Would someone please quantify how much better a 6.5, 85g bullet traveling at 3000fps is over a .25 of same weight an MV.
Ta
K
Ta
K
6.5x55 or .308
- Thread starter Jimmy.jim86
- Start date
They both kill deer end of story
I've only your word for that.
K
K
Never owned a 25-06 but seen plenty of deer shot with one, I owned a 6.5x55 for 24 years and I would not want to stand in front of one with someone shooting at me.
Unless I was standing behind a 1" thick steel plate and then it would make your ears ring.
Unless I was standing behind a 1" thick steel plate and then it would make your ears ring.
I will say, on an open forum, that there will be absolutely no practical difference on deer from either caliber or cartridge if shot in the boiler room with properly constructed bullets.
Moreover, I will say that a 140gr 6.5x55 full load will outperform the .308 caliber with 165gr bullet of the same construction in every way except its slightly smaller frontal area. But again, deer won't be able to tell the difference and I would bet my third born that the 6.5 would penetrate deeper.
You keep referencing energy in foot pounds???? I'm TELLING you, as a witness of hundreds of game animals being taken with everything from a 6mm to a 375H&H, woodcock to moose, energy equations have nothing to do with so-called killing power. If you hunted, you would know this too.
And you keep citing the .22 caliber cartridges. Why? Their general high velocity (bullet construction becomes a huge issue) and low bullet weights (low SD thus poor penetration) removes them from consideration on large game. We are talking about the .264/6.5mm caliber. A caliber that has proven itself time and time again for over 120 years. A caliber with a real range of big game bullet weights. Your method of reasoning with regards to caliber sizes is informally false because you are only considering a very small aspect of ballistics.
I'm not going to educate you through argumentation. Your beliefs are misguided. I have nothing more to say on the topic. I will reiterate one last time. Energy figures tell very little about a cartridges killing capacity and bullet diameter is largely a moot point with modern expanding projectiles (given appropriate weight to caliber ratio). Stopping cartridges for dangerous game require a whole different set of parameters so don't bother going there.
Last edited:
swarovski
Well-Known Member
I doubt the 6.5x284 will knock the deer down better than a 308 even at 400yds, check out terminal ballistics by nathan foster,Calibre food fight, you gota love it ......Man you boys have lot of time on your hands, get back to the party!
With my 6.5-284, I have no problem taking a deer down at 400 yards, but would never do that with my 308, but that's just me. Its all about effectively placing said crosshairs on said target and pressing the trigger.
-Z
swarovski
Well-Known Member
the bigger they are the harder they fall
Canadian,
Let me try another way, what do you think makes a deer die if you fire a bullet at it? I presume you will agree that it is some sort of damage to internals. Would you also agree that some cartridges will do more damage and others might do less which will have an effect on how quick a deer dies. Remember our duty is to put the animals down as quick as practical possible.
Deer are shot at an average well under 250yds meaning we do not have to have such a close look at the higher bc values, (by the way the Lapua have some lousy bc values with some of their 6.5x55 factory hunting loads).
The absolute best the 6.5x55 can do is dump 10-30% less energy into the animal. Due to the high sectional density the likelihood of the bullet dumping a large portion of this energy into the back stop is of course much higher than with the 308. Over penetration is the biggest problem with the swede, however even if one finds the optimum bullet..... energy and bullet diameter is lower/smaller than the 308, at the end of the day less damage = less killing power. take it or leave it...
As an engineer I have learned to trust physics, maths and facts.
Fact is also that in the meantime more and more swedes prefer the 30-06/9.3x62 for moose.
edi
Let me try another way, what do you think makes a deer die if you fire a bullet at it? I presume you will agree that it is some sort of damage to internals. Would you also agree that some cartridges will do more damage and others might do less which will have an effect on how quick a deer dies. Remember our duty is to put the animals down as quick as practical possible.
Deer are shot at an average well under 250yds meaning we do not have to have such a close look at the higher bc values, (by the way the Lapua have some lousy bc values with some of their 6.5x55 factory hunting loads).
The absolute best the 6.5x55 can do is dump 10-30% less energy into the animal. Due to the high sectional density the likelihood of the bullet dumping a large portion of this energy into the back stop is of course much higher than with the 308. Over penetration is the biggest problem with the swede, however even if one finds the optimum bullet..... energy and bullet diameter is lower/smaller than the 308, at the end of the day less damage = less killing power. take it or leave it...
As an engineer I have learned to trust physics, maths and facts.
Fact is also that in the meantime more and more swedes prefer the 30-06/9.3x62 for moose.
edi
The 6.5x55 is capable and does kill any deer in the uk a 308 is just a little better a 30-06 is better again.
BUT THEY ARE ALL DEAD HOW DEAD DO YOU WANT THEM TO BE.
