Filling a new FAC

[WalkedUp]

Happy rabbiting

 

[Selous]

I think The nations above GB where far larger beasts reside might disagree strongly. At equal weight bullets a 6.5mm bullet will have a higher BC giving a higher retained velocity and less wind drift from the much better BC . 308 win is a fine hunting rifle but using say a 140 grain bullet ( which is more than we need in the UK ) the same case as the 308 necked down to use the 6.5mm using the same 140 weight bullet the guy with the 308 will be at a large disadvantage.
The fact is 6.5 maintains more speed through the flight path , less wind drift and the longer length in the bullet aids deeper penetration.
Of course we are really are comparing the same Eggs regarding powder capacity from the same case of the 308 !
All this means nothing if the shooter takes shots inside 200 yards on a broadside shot , the 243 could and will also do the job equally and will have enough steam to break both shoulders and exit also

The reason for the 6.5s popularity in Scandinavia is much more mundane than you consider. Essentially it was largely down to expedience that the 6.5x55 rifles and ammunition was widespread because of military adoption. They had it and so made it work rather than using it because it was the best thing for killing moose. The one thing the 6.5 has in its favour is sectional density and these days a good ballistic coefficient. That makes 6.5mm good at flying but not necessarily as good at killing. What the 6.5 lacks is frontal area, increasing to a .308 calibre projectile makes a massive difference as the surface area increased in proportion to the calibre squared. As bullets expand, let’s say to 2x diameter the expanded area of a .264 bullet becomes 0.218 square inches whereas a .308 expanded to 2x diameter becomes 0.297 square inches , an increase of 30%. If you believe the studies of Kevin Robertson who reports the permanent wound channel to be 3x the diameter of the expanded bullet then the permanent wound channel becomes1.96 square inches for the .264 and 2.68 square inches for the .308 which is 36% greater. A bigger permanent cavity means more air into the chest and more blood out so a faster kill. It’s just science and is an unavoidable conclusion that a larger diameter bullet does more physical injury to tissue. Using the Scandinavian moose argument is also negated by the widespread use of the 7.62x51 cartridge from the R1 semi automatic rifle, essentially a British SLR for elephant culling (whole herds at a time) in Zimbabwe by men like Ron Thompson yet no one would suggest the cartridge is a good one for elephant just as no one would suggest the 6.5 is a good moose cartridge.

 

[Bowland blades]

The reason for the 6.5s popularity in Scandinavia is much more mundane than you consider. Essentially it was largely down to expedience that the 6.5x55 rifles and ammunition was widespread because of military adoption. They had it and so made it work rather than using it because it was the best thing for killing moose. The one thing the 6.5 has in its favour is sectional density and these days a good ballistic coefficient. That makes 6.5mm good at flying but not necessarily as good at killing. What the 6.5 lacks is frontal area, increasing to a .308 calibre projectile makes a massive difference as the surface area increased in proportion to the calibre squared. As bullets expand, let’s say to 2x diameter the expanded area of a .264 bullet becomes 0.218 square inches whereas a .308 expanded to 2x diameter becomes 0.297 square inches , an increase of 30%. If you believe the studies of Kevin Robertson who reports the permanent wound channel to be 3x the diameter of the expanded bullet then the permanent wound channel becomes1.96 square inches for the .264 and 2.68 square inches for the .308 which is 36% greater. A bigger permanent cavity means more air into the chest and more blood out so a faster kill. It’s just science and is an unavoidable conclusion that a larger diameter bullet does more physical injury to tissue. Using the Scandinavian moose argument is also negated by the widespread use of the 7.62x51 cartridge from the R1 semi automatic rifle, essentially a British SLR for elephant culling (whole herds at a time) in Zimbabwe by men like Ron Thompson yet no one would suggest the cartridge is a good one for elephant just as no one would suggest the 6.5 is a good moose cartridge.

