Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact
NitroExpress.com: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma

View recent messages : 24 hours | 48 hours | 7 days | 14 days | 30 days | 60 days | More Smilies


*** Enjoy NitroExpress.com? Participate and join in. ***

Shooting & Reloading - Mausers, Big Bores and others >> Rifles

Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma
      #304203 - 18/08/17 11:25 PM

https://www.americanhunter.org/articles/2017/3/31/behind-the-bullet-65-284-norma/


Wildcatters are an intriguing lot, they never seem to tire of the labors required to produce a cartridge that’s just a little bit different. Neck it up, neck it down, shorten it, blow out the case walls—it’s all good stuff. From the days of A. O. Neider and Charles Newton, to the line of P.O. Ackley cartridges, to Col. Townsend Whelen’s efforts; there are plenty of little niches that have been filled.

When the .284 Win. was released in 1963—designed to mimic the performance level of the .270 Win. and .280 Rem. in a short action rifle—it wasn’t long at all until the wildcatters began to work their magic on the rebated rimmed case. Being 7mm wasn’t necessarily a bad thing for the .284 Win., but the deep-rooted following for the longer predecessors forced it to the wayside. For the record, the .284 Win. is a fine cartridge in and of itself, though it has become nearly obsolete.

Of all the variations developed on the .284 case—and there are many—the 6.5-284 has been the most successful, and with very good reason. It represents an excellent case-capacity-to-bore-diameter ratio, delivering respectable velocities, without being over the top. The 6.5-284 can handle the lighter bullets very well, yet can also push the heavier, higher Sectional Density bullets just as well, making for both a good varmint cartridge—even if a bit heavy—and a perfectly viable big game cartridge as well. It is the darling of the 1,000 yard target community, with good reason; it is one of the most accurate cartridges I've ever come across.

The original 6.5-284 wildcat cartridge had the last name of Winchester, with an overall length of 2.800”, just like the .308 Winchester and its ilk, in order to fit in the magazines of the short-action rifles. The Swedish firm of Norma saw the brilliance of this design, with its 35˚shoulder and very slight tapered body, giving it a legitimate name in 2001; the 6.5-284 Norma came onto the scene as a SAAMI-recognized cartridge. Norma had a bit of foresight in its application for approval: they extended the specified overall length from 2.800” to 3.228”, to allow the longer spitzer bullets to be seated out further, taking full advantage of that case capacity.

The 6.5mm bullets are a bit of an enigma; by design the high Ballistic Coefficient they possess will give flat trajectories and good resistance to wind deflection, and the high Sectional Density figures of the 140, 156 and 160-grain bullets give superb performance on game animals. If you take a look at some of the modern developments in the 6.5mm caliber—the .260 Remington, the 6.5mm Creedmoor and 6.5 Grendel—they have garnered quite a bit of attention from the shooting community, driving the 6.5mm bullets into tight little groups very far downrange. It’s kind of funny that it took us this long to appreciate the full potential of this bore diameter—including the 6.5-284 in that mix—when we had the 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser and 6.5x54 Mannlicher Schonauer since the late 19th century. Sometimes the answer is right in front of our face all along.

While the 6.5-284 Norma makes a fantastic target round—my own Savage Model 116 will hold 1/3-MOA out to 500 yards with 140-grain Hornady ELD Match bullets—it is also a great hunting round. Norma’s 156-grain Oryx factory load, at 2850 fps, is a fantastic hunting round, and that same rifle of mine shoots the bonded semi-spitzer very well. If you handload for the 6.5-284, as I do, you have a world of bullets at your fingertips. I have had fantastic results with the 125 and 132-grain Peregrine PlainsMaster, the North Fork 140-grain hollowpoint and the 130-grain Swift Scirocco II, with the lighter bullets traveling between 2850 and 3000 fps, and the 140 North Fork rolling out at 2700 fps. Hornady’s long and heavy 160-grain InterLock round nose also works in the 6.5-284 Norma, and though it leaves my barrel at 2600 fps, it would make a great black bear bullet, especially if the distances are on the closer side of average. Look to powders like IMR4955 and Hodgdon’s H4831SC for a good balance of fine accuracy and consistent velocities.

