6.5PRC - first run at reloading. Request experienced reloader input

[finnbear270]

Dodge, Imposition has come from those who think they know better than those of us at the user end, no lead poisoning from food at my table.
Favourite bullet on my shelf has always been the Nosler Partition.

 

[User00033]

Yeah, whatever, your choice. Just make sure you’ve taken all the alcohol off the table as well, and especially that horrible bogwater they call whiskey, because that will do you a lot more harm than anything you might ingest with the venison!

The point is simple - the minute people start making poor decisions on how to use copper bullets then there is a much bigger problem than the minuscule chance of you getting any ill effects from lead.

I think I misunderstood you @finnbear270 first time round, so sorry for that but I’m leaving it up anyway!

 

[finnbear270]

Whiskey /Wiskey, YEUUCH!, A fine Cognac or a decent Rum for me, but waaay after the tinnies!

 

[zambezi]

Well you did ask for opinions - you might get some you don’t like!

Fair comment. And your first hand experience with monometal at distance is noted.

However, finnbear270's point stands: we are having monometal imposed on us. It is not a personal choice.

And so whether or not the terminal ballistics of monometal at distance are ideal, we are all now bounden to find ways of optimising their performance through that which we can control: MV, projectile design.

youtu.be/s5vIDqevFp4?t=276

 

[Rusty Gate]

Per the title, I have just started reloading for my 6.5PRC. I can find very little online load data, and none at all for Vihtavouri powders. So any 6.5PRC experience using Viht would be very welcome.

Hornady publish some data for 6.5PRC, and I see that they indicate that Federal 210 primers are appropriate View attachment 180205. From web research, it seems that CC1200 primers are equivalents to the Federal 210 View attachment 180208

Using GRT as a guide [see below] I built a min-ladder of conservative loads up to 50gr N160. ALL were very accurate. Not sure if that is testament to the rifle or the cartridge, or both. But there seemed to be a sweet spot at 50gr N160 delivering 3088fps. The magnetoscope V3 chrono is registering a 7% higher MV than GRT predicted.

Hornady once-fired brass [FL sized and annealed]
CCI200 primers
Barnes 120gr ttsx [30242]
Viht N160 50gr
COAL/CBTO = 2.950"/2.300"
0.262" inside neck achieved with Hornady bushing die

I will do more testing to confirm, but I would invite any other loaders for this cartridge with data to share to chime in with their wisdom.


View attachment 180210

Joint the Vit group on fb, they have a link a few posts down for an update to include the PRC's

 

[User00040]

Just make sure you’ve taken all the alcohol off the table as well, and especially that horrible bogwater they call whiskey..

Whiskey /Wiskey, YEUUCH!, A fine Cognac or a decent Rum for me, but waaay after the tinnies!

Call me a luddite but I went 7mm Rem Mag instead of PRC.

Then again I like peaty, undiluted single malt whisky so I might just have a more refined palate

 

[zambezi]

With the 120 grains, the Vo=975m/s for 60 grains of N565 and 1002m/s with 63 grains RS76. There are 2 nodes just below those values (with my rifle) on which I’ll zoom at right after the confinment

@EQUADIF68 Did you ever chase down that combo's best node sir?

 

[EQUADIF68]

@EQUADIF68 Did you ever chase down that combo's best node sir?

I'm going to conduct a new (personal) campain of tests using Fed 210M, N565 and Lapua brass (instead of Hornady).
Considering the new N568 still remains an open issue at the time being ( differences between N565 & N568 can only be shown after having tested both, I don't see any other alternative).

 

[NullMac]

That statement was a concession to borbal who cannot countenance the MVs Magnetospeed V3 declares given the known cartridge parameters I was using.

What has happened since that post is that I have shot the 6.5PRC at 600yds and absolutely proven Magnetospeed's accuracy in measuring MV:

That's why I was asking. I am sure there must be some error in them, but the one I have seems to be "spot on". It's a V2.

 

[NullMac]

If you intend to use the Barnes bullet for a 450m+ deer hunting bullet, it is very far from perfect. The lighter Barnes bullets are proven to be highly unreliable at slow impact velocity such as what you’d be getting at 450m+. (That’s <2100fps and dropping 100fps every 50m.) If you are planning to shoot game at 450m+ with the 120gr, then it’s a bad choice, period. We have heaps of direct hands-on evidence of lung shots with Barnes 120gr in 6.5mm and 129gr in .277” that have resulted in very long runners, slow deaths, hard retrieves, and lost deer. And that’s from cartridges producing comfortably faster muzzle velocity than your test results to date. Anything behind the rear line of the foreleg and the difference in outcome and visible wound cavity between the light Barnes and a heavy for calibre, weight shedding lead bullet is immediately obvious.

