • Overall: 305

      Although I think that the 6.5×284 is a cool cartridge, I’d hesitate on the due to the rebated rim. An addition step of complexity to forming brass, (284 brass, if available…. don’t see that every day.) 6.5x’06 might be a more practical solution, but again, a .473″ bolt face.

      If you already have a .531″ bolt faced donor action, then a 6.5 Rem Mag, will be a good choice.

    • #30657
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      Yeah, or you could ask the same smith that’s going to fit your barrel to sleeve the bolt face and install a Sako extractor, then make it whatever you please.

    • #30660
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Actually Uber7mm comparing the 6.5RM and the 6.5-06 the case capacity is right at equal. Only real difference is the bolt face and length of the cartridge and the resulting powder column.

      59.3grs (h2O case capacity) divided by 15.432 (weight of 1 CC of water) =3.84cc case volume. Most will complain that no good source ( like norma and lapula) exist for the 6.5 RM. Norma actually does make .264 WM brass which in new virgin form would be easy to turn over to the 6.5mm RM just run through the dies. Lapula does not offer anything in that bolt face.

    • #30662
      uber7mm
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 17
      • Comments: 288
      • Overall: 305

      A 6.5x’06 AI might give you a little more advantage over the 6.5 RM. if you don’t mind fire forming to move out the shoulders for AI cases.
      (6.5×270 AI or 6.5×280 AI will even have a greater case capacity.)

      Another advantage of the 6.5x’06 AI: Cool Factor Points; sleek looking cartridges.

    • #30666
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      hmmmm

      don’t see the advantage

    • #30680
      Harter
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 76
      • Comments: 807
      • Overall: 883

      There is a 300 Gibbs . It takes the 06′ case gives it a 308 case dia taper neck and shoulder necked to 6.5 it would pretty close to the WM .

    • #31567
      Three44s
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 12
      • Overall: 13

      OK, here’s gas on the fire!

      How about a 6.5 Sarge Mag?

      You have donor action that is currently a 7 Rem Mag so it’s a long action.

      You want a 6.5 mag that comes close to a .264 Win mag.

      How about going one more step and getting your own cartridge?

      Have your own reamer made to come up with a .264 Win mag dehorned a bit? Your brass source would be very reliable in the 7mm Rem mag and you can get a neck just as you want it and you will use your action as it’s set up. We have learned a whole lot about barrel life since the .264 Win mag rolled out and promptly went in head first and a longer neck and judicious loading where appropriate, good break in and cleaning afterwards as well as not trying to turn a bolt gun into a machine gun goes a long way to keeping one’s barrel steel relevant.

      You’ll also get notority if that matters ……….. your own cartridge ……… the 6.5 Sarge Magnum!

      Just a thought

      Best regards

      Three 44s

    • #31585
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      Ok. A wildcat called the 6.5 Sergeant has “cool” written all over it.
      Conjures images of strength, power, reliability, precision, resourcefulness, and a pretty epic propensity for effective field work.
      The steak is good. The sizzle is awesome.

    • #31590
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      welllll… it is catchy LOL ….

      Could be done quite easily. Just have to wait until June or so (the son will be using the 7 Mag for deer hunting)

    • #31754
      Three44s
      Participant
      • Bronze
      • Posts: 1
      • Comments: 12
      • Overall: 13

      Well you’ve not only have time to ponder it but time to get a reamer ground to boot!

      Do I get a “commission” for giving you the idea? LOL!

      Three 44s

    • #31858
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Three44s;n11992 wrote: Well you’ve not only have time to ponder it but time to get a reamer ground to boot!

      Do I get a “commission” for giving you the idea? LOL!

      Three 44s

      commission? wow I didn’t know monies would be flowing my way. Sure I’m positive I won’t need all those billions LMAO

    • #31864
      uber7mm
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 17
      • Comments: 288
      • Overall: 305

      Sgt. Mike;n12111 wrote:

      commission? wow I didn’t know monies would be flowing my way. Sure I’m positive I won’t need all those billions LMAO

      Maybe he means the 1888 German Commission rifle?