My Savage rifle was built in their Custom Shop, on the Model 116 action, a long action, to allow for extra room in the magazine for the really long bullets. The Berger Hybrid and Nosler AccuBond bullets can be very long, and if they don’t touch the lands and grooves of the throat—which is a very bad thing—you can seat them out a bit further.

As a hunting cartridge, the 6.5-284 Norma has been touted—by this author and some colleagues—as one of the best for game animals up to the size of elk. I feel it’s one of the best cartridges ever developed for whitetail deer hunting, anywhere, at any distance. In my opinion, the 6.5-284 Norma represents the best balance of case capacity and velocity in the caliber; it has a bit more horsepower than the Creedmoor or .260 Rem., yet isn’t as overbore as .264 Win. Mag. or 6.5-300 Wby. Mag. It gives terminal performance very close to the .270 Win., with recoil scarcely more ferocious than that of the .243 Win. It accompanies me on many hunts throughout the year, and that’s not going to change anytime soon.

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
DarylS
.700 member


Reged: 10/08/05
Posts: 26413
Loc: Beautiful British Columbia, Ca...
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304211 - 19/08/17 03:19 AM

Good article. I found this sentence very interesting as well, considering the Norma 156gr. Oryx factory load" does 2,800fps".

" Hornady’s long and heavy 160-grain InterLock round nose also works in the 6.5-284 Norma, and though it leaves my barrel at 2600 fps, it would make a great black bear bullet, especially if the distances are on the closer side of average."

In a 23.4" bl. M96 6.5x55, I run 2,540fps with the Hornady RN using IMR7828.

These are also good moose loads. Lads I worked with in Corrections bought 6.5's and ran my THEN load of 47.0gr. H450 without any problems. This load was maximum listed from my Pacific (Division of Hornady) Manual, back in the 80's, noted at 2,400fps.

--------------------
Daryl


"a gun without hammers is like a Spaniel without ears" King George V


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
szihn
.400 member


Reged: 24/06/07
Posts: 2100
Loc: Wind River Valley, Wyoming
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: DarylS]
      #304427 - 24/08/17 12:25 AM

As a gunsmith with about 1/2 half a century of experience I never understood the fad that is the 6.5-284. Good shell, and dose all the 6.5-06 dose in the hunting fields.............for more money.

See, the 284 Winchester was introduced by Winchester in their M88 lever action for the expressed purpose to duplicate the 270 Winchester's performance in a lever action. It did that just about perfectly.
The 270 is just a necked down 30-06 in effect.
So the case capacity of the 284 was about the same as the 06.

Now we've have had the 30-06 since 1906. The 256 Newton was basically a 6.5-06. The 6.5-06 has existed for a very long tome. Since the 20s at least.
So here comes a new fad shell trying to convince everyone that it's somehow worlds ahead of all the "competition", and it's not. In fact, it's the same formula. Pressure for pressure and barrel length for barrel length, the 6.5-06 is the same or slightly ahead. The 6.5-284 is a tie at the the best, and a very close second in most cases. On deer and antelope I can't see any difference between the 6.5-284, the 6.5-06 and the 270 Winchester. One elk I can see a bit of difference with the 270 beating them both. (For less money and fuss)

So the next argument is that the short actions are "better". But in my 49 years of building I have yet to see any evidence that they are. I read that they are all the time. I know most target shooters go to short actions because they embrace the idea that may be stiffer and they can't hurt. I agree.
But "better...................... No I can't say they are, in any way. I have not see in in 49 years of gunsmithing. No worse mind you, but no better. Especially in hunting rifles. I think most of that is a rehash of the Emperors New Cloths.

And then I see the demand to make 6.5-284s most often are from those that want to put the cartridge into a long action anyway. As a man who dose the work, I can assure those reading this it's true.

I have made more 6.5X284s for customers on Mausers and Remington long actions and a handful of Ruger 77s, and so far I have not had anyone bring me a short action to make their custom 6.5X284 on.

On Mausers I have made a LOT of 6.5-06s and about 25 6.5-284s. I shoot them, I zero them, I do load work for them, and I own a chronograph. They are equal in accuracy and the 6.5-06 will out-run the 6.5-284 by a small margin in every bullet weight.

