What 6.5 bullet?

[gixer1]

The classics. Are they harder construction than the prohunters? Had a prohunter 130 grain not exit a fallow buck with the .270 and that put me off slightly. Dead deer though but no trail!


I couldn’t find them for love nor money for a while. Do you find them messy?

I don’t think the internal construction is any different - I believe it’s down to the base shape alone (flat base Vs boat tail) if the bullet was inside the fallow it likely did its job and dumped all the energy into the animal but I get what you are saying about the blood trail. I shot a fallow just the other day and the bullet was found in the opposite side but it dropped on the spot so I can’t complain,

There’s a great article about Sierra here that is worth a read -

Sierra Hunting Bullets

 

[Border]

I don’t think the internal construction is any different - I believe it’s down to the base shape alone (flat base Vs boat tail) if the bullet was inside the fallow it likely did its job and dumped all the energy into the animal but I get what you are saying about the blood trail. I shot a fallow just the other day and the bullet was found in the opposite side but it dropped on the spot so I can’t complain,

There’s a great article about Sierra here that is worth a read -

Sierra Hunting Bullets

I think you are right regarding the differences. Although most seem to prefer an exit wound alot of hunters that shoot bayed game might prefer a bullet that stays in the game for the safety of the dog.
Far from an expert, but if the bullet does a lot of damage to the heart and lungs and doesn’t exit I would expect to find some blood from the mouth or entry wound, especially if it runs???
Possibly not as easy as a through and through but.....

 

[bullet chucker]

The classics. Are they harder construction than the prohunters? Had a prohunter 130 grain not exit a fallow buck with the .270 and that put me off slightly. Dead deer though but no trail!


I couldn’t find them for love nor money for a while. Do you find them messy?

Of course they can be, bullet placement plays a big part, My shots are NOT' long range ever, up till now anyway.

BC.

 

[swede]

I'm having great results with Yewtree 102.4gr Super X. They are like a happy medium, the front half fragments dumping energy while the shank punches through providing a decent exit.

 

[Jagged77]

I’ve just started using the 130 gr tipped game king out of my .260 very impressed so far. Flat shooting and hard hitting. Took two large fallow bucks with them on Friday.

 

[wildfowler.250]

Cheers folks. I’m still very torn on the 120 vs 140 debate. The 140’s definitely shot better in my particular rifle. Slightly cautious that a bonded 140 may punch through deer without much expansion. Then again, it’s a balance between heavy and slow with minimal meat damage and ballistic tips with a rapid dump of energy.

The blood trail / prohunter lack of exit ‘issue’ was with a big fallow that ran maybe 60M in woodland. Solid shot placement and a dead deer but the guide and I didn’t see where it ran. Just a slightly anxious follow up and a nice bit of claret makes life easier.

 

[Utectok]

Accubond LR won't necessarily make any more mess than Accubond. You need also to factor in the impact velocity, you don't mention which 6.5 cartridge but I assume MV is less than with your 270?

One thing about ABLR is that they're considerably longer than regular AB. So the 142gr might not stabilize adequately. Keep in mind that on paper they might fly true, but on quarry the bullet might not go on straight line if it's marginally stable. Hornady does list 1-8" minimum twist for 143 eldx, and they have identical BC with 142 ABLR so you might manage it with ABLR. Then again, they're different construction so might act (stabilize) differently in carcass.

I don’t understand if it’s ok on paper how come not on quarry. If the bullets tumbling on impact it would show up with proper testing I’d have thought?

 

[jthyttin]

I don’t understand if it’s ok on paper how come not on quarry. If the bullets tumbling on impact it would show up with proper testing I’d have thought?

How do you test terminal performance by only shooting paper?

Not necessarily talking about only tumbling, but changing direction (especially if clipping bone) and so on.

 

[Utectok]

How do you test terminal performance by only shooting paper?

Not necessarily talking about only tumbling, but changing direction (especially if clipping bone) and so on.

If you have experience an unstable bullet it’s pretty obvious on paper mate dispersion odd fliers and so forth particularly noticeable at distances beyond 100m the idea that an unstable bullet can only be detected by terminal performance is utter nonsense. Sorry…

 

[jthyttin]

Sorry…

Sorry for yourself, a bullet that is stable on paper may still not be stable when the "media" is changed from air to living tissue.

