Article

[Corjack]

here is an article. The writer is not very high in my list of most favourite persons. However he occasionally seems to have a few moments.

I would like everyone to read it, and see how many things they can find favour, or fault with, and have a discussion.

The one comment I noticed was the one where any flavour of 6.5 beats a 308, with very few exceptions. I personally find this to be true, on paper, and in field conditions.

Read it, comment on specific things, and let's have a discussion.

http://www.scout.com/military/snipers-h ... the-bullet

[stokesrj]

I don't see anything to disagree with for me, especially if you are from a precision rifle match shooting mentality. For hunting purposes, which is where my heart is, the 6mm Creedmoor is academic. For long range hunting, the 6.5 Creedmoor is far superior in my opinion.

I have several .260's and I am unable to match the performance of the 6.5 Creedmoor. I've never figured out why this is. In this article he says that you can eek out a little more velocity with the .260. I've found only the opposite of this to be true. Perhaps it is the bore diameter or chambers in my .260's but I can drive the same bullet to higher velocity and better precision from the Creedmoor. Again this is academic because to even measure the difference is difficult, so for hunting it is a wash.

I also agree with the disadvantages of the 6.5X47 Lapua that this author sites. Everyone I know in the crowd I run with who bought a 6.5X47 replaces it with a 6.5 Creedmoor as soon as they wear the 6.5X47 barrel out. And it doesn't take that long to wear one out if you are a serious competitor, less than a year.

That's about all I see to comment on for now.

[Chamois71]

I am by no means of any great expertise in this realm of new 6.5 and 6mm rounds. I did however shoot the .308 extensively at one time in both an M1A service rifle and in a custom DD Ross built USMC M40A1 sniper. Most of my shooting was 600m and less because that is what was available to me.

Insofar as his comments on rate of twist for .308, I agree; 1:10 is best. When Dan Ross built me my M40 he suggested the 1:10 twist vs the normal spec and after a short discussion I conceded to a man that knew more than I did. I wasn't sorry. That rifle shot 168 and 175 match rounds superbly for the years I owned it. It was truly a fun gun to shoot with the added bonus that I was able to get a lot of my match ammo thru work, which kept the economics majorly in my favor. My M1A had a Kreiger match barrel in 1:10 twist and when my eyes were younger I could work magic on some days slung up in a prone position with 168 and 175 grn pills. It was a Carl Leisinger built match gun.

Both of those rifles are with happy new owners and my quest for a 6.5 is not in the realms of a long range precision build, but rather in an old cartridge in a stalking platform; K95 in 6.5x57R.

Best
Scott

[rick137]

A disclaimer. All of my knowledge on the subject comes from the printed page or the computer screen, not the range or the field.

Comments:

1- The dude who wrote the article is statistics and numerically challenged. No distinction between accuracy and precision although it was probably accuracy. Nothing about how many shots in a group or how many group to reach conclusion. HR Vaughn states that anything statistically accurate needed at least five groups of five and for all experiments in his book he claimed to use eight groups of five. How many shots to barrel death?
2 - Incomplete analysis. Accuracy is the product of four factors - scenario, weapons system, shooter and environmental conditions. At least the author realized he was talking about a system. The weapon systems consists of rifle, ammo, non-human component of support, and sighting system. Each of those has components such as barrel and trigger as elements of the rifle system. But no mention of environmental conditions. Perhaps he assumed the shooter component includes ability to perfectly estimate the wind and range.
3 - The discussion should be about suitability for the scenario. For some situations 308 may be better, others 6.5mm and still others 6mm. The rational approach is to do a WEZ analysis and examine the effect of each variable and its uncertainty on the accuracy. Bryan Litz' WEZ analysis does not quantify every variable but it is a long way down the road.
4 - Cal Zant in his PRS blog discusses the issues much more rationally. http://precisionrifleblog.com/

[7x57]

From a practical perspective I find it hard not to agree with him. He is speaking about long range target and has considerable experience in this field.
Can't argue that my 6.5 Lapua hasnt got the legs that my sons 260 has and probably when the barrel is finished I will look at another 6.5 cartridge. Guess it does come down to other variables as well and on a certain day one cartridge will our perform another. Think the crux of his argument is that it comes down to choosing the correct projectile and shooter skill. Hard to argue with that.