      Okay, that was a stretch…..

    • #31866
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      ooohhhh well that makes sense LMAO

    • #32186
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Because we all like to look at pictures be it groups or even reamers.
      Prior to submitting this print to Dave Kiff to over look and finalize, I will need to round up a sizing die for a sample without measuring donor brass (.264 Win Mag) I’m expecting to trim approx .063″.
      Once the samples are completed I might need to adjust the neck diameter to ensure a no turn neck on the prints, I want only to turn the necks for uniformity.

      Proposed barrel contour Shilen std palma 5.5 pounds finishes out to 30 length, or Brux light varmint 6.5 pounds finishes out to 27ish length. Twist I will go against my norm and twist faster on this one. So the 1-8 gets the nod only to ensure stability with the 142gr Sierria in the coldest of environments that I expect to find myself, the normal twist that Remington used was 1-9″.

      Need to round up a FL sizing die (6.5 Remington Mag) in order to get this going, been watching ebay nothing cheap enough yet may have to order off Midwayusa ( Lee set price is reasonable)

    • #32321
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873
      Calculated Table 6.5 Rem Mag 142grs SMK @2950 MVCalculated Table 300 Win Mag 175gr SMK @3200 MV
      RangeDropDropSpin DriftSpin DriftVelocityEnergyRangeDropDropSpin DriftSpin DriftVelocityEnergy
      (yd)(in)(MOA)(in)(MOA)(ft/s)(ft•lbs)(yd)(in)(MOA)(in)(MOA)(ft/s)(ft•lbs)
      100000.10.12796.62465.6100000.10.13003.63504.9
      200-2.9-1.40.20.12642.22200.9200-2.4-1.10.20.12806.13059.1
      300-10.9-3.50.50.22492.51958.4300-9.1-2.90.60.22615.12657
      400-24.4-5.80.90.22347.51737.3400-21-510.22431.42296.8
      500-44.3-8.51.40.32207.61536.4500-38.8-7.41.60.32255.21975.9
      600-71.3-11.32.10.32072.81354.5600-63.4-10.12.40.42086.81691.8
      700-106.3-14.52.90.41942.71189.8700-96-13.13.50.51925.71440.7
      800-150.7-183.90.51816.71040.5800-16.54.80.61770.81.5861.008
      900-205.5-21.85.20.61694.6905.3900-191.1-20.36.40.71621.81021.9
      1000-272.5-266.80.61576.1783.11000-257.5-24.68.50.81478.3849.1
      1100-353.6-30.78.60.71461.4673.21100-339.9-29.51111341698.6
      1200-450.9-35.910.80.91350.7575.11200-441.7-35.114.21.11211.1569.9
      1300-567.4-41.713.511244.7488.41300-567.2-41.718.21.31095.9466.6
      1400-706.3-48.216.71.11145413.31400-721.6-49.222.91.61035.2416.3
      1500-871.9-55.520.61.31069.2360.41500-908.4-57.828.41.8995.4385
      Calculated Table 6.5 Rem Mag 142grs Berger @2950 MVCalculated Table 300 Win Mag 200 gr SMK @2900 MV
      RangeDropDropSpin DriftSpin DriftVelocityEnergyRangeDropDropSpin DriftSpin DriftVelocityEnergy
      (yd)(in)(MOA)(in)(MOA)(ft/s)(ft•lbs)(yd)(in)(MOA)(in)(MOA)(ft/s)(ft•lbs)
      100000.10.12802.42441100000.10.12739.53332.2
      200-2.9-1.40.20.12653.72188.8200-3.1-1.50.30.12578.32951.6
      300-10.8-3.40.50.12509.21957300-11.5-3.70.60.22422.42605.5
      400-24.2-5.80.80.22369.21744.7400-25.8-6.210.222722292
      500-43.8-8.41.30.22233.81551500-46.9-8.91.60.32127.32009.3