Ok I have here a collection of tTSX 100 and 120 grn recovered from deer or picked up in the end of a strike after it passed through . 16.4mm is the largest 7.60 mm the minimum . Now take the actual diameter of an unfired 30 cal , it pretty much illustrates that diamiter of an unfired bullet . Now tell me straight how can a bullet pushed slower that is approximately just 1mm greater in width and with a poorer BC before impact is going to trump a 6.5 with a considerably better BC weight for weight - It simply cannot.
Please remember like i say it starts off only 1mm extra , goes slower , has an inferior BC ( meaning it looses speed faster ) The further away the beast is the worst it gets , say 100 yards or less you might find tit for tat but the further away you won't it will be cavernous differences and at 1000 yards the 308 is running well into the transonic . What the 308 can do ? well quite a lot , especially regards cheap practice rounds , decent barrel life and a very capable deer rifle inside 300 yards but it is inferior until we get into the reduced capacity cartridges. Oh its also about the best choice for subsonic loads with a heavy bullet ( if it has a suitable twist to stabilize real long bullets as the slow speeds )

 

[User00057]

Yep, pretty much. I don’t think the 6.5s hit anywhere near as hard compared to the 308. They are ok on small deer though and do kill larger deer, just not as convincingly.

You dont think or you know ? I disagree totally with this statement from actual experience.

 

[Selous]

You dont think or you know ? I disagree totally with this statement from actual experience.

I know through having used it…I have owned and used the 6.5 a fair bit having owned one for over 20 years and it doesn’t hit as hard as the 308 that I have used for 30 years or so. I was once talking to a UKDTR chap who said the most common calibre for follow ups (in England) was .243 which does not surprise me in the slightest.
Bullet choice may be a factor but I’m using very comparable bullets so the 100g TTSX at 3200fps vs a 130g TTSX at 3000fps on Roe and Red deer. The 6.5 is OK and is adequate but the .308 has a more noticeable effect in my experience. I attribute that to the increased frontal area. I have also seen it with the 7mm Magnum vs the .300 Magnum. The larger calibre hits harder and drops deer faster. Frontal area is important and overlooked in my opinion as is the diameter of the expanded bullet. This can to some extent be offset to some degree by increased velocity and perhaps by using very frangible bullets. Where the 308 does start to lose out is at long range (over 250m) where BC and retained velocity become more important but these shots are in the minority and in reality both calibres are bettered by the magnums that fire larger, heavier bullets with higher BC faster. Inside 300m I would take a .308 or 30/06 any day of the week over a 6.5. It’s just my opinion so do with it what you will, but it’s based on 30 plus years of shooting deer and other animals up to bovines with a variety of calibres from .22 centrefire to .375H&H.

 

[Selous]

Ok I have here a collection of tTSX 100 and 120 grn recovered from deer or picked up in the end of a strike after it passed through . 16.4mm is the largest 7.60 mm the minimum . Now take the actual diameter of an unfired 30 cal , it pretty much illustrates that diamiter of an unfired bullet . Now tell me straight how can a bullet pushed slower that is approximately just 1mm greater in width and with a poorer BC before impact is going to trump a 6.5 with a considerably better BC weight for weight - It simply cannot.
Please remember like i say it starts off only 1mm extra , goes slower , has an inferior BC ( meaning it looses speed faster ) The further away the beast is the worst it gets , say 100 yards or less you might find tit for tat but the further away you won't it will be cavernous differences and at 1000 yards the 308 is running well into the transonic . What the 308 can do ? well quite a lot , especially regards cheap practice rounds , decent barrel life and a very capable deer rifle inside 300 yards but it is inferior until we get into the reduced capacity cartridges. Oh its also about the best choice for subsonic loads with a heavy bullet ( if it has a suitable twist to stabilize real long bullets as the slow speeds )

The .308 expands too. The increased diameter is squared to calculate the area so a small increase in diameter results in a much larger increase in area. The increased area causes more tissue damage and “puts the brakes on” the projectile harder leading to greater energy transfer.
Do the maths, the 130g TTSX at 3000fps has more muzzle energy than a 6.5mm 100g TTSX at 3200 and this is still the case at 200m (1700 ft lbs for .308 vs 1500ft lbs for the 6.5). The larger frontal area transfers more energy to tissues which is used to do work - in this case temporary cavitation and tissue destruction - permanent cavitation.

 

[VSS]

. I was once talking to a UKDTR chap who said the most common calibre for follow ups (in England) was .243 which does not surprise me in the slightest.

Do you think that's a factor of the calibre itself, or could it simply be that the majority of beginners and inexperienced stalkers (ie, the ones you would think are most likely to lose a deer) are using .243 because of its reputation as an ideal "starter" rifle or because that's all that their FEO would allow in the first instance?

Like most I suspect, I started off with a .243 and then moved up to a larger calibre after losing a deer. Didn't want that happening again, and assumed that a rifle with a bit more clout would solve the issue. However, with the wisdom of hindsight and more experience, I know that the fault that caused me to lose that deer was entirely mine: A combination of poor shot placement and inexperience. The fact I was using a .243 was not the problem, I'm now convinced of that and, although the .270 has become my "go to" stalking rifle, I'm equally happy using my .243 now my confidence has been restored.