DEAD IS DEAD
BUT THEY ARE ALL DEAD HOW DEAD DO YOU WANT THEM TO BE.
DEAD IS DEAD
Perhaps the debate of these capable cartridges is due to the restrictions on owning many rifles with overlap in use. Like being on a very limited budget, this makes one's mind split hairs when making decsions.
I have owned a lot of .308s, probably own a dozen right now, including five military battle rifles. I own three 6.5x55s: an unaltered M38, a Ruger M77, and original 1893 Mauser sporting rifle. I shoot different ammunition in each of the 6.5x55s, and enjoy them for what they are, accurate, efficient, mild recoil, inexpensive, and perfect for deer sized game out to 250 to 300 yards. They are like a balanced spinning reel and rod with 10-lb line; they do what 90% of outings require.
I have owned a lot of .308s, probably own a dozen right now, including five military battle rifles. I own three 6.5x55s: an unaltered M38, a Ruger M77, and original 1893 Mauser sporting rifle. I shoot different ammunition in each of the 6.5x55s, and enjoy them for what they are, accurate, efficient, mild recoil, inexpensive, and perfect for deer sized game out to 250 to 300 yards. They are like a balanced spinning reel and rod with 10-lb line; they do what 90% of outings require.
Last edited:
No matter which way you try it won't matter because your premise is wrong. Energy and so-called energy transfer has little to do with "killing power". You can theorize all you want, but I have something much more valuable--empirical field experience. There are two ways to kill an animal quickly. a) hit the central nervous system or b) hit them in the vitals. No such thing as over-penetration. You do understand bullets expand, right?
The rest of your post is a mess and makes no sense. If you are an engineer than why do you have such a hard time with physics? Moreover, terminal ballistics is much more complex than what can be understood from an inadequate and entirely made up "killing formula."
Seriously, do you hunt?
Now that is serious bla bla, don't embarrass your self.
Yes I hunt, shot five deer last week (4 with 308 and 1 with 243)...and you? How many did you shoot?
edi
palmer_mike
Well-Known Member
I've followed this argument with great curiosity - I freely admit that my grasp of ballistics is poor at best, so am always looking to learn.
You say that energy has little to do with killing power: could you explain a bit more? If we take good (or even adequate) shot placement as a given, what then becomes important in terms of effective killing?
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
can you explain death when no vital organ or spinal cord/brain has been hit?
I have killed several deer with both high neck shots that missed the spine and close shots to the thoracic spine.
I can.
The bullet doesn't have to sever the spine to kill.
Animals and people will die from blood loss and most shots are aimed to cause this through tissue destruction, aided by the expansion or frangibility of the bullet to cause more damage. (I agree "Over penetration" is a poor choice of words to describe a lack of expansion IMO)
They also die from what hot models on CSI term "blunt trauma".
This can come from internal damage and blood loss or increased pressure resulting from the trauma
where either:
no penetration has happened at all, (e.g hammer to the head)
or
a projectile has passed through surrounding non vital tissue with such force that the energy (or dare I say.....shock) transferred into the tissue has disrupted neurological pathways and signals, resulting in stopping the heart and or breathing.
on that basis more energy is ALWAYS better
Last edited:
What I mean with over penetration is if a bullet ****es through an animal even if expanding somewhat but having quite a large portion of it's initial velocity left when leaving the animal. In other words only using a part of it's energy. Often happens if one uses the wrong bullet for the job. In Ireland the Lapua mega bullet was sold in huge quantities and in some areas nothing else was available apart for match bullets for the 6.5x55. This bullet is a disaster on small deer like a Sika hind/calf because it was designed for Moose (little picture on the box) meaning it is a very tough bullet that expands less, is slow and penetrates very deep into a large animal. Shoot it through the chest side on of a Sika doe for example with only a few inches of flesh and internals you would not dump much energy into the animal but have good penetration in the backstop.... The results we were getting were exactly like described, animals did not even react to the shot. My shooting friend had to be urged to check if he had hit the deer because he was convinced he had missed. On every occasion he had hit, perfect heart shots in most cases but all deer ran on, partially over 200yds into dense cover. Small hole through and through not much damage inside. On one occasion that bullet worked well on a sika stag as it hit the leg bone entering and expanded a bit more. We recovered that bullet under the skin opposite side. I shot a few Sika's side on with the 22-250, they all dropped like a puppet with the strings cut. I don't recommend a 22-250 on larger deer but at least all energy went into the animal, way more energy than in the case of the hard slow bullet vs small deer.
Most people think the large sectional density of the 6.5 x55 coupled with slow speed especially in the heavier bullets is a bonus, It might be on very large game but on smaller deer people are getting wiser, using lower weight bullets that expand quicker and are getting better results with the swede.