When I made the first 6.5-284 back about 30 years ago the customer brought me a Steyr M98 long action already re-barreled in 270. He was going to make a 270 but then read some magazine article that made him want a 6.5X284. I have to pull the barrel and make one in 6.5 bore and install that.

No problem.

The action on the other hand had to be modified to feed the 284 shells which took a bit of work. The 284 brass was hard to get and it's not much easier now. It was expensive then and it's far more now. The reamer cost me about 2X more then the 6.5-06 reamer. The dies cost 3X more.

And so the build was far more expensive than it would have been for a 6.5-06 and the customer was delighted, so I was happy too, but I did see the truth of it. I told him all this BEFORE I went to work. He didn't care, so I did as I was bidden. He wanted to have a 6.5-284 because it was so "modern" and showed he was an expert in rifles.

He got 98% of a 6.5-06 for about $400. $400 more 30 years ago. That $400 was worth a LOT more 30 years ago than it would be today.

Now I expect since Norma brought out the shell as a factory standard, it may have come down some, but the brass has not. Necking up a 25-06 or necking down a 270 to make a 6.5-06 is much cheaper.

But I don't have a dog in the fight.

I do what the customers tell me to do, as long as it's safe, and as long as I tell them all the options and lay out the facts. I feel no obligation to try to sway them. I only make these points to them so if they come back later saying that it's not as fast as they hoped it would be I can say "well I told you". Facts don't often move passion. They will move intelligent inquiry, but not passion. We see that in politics every day. Truth means nothing to those that want something other then truth to be right.

Heck, if speed is the key, I might just suggest a 264 Win Mag. Dies and brass are not high at all. (264 is a bit hard to buy, but 7MM Rem Mag necks down in one pass perfectly)

The 26 Nosler is super fast too, if you don't mind the super expensive brass, high price for the dies lots of action work and short barrel life.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: szihn]
      #304437 - 24/08/17 07:19 AM

1. 270 is not superior in any way, period..we have had this long drawn out discussion before..

2. lots and lots of 6.5/284 long range shooters who would argue the virtues of the 6.5/284 vs the 270 for competition..it seems like I am on a hamster wheel on this site.as I stated last week and the week before, if the 270 is such a ballistic marvel, why is it not used or talked about in competition... ..

3. It would be impossible for me to care any less about price..sometimes for some it doesn't matter..and yes, when it comes to this, I am one of them..

On the road..
will check in when I get back from Alaska
Love and kisses

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304469 - 25/08/17 02:30 AM

http://www.rifleshootermag.com/ammo/ammunition_rs_thelongsuffering_200812/

Pretty good info and history on perhaps why the 6.5 has found favor in Europe for the past 100 plus years and why it is being used more readily now for different sporting competition as well as hunting..

Hornady tech info

https://www.hornady.com/bullets/eld-x#!/#product-lineon their bullet..bc/sd


Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
szihn
.400 member


Reged: 24/06/07
Posts: 2100
Loc: Wind River Valley, Wyoming
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304478 - 25/08/17 08:10 AM

Love and kisses back to you too Ripp.

(I remember that discussion. You lost it. )


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rule303
.416 member


Reged: 05/07/09
Posts: 4896
Loc: Woodford Qld
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: szihn]
      #304482 - 25/08/17 12:57 PM

270 Vs 6.5. In the target world, the 6.5 would be a clear winner on use alone. Then add in the reasons for this.

In the hunting world it would be the 270 on physics alone. The 270 will penetrate as much as needed and puts a bigger hole, not by much, but a bigger hole in the animal.

The above is all things being as equal as they can.

Same can be said about 280 (7mm) Vs 270 in the hunting world.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: szihn]
      #304487 - 25/08/17 04:27 PM

Quote:

Love and kisses back to you too Ripp.

(I remember that discussion. You lost it. )




Well you are batting 100%..as you memory is as bad as your info that the 270 is as good as a 6.5

You stated in that discussion that the 270's bullets BC and sd were better than the 6.5..which I proved to you was incorrect..then you attempted to compare a 150gr bullet for a 270 vs a 140 for a 6.5..which I called bs on and stated you need to compare apples to apples....Hey its all there, go look for yourself ...

