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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 12-14-2018, 11:14 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Parsons View Post
Thx, no harm done, I'm here for a good time,,, not a long time. Ha.

I'm not the book smart dude, and English is definitely not my first language,,, but hey,,, why not give it a try. Ha

All good as I wounder off track, find my self lost, and forward to not discovering what's been lost before its found.

And no,,, I'm not found of 308's since its only 1 of many,,, the trick is to enjoy them all,,, of course I like the 7mm's more,,, but I don't have any of them at the moment.

Ho Hummmmm,,, lifes to short at times. LOL
So why not let the 6.5 guys enjoy and discuss the 6.5 without bringing the bs into the discussion? Or at least come up with some facts to dispel whatever you take issue withh.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-14-2018, 11:32 AM
AndrewM AndrewM is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 2,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinky Coyote View Post
Just for the record I read Don’s posts differently than suggested, maybe I have it wrong?, I see his posts as bring levity and humour to the subject, not insulting or negative. So my response is based around that...and in no way meant as an insult to Don. He knows his stuff and adds his personality to this place. So Don if you took my reply as negative I’ll apologize now as certainly not meant that way at all. I applaud your creativity and imagination.👍

Edit add. Sarcasm and unusual sense of humour’s are not easily read. Pretty sure Don and I are on solid ground. But happy to be shown otherwise and face music.

Andrew, we never got to finish. I see your points however do you see mine? Yours being that the energy is there and driving...no argument. Mine being...how important is it a factor for comparing cartridges and bullets to one another for hunting? Are you saying it is? I am saying it’s not. How do you quantify the lottery of energy figure on the terminal end vs the constant of energy on the shooter end?

I have a good example above. What did the work there in terms of useful info to use for comparing cartridges and bullets?
Ok thanks for clarifying. I read it as an insult.

I see what you are saying but the energy is what transfers to the wound channel and to the animal via biological and hydrostatic shock.
You can shoot a rabbit with a 22 and it dies with minimal damage. Shoot that rifle with your 6.5 and it will blow a much larger hole and do much larger damage. Now take this to a deer. You can kill a deer with a 22. Take your 6.5 and it will do much more damage. Now take a even larger caliber with much more energy and it does even more damage. A good shot will kill regardless. A poor shot (by aim or by direction animal is standing etc) will be helped out by the higher energy rifles like the magnums.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-14-2018, 11:34 AM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

I watched the video to the end and one thing from it all jumped out at me.
The narrator seemed to be making some assumptions based on very narrow more or less arbitrary perimeters.

For example, at one point he made the statement that at so many yards one cartridge stops killing Elk.
I know he didn't mean that literally. That it was meant to make a point, but the point is useless if the perimeters are not real.

Ballistics are useful for comparison sake but ballistics alone do not tell the whole story.
Ballistics is a game of clearly defined numbers. Hunting never is.

A shot through the lungs does not need nearly the ft lbs energy to do it's work as a shot through the shoulder needs, even with the same load in the same cartridge in the same rifle.

It seems to me that arguing about a few feet per second velocity difference or a few pounds per square inch energy difference is a total waste of time.

A competent shooter can make the shot with whatever rifle he chooses. A wanna be is likely to miss no matter how good the ballistic numbers are.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-14-2018, 11:46 AM
lclund1946 lclund1946 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewM View Post
I have been avoiding commenting as it is a waste of my time. Without energy you don’t have movement nor penetration so no idea what point you are making. You have no idea what physics even means if you think energy doesn’t matter yet you think you understand everything. If you don’t want to listen you cannot be taught as you already “know” everything. You are accusing people of taking meds or drugs and all to prove a point of what? Personal insults make your point more? You love your 6.5 and don’t like to look at all the math so just shoot it and enjoy it. Stop trying to make everyone else believe what you do. I have never once said I don’t like the 6.5 nor have I said it wouldn’t kill. I just pointed out your fatal flaws in your math in your ridiculous comparison threads. I am still trying to determine why the 6.5 supporters feel they need to argue to justify shooting one. If it works for you, shoot it and enjoy! Just stop calling everyone else down for enjoying their favourite round.
Andrew I don't doubt that you are a wiz at physics and I don't think that SC does not realize that energy is part of the equation. I don't think that he has been the instigator in the senseless arguments that ensue nor does he feel the need to argue to justify shooting a 6.5. Rather it is a few people that seem to feel the need to justify their choice of cartridge/caliber in spite of, or should I say because of what the facts show.