[Corjack]

I would not count the 6.5x47 out. While the sixes dominated the top one hundred PRS shooters. The top shooters that used 6.5s were using the 6.5x47 Lapua. This max change now that the 6.5 Creedmoor is now available from Lapua with the small primer pocket. I have it in my head this new stuff is superior to the other brass offerings from Hornady, Nosler, and Norma.

After thinking about the statement on the 308, I think if I were still just average joe hunter, shooting at max 300 yards, the 308 would still be my go to just because of the bigger hole. A bigger hole, even with good shot placement never hurts anything. We still need to be as humane as is practical.

[deerhunter338mag]

A disclaimer. All of my knowledge on the subject comes from the printed page or the computer screen, not the range or the field.

Comments:

1- The dude who wrote the article is statistics and numerically challenged. No distinction between accuracy and precision although it was probably accuracy. Nothing about how many shots in a group or how many group to reach conclusion. HR Vaughn states that anything statistically accurate needed at least five groups of five and for all experiments in his book he claimed to use eight groups of five. How many shots to barrel death?
2 - Incomplete analysis. Accuracy is the product of four factors - scenario, weapons system, shooter and environmental conditions. At least the author realized he was talking about a system. The weapon systems consists of rifle, ammo, non-human component of support, and sighting system. Each of those has components such as barrel and trigger as elements of the rifle system. But no mention of environmental conditions. Perhaps he assumed the shooter component includes ability to perfectly estimate the wind and range.
3 - The discussion should be about suitability for the scenario. For some situations 308 may be better, others 6.5mm and still others 6mm. The rational approach is to do a WEZ analysis and examine the effect of each variable and its uncertainty on the accuracy. Bryan Litz' WEZ analysis does not quantify every variable but it is a long way down the road.
4 - Cal Zant in his PRS blog discusses the issues much more rationally. http://precisionrifleblog.com/

Hehe environment is so important. I was shooting last Friday out to 1112meters. No wind but there was a mirage doing crazy things and really difficult to read. I was hitting the gong but no real constant groups at that range. But I'm not a target shooter so every hit was a dead deer. The other week I was up the tops watching the fog been pushed through the mountains no wind. These days rifles, scopes and projectiles make LR so much easier but the environment is still the same.

[7x57]

I would not count the 6.5x47 out. While the sixes dominated the top one hundred PRS shooters. The top shooters that used 6.5s were using the 6.5x47 Lapua. This max change now that the 6.5 Creedmoor is now available from Lapua with the small primer pocket. I have it in my head this new stuff is superior to the other brass offerings from Hornady, Nosler, and Norma.

After thinking about the statement on the 308, I think if I were still just average joe hunter, shooting at max 300 yards, the 308 would still be my go to just because of the bigger hole. A bigger hole, even with good shot placement never hurts anything. We still need to be as humane as is practical.

Yes you are correct about the 6.5 Lap and I am keen to try a few different projectiles esp. around the 130 grain mark. I have seen the calibre do very well in a long range shoot to 500 and the conditions were appalling. The shooter had some skil.
The 308 is hard to beat as a general shooter out to the range you say. My Blaser 308 likes heavier pills and is very consistent with them.

[stokesrj]

It's hard to argue against a .308 up to 300 yards, it works, and works well.

However, that doesn't mean that any of the 6.5's won't work better, and yes I include the 6.5X47 in that group. It is for certain the 6.5's will work better at longer ranges. I've shot lots and lots of animals with both the 30-06 and 308, and quite a few with the 6.5 as well. I see cleaner quicker kills with the 6.5's mostly I believe, due to more precise bullet placements.

Also of extreme importance is bullet construction, most of my experiences have been with Nosler Ballistic tip, and Partition bullets but also a range of others. Beyond 300 yards, I haven't yet seen anything as quick killing as the 140 grain 6.5 mm Berger hunting VLD but that is mostly out of my 6.5 STW with it's higher velocity. Many of my friends use 300 win mags and often comment on how quick the 6.5 kills compared to their 300 win mag.