A bit of an aside but you raised an interesting point.

I have working up a 270 load 110 TTSX which is giving me 2350 fps at 400 yards. Now that's for a stopping shot only. THEORETICALLY that's going to expand. Accuracy is great but what I have not tested is real world terminal effects. Without fragmentation I am currently sceptical about efficient kills in the shoulder, lungs etc.

There is no point lamenting the loss of lead, it will be gone shortly, we need to understand copper and make it work. I suspect it means bigger cartridges or shorter ranges, but time will tell. Already the 308 has gone in favour of the extra powder in a 270.

Thoughts ?

 

[25 Sharps]

I am starting on this path for a friend of mine. I have to agree with you re the Hornady brass.
My go-to brass is Lapua, so I wasn't expecting as much from his once fired Hornady cases, but I was pleasantly surprised with the consistency
in both weight and length of the Hornady cases, matching that of Lapua. Whether he gets as many firings per case remains to be seen.

It won’t…….

 

[25 Sharps]

A bit of an aside but you raised an interesting point.

I have working up a 270 load 110 TTSX which is giving me 2350 fps at 400 yards. Now that's for a stopping shot only. THEORETICALLY that's going to expand. Accuracy is great but what I have not tested is real world terminal effects. Without fragmentation I am currently sceptical about efficient kills in the shoulder, lungs etc.

There is no point lamenting the loss of lead, it will be gone shortly, we need to understand copper and make it work. I suspect it means bigger cartridges or shorter ranges, but time will tell. Already the 308 has gone in favour of the extra powder in a 270.

Thoughts ?

.308 will push a 110 to 3400 FPS that’s pretty fast and will give 2426 FPS at 400 so better than your .270 with higher powder capacity…….

.308 is a very efficient cartridge, why do you think NATO adopted it?!

 

[User00040]

A bit of an aside but you raised an interesting point.

I have working up a 270 load 110 TTSX which is giving me 2350 fps at 400 yards. Now that's for a stopping shot only. THEORETICALLY that's going to expand. Accuracy is great but what I have not tested is real world terminal effects. Without fragmentation I am currently sceptical about efficient kills in the shoulder, lungs etc.

There is no point lamenting the loss of lead, it will be gone shortly, we need to understand copper and make it work. I suspect it means bigger cartridges or shorter ranges, but time will tell. Already the 308 has gone in favour of the extra powder in a 270.

Thoughts ?

Read my thread: Comparing Terminal Performance of Non-lead/Copper Bullets on UK Deer

 

[sikadog]

I went old school sold my 6.5-284 and now own a 264 win mag.

 

[NullMac]

.308 will push a 110 to 3400 FPS that’s pretty fast and will give 2426 FPS at 400 so better than your .270 with higher powder capacity…….

.308 is a very efficient cartridge, why do you think NATO adopted it?!

Gee, sensitive.

NATO adopted the 7.62x51 because you get more bullets in a ton than you do 30-06, and the US had not finished the AR15 development.

Still, good to see 308 fanboys exist, even if "efficiency" is the best you can do these days. Oh and some ballistic fantasies.

 

[25 Sharps]

Gee, sensitive.

NATO adopted the 7.62x51 because you get more bullets in a ton than you do 30-06, and the US had not finished the AR15 development.

Still, good to see 308 fanboys exist, even if "efficiency" is the best you can do these days. Oh and some ballistic fantasies.

Sure, it was the only replacement ‘06 cartridge they trialled and was just convenient to use!

I’m not a fan boy, I own one but I also own 5 other deer rifles, out of the lot of them the 30s get used the least! The .280 is my preferred larger calibre in the cabinet, the slightly bigger, slightly better version of your .270

But there’s no denying .308 is an efficient cartridge and capable of matching or bettering the particular load you mention above. The .280 gives me 3150 ft lb vs 2930 ft lb from the .308 but that’s 7.5 more grains of powder and noticeably more recoil.

I’m not sure what you’re referring to in terms of ballistic fantasies but my rifle is capable of just shy of 3500 FPS with a 110 gr bullet so it’s not a fantasy and the down range data relies on nosler’s BC data, just as yours does!

 

[User00033]

Okay you bunch of handbags I’m just finishing my dinner and maybe a bit later I’ll get round to telling you what we found out with the .300 WSM and 130gr Barnes.

 

[25 Sharps]

Okay you bunch of handbags I’m just finishing my dinner and maybe a bit later I’ll get round to telling you what we found out with the .300 WSM and 130gr Barnes.

Let me guess, pencilled through and runners?

 

[sikadog]

The answer to the 300wsm is buy a 325 wsm instead.

 

[Selous]

Let me guess, pencilled through and runners?

Ooh is this a guessing game…. I bet they poleaxed everything out to 450m and left a good exit wound …..