You seem to think that the comparison chart he posted has some flaws and I suppose you think the same about the one that I made up. I beg to differ as the Chart I Posted was meant compare MV, ME, RE, and use a Minimum IV of 1900 f/s and a Minimum TE of 1200 ft.lbs to determine EFFECTIVE RANGE of various Factory and Handloads. The IV isabove industry standard for the ELD-X at 1800f/s and the Nosler LRAB at 1300 f/s and Minimum TE (1200 ft.lbs.), which I have established over a lifetime of experience seeing moose killed at 600 yards. I explained that in two other threads where I posted my chart, which you may have missed, and the 1900 f/s IV is higher than both Hornadys and Noslers Long range hunting bullets. The three examples I gave , to illustrate how I came to these figures, all had
IV and TE less than this and penetrated the moose sufficiently to get a one shot kill at 600 yards. In fact the only bullet to expend all of its TE and Momentum in the moose was the 30-06, with the bullet under the hide on the other side, that had very similar TE and SD to the 7mm08 which had enough momentum left to pass thorough the moose and expend its EXCESS ENERGY on mother earth as did the 270. This is where using these figures to compare Effective Range of various cartridge bullet combinations comes into play.

SC is right in that using the industry standards of Minimum IV and SD greater than 0.250, I believe, is sufficient to get enough penetration to kill Large American game given a bullet of proper construction. Therefore Energy does not have to come into consideration as Minimum IV is achieved at different distances as shown in the charts. I do like to include my 1200 ft.lb. Energy as I have used that without fail for about 60 years. I believe I explained to SC, on a much earlier thread that we were basically using two different methods to reach the same conclusion. If you look closely at the chart I posted you will see that a 150 grain bullet, regardless of MV, ME, SD or caliber will reach both 1900 f/s IV and 1200 ft.lbs. TE at the exact same yardage. Lighter, faster bullets all reach 1200 ft.lbs. TE long before they slow down to 1900 f/s and the opposite is true of heavier slower bullets. With lighter bullets there is an excess of velocity and momentum that can result in bullet failure due to the High IV or striking a rib but for the most part can be very effective on Large Game to the 1200 ft.lbs. TE. This can be beneficial with solid bullets like the Barns X but BC usually limits its Effective Range. Heavy larger caliber bullets usually tend to slow down and reach Minimum IV with excess TE that can result in bullets not expanding and passing through like a solid. This can be considered Excess or Wasted Energy or Overkill as Jams Brion called it in the video that I posted. I posted it in the hopes that some would see how using either Method of Determining Effective Range, for a given situation, is much better than bickering over which cartridge is superior based on personal preference and misconceptions about those preferences. If you find something that you don't agree with on the video or chart that I posted please lets discuss it rationally as you seem to want to.

Hopefully the people who seem to post on these threads just to derail them, or further their addenda will actually learn something, in spite of themselves. If not perhaps the mods should be shutting them down, instead of threads, so those of who want to share new ideas and learn can do so without being harassed and bullied.

On second thought I will post my chart so it will be easier to reference in case there are any pertinent questions:
[IMG][/IMG]

Last edited by lclund1946; 12-14-2018 at 11:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-14-2018, 11:53 AM
Beeman3 Beeman3 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 536
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 41thunder View Post
Ya he has an incredible amount of knowledge regarding long range hunting. Not just long range shooting. They test the theoretical against actual. 100’s of actual results vs a handful of selected results.. hmm what would you listen to?
Yep. I listen to what he says and enjoy his detailed wound channel pics. I’ll take real world results over theory any day. I also believe Broz says it like it happens. No BS just real results on game.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 12-14-2018, 12:22 PM
obsessed1 obsessed1 is online now
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,920
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeman3 View Post
Yep. I listen to what he says and enjoy his detailed wound channel pics. I’ll take real world results over theory any day. I also believe Broz says it like it happens. No BS just real results on game.
Agreed. Real world results tried and tested.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 12-14-2018, 12:46 PM
41thunder 41thunder is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeman3 View Post
Yep. I listen to what he says and enjoy his detailed wound channel pics. I’ll take real world results over theory any day. I also believe Broz says it like it happens. No BS just real results on game.
I agree 100%. Ya no one “owns” those guys. They had a creedmoor build and one guy asked how far do they think you could shoot an elk with it. Their response was elk calibers start at 30. I liked the comparison between the 300 win vs the 30 nosler also. Lots of real world data. Anyone can punch numbers into a calculator.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 12-14-2018, 12:47 PM
Don_Parsons Don_Parsons is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,827
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
So why not let the 6.5 guys enjoy and discuss the 6.5 without bringing the bs into the discussion? Or at least come up with some facts to dispel whatever you take issue withh.
It's because I have a rifle with 6.5 written on it. Ha