It's not magic, the only thing required to kill an animal quickly and humanely is the removal of things that are required to sustain life and mobility. That is not done with diameter or velocity alone, it is done with sufficient energy delivered to the vital organs after passing though what ever is required to get to them. The 6.5mm bore is I believe the smallest diameter bullet that can deliver that result reliably at distances.

The 6.5mm is in my opinion the diameter that most effectively blends sufficient mass in a form factor that penetrates all the air encountered in a long range shot easily, and generates recoil that nearly anyone can handle comfortably. I think that is it's key attribute. Moving to 30 caliber you must shoot a 200 grain minimum to equal the 140 grain 6.5 and that generates recoil that many find to degrade accuracy. I honestly believe the reason my friends have seen the 6.5 kill on the spot so many times is due to bullet placement which in turn is promoted by the mild recoil, and lot's of practice.

My son is going on a moose hunt to Alaska this fall, he has the choice of any of my rifles he would like, including 308, 30-06, 300 win mags, 375 H&H, 9.3X62 and so on. He plans to take a 6.5 Creedmoor. I would choose the 9.3X62 but he says it kicks too much and he has seen enough out of the 6.5 mm rifles I own to have 100% confidence. I've killed a number of moose with my 270 win so I also have 100% confidence in the 6.5 Creedmoor. With the right bullet it will shoot completely through both shoulders of a massively muscled bull moose.

[SPEEDY]

There is also something that was left out that is of importance, long-range hunting.
The 6.5's are the superior L/R bullet, but there's more to life then gongs and targets.
As to the bullet weight in 308win debate, I disagree to a point. The heavier projectiles might make a better L/R choice for target shooting out at 100m, but for hunting under 800m the 168gn pills work best and is flatter shooting over the shorter legs. Finding projectiles suitable for both L/R shooting and performance on game can be tricky.

This article was about one aspect of shooting, L/R precision match shooting, so it's probably quite accurate in that regard, but a little to single focused to be accurate for all situations.

[Corjack]

I agree Speedy. That is why I posted that the average Joe hunter that seldom takes a shot past 300 yards would probably be better served with a 308.

[stokesrj]

There is a poll on the Facebook group Blaser Club for favorite caliber, at the moment, the .308 is in the lead with 333, second is the 30-06 with 315, third is the 9.3X62 with 248, fourth is the 6.5X55 at 141, and fifth is the 300 win mag at 108. So there are a lot of people that think the 308 is best, or at least their favorite, it is probably highly slanted towards european hunting conditions.

I find myself in the minority more often than the majority, and this is no exception, I think the 6.5X55 is a better hunting caliber than the .308 at least in my hands it has consistently produced cleaner kills both up close and out there at moderate range, 450 yards or so. And it does it with more polite manners, especially when fired from very light hunting rifles.

[Ado]

i think the following Byran Litz article adds to the discussion around LR shooting - if you are shooting .30 Cal you need to go really heavy (230gr) in bullet weight choice as to be as effective in LR shooting as 140gr 6.5mm - but the extra recoil has impacts on the pilot....

What is wrong with .30 Cal - Bryan Litz

rick137 - He is typically much more scientific in his approach too

[SPEEDY]

I was watching MeatEater again and got to thinking, Steve rinella uses a plain vanilla 7mm rem mag to take pretty much everything and usually at a reasonable range of 300 yards or so. Now I started thinking about it being considered one of the best all round big game and LR hunting rounds.
While looking into it I compared it to the 308win, now I only did this using the AD I reloading manual.
But I worked out that the 7mm only has a 100-150fps over the 308win with any common bullet weight. Now that's not much and it has me thinking that the 308win will do anything that the 7mm rem can, and the 30/06 would probably be an even better option.

So I'm even more sure now that for big game LR hunting a 308win makes a top choice, one big additional reason is recoil, no matter how you cut it, less recoil = more accuracy, and a rifle you enjoy shooting is much better then one you don't.

[jeff]

At shortish hunting ranges, sure....but run the ballistics for the same, 162/168gn bullet weight out of each at, say, 500m and you will start to see a difference. 7RM recoil in anything but a lightweight mountain rifle isn't noticeably different to a 30-06 either, IMHO.

Seriously toying with a 7RM or 270Wby barrel for my Sauer before I do NZ.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk