6.5mm vs 7mm vs .30 cal
- Thread starter Selous
- Start date
Scipio
Well-Known Member
Same shot placement as for the 6.5s?
Thanks Dave, I have heard of these. I may call in and get some from Stephen
In my opinion 120 grain lower limit is quite reasonable for non lead bullets and all large game. Would you want to shoot a large bull elk or a large keiler with a 6.5 100 grain non lead bullet?Hello mate , yes,for increased terminal effect, it could seem a good option.Especially if one shoots more behind the front legs, than fwds of them. Depending on how high speeds the bullet impacts with, it might give some meat damage issues though.
But as long as the hunter takes these choices with their eyes open, it is their choice, of course.
This said, sometimes the choice it not the hunters, as some countries, like Sweden for example, wont allow for 100 grn coppers for deer sized game, setting a min bullet weight of 7.7 gram/118,8 grn across all calibers. Obviously this seems a bit unthought through, as this leaves a 130 30 cl legal, whilst 100 grn 6.5 option becomes illegal even though i suspect those end up being more or less on par sectional density and speed wise.
I think that DK maybe has a slightly lower new limit(calibre and energy wise) regarding non lead bullets vs Sweden and Norway??
Scipio
Well-Known Member
hello @Border , yes we do
here the new (non lead) limitations for class 1 one game, so Red, Sika, Fallow, Muflon and Wildboar, are min 6 mm caliber, and E100 of 2000 Joule. So it's tied only to energy and diameter not bullet weight And given that we dont really have wildboar here, well besides maybe in the border areas with Germany, or moose or big bears and so on, that probably works out quite well for the Danish game.As for Sweden and Norway, where much larger game can be met, i agree that different considerations might be necessary.
But perhaps doing it via sectional density and not a singular weight across all the calibers would be a better way, no? (besides of course also an E and diameter minimum too).
That way the necessary bullet weight becomes relative to the caliber size, and a good minimum penetrational ability is ensured. Instead, as it is now, the system makes a probably more deer class suited projectile, like a 30 cal 130 grn non lead solid, legal for all of class 1, but a 110 or 118 grn 6.5 illegal. Even though the latter will actually have deeper likely penetration/SD if the speed of impact is identical.
And the two animals you mention should maybe ideally also have their own class of min cal, SD and impact energy, as they quite rightly might take more than what the rest of class 1 one does to go down.
So why not solve that without making 6.5 hunters who are out for deer having to use bullet weights which in their caliber is maybe a bit too heavy for most deer? It just seems a bit unnecessarily clumpsy to me, especially when they now had to change the rules anyways, so had a chance to rethink things.
Last edited:
Rutland lad
Well-Known Member
Same here. Spent a lot of time, money and powder to discover 120 grain TSX and my 6.5x55 are not good bedfellows.
Tried Fox Classic in 123 grain TSX- bang in accurate and have accounted for quite a few deer.
@Rutland lad What powder please?
Took me a while to find it but E100 is energy at 100m. A more reasonable, if harder to measure, parameter to be usinghello @Border , yes we do
Rutland lad
Well-Known Member
Initially RS60 then changed to RS62
Scipio
Well-Known Member
Hello mate, - yes it is, perhaps i should have specified that better. I'll remember that to the Next Time
I do suspect they merely estimate/calculate an assumed "standard E100 " for a lot of the loads rather than test them, but I can't say that I know that for certain
Konnari
Well-Known Member
Absolutely….but not as critical as for the 6.5. I prefer high shoulder shot in general when using copper bullets….works beautifully
Scipio
Well-Known Member
Put a chronological behind a nice lump of steel just before a bit of ballistic gel to measure it!Hello mate, - yes it is, perhaps i should have specified that better. I'll remember that to the Next Time
I do suspect they merely estimate/calculate an assumed "standard E100 " for a lot of the loads rather than test them, but I can't say that I know that for certain
There is a lot to be said for placement choice and bullet choice . I run one of the 6.5mm and there is a good mix of Reds and Sika in the mix very few have run more than a few steps , yeah i sometimes find some beasts will run further if culling shooting as many as possible from a group Nothing to do with the calibre
or cartridge in that just adrenalin!
Nearly always favour Barnes tTSX 100 grain but the same in 120 work though they need more energy to open up well when the shots are longer . Once we left lead we should imho have looked again "carefully" at dropping traditional weights as much as 20 grain
I would " personally" raise that aim ring up a Tad doing the shot where the plumbing is (Under the assumption of a perfect raged strike. A bit too high on trajectory is better than a bit too low IMHO. Also the higher strike also drops the beast more often dropped where it stands .Some good emperical input, thank you
View attachment 437286
Konnari
Well-Known Member
I would say minimal with both cartridges…I have shot quite a few fallow, muntjac and Chinese deer with 6.5mm and 30-06.
Midlandstalker2024
Well-Known Member
Have a .243 and bought a .308 for this season as I got tired of trying to find reds in heavy cover after hitting them with the .243.
anything I’ve shot with the .308 this year has dropped far shorter than the .243 regardless of the distance.
anything I’ve shot with the .308 this year has dropped far shorter than the .243 regardless of the distance.
Scipio
Well-Known Member
what sort of ammo in terms of type and weight did you use in the two rifles ? .-)
Similar threads