And I'm part of the secret 6.5 Club. LOL
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 12-14-2018, 12:52 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 41thunder View Post
I agree 100%. Ya no one “owns” those guys. They had a creedmoor build and one guy asked how far do they think you could shoot an elk with it. Their response was elk calibers start at 30. I liked the comparison between the 300 win vs the 30 nosler also. Lots of real world data. Anyone can punch numbers into a calculator.
That should tell you they don’t know as much as they thought.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 12-14-2018, 12:53 PM
41thunder 41thunder is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
That should tell you they don’t know as much as they thought.
Orrrrrr they know a lot more than you
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 12-14-2018, 12:54 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 41thunder View Post
Orrrrrr they know a lot more than you
Leave the personal attacks out marky, we don’t need this one shut down.

I would say the 28 Nosler would out do a 300win mag handily on an elk at long range. Maybe they don’t know as much as they thought.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:14 PM
Beeman3 Beeman3 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 536
Default

In all the elk kills they have had the 7mm didn’t perform as well as the 30 cal. Just repeating what they say over on those forums. Was either last season or the one before he was involved in the harvest of 60 elk on the ranch he manages. So I think he’s got more data than most of us combined. It’s all recorded with shot distance, impact velocity etc. Lots of pictures and good reading.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:18 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeman3 View Post
In all the elk kills they have had the 7mm didn’t perform as well as the 30 cal. Just repeating what they say over on those forums. Was either last season or the one before he was involved in the harvest of 60 elk on the ranch he manages. So I think he’s got more data than most of us combined. It’s all recorded with shot distance, impact velocity etc. Lots of pictures and good reading.
In all the elk I’ve killed, which you would be able to count on both hands, most were killed with a 280, the one nightmare blood trail I had was a single lung with a 300wsm. I killed one with a 260rem quicker than a 300wsm, data can be skewed.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:21 PM
41thunder 41thunder is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Leave the personal attacks out marky, we don’t need this one shut down.

I would say the 28 Nosler would out do a 300win mag handily on an elk at long range. Maybe they don’t know as much as they thought.
Who?
Why do you edit your responses to make assumptions?
The long range only guys have 100’s of on game terminal performance first hand experience. That’s a lot of valuable info. Hopefully I’ll be able to have a 338 lapua vs 26 nosler real world showdown to share next week. So far we only have 10 animals down this year with the 6.5’s. Not a ton but enough to make some general observations.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:28 PM
AndrewM AndrewM is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 2,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lclund1946 View Post
Andrew I don't doubt that you are a wiz at physics and I don't think that SC does not realize that energy is part of the equation. I don't think that he has been the instigator in the senseless arguments that ensue nor does he feel the need to argue to justify shooting a 6.5. Rather it is a few people that seem to feel the need to justify their choice of cartridge/caliber in spite of, or should I say because of what the facts show.