Generally I think for any deer the 308/30-06 is the safer more reliable bet.
edi
Most people think the large sectional density of the 6.5 x55 coupled with slow speed especially in the heavier bullets is a bonus, It might be on very large game but on smaller deer people are getting wiser, using lower weight bullets that expand quicker and are getting better results with the swede.
Generally I think for any deer the 308/30-06 is the safer more reliable bet.
edi
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
lots of ways to skins a cat though
I use the heaviest possible bullet in my .222 at 60gr
got best results from 87gr bullets (mid to high weight for calibre) in .243
Won't bother with anything other than 130gr (Mid range) in my .270
and really like 200-208gr (mid to high) in 300WM
Arguably I could shoot
50g in .222,
60-70gr in .243,
100-110gr in .270
and 150gr in 300WM
choose a properly constructed bullet matched to your target and the intended impact velocity and the weight is irrelevant
MARCBO
Well-Known Member
What kills an animal fast and reliably, in my experience, is proper shot placement in conjunction with a bullet of adequate construction (reliable expansion) and of proper weight for caliber (high sectional density for good through penetration). For UK hunting this encompasses all cartridges from .243 to any .308--pick your poison as you can't go wrong. Typically, good bullets begin to expand at impact and reach full diameter quite quickly. Most 6.5 bullets in production expand to 0.6". I've shot moose with complete pass throughs with a 405gr. 45-70 LEAD bullet plugging away at 1350fps. With the high velocity cartridges bullet construction becomes paramount because they can disintegrate or break up, which can result in poor penetration and thus a lost animal.
It doesn't matter if your bullet is .1" larger after expansion or is going 300fps faster--it's going to make soup out of the vitals and that animal will be dead just as quick. The DRAWBACK of uber high velocity cartridges is again, bullet frangibility, but more important to me is the extra meat loss and bruising that results to surrounding tissues. Not to mention extra recoil, noise, expense, etc. They are simply unnecessary and tend to cater to a very specific (young and/or inexperienced) demographic when it comes HUNTING. There are some who warrant the use of such cartridges, but if you think you need a magnum, you probably don't.
I've seen hundreds of animals shot by me as well as friends and acquaintances from a large pool of cartridges. I've seen moose shot taken with 6mm, 6.5mm, 7mm, 8mm, .308, .30-06, .45-70, .375H&H and more. I've seen a few bad shots too, but in my experience I've never seen a moose react differently, regardless of cartridges, when shot in the vitals. In fact, the fastest drop I have seen was a 1100lbs bull moose taken with a 7mm-08 with 160gr partition. Moose walked about 10 yards and dropped. I'm not saying a 9.3mm 285gr bullet @2600fps isn't better, but my experience in the field has told me that the differences are probably more related to the physiology of that specific animal and/or the exact shot placement. Terminal ballistics are complex and anybody who tries to tell you otherwise should be ignored--especially if they try to compartmentalize killing power in a neat little formula.
Pass throughs are desirable provided good expansion. This means more tissues damage in the vital region and two bloods trails as opposed to one. Anybody who tells you different hasn't a clue and is a blind follower of the high velocity school.
Regarding temporary cavitation. I understand that the faster the bullet is travelling the more likely it will produce a larger temporary cavity--at least in ballistic gelatine. Whether this has any effect on game animals, I don't know. However, experience tells me that if it does make a difference, it's negligible. Shot a whitetail with .357 magnum out of a model 92 with 200gr cast semi-wadcutter traveling at a measly 1700fps. Vital shot and was a bang flop. Punched a cookie cutter whole through the animal with absolutely no surrounding tissue damage.
I've also seen one deer run over 3 miles in south. Sask. after being shot through the vitals with a .300 win mag. Recovered the animal the next day and it had already been gnawed on. Skinned it out to see what went wrong and surprise surprise, bullet failure. Not the cartridges fault, of course.
Point is, I've seen a lot of animals taken with low energy and high energy, small bore and large bore cartridge combinations and while there may be differences in terminal performance between say a .243 and a 375H&H, on living things the difference is slight. Moreover, the difference between say a 6.5x55 and a .308 would be even slighter, most likely nil.
Analogies are a slippery slope and often muddle arguments more than compliment them. But I will say this, hydrostatic shock is largely a myth and has been proven as such by science--not sure why it is such a persister one on forums. Your reasoning at the end of your post is not new to me, and is largely based on junk science. While remote neural damage has been reported in studies, it is more complex than deducing that it has an incapacitation effect.
Please, read here: http://www.rathcoombe.net/sci-tech/ballistics/myths.html
I also suggest that ejg reads the above article if for no other reason than maybe he will stop talking about something he knows nothing about, but i doubt it.
EDIT TO ADD** I'm not saying kinetic energy means nothing. However, it is often cited out of ignorance/misunderstanding, unfortunately.
Last edited:
Similar threads