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Rule303]
      #304488 - 25/08/17 04:55 PM

Quote:

270 Vs 6.5. In the target world, the 6.5 would be a clear winner on use alone. Then add in the reasons for this.

In the hunting world it would be the 270 on physics alone. The 270 will penetrate as much as needed and puts a bigger hole, not by much, but a bigger hole in the animal.

The above is all things being as equal as they can.

Same can be said about 280 (7mm) Vs 270 in the hunting world.




I don't agree with this..all things being equal, which they are not..the 6.5 has a better BC..so it will retain its speed for longer shots better than the .270..and the sd of the 6.5 when compared to the 270 of equal gr bullet is also better, therefore it will penetrate better..

Agree with you, in the real world and where most shots are taken..300 yards and less, none of this makes much if any difference..

I am merely pointing out the fact, as claimed in an earlier post, that the 270 really does not do anything better than a 6.5, and when given the distance the 6.5 really surpasses the 270 ...


Hornady website

6.5MM .264"
143 gr
ELD-X®
.625 (G1)
.315 (G7)



270 CAL. .277"
145 gr
ELD-X®
.536 (G1)
.270 (G7)

This doesnt includ the ELD-match bullet..which is as follows:

6.5MM .264"
147 gr
ELD® Match
.697 (G1)
.351 (G7)

270 CAL. .277"
N/A..cause the 270 sucks ..

Seriously no match bullets made by Hornady in their latest long range bullet.

Swift Scirocco Bullets--I know they are expensive..BUT....no comparison..

6.5MM .264 130 BTS .266 .571

270 .277 130 BTS .242 .450

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rule303
.416 member


Reged: 05/07/09
Posts: 4896
Loc: Woodford Qld
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304494 - 25/08/17 07:26 PM

Quote:

Quote:

270 Vs 6.5. In the target world, the 6.5 would be a clear winner on use alone. Then add in the reasons for this.

In the hunting world it would be the 270 on physics alone. The 270 will penetrate as much as needed and puts a bigger hole, not by much, but a bigger hole in the animal.

The above is all things being as equal as they can.

Same can be said about 280 (7mm) Vs 270 in the hunting world.




I don't agree with this..all things being equal, which they are not..the 6.5 has a better BC..so it will retain its speed for longer shots better than the .270..and the sd of the 6.5 when compared to the 270 of equal gr bullet is also better, therefore it will penetrate better..

Agree with you, in the real world and where most shots are taken..300 yards and less, none of this makes much if any difference..

I am merely pointing out the fact, as claimed in an earlier post, that the 270 really does not do anything better than a 6.5, and when given the distance the 6.5 really surpasses the 270 ...


Hornady website

6.5MM .264"
143 gr
ELD-X®
.625 (G1)
.315 (G7)



270 CAL. .277"
145 gr
ELD-X®
.536 (G1)
.270 (G7)

This doesnt includ the ELD-match bullet..which is as follows:

6.5MM .264"
147 gr
ELD® Match
.697 (G1)
.351 (G7)

270 CAL. .277"
N/A..cause the 270 sucks ..

Seriously no match bullets made by Hornady in their latest long range bullet.

Swift Scirocco Bullets--I know they are expensive..BUT....no comparison..

6.5MM .264 130 BTS .266 .571

270 .277 130 BTS .242 .450




Ripp, the SD etc is covered in my post "In the target world, the 6.5 would be a clear winner on use alone. Then add in the reasons for this." That means SD etc.

Penetration at normal hunting ranges and proper bullet construction the 270 has more than enough. It still puts a bigger hole in the animal and this is what kills short of a head/spine shot. The 7mm is that much better again.

If I was to hunt scrub bulls or donkeys and I had a choice of only 6.5, 270 7mm, (note I did say Only)I would chose 7mm, 270, 6.5 in that order. Smaller less tenacious or dangerous I would be happy to any of them. If I want to nail targets at long range then the 6.5 wins.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
szihn
.400 member


Reged: 24/06/07
Posts: 2100
Loc: Wind River Valley, Wyoming
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Rule303]
      #304496 - 26/08/17 12:03 AM

Yeah I was baiting.

It was funny and fun,----------- but I probably should not have done it.

Still Ripp's a good sport even when he takes the bait.