You seem to think that the comparison chart he posted has some flaws and I suppose you think the same about the one that I made up. I beg to differ as the Chart I Posted was meant compare MV, ME, RE, and use a Minimum IV of 1900 f/s and a Minimum TE of 1200 ft.lbs to determine EFFECTIVE RANGE of various Factory and Handloads. The IV isabove industry standard for the ELD-X at 1800f/s and the Nosler LRAB at 1300 f/s and Minimum TE (1200 ft.lbs.), which I have established over a lifetime of experience seeing moose killed at 600 yards. I explained that in two other threads where I posted my chart, which you may have missed, and the 1900 f/s IV is higher than both Hornadys and Noslers Long range hunting bullets. The three examples I gave , to illustrate how I came to these figures, all had
IV and TE less than this and penetrated the moose sufficiently to get a one shot kill at 600 yards. In fact the only bullet to expend all of its TE and Momentum in the moose was the 30-06, with the bullet under the hide on the other side, that had very similar TE and SD to the 7mm08 which had enough momentum left to pass thorough the moose and expend its EXCESS ENERGY on mother earth as did the 270. This is where using these figures to compare Effective Range of various cartridge bullet combinations comes into play.

SC is right in that using the industry standards of Minimum IV and SD greater than 0.250, I believe, is sufficient to get enough penetration to kill Large American game given a bullet of proper construction. Therefore Energy does not have to come into consideration as Minimum IV is achieved at different distances as shown in the charts. I do like to include my 1200 ft.lb. Energy as I have used that without fail for about 60 years. I believe I explained to SC, on a much earlier thread that we were basically using two different methods to reach the same conclusion. If you look closely at the chart I posted you will see that a 150 grain bullet, regardless of MV, ME, SD or caliber will reach both 1900 f/s IV and 1200 ft.lbs. TE at the exact same yardage. Lighter, faster bullets all reach 1200 ft.lbs. TE long before they slow down to 1900 f/s and the opposite is true of heavier slower bullets. With lighter bullets there is an excess of velocity and momentum that can result in bullet failure due to the High IV or striking a rib but for the most part can be very effective on Large Game to the 1200 ft.lbs. TE. This can be beneficial with solid bullets like the Barns X but BC usually limits its Effective Range. Heavy larger caliber bullets usually tend to slow down and reach Minimum IV with excess TE that can result in bullets not expanding and passing through like a solid. This can be considered Excess or Wasted Energy or Overkill as Jams Brion called it in the video that I posted. I posted it in the hopes that some would see how using either Method of Determining Effective Range, for a given situation, is much better than bickering over which cartridge is superior based on personal preference and misconceptions about those preferences. If you find something that you don't agree with on the video or chart that I posted please lets discuss it rationally as you seem to want to.

Hopefully the people who seem to post on these threads just to derail them, or further their addenda will actually learn something, in spite of themselves. If not perhaps the mods should be shutting them down, instead of threads, so those of who want to share new ideas and learn can do so without being harassed and bullied.

On second thought I will post my chart so it will be easier to reference in case there are any pertinent questions:
[IMG][/IMG]
The 6.5PRC does put up some nice numbers.
I don't think you read the prior message as SC said the same SD equaled the same penetration for different velocities and different size bullets. I said energy needs to come into effect in order to calculate penetration. Your charts show the maximum effective range based on velocity and energy. This doesn't reflect the maximum amount of damage though.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:30 PM
lclund1946 lclund1946 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeman3 View Post
Yep. I listen to what he says and enjoy his detailed wound channel pics. I’ll take real world results over theory any day. I also believe Broz says it like it happens. No BS just real results on game.
Great attempt to derail this thread. According to your last post Broz helped you spec the reamer when you built your 300 Win Mag. Guess I could call BS when you say you are shooting a 300 Win Mag as Saami has specific specs for the 300 Win Mag? I am not sure if you are calling my account of the results when shooting moose at 600 yards BS but I have killed around 50 Moose and saw a lot more than that being shot with a number of different calibers and loads. Add around 10 elk and numerous deer as well as a couple of Bighorn sheep and I can say most shot from 200 to 600 yards with a 270 or 7mm08 were complete pass through with no bullet recovery and wound channel that resulted in Bang Flop or death within seconds. My chart reflects those results and indicates that some loads in an actual 300 Win mag have less Effective Range than a 270 Win, 6.5 CM or 6.5 PRC with Hornady Percision Hunter factory ammo. Even the same can be said about some handloads in a 7mm08, 308 Win, 6.5X 47L, 6.5x55 among others. That is why we use Terminal Ballistics to compare different loads in various cartridges as to Effective Range and all BS aside it is better than conjecture.