You mentioned tumbling, one example would be shooting subsonic 240gr Matchking from 300 Whisper (or nowadays 300 BLK). With 1-8" twist, stable on paper and reliably tumbling in tissue or ballistic media. Been there, done that. I just used 7.62x39 (with .308" barrel).

Some bullet manufacturers (like GSC) used to list three different stability numbers. Smallest (i.e. least stable) for paper, middle for general hunting and highest for DG hunting. Of course not usually for the same bullet, but certain stability factor for certain application. Haven't checked since they started advertising for US only.

 

[Utectok]

Sorry for yourself, a bullet that is stable on paper may still not be stable when the "media" is changed from air to living tissue.

You mentioned tumbling, one example would be shooting subsonic 240gr Matchking from 300 Whisper (or nowadays 300 BLK). With 1-8" twist, stable on paper and reliably tumbling in tissue or ballistic media. Been there, done that. I just used 7.62x39 (with .308" barrel).

Some bullet manufacturers (like GSC) used to list three different stability numbers. Smallest (i.e. least stable) for paper, middle for general hunting and highest for DG hunting. Of course not usually for the same bullet, but certain stability factor for certain application. Haven't checked since they started advertising for US only.

Sorry I was talking about normal uk deer legal rounds at normal velocities not subsonic or other outliers which I know precisely zero about. Straight shooting

 

[Rusty Gate]

Sorry folks! Quick reply at work but it’s a 6.5x55

Thanks for the quick replies!

Mine loved partitions

 

[jthyttin]

Sorry I was talking about normal uk deer legal rounds at normal velocities not subsonic or other outliers which I know precisely zero about. Straight shooting

Same principle goes there, and excellent example is 243 with non-lead bullets. If you try to match the weight used with bullets containing lead, the stabilization will suffer and you might get to the point that bullet is on the ragged edge of stability on paper, and does some funny things on quarry. Actually I think some high BC lead containing bullets over 100gr might experience the same.

You do know, that even in air (i.e. shooting paper), air density is a factor when you're marginally stabilized? So at higher altitude or higher temp, bullets might stabilize. And sea level, especially when combined with freezing temps, it doesn't. I have experience also in this, shooting Hornady 75 BTHP from 1-9" AR (presumably designed as highest BC bullet you can shoot from 1-9" keeping the OAL dictated by AR mag). At summer it was fine, when temperature dropped to -20C started to show marginal stability (on paper) and -25 - -30C accuracy suffered.

 

[wildfowler.250]

Mine loved partitions

140 grain?


140 grain seemed to always be the standard and then more recently everyone seemed to prefer the 120 btips

 

[Cottis]

Cheers folks. I’ve heard good accuracy and performance out of them. Are they messy? Appreciate the jacket makes a big difference but that ballistic tip look has put me off before

130gn Gamechangers TGK's are properly good bullets. Real sweet spot in my opinion. I used to use 143gn ELDX's and they killed great but like you, I found they were a bit splatty and messy.

Switched to 130gn TGK's. Much much better bullet for killing UK deer cleanly in my view. Without question they are a harder bullet. Do not be put off by the green tip. These are a thicker jacketed bullet than the Hornady.

By chance, I was checking zero yesterday before the shooting season starts for me, as the rifle has not been shot since May. I happened to recover this bullet from the ground a yard behind the target. This is baked hard ground at this time of year on a slope. No real moisture in it and pretty much like the bullet hitting concrete. The bullet is still surprisingly together. Yes it is mangled but considering that it hit pretty much concrete at 100yds, I think it shows that it stands up to abuse pretty well.

The deer I shot with it last year were very cleanly killed. I tend to move the shot further forward and slightly higher and these do punch through. They are not super explosive on headshots like some other bullets but they definitely open up and cause massive trauma. I just think they are a very good all round bullet for the ranges we shoot at in the UK. The ELDX is better accuracy wise at silly distances but I don't shoot that far on deer and the slightly lighter weight helps keep the bullet a touch flatter.

It is a good bullet. Just over 2700fps for me and it is a very accurate out to 300yds.

 

[ColinBr]

130gn TMK's are properly good bullets. Real sweet spot in my opinion. I used to use 143gn ELDX's and they killed great but like you, I found they were a bit splatty and messy.

Switched to 130gn TMK's. Much much better bullet for killing UK deer cleanly in my view. Without question they are a harder bullet. Do not be put off by the green tip. These are a thicker jacketed bullet than the Hornady.

