6.5 PRC?

Shooting Supplies : Ammo - Reloading - Firearms - Optics - Accessories
wildfowler.250

wildfowler.250

Well-Known Member
What’s the verdict on this caliber? I get a new gun itch now and again and to be honest, I have absolutely no need to change but anyway, bear with me…

Currently have a sako 75 in .270 which just works. So I’m tempted to keep it… I have swithered on putting a new stock on it,(thats basically a new gun then anyway I tell myself).

I have plenty .270 brass.

I do like a ‘flat’ shooting cartridge. Yes they all drop.

I’m very tempted by the 6.5 PRC . Similar ballistics to the .270? Lots of 6.5 bullet options these days.

Are there any cons to this caliber?

I can reload and have for maybe five years but I’m still fairly basic at it. Choose bullet, vary powder, go with best groups. Nothing fancy.

Are there any cons to using/reloading a magnum cartridge? Brass going to wear out quicker? I don’t currently anneal either?


Realistically, is there any difference between the two cals? And I realise I shoot most of my deer at 150 yards so probably no gain. It would be just nice to have something tailored that I can plink smaller groups at targets out to a bit further. And maybe if needed, stretch a chest shot out to 300 yards - but I prefer a crawl and gets close.


Opinions welcome. There seems to be more factory 6.5PRC coming in now?
 
In quick reflection on this, from a 270 user, in favour of 6.5PRC :
Availability of Lapua brass
Wide range of target bullets.
 
wildfowler.250 said:
What’s the verdict on this caliber? I get a new gun itch now and again and to be honest, I have absolutely no need to change but anyway, bear with me…

Currently have a sako 75 in .270 which just works. So I’m tempted to keep it… I have swithered on putting a new stock on it,(thats basically a new gun then anyway I tell myself).

I have plenty .270 brass.

I do like a ‘flat’ shooting cartridge. Yes they all drop.

I’m very tempted by the 6.5 PRC . Similar ballistics to the .270? Lots of 6.5 bullet options these days.

Are there any cons to this caliber?

I can reload and have for maybe five years but I’m still fairly basic at it. Choose bullet, vary powder, go with best groups. Nothing fancy.

Are there any cons to using/reloading a magnum cartridge? Brass going to wear out quicker? I don’t currently anneal either?


Realistically, is there any difference between the two cals? And I realise I shoot most of my deer at 150 yards so probably no gain. It would be just nice to have something tailored that I can plink smaller groups at targets out to a bit further. And maybe if needed, stretch a chest shot out to 300 yards - but I prefer a crawl and gets close.


Opinions welcome. There seems to be more factory 6.5PRC coming in now?
Click to expand...

Why do you need a cartridge that will deliver 1,000 foot-pounds at half a mile, to shoot a deer at 150 yards?

If you want to wallop both your shoulder and your wallet it’ll do the job handsomely, but there are a lot of more rational choices.

maximus otter
 
Consider 6.5PRC to be a 270 Ackley plus. A lot more energy, a wider bullet choice, better ballistics. It's a true hybrid long range gun, also being mile capable.
As has been said, can be a bit brutal, but I shan't be going back to 270. Twist rate can perhaps deal with copper better - all depends on what you want to use it for...... but it's a great round - and in my view more flexible than 270
 
Thanks folks. Interested to hear any more views on the above. It seems to be becoming more available anyway.

Generally for roe I use the .222 but that’s a different story. Such a great little cartridge.


I’m maybe fractionally off with my energy levels. It looks similar as far as muzzle velocity at 100 yards for the .270 vs PRC but I assume that’s probably comparing 130 grain in the .270 vs 143grain in the PRC,(hence more energy).


I can’t see much to change me off the .270 but the PRC does seem to tick many boxes. May even be a slightly more inherently accurate caliber?
 
Sorry - but no such thing as 'an inherently more accurate calibre'. Is it easier to shoot? Depends on your set up. Powder wise - uses about the same amount of powder in a more efficient manner, and has a wider range of capability. You will lose nothing moving to PRC, but may gain something.
 
maximus otter said:
Why do you need a cartridge that will deliver 1,000 foot-pounds at half a mile, to shoot a deer at 150 yards?

If you want to wallop both your shoulder and your wallet it’ll do the job handsomely, but there are a lot of more rational choices.

maximus otter
Click to expand...
From what I've heard from anyone using the PRC it is not sore on the shoulder to shoot. Actually it's meant to be very forgiving in this area.

I have 1 being made and this was 1 of the things I wanted to know before heading this route.
 
Eric the Red said:
Sorry - but no such thing as 'an inherently more accurate calibre'. Is it easier to shoot? Depends on your set up. Powder wise - uses about the same amount of powder in a more efficient manner, and has a wider range of capability. You will lose nothing moving to PRC, but may gain something.
Click to expand...
I get what you’re saying. But some are classic target calibers. .222 for example was popular for bench rest and has been really unfussy for ammo. I think the .270 is probably for the vast majority a hunting round. I don’t think there’s a lot of match bullets and there must be something in it regarding caliber.

But agree, rifle build, scope, shooter all big factors.
ColinBr said:
From what I've heard from anyone using the PRC it is not sore on the shoulder to shoot. Actually it's meant to be very forgiving in this area.

I have 1 being made and this was 1 of the things I wanted to know before heading this route.
Click to expand...