I took a look at LRH and found this Review of a Montana Rifle Co., X3, chambered in 6.5PRC using Hornady Factory ammo. http://https://www.longrangehunting....c-review.1223/
I believe I suggested this rifle/cartridge combination on AO before and let it be know that it can be ordered through Prophet River unless they already have some on order for their stock. Perhaps someone could post as good or better with their pet cartridge in an attempt to derail this thread further.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:34 PM
Stinky Coyote Stinky Coyote is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewM View Post
Ok thanks for clarifying. I read it as an insult.

I see what you are saying but the energy is what transfers to the wound channel and to the animal via biological and hydrostatic shock.
You can shoot a rabbit with a 22 and it dies with minimal damage. Shoot that rifle with your 6.5 and it will blow a much larger hole and do much larger damage. Now take this to a deer. You can kill a deer with a 22. Take your 6.5 and it will do much more damage. Now take a even larger caliber with much more energy and it does even more damage. A good shot will kill regardless. A poor shot (by aim or by direction animal is standing etc) will be helped out by the higher energy rifles like the magnums.
Not much to disagree with there. My take on the extreme differences would be something like this:

.22 vs 6.5 whatever. Is what percentage difference? Massive difference but same goes for sd and impact velocity and recoil energy. The percentage of difference between our centerfires we commonly discuss is fractional and as compared to our big game animals minimal however we make it sound like a huge difference between a .30” diam bullet weighing a few more grains than a .264” diam. Option. To the size of a big game animal that is nothing. The amount of evidence available that pints to bullet construction with sd and impact velocity are the reliable figures to use. Terminal energy between centerfires does not correspond accurately, not in percentage, it’s a complete lottery number. Smaller slower but higher sd bullets have routinely surprised with spectacular terminal whereas the big boys on paper have just as similarly not shown that advantage terminally.

I don’t include terminal energy because it’s not important for comparing. I want to be shown otherwise, I started life in this understanding it as a huge factor but that’s what was instituted at the time, been reading about the topic and living it for about 37 of my 45 yrs I suppose. Killing since 7 reading ballistics since about 12. Really reading and living it past 15 or so years with the super nerd eye on it.

We could go extreme in example to show points. Biggest grizzly with a 22, or even a rabbit with a 22 as you mentioned. You can do drastically different terminal to a rabbit with just different ammo in a 22. High velocity rapid fragmentation cci stinger vs standard velocity solids? Same thing I’m saying. The energy isn’t the reliable data to compare. Impact velocity, sd and construction. The .22 standard velocity with the slower higher sd will just like a hole, all energy wasted. The rapid frag cci stinger at higher impact velocity will come apart and yes expend more energy inside but it’s bullet construction at impact velocity and that lower sd in this case that’s doing the work. Be like a heavy solid from 338 win mag on a deer vs a lighter ballistic tip.

The energy transfer between them and damage shown will be drastically different on the terminal end...so a useless figure to compare with. It’s the sd, impact velocity and assuming bullet construction to your preference for game intended(delayed vs rapid).

Can’t argue with physics, the energy is there as it gets to the animal and on the shooters shoulder. What happens after the animal is determined by leaps and bounds moreso by impact velocity, sd and construction.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:35 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 41thunder View Post
Who?
Why do you edit your responses to make assumptions?
The long range only guys have 100’s of on game terminal performance first hand experience. That’s a lot of valuable info. Hopefully I’ll be able to have a 338 lapua vs 26 nosler real world showdown to share next week. So far we only have 10 animals down this year with the 6.5’s. Not a ton but enough to make some general observations.
I’m not making assumptions.

It was in reference to Elk hunting starting at 30 Cal, 7mm caliber is more than capable of efficiently killing elk.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 12-14-2018, 01:41 PM
Beeman3 Beeman3 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 536
Default