By chance, I was checking zero yesterday before the shooting season starts for me, as the rifle has not been shot since May. I happened to recover this bullet from the ground a yard behind the target. This is baked hard ground at this time of year on a slope. No real moisture in it and pretty much like the bullet hitting concrete. The bullet is still surprisingly together. Yes it is mangled but considering that it hit pretty much concrete at 100yds, I think it shows that it stands up to abuse pretty well.

The deer I shot with it last year were very cleanly killed. I tend to move the shot further forward and slightly higher and these do punch through. They are not super explosive on headshots like some other bullets but they definitely open up and cause massive trauma. I just think they are a very good all round bullet for the ranges we shoot at in the UK. The ELDX is better accuracy wise at silly distances but I don't shoot that far on deer and the slightly lighter weight helps keep the bullet a touch flatter.

It is a good bullet. Just over 2700fps for me and it is a very accurate out to 300yds.

I love the 69gr TMKs in my 223. I use them for target and deer. I find them ideal for Roe and the damage has been very acceptable.

I've moved onto the 130gr Gamechangers in 6.5, but wouldn't hesitate in using the 130gr TMKs either.

 

[Cottis]

I love the 69gr TMKs in my 223. I use them for target and deer. I find them ideal for Roe and the damage has been very acceptable.

I've moved onto the 130gr Gamechangers in 6.5, but wouldn't hesitate in using the 130gr TMKs either.

I have just edited my previous post. I meant TGK's Gamechangers. That is the bullet I use in the 6.5. I'm typing away as I am doing other stuff. No idea what the TMK's are like in 6.5

Apologies all for any confusion.

 

[Utectok]

Same principle goes there, and excellent example is 243 with non-lead bullets. If you try to match the weight used with bullets containing lead, the stabilization will suffer and you might get to the point that bullet is on the ragged edge of stability on paper, and does some funny things on quarry. Actually I think some high BC lead containing bullets over 100gr might experience the same.

You do know, that even in air (i.e. shooting paper), air density is a factor when you're marginally stabilized? So at higher altitude or higher temp, bullets might stabilize. And sea level, especially when combined with freezing temps, it doesn't. I have experience also in this, shooting Hornady 75 BTHP from 1-9" AR (presumably designed as highest BC bullet you can shoot from 1-9" keeping the OAL dictated by AR mag). At summer it was fine, when temperature dropped to -20C started to show marginal stability (on paper) and -25 - -30C accuracy suffered.

That much temperature drop will lower velocity I’d have thought and consequently less gyroscopic stability?

 

[maximus otter]

I stalk only the three small species on open agricultural land, self-imposed maximum range of 200 yards.

My rifle is a Sako 85 Finnlight in 6.5 x 55mm.

I use only Norma factory ammo loaded with the Nosler 120 grain Ballistic Tip bullets. (l reload for several calibres, but the Norma gives me ~0.5 MOA off the bench, so why bother?)

It is pinpoint accurate and massively destructive on impact, factors which are crucial as l don’t have access to a tracking dog.

For a lot of insight based on real world experience, read these blokes on the 6.5 Swede:

6.5x55

maximus otter

 

[wildfowler.250]

I stalk only the three small species on open agricultural land, self-imposed maximum range of 200 yards.

My rifle is a Sako 85 Finnlight in 6.5 x 55mm.

I use only Norma factory ammo loaded with the Nosler 120 grain Ballistic Tip bullets. (l reload for several calibres, but the Norma gives me ~0.5 MOA off the bench, so why bother?)

It is pinpoint accurate and massively destructive on impact, factors which are crucial as l don’t have access to a tracking dog.

For a lot of insight based on real world experience, read these blokes on the 6.5 Swede:

6.5x55

maximus otter

Thanks! I’m very torn between the 140 accubonds and the normas.

Accubonds give a lovely , minimal bruising carcass from the .270.

Slightly concerned the slower 6.5 home loaded may be more of a pass through.

Did wonder if the accubond long range would open up better (inside normal distances, sub 200).

The 120 prohunters didn’t shoot amazingly. Sub 1” as opposed to thumbhole with the 140’s. But the normas appeal from a dump of energy point of view.

I take it the Norma’s still give a reasonable, non bruised carcass and an exit trail?