      600-70.4-11.21.90.32103.21374.9600-75.6-122.40.419881754.9
      700-104.8-14.32.70.419771214.8700-113.1-15.43.40.51853.61525.6
      800-148.1-17.73.60.41854.81069.3800-160.8-19.24.60.51723.61319.1
      900-201.6-21.44.80.51736.2936.9900-220.2-23.46.10.61597.61133.3
      1000-266.6-25.56.20.61621816.71000-293.3-2880.81475.8967
      1100-344.9-29.97.80.71509.2707.91100-382.4-33.210.20.91358.4819.3
      1200-438.5-34.99.80.81400.96101200-490.4-391311246.2689.6
      1300-549.8-40.412.20.91296.8522.71300-620.8-45.616.31.21141.1578.1
      1400-681.9-46.515.111197.5445.71400-778-53.120.31.41064.3503
      1500-838.3-53.418.41.21106.9380.81500-965.7-61.5251.61023.3464.9
      Calculated Table 6.5 Rem Mag 123grsSMK @3100 MVCalculated Table 7mm Rem Mag 168gr SMK @ 2900 MV
      RangeDropDropSpin DriftSpin DriftVelocityEnergyRangeDropDropSpin DriftSpin DriftVelocityEnergy
      (yd)(in)(MOA)(in)(MOA)(ft/s)(ft•lbs)(yd)(in)(MOA)(in)(MOA)(ft/s)(ft•lbs)
      100000.10.12918.72326.2100000.10.12741.72803.5
      200-2.6-1.20.20.12736.42044.8200-3.1-1.50.20.12582.62487.7
      300-9.8-3.10.50.12560.21789.8300-11.5-3.70.50.22428.72200
      400-22.4-5.30.80.22390.21560.1400-25.7-6.110.22280.11939
      500-41-7.81.40.322271354.2500-46.7-8.91.50.321371703.3
      600-66.7-10.620.32070.51170.7600-75.2-122.30.41999.31490.9
      700-100.5-13.72.90.41920.41007700-112.5-15.33.20.41866.41299.2
      800-143.7-17.240.51775.7861800-159.8-19.14.40.51737.71126.3
      900-198-215.30.61636.1730.9900-218.6-23.25.80.61613.1970.5
      1000-265.3-25.36.90.71501.3615.41000-290.8-27.87.60.71492.4830.7
      1100-348.1-30.290.81371.7513.81100-378.6-32.99.70.81375.9706.1
      1200-449.4-35.811.50.91248.4425.61200-484.9-38.612.311264.4596.3
      1300-573.1-42.114.51.11133.5350.81300-613-4515.51.11159.3501.2
      1400-723.9-49.418.21.21056.1304.51400-767-52.319.31.31075431
      1500-905.8-57.722.61.41013.9280.71500-951-60.523.71.51030.8396.3

    • #32323
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      and some wonder why I’m looking into this bullet/cartridge

    • #47446
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      The rifle I was pondering this all for is a remington 700 chambered in 7mm Remington Magnum.

      my reason for shifting to the 6.5 bore that would use the same case that would offer a high BC.

      Sierria has solved my problem with two new offerings in 7mm.

      The 183gr SMK

      Ballistic Coefficients and Velocity Ranges
      0.707 @ 2300 FPS & ABOVE
      0.713 BETWEEN 1720 FPS & 2300 FPS
      0.690 @ 1720 FPS & BELOW

      The 197gr  SMK

      Ballistic Coefficients and Velocity Ranges
      0.780 @ 2300 fps and above
      0.765 between 1550 fps and 2300 fps
      0.711 @ 1550 fps and below

       

    • #47449
      kens
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 56
      • Comments: 531
      • Overall: 587

      Can you guys help me understand the 6.5mm, please.

      I read the article referring to sectional density, ballistic cooefficient, the 6.5 is better than all the rest.

      How is that?

      Isn’t SD and BC a physics function of weight vs diameter; length vs diameter; and  shape vs diameter?? correct?