Sorry. Not attempting to derail. Only showing others experiences in real world experience. Data charts give us a good starting point but on game performance can be different. You are right my 300 Win Mag is not SAMMI. None of my customs are. Why limit yourself? Not here to bash people’s caliber choice. I shoot lots of different stuff but know they all have limits. Good chart by the way. Gives some good examples.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 12-14-2018, 02:14 PM
41thunder 41thunder is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeman3 View Post
Sorry. Not attempting to derail. Only showing others experiences in real world experience. Data charts give us a good starting point but on game performance can be different. You are right my 300 Win Mag is not SAMMI. None of my customs are. Why limit yourself? Not here to bash people’s caliber choice. I shoot lots of different stuff but know they all have limits. Good chart by the way. Gives some good examples.
Ya not sure why people don’t want to hear real world experiences and just rely on theories and calculations. The 6.5 prc will be a good round. Especially for Deer sized game. I think bigger calibers will work better on bigger critters
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 12-14-2018, 03:00 PM
lclund1946 lclund1946 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewM View Post
The 6.5PRC does put up some nice numbers.
I don't think you read the prior message as SC said the same SD equaled the same penetration for different velocities and different size bullets. I said energy needs to come into effect in order to calculate penetration. Your charts show the maximum effective range based on velocity and energy. This doesn't reflect the maximum amount of damage though.
I am sorry but I think what SC said was that Bullets with the same, or similar, SD will penetrate the same at the Minimum Impact Velocity. Of course the bullets have to be of Similar Construction but not the same weight or diameter. The SD, or Sectional Density, actually represents the weight of a cross section (lbs.per square inch) so is if it is the same it is the same regardless of the size of the bullets. This is why industry have adopted SC's method of calculating Effective Range using SD above 0.25 for Heavy game and below 0.25 for light game. Minimum Impact Velocity, as determined by industry for a particular bullet design, takes into consideration how it is expected to expand and the minimum Velocity X SD take energy into consideration. Noslers LRAB bullets have a Minimum IV of 1300f/s which makes them good for expansion at the range that velocity is achieved but at 3300 fps just ahead of the muzzle it may well come apart and not penetrate well at all. The 26 Nosler has a lot more ME and Recoil at 3300 fps with the 129 LRAB but actually has 1200 ft. lbs. energy at 745 yards which is just the same as the 6.5 PRC with the 143 ELDX. While it doesn't reach its minimum IV until 1350 yards it only has 486 ft.lbs energy left which may not be enough to penetrate through past the hide and a rib. By this we can determine that the 6.5 PRC would be equal on Elk to 754 yards with these two factory rounds and likely the 6.5PRC would be more effective at 100 yards. The 300 Win Mag with the 212 ELD-X factory load would reach IV at 820 yards and the excess energy would leave a more devastating wound channel at 1530 ft. lbs. TE but the Elk would not be any more dead as penetration would be about equal if shot through the lungs. That extra energy would then be considered Excessive or Wasted or as some say overkill. Using a 180 grain Win PPP in the 300 Win Mag would put the 1200 ft. lb. TE at 660 yard Effective Range and 1739 fps IV so it comes in last and would kill the ELK with less wound trauma than both the 26 Nosler and 6.5 PRC at 745 yards. I did not manipulate the figures but punched in different scenarios give a good indication how different Cartridges and ammunition compare as to Effective Range. Of course the 300 Win Mag will produce more damage with the excessive energy with 212 bullets, as would the 26 Nosler loaded with the 142 LRAB, at 750 yards but is excessive meat damage all that desirable. The True Magnum people used 750 yards maximum on Elk, with factory ammo, and Moderate Recoil as the criteria for selecting the cartridge for their clubs rifle and the 6.5 PRC was the winner.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 12-14-2018, 03:03 PM
41thunder 41thunder is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lclund1946 View Post
I am sorry but I think what SC said was that Bullets with the same, or similar, SD will penetrate the same at the Minimum Impact Velocity. Of course the bullets have to be of Similar Construction but not the same weight or diameter. The SD, or Sectional Density, actually represents the weight of a cross section (lbs.per square inch) so is if it is the same it is the same regardless of the size of the bullets. This is why industry have adopted SC's method of calculating Effective Range using SD above 0.25 for Heavy game and below 0.25 for light game. Minimum Impact Velocity, as determined by industry for a particular bullet design, takes into consideration how it is expected to expand and the minimum Velocity X SD take energy into consideration. Noslers LRAB bullets have a Minimum IV of 1300f/s which makes them good for expansion at the range that velocity is achieved but at 3300 fps just ahead of the muzzle it may well come apart and not penetrate well at all. The 26 Nosler has a lot more ME and Recoil at 3300 fps with the 129 LRAB but actually has 1200 ft. lbs. energy at 745 yards which is just the same as the 6.5 PRC with the 143 ELDX. While it doesn't reach its minimum IV until 1350 yards it only has 486 ft.lbs energy left which may not be enough to penetrate through past the hide and a rib. By this we can determine that the 6.5 PRC would be equal on Elk to 754 yards with these two factory rounds and likely the 6.5PRC would be more effective at 100 yards. The 300 Win Mag with the 212 ELD-X factory load would reach IV at 820 yards and the excess energy would leave a more devastating wound channel at 1530 ft. lbs. TE but the Elk would not be any more dead as penetration would be about equal if shot through the lungs. That extra energy would then be considered Excessive or Wasted or as some say overkill. Using a 180 grain Win PPP in the 300 Win Mag would put the 1200 ft. lb. TE at 660 yard Effective Range and 1739 fps IV so it comes in last and would kill the ELK with less wound trauma than both the 26 Nosler and 6.5 PRC at 745 yards. I did not manipulate the figures but punched in different scenarios give a good indication how different Cartridges and ammunition compare as to Effective Range. Of course the 300 Win Mag will produce more damage with the excessive energy with 212 bullets, as would the 26 Nosler loaded with the 142 LRAB, at 750 yards but is excessive meat damage all that desirable. The True Magnum people used 750 yards maximum on Elk, with factory ammo, and Moderate Recoil as the criteria for selecting the cartridge for their clubs rifle and the 6.5 PRC was the winner.
You do know they also sell it in 338 300 and 7mm
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 12-14-2018, 03:44 PM
lclund1946 lclund1946 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Rimbey, AB
Posts: 671
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 41thunder View Post
Ya not sure why people don’t want to hear real world experiences and just rely on theories and calculations. The 6.5 prc will be a good round. Especially for Deer sized game. I think bigger calibers will work better on bigger critters
And who said that they did not want to hear real world experiences and that they just rely on theories and calculations? SC gave a great account of his real world experiences with a 6.5 Grendel with some great pictures that backed up what the charts told him to expect. You and a few others like yourself chose to badger and ridicule him rather than thank him for and accept the results. I explained, again, to Beeman3 that I had used considerable real world experiences to determine the figures used to put my chart together yet you come back with nothing but this rubbish. I heard all of the same arguments about the 7mm08 being good for deer to 200 yards, being a lady's gun or "my rifle is bigger than yours" in spite of it shooting the exact same bullet at the exact same speed for years beginning back in about mid 1980. Ironically my 7mm08 with 140/145 grain bullets, see Speer 145 BTSP on the chart, managed nearly 100% pass throughs on moose from 150-600 yards on moose at up to 875# dressed. Ironically the charts show that the 6.5 CM with the 143 ELD-X Factory load should do the same thing and the 6.5 PRC to another 150 yards or so. Many loads in the 300 win Mag and even the STW with a 140 Barns X Hand Load at 3300 fps come up short by comparison.