 

[Bowland blades]

The .308 expands too. The increased diameter is squared to calculate the area so a small increase in diameter results in a much larger increase in area. The increased area causes more tissue damage and “puts the brakes on” the projectile harder leading to greater energy transfer.
Do the maths, the 130g TTSX at 3000fps has more muzzle energy than a 6.5mm 100g TTSX at 3200 and this is still the case at 200m (1700 ft lbs for .308 vs 1500ft lbs for the 6.5). The larger frontal area transfers more energy to tissues which is used to do work - in this case temporary cavitation and tissue destruction - permanent cavitation.

They all work ! Unfortunately I am plainly debating with a man who has a tendency to pass over details that does not reflect important facts to support their case. How about this ... Kinetic energy at short range is more than totally fine in all our UK deer calibres . When we use copper bullets ( of any brand ) there comes a point where retained speed on impact is the vitally important to open up the bullet correctly . If we used that point wisely we would use lighter weight and faster speed
Forget of the width of 308 over the 6.5mm we are talking not far off 1mm before the expansion occurs and frankly the 100 grain tTSX expands better than the 100 grain tTSX at longer ranges ( i am not guessing here or making it up) I have used both extensively and have a load of recovered bullets so its not a guess . I also shot my own 308 and 7-08 on deer for years ( but that was back in the lead bullet )
As an aside inside ... None of this matters if you call a halt after 200 yards, everything should work fine no matter what you choose as long as it meets the legal minimum . Indeed a 223 with a 50 grain copper bullet should do the job IF THE ACCURACCY was in the vital zone and that is far from all UK legal !
Again and again you talk about bullet diameter from the box , it is immaterial and the reason i shoot 100 grain copper tTSX over the 120 grain ( it opens up more at longer ranges ) as the velocity diminishes. the opening up a bullet ( especially in copper) is far less pronounced , would pictures of copper rounds recovered help you understand this ?

 

[User00057]

I know through having used it…I have owned and used the 6.5 a fair bit having owned one for over 20 years and it doesn’t hit as hard as the 308 that I have used for 30 years or so. I was once talking to a UKDTR chap who said the most common calibre for follow ups (in England) was .243 which does not surprise me in the slightest.
Bullet choice may be a factor but I’m using very comparable bullets so the 100g TTSX at 3200fps vs a 130g TTSX at 3000fps on Roe and Red deer. The 6.5 is OK and is adequate but the .308 has a more noticeable effect in my experience. I attribute that to the increased frontal area. I have also seen it with the 7mm Magnum vs the .300 Magnum. The larger calibre hits harder and drops deer faster. Frontal area is important and overlooked in my opinion as is the diameter of the expanded bullet. This can to some extent be offset to some degree by increased velocity and perhaps by using very frangible bullets. Where the 308 does start to lose out is at long range (over 250m) where BC and retained velocity become more important but these shots are in the minority and in reality both calibres are bettered by the magnums that fire larger, heavier bullets with higher BC faster. Inside 300m I would take a .308 or 30/06 any day of the week over a 6.5. It’s just my opinion so do with it what you will, but it’s based on 30 plus years of shooting deer and other animals up to bovines with a variety of calibres from .22 centrefire to .375H&H.

What do you mean by a more noticeable effect though ?
No one questioning your experience but I’m asking how you have proved that 308 is more effective than 6.5 as I personally can’t really tell the difference when the bullet weights are similer. I’ve had runners with 30-06,6.5 and 243

 

[Bowland blades]

The 243 win very likely does have the most number of "runners" but its little to do with the equipment - Its the most popular choice in the UK, so the statistics of ownership mean that should be the case being the most popular UK choice of the lot . Its not an issue with the bullet or the bullets energy ( nearly ever beast i have shot with 243 win entered with a little hole and put a big hole coming out ! )
Lost deer are overwhelmingly going to be ...... A bad shot ! Or the bullet finding an unseen branch, wire etc - most certainly not a 100 grain deer bullet over a 120 or 150 grain etc
Come on lets get real eh? The highest rate of wounding in pheasant shooting is the 12 bore and i don't even need the numbers 410 has far less wounders of course because it makes up only a small percentage LOL . There are Lies , Dammed lies and Statistics !