      Then how is it the 6.5 gets all the hype?

      I’ll propose this, if you will, please correct my misunderstandings,

      If you were to have bullets of constant SD & BC, and applied the same constant to each caliber, then you would have something ‘approximately’ as follows:

      22cal 62gr bullet

      25cal 117gr

      7mm 139gr

      30cal 168gr

      and so on. No, this is not specific weights, but my point is that ALL calibers can have equal SD & BC, and the larger the caliber for constant BC, the bullet weight goes up with caliber.

      What am I missing?

      why the 6.5mm they say has better ballistics??

      If shooting a flat trajectory is the deal, then speed is the answer.

      BTW, has anyone taken a long barrel Swede ’96 and loaded a little 85gr pill in it? Shoot THAT over a chronograph and tell me what speed is !!……..a janky ‘ol mauser – and the guy next to me had a brand new Uber.mm mag Remchester he was all proud and talking of, until,,,,,both of us shot over the chrono,,,,,,,he just picked up his stuff and went home.

    • #47450
      Goodsteel
      Keymaster
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 208
      • Comments: 2452
      • Overall: 2660

      Well Kens, for me, it’s all about what you pay for what you get. In this case, recoil vs. speed.

      Obviously, the 338Lapau is a really tough act to follow with turned solids, and it will stomp the 6.5 and most others out past a mile. But you pay for it dearly with recoil and shootability of the rifle. The 300 WinMag is another I know real well, and if you drop some 210 grain Berger VLD in there, it looks great on paper, but you need an 18lb rifle with a muzzle break in order to control your shooting way out there.

      The 6.5 is just a very “human” caliber. That diameter has an impressive lineup of high BC bullets, and has had for the last 80 years or so. You can shoot those bullets at 2800FPS in a 12lb rifle without beating yourself to a pulp, and there is enormous control-ability there. Most would say, considering the recoil vs how far you get to shoot, you definitely get more with the 6.5 than you do most other calibers.

      Comparing the 338Lapua, 300 WinMag, the 280 Remington AI, the 6.5X284 Norma, the 240 Weatherby Magnum, and the 223 Norma, it becomes shockingly apparent that the 6.5mm is where you start to be able to pretend you could actually deposit enough energy at 1000 yards to do something other than punch a hole in paper. Everything above the 6.5 will beat it both in range and energy deposition at long range, but if you go on with your bad self and just buy the best long range rifle, you’re going to get an education the first time you sit down to spend a leisurely afternoon sending 100 rounds downrange at a long distance venue.

      To me, that’s what puts the 6.5 above the heap in a nutshell. Am I way off base here?

    • #47451
      kens
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 56
      • Comments: 531
      • Overall: 587

      Well, I was wondering about that myself, but, all the gun rags and writers don’t say it that way.

      They merely say the 6.5 has better efficiency ( BC/SD ) downrange, that’s all they say.

      With all the many bullet offerings in 7mm and 30cal, I cannot be convinced about the ‘better’ BC/SD of the 6.5.

      Now when you describe it as more ‘human’, as in less recoil, as in trying to get the higher bullet weight (ie high BC), to go waaaay downrange, then it makes sense.

      The gun rag writers won’t say that for a constant BC + constant SD + constant fps (ie flat trajectory), that the 6.5 has less recoil than a 7mm or .30 or 338

    • #47456
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      just talking BC right now the 6.5 usually has a high BC which equates out to a better or more retained velocity hence flatter shooting. Its all about time which a lot of 6.5 are described  as start slow end fast.

      looking at the 123gr SMK nominal length 1.295 dia .264

      .510 @ 1,635 fps and above
      .477 between 1,635 and 1,400 fps
      .450 between 1,400 and 1,250 fps
      .420 @ 1,250 fps and below

      the 142gr SMK  nom length 1.375 dia .264

      .626 @ 2850 fps and above
      .611 between 2400 and 2850 fps
      .606 between 2050 and 2400 fps
      .581 @ 2050 and below