I know that it is highly unlikely that you will ever figure it out but please go somewhere else to listen to yourself talk as you have had nothing that I or anyone else care to hear. If you persist in hijacking these threads I hope the mods put you out of commission or everyone put you on the ignore list as I am about to do. I really can't afford to blow my cool and tell you what I really think of you as the mods have their eye on me as I have done that to others like you in the past on more than one occasion.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 12-14-2018, 04:07 PM
Big Sky's Avatar
Big Sky Big Sky is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,295
Default

Do people actually still say 'the bomb'?
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 12-14-2018, 04:18 PM
David Henry David Henry is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 816
Default

Thanks lclund for posting that chart, some really interesting data. What stands out for me are two cartridges listed that are often overlooked as all round superb hunting chamberings, they are the 6.5x55 and the 7mm08, so often we get wound up in small margins of increased velocity or energy down range when at practical hunting distances these don't ever come into play. That said we move onward in slow gains, but gains none the less and the beltless magnum 6.5's of various designs seem to be breaking some new ground that will set the bar for the next while. D.H.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 12-14-2018, 04:48 PM
Don_Parsons Don_Parsons is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,827
Default

Yes, the SD & BC really stand out for the 6.5 caliber,,, if recoil is a factor,,, how come 6mm's don't fit into things.