Less recoil is always a big plus. Even if manageable, less is better!
 
wildfowler.250 said:
I get what you’re saying. But some are classic target calibers. .222 for example was popular for bench rest and has been really unfussy for ammo. I think the .270 is probably for the vast majority a hunting round. I don’t think there’s a lot of match bullets and there must be something in it regarding caliber.

But agree, rifle build, scope, shooter all big factors.


Less recoil is always a big plus. Even if manageable, less is better!
Click to expand...
All I've heard is that it is more of a shove rather than a snap.
 
If you're thinking on doing more long range target/range, go PRC. If you want to shoot deer at 300yds, just sharpen up your load development and your technique with your 270 ?
I do have a target load for my 270 using 135 Matchkings, and it's decent, but it's just not going to compete with a modern chambering and the variety of modern bullets.
 
wildfowler.250 said:
What’s the verdict on this caliber? I get a new gun itch now and again and to be honest, I have absolutely no need to change but anyway, bear with me…

Currently have a sako 75 in .270 which just works. So I’m tempted to keep it… I have swithered on putting a new stock on it,(thats basically a new gun then anyway I tell myself).

I have plenty .270 brass.

I do like a ‘flat’ shooting cartridge. Yes they all drop.

I’m very tempted by the 6.5 PRC . Similar ballistics to the .270? Lots of 6.5 bullet options these days.

Are there any cons to this caliber?

I can reload and have for maybe five years but I’m still fairly basic at it. Choose bullet, vary powder, go with best groups. Nothing fancy.

Are there any cons to using/reloading a magnum cartridge? Brass going to wear out quicker? I don’t currently anneal either?


Realistically, is there any difference between the two cals? And I realise I shoot most of my deer at 150 yards so probably no gain. It would be just nice to have something tailored that I can plink smaller groups at targets out to a bit further. And maybe if needed, stretch a chest shot out to 300 yards - but I prefer a crawl and gets close.


Opinions welcome. There seems to be more factory 6.5PRC coming in now?
Click to expand...
I shot with a .270 for years, both unmoderated and moderated. Roe, sika and fallow.

I now shoot with a 6.5Creedmoor and a 6.5PRC. Mainly roe and sika.

6.5PRC is essentially a .270 in your dreams. It is a little bit flatter, it hits a little bit harder and it drifts a little bit less.

The differences are so marginal that the only compelling reason to change is curiosity.

I love it. But then… I always loved the .270!
 
Mungo said:
I shot with a .270 for years, both unmoderated and moderated. Roe, sika and fallow.

I now shoot with a 6.5Creedmoor and a 6.5PRC. Mainly roe and sika.

6.5PRC is essentially a .270 in your dreams. It is a little bit flatter, it hits a little bit harder and it drifts a little bit less.

The differences are so marginal that the only compelling reason to change is curiosity.

I love it. But then… I always loved the .270!
Click to expand...

Sounds great tbh. I do prefer the 130 weight range. All the 6.5’s seem geared more towards heavy for caliber which in say the Swede, I find a little loopy . But maybe 130 in PRC would just be messy.


Difference in perceived recoil due to different powders and burn rates? Assuming similar rifle builds/weights
 
wildfowler.250 said:
Sounds great tbh. I do prefer the 130 weight range. All the 6.5’s seem geared more towards heavy for caliber which in say the Swede, I find a little loopy . But maybe 130 in PRC would just be messy.


Difference in perceived recoil due to different powders and burn rates? Assuming similar rifle builds/weights
Click to expand...
I plan on using 130gr Gamechangers in my PRC. Those and some heavier ELDMs.
 
wildfowler.250 said:
Sounds great tbh. I do prefer the 130 weight range. All the 6.5’s seem geared more towards heavy for caliber which in say the Swede, I find a little loopy . But maybe 130 in PRC would just be messy.


Difference in perceived recoil due to different powders and burn rates? Assuming similar rifle builds/weights
Click to expand...
I mostly shoot 147gr in PRC.

Beyond about 175m, it drops less than 130gr in .270, and drifts substantially less. At 300m there is enough of a difference that it’s worth really paying attention to.

Putting all the complex ballistic jabbering aside, it essentially means that you can point and shoot with a factory 147gr PRC to somewhere around 50-75m further than you can with 130gr .270.

It essentially increases your margin of error.

If you’re using a rangefinder and dialling in your drop, it will make so little difference that it’s not worth the cost of changing.

In terms of recoil, in a moderated rifle with the same barrel length, that fits you, there’s absolutely no detectable difference at all.

All of what I’m saying assumes a 24” barrel in both .270 and 6.5PRC. If you’re messing about with shorter barrels, then it all starts to depend on what length barrel you’re using.
 
I had a 6.5 PRC rifle custom made by Steve Kershaw this year and I love it. Marginal difference not worth talking about to a .270 at sensible deer stalking ranges. I got it for the option of some longer range target shooting.
Shooting 143g led-x @ 3,000 ft / sec and recoil is ok, marginally less than my .308 shooting 150g
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

6.5 prc should I get one?
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
Peakeyp628a
Peakeyp628a
6.5x55 or 6.5 creedmoor
8 9 10
Replies
181
Views
13K
Norfolk Deer Search
Norfolk Deer Search
Is the 6.5 PRC taking over!!
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
Ronin
Ronin
Sold: 6.5 prc
Replies
3
Views
410
hedge hunter
hedge hunter
6.5 variation question.
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Edinburgh Rifles
Edinburgh Rifles
Back
Top