      The 6.5 150gr SMK  nom length 1.5 dia .264

      .713 @ 1760 fps and above
      .686 between 1240 and 1760 fps
      .621 @ 1240 fps and below

      The closer to 1.0 (which is considered the perfect projectile) the better for flight and retained velocity.

      the darling 30 caliber produces BC such as:

      240 SMK  Nom length 1.591 dia .308

      .711 @ 2150 fps and above
      .702 between 2150 and 1800 fps
      .685 @ 1800 fps and below

      220 SMK Nom Length 1.489 dia .308

      .629 @ 2100 fps and above
      .624 between 2100 and 1700 fps
      .608 @ 1700 fps and below

      168 SMK  Nom Length 1.215 dia .308

      .462 @ 2600 fps and above
      .447 between 2600 and 2100 fps
      .424 between 2100 and 1600 fps
      .405 @ 1600 fps and below

      155 Palma  Nom length 1.131 (note there is three versions of this bullet offering differing length) dia .308

      .504 @ 2700 fps and above
      .470 between 1800 and 2700 fps
      .430 between 1500 and 1800 fps
      .380 @ 1500 fps and below

      Now the 6.5 Creedmoor  launches it’s 123gr bullet at 2900ish fps the 142 at 2600ish to 2700 fps

      a 142gr load would produce

      Range  Drop     Velocity    BC             Time to target
      (yd)       (in)         (ft/s)                           (secs)

      0            -1.5      2605.0      .611                0
      200       -4.3      2312.7       .606              0.219
      400       -33.2   2040.4      .606              0.464
      600        -95.7    1786.4     .581               0.741
      800       -202.1  1547.6      .581               1.057
      1000      -367.2 1324.1      .581               1.42
      1200      -612.5  1122.3     .581                1.841
      1400     -967.4  1020.3     .581                2.337<<<< bullet transsonic  below speed of sound
      1600    -1455.9  962.8      .581                2.905
      Now I’ll use 30-06 168 data topped out at 2900fps,   because the 308Win has to struggle to stay supersonic at 1000 yards:

      Range      Drop             Velocity            BC            Time to target
      (yd)           (in)                (ft/s)
      0              -1.5                2907.3              .462                 0
      200        -3.3                 2483.4             .447                  0.223
      400        -27.9               2096.3            .424                  0.486
      600        -84.5               1744.8             .424                  0.8
      800       -187.6              1422.4              .404                1.181
      1000      -360.7             1134.5              .404                1.654
      1200      -640.9             1000.4             .404               2.225 <<<< bullet transsonic  below speed of sound
      1400     -1060                927.2               .404               2.849
      1600    -1641.8             864.7                .404                3.522

      This is a except from sierria exterior ballistics site  that might help some versus my examples  and will touch on Sectional Density

      ( http://www.exteriorballistics.com/ebexplained/5th/221.cfm)

      2.1 The Ballistic Coefficient Explained

      There are at least three ways to describe the BC. First, it is widely recognized as a figure of merit for a bullet’s ballistic efficiency. That is, if a bullet has a high BC, then it will retain its velocity better as it flies downrange from the muzzle, will resist the wind better, and will “shoot flatter.” But this description is qualitative, rather than quantitative. For example, if we compare two bullets and one has a BC 25% higher than the other, how much is the improvement in bullet ballistic performance? This question can be answered only by calculating the trajectories for the two bullets and then comparing velocity, wind deflection, and drop or bullet path height versus range from the muzzle. So, the figure of merit approach really gives only a qualitative insight into bullet performance, and sometimes this insight is not correct. It often happens that the bullet with the smaller BC is lighter than the bullet with the higher BC. The lighter bullet therefore can be fired at a higher muzzle velocity, and it can then deliver better ballistic performance just because it leaves the muzzle at a higher velocity. We will talk more about this later.

      The second way to describe the BC is to use its precise mathematical definition. Mathematically, the BC defined as is the sectional density of the bullet divided by the form factor. This definition emerges from the physics of ballistics and is used in mathematical analysis of bullet trajectories. But in a practical sense, this definition is not satisfactory to most people for at least two reasons. The first is the question of a bullet’s form factor. The form factor is a property of the shape of the bullet design, but it is no easier to explain than the BC. The second reason is that this mathematical definition can lead to an erroneous conclusion. Assume for the moment that the form factor is just a constant property of the bullet design (not always true). The sectional density of a bullet is its weight divided by the square of its diameter. (The square of any number is the number multiplied by itself). So, to get a large BC we need a large sectional density. It appears from the mathematics that a bullet with a very small diameter should have a very large sectional density because its weight is divided by a very small number, and this should give it a very high BC. In other words, this line of reasoning would lead us to expect that small caliber bullets should have very large BC values. But this is not true because when the diameter of the bullet is small, the volume also is small. The weight of the bullet then is small, and the sectional density is necessarily small also. The net result is that small caliber bullets generally have lower BC values than larger caliber bullets.

      The third way to describe the ballistic coefficient traces back to the historical development of the science of ballistics in the latter half of the 19th century. This explanation is lengthier, but it provides a better understanding of what the BC is and what its role is in trajectory calculations. The latter half of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th century was a period of very intensive and fruitful development in the science of ballistics. The developments in ballistics were driven by technological advances in guns, projectiles, propellant ignition, and propellants throughout the 19th century, and by warfare, particularly in Europe and America. Warfare was almost an international sport among the kings, emperors, Kaisers and tsars in Europe throughout the 1800’s. The United States experienced the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Civil War, the Indian wars in the West, and the Spanish-American War within that same century. Governments were eager to fund research, development and manufacturing of improved guns and gunnery, because battles were generally won by the forces that had superior arms.

    • #47457
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Now earlier I introduced the new 7mm that sierria came out with these two will bring life with the 7mm Remington magnum

      looking at the 197grs .284 in the 7mm Remington magnum  running out the muzzle 2600fps

      0.780 @ 2300 fps and above
      0.765 between 1550 fps and 2300 fps
      0.711 @ 1550 fps and below

      Range       Drop      Velocity      Time       BC
      (yd)           (in)           (ft/s)           (s)

      0                -1.5        2603.9            0           0.78
      200           -4.1        2378.1          0.241      0.78
      400           -31.4     2163.7          0.506      0.765
      600           -88.5    1960.6          0.797      0.765
      800          -181.8    1769.8         1.119        0.765
      1000        -319.8    1593.1         1.477       0.765
      1200        -512.8    1433.1         1.874       0.711
      1400        -773.7    1293.2         2.316       0.711
      1600       -1118       1177.2          2.803      0.711

      Looking at the 183gr 7mm  in the Remington magnum coming out the muzzle at 2800fps  aan interesting note is that the BC actually goes up in the mid velocity

      0.707 @ 2300 FPS & ABOVE
      0.713 BETWEEN 1720 FPS & 2300 FPS
      0.690 @ 1720 FPS & BELOW

      Range       Drop       Velocity       Time       BC
      (yd)          (in)           (ft/s)            (s)

      0                -1.5       2804.5            0             0.707
      200          -3.4        2540.4          0.225       0.707
      400        -26.9        2291.3          0.474       0.713
      600         -77           2058.2         0.75          0.713
      800        -160         1839.7          1.058        0.713
      1000       -284.4     1635             1.404        0.69
      1200       -461.1     1447.3           1.795         0.69
      1400       -704.4     1285.8         2.235         0.69
      1600      -1032.2     1156.3         2.729     0.69

      Now why is this worth my time to post this    well everyone is always toting the 300 win magnum and bigger,  the 7mm Magnum is known to be softer on the shoulder than the 300 WM  and others so lets look at the 300 WM in similar bullet weight running full bore velocity.

      300 WM 180gr SMK  at 3000 fps:

      Range          Drop          Velocity           Time         BC
      (yd)               (in)            (ft/s)                (s)

      0                    -1.5            3007.1              0              0.475
      200               -2.9           2610.1             0.214        0.496
      400            -24.9           2253.7             0.462        0.496
      600            -74.6           1925.3             0.75           0.494
      800          -162.1           1629.3             1.089         0.494
      1000        -302.5          1374.9              1.49           0.494
      1200         -517              1176.3              1.964         0.494
      1400        -832.1          1044.3              2.508        0.494
      1600       -1274.8          958.4               3.11           0.494

      300 WM 200gr SMK at 2800 fps

      Range           Drop          Velocity          Time        BC
      (yd)               (in)              (ft/s)               (s)

      0                   -1.5              2805.7             0             0.565
      200              -3.5             2477.5         0.228          0.565
      400           -28.3             2172.3          0.486         0.565
      600          -82.8             1887.8          0.783          0.56
      800         -176.6            1628.6          1.125            0.56
      1000       -323.2           1401.8           1.523           0.56
      1200       -541.1            1216.9            1.983           0.56
      1400       -853              1083.8           2.508          0.56
      1600      -1283.4            995.1           3.088          0.56

      more velocity is not the answer cleaner bullets with less drag is.  That is what that BC number in layman terms,  means cleaner bullet less drag.

       

      With this new offering I can now just stay with the 7mm RM just need to rebarrel (mine is pretty much shot out bought it that way, basically just bought the action)   I’ll go with the 1-8 twist and a 30 incher so I wont have to push the cartridge hard to hit my desire results.

    • #47459
      kens
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 56
      • Comments: 531
      • Overall: 587

      but, you mentioned “just talking BC right now the 6.5 usually has a high BC”

      How is that? here is numbers I lifted from Sierra’s data.

      Here is 6.5mm first, followed by 7mm, 338, and 375.

      0.264  dia
      150  gr
      .307 SD
      .713 @ 1760 fps and above
      .686 between 1240 and 1760 fps
      .621 @ 1240 fps and below

      0.284 dia
      197 gr
      .349 SD
      0.780 @ 2300 fps and above
      0.765 between 1550 fps and 2300 fps
      0.711 @ 1550 fps and below

      0.338 dia
      300 gr
      .375 SD
      .768 @ 2300 fps and above
      .760 between 2300 and 1800 fps
      .750 @ 1800 fps and below

      0.375 dia
      350 gr
      .355 SD
      .805 @ 2,200 fps and above
      .780 between 1,700 and 2,200 fps
      .720 @ 1,700 fps and below

      If you only want to look at BC, then the 6.5mm looks pretty weak, and these are the best bullets that Sierra has got.

      If you want to carry power (either killing power or flat shooting) downrange, then you must start with a high SD. SD goes back the old Newton’s theory that an object in motion wants to stay in motion (and if in a straight line wants to keep going straight). BC is a lot of voodoo and black majic, figgering baro pressure, humidity et al.

      Look at some of the lighter bullets and notice the BC actually goes up as speed falls off.

      Look at this one below, if you only look at BC, then this one shot out of a old SMLE would shoot flatter the further it goes, correct?????

      0.311 dia
      125 gr
      .185 SD
      .274 @ 2500 fps and above
      .282 between 2500 and 2000 fps
      .289 @ 2000 fps and below

    • #47460
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      BC is a lot of voodoo and black majic, figgering baro pressure, humidity et al.

      really?????   I guess you are entitled to your opinion

      I have a rifle to build … Later and in closing my point in the resurrecting this old post was that Sierria was offering a 7mm that would fly better than the 6.5 which meant I could simply stay with original caliber that I already have supporting dies brass etc just a barrel change and order new bullets…

    • #47461
      Glenn
      Participant
      • Silver
      • ★★
      • Posts: 43
      • Comments: 222
      • Overall: 265

      Those BC numbers are crazy for the new bullets.  Here I was thinking that anything above .450 was good.

    • #47465
      kens
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 56
      • Comments: 531
      • Overall: 587

      My reference to voodoo & black majic comes from the thought that those really looooong high BC bullets are likely going to need special attention in order to actually gain the results of that loooong ogive and boattail.

      Example: the longer the ogive, the more bearing surface you give up to the rifling, same with boattail.

      the longer the ogive, the faster the twist you need to make it work, same for boattail

      I am of the school of thought that bearing surface to the bore trumps the looooong ogive. (standard SP accepted)

      Those really high BC bullets all need a twist so fast that you will likely lose accuracy with a normal sane bullet (ie like the AR’s 1:7 bbl with standard 55gr bullets)

      You likely will commit your self to those one particular type of bullet for your rifle to run right, you will lose flexibility

      In order to actually see the gains, you will have something like Tim describes in the XCB project: that is, it is not just the bullet but the entire system of bullet + barrel + action + bedding + sights + load +and so on +.

      My point is the voodoo is the makers of those bullets are selling something (BC) that doesnt exist in the everyday world. Yeah it exists (but mostly on paper analysis) , it is at the point of diminishing returns. Inside of 500 yards it isnt gonna make a noticeable difference. All the waaaaaay out at 1000yds you gotta dope the wind, dope the mirage, to the point that there is diminishing returns, UNLESS you are building a 1000yd benchrest target gun.

      Are you building a 1000yd target gun?

       

    • #47467
      Sgt. Mike
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 84
      • Comments: 789
      • Overall: 873

      Kens actually looking for 1200 yard plus.

      Not for any other reason than to punch paper. The other aspect is recoil which is a factor when your shooting long strings.  Which explains why I was leaning toward the lower recoiling system, like the 6.5 Rem Mag.  Then when sierria introduced the two new 7mm bullets the 7mm Rem Mag now is back on the table as it is the upper end of recoil for the project. Other wise the 7mm STW and a few others would be in front of the 7mm Rem Mag because of velocity and ability to stay supersonic. Looking between the two 183gr and 197gr I’m suspecting the 183gr will fit my bill the best . As I don’t deer hunt it will never need to go with lighter for carry purposes.

      Will this fit my bill ? Only one way to find out, I usually don’t run my rifles at the upper end unless that is where the accuracy is at. All the figuring and numbers are just a guide. I can always slip back to the 6.5mm or the 30 cal bore if need be. Just have to stay with the .532 rim unless the bolt is altered to a different diameter.  I’ll probably do like Glenn did on his choice of barrel profile when a bunch of us ordered barrels couple years ago. The Heavy palma will get the nod with the 30″ tube, considering a Muzzle brake but may not be needed. Like the title says ponderings.

       

      The 183gr will need a 1-8 twist per Sierria, the 197gr 1-7.5 .

      But I can get by with a 1-7.7 for the 197s as long as I don’t shoot in winter. On a warm day the the 183s will stabilize in a 1-9 twist.

      another shooter has already did some work along the same line here is his results with the 197grs / 59 grs H4831SC . 26″ MTU contour 1-7.5 , 5 shot group.  Recorded velocity 2598

      The build will be along these lines with a 30″ Heavy Palma barrel

    • #47469
      kens
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 56
      • Comments: 531
      • Overall: 587

      Oh, sorry,

      you opened the post with   “intended for longer range shooting more common in the Western United States” , I was thinking you talking about elk hunting out around 300yds, the stuff you read about magnums in the gun rags.

      There was so much about BC, SD, brass cases, in the post, I didn’t realize you going out 1000yds until the post was at the end.

    • #47488
      kens
      Participant
      • Gold
      • ★★★
      • Posts: 56
      • Comments: 531
      • Overall: 587

      Apparently there is not enough said about the 6.5mm.Now hornady has announced a new 6.5mm

      6.5PRC.

      A rimless case with magnum standard boltface. A rimless .532 case body.

Viewing 52 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 2017 Goodsteel Forum. Designed by Covalent Designs, LLC.