Just asking since my math stuff is very good.

Their frugal on powder, low recoil,,, the BC & SD it fairly good. Not as good as the 6.5's mind you.

I thought about the 6's a few years ago
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 12-14-2018, 05:43 PM
41thunder 41thunder is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 161
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lclund1946 View Post
And who said that they did not want to hear real world experiences and that they just rely on theories and calculations? SC gave a great account of his real world experiences with a 6.5 Grendel with some great pictures that backed up what the charts told him to expect. You and a few others like yourself chose to badger and ridicule him rather than thank him for and accept the results. I explained, again, to Beeman3 that I had used considerable real world experiences to determine the figures used to put my chart together yet you come back with nothing but this rubbish. I heard all of the same arguments about the 7mm08 being good for deer to 200 yards, being a lady's gun or "my rifle is bigger than yours" in spite of it shooting the exact same bullet at the exact same speed for years beginning back in about mid 1980. Ironically my 7mm08 with 140/145 grain bullets, see Speer 145 BTSP on the chart, managed nearly 100% pass throughs on moose from 150-600 yards on moose at up to 875# dressed. Ironically the charts show that the 6.5 CM with the 143 ELD-X Factory load should do the same thing and the 6.5 PRC to another 150 yards or so. Many loads in the 300 win Mag and even the STW with a 140 Barns X Hand Load at 3300 fps come up short by comparison.

I know that it is highly unlikely that you will ever figure it out but please go somewhere else to listen to yourself talk as you have had nothing that I or anyone else care to hear. If you persist in hijacking these threads I hope the mods put you out of commission or everyone put you on the ignore list as I am about to do. I really can't afford to blow my cool and tell you what I really think of you as the mods have their eye on me as I have done that to others like you in the past on more than one occasion.
There’s a phrase in here that I’d like to quote “should do the same thing”. Should doesn’t mean it will. I have a 6.5x284, I love it. But it has limitations. You honestly can’t say that a 300 win, Shooting a bullet at the exact same speed, with 75 more grains of lead Won’t perform better on game(215 Berger vs 140). If this gets you upset you need a new hobby. It’s just a cartridge. And we are both free to use what we prefer. There’s lots of wolves out there by rimbey. A prc would work great
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 12-14-2018, 05:50 PM
Stinky Coyote Stinky Coyote is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,189
Default

That poses a good question. One that could start a whole new thread!

As much as I believe the sd impact velocity penetration...and I know dead is dead. I still seem to have a preference for a minimum amount of bullet weight. I’m sure if I saw more kills with some 6mm 103-108 gr I’d have the equation verified but I have a desire for 120 grains as minimum. Old institutions perhaps. There needs to be a certain amount of material to disperse in the bullet types like(rapid expansion at lower velocities)...perhaps?

I thought a 243 with fast twist and 105’s would be an awesome 1000 yrd sheeper but I don’t reload so. And in that time I’ve shortened my range expectations and goals to more realistically reflect my typical field accuracy of moa give or take 1/4 moa either way. If the 6mm creedmoor were available then I’d have been all over it. I’d sooner shoot a Grendel to 600 instead, I like the 123 gr over the 108 inside that range even though less speed. Even if they do 6mm Grendel which would be brilliant btw...I’d still go 6.5 for hunting...more steel and paper the 6mm would get the nod.

The waters will get muddy now.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 12-14-2018, 06:00 PM
Stinky Coyote Stinky Coyote is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 41thunder View Post
You honestly can’t say that a 300 win, Shooting a bullet at the exact same speed, with 75 more grains of lead Won’t perform better on game(215 Berger vs 140).
Pretty easy to say when you’ve seen it first hand. And many examples just like it. You can find example after example. Magnums poking holes and 308/30-06 based cartridges leveling critters. Pretty common info you find anywhere to show you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Dude...you’ve prolly seen it too, just not paying attention. It’s not about the terminal energy or the diameter or the weight nearly as much as it’s about terminal velocity, sd, and construction. You will never understand, time to move on man.✌️
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 12-14-2018, 06:17 PM
Dubious Dubious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,521
Default

I love the 6.5 threads they bring all the dogs into the yard
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 -6. The time now is 02:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.