Keeps the comparisons going and makes others look at the details, and the real world is compared to the mathematical world. When the 2 meet up and march in parallel it's very interesting. Sometimes however (many times) they don't.

Edited by szihn (26/08/17 12:05 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grenadier
.375 member


Reged: 20/02/08
Posts: 570
Loc: North of the Columbia, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: szihn]
      #304502 - 26/08/17 03:09 AM

Any ballistic advantage the 6.5mm has over the .277 caliber is based solely on bullet availability. The Ballistic Coefficient (BC) of a bullet is it’s sectional density (SD) divided by its form factor. Compare a group of different caliber bullets that have the same shape and those with the highest sectional densities will have the highest BCs, i.e. the largest calibers. Using bullets of the same shape, any .277 caliber bullet would have a higher BC and a SD than its 6.5mm counterpart. It is the same with .257 caliber bullets compared to 6mm.

Consider the example of the Hornady 147 gr 6.5 ELD-match bullet given above. That bullet has an SD of 0.301. A 161.5 gr .277 gr bullet would achieve the same 0.301 SD and if made to the same shape as the 6.5 mm ELD bullet their BCs would be equal. On the other hand, it would be more comparable for Hornady to make something like a 168 gr .277" ELD and that would trump the BC of the 6.5.

But the market is what it is and bullet makers are not being called upon to make match bullets in diameters between 6mm and 6.5mm or between 6.5mm and 7mm.

--------------------
~


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Rule303]
      #304503 - 26/08/17 03:48 AM

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

270 Vs 6.5. In the target world, the 6.5 would be a clear winner on use alone. Then add in the reasons for this.

In the hunting world it would be the 270 on physics alone. The 270 will penetrate as much as needed and puts a bigger hole, not by much, but a bigger hole in the animal.

The above is all things being as equal as they can.

Same can be said about 280 (7mm) Vs 270 in the hunting world.




I don't agree with this..all things being equal, which they are not..the 6.5 has a better BC..so it will retain its speed for longer shots better than the .270..and the sd of the 6.5 when compared to the 270 of equal gr bullet is also better, therefore it will penetrate better..

Agree with you, in the real world and where most shots are taken..300 yards and less, none of this makes much if any difference..

I am merely pointing out the fact, as claimed in an earlier post, that the 270 really does not do anything better than a 6.5, and when given the distance the 6.5 really surpasses the 270 ...


Hornady website

6.5MM .264"
143 gr
ELD-X®
.625 (G1)
.315 (G7)



270 CAL. .277"
145 gr
ELD-X®
.536 (G1)
.270 (G7)

This doesnt includ the ELD-match bullet..which is as follows:

6.5MM .264"
147 gr
ELD® Match
.697 (G1)
.351 (G7)

270 CAL. .277"
N/A..cause the 270 sucks ..

Seriously no match bullets made by Hornady in their latest long range bullet.

Swift Scirocco Bullets--I know they are expensive..BUT....no comparison..

6.5MM .264 130 BTS .266 .571

270 .277 130 BTS .242 .450




Ripp, the SD etc is covered in my post "In the target world, the 6.5 would be a clear winner on use alone. Then add in the reasons for this." That means SD etc.

Penetration at normal hunting ranges and proper bullet construction the 270 has more than enough. It still puts a bigger hole in the animal and this is what kills short of a head/spine shot. The 7mm is that much better again.

If I was to hunt scrub bulls or donkeys and I had a choice of only 6.5, 270 7mm, (note I did say Only)I would chose 7mm, 270, 6.5 in that order. Smaller less tenacious or dangerous I would be happy to any of them. If I want to nail targets at long range then the 6.5 wins.






Agree--IF I was hunting the game you stated..and those were my choices..yes, I would use a heavy for caliber bullet in 7mm..however if I had a choice I would choose a 30 cal or 338..I have done exactly that in my 300RUM shooting 200 gr A-Frames vs the 180's..impressive on elk..

As to BC and SD..my thoughts and research are the higher ballistic coefficient allows the 6.5 to achieve and maintain its velocity and not be blown off as easily by wind..the SD, which is also better in the 6.5 vs the 270...higher sc equals deeper penetration..I do fully agree that the 270 is more than enough..but the 6.5 does have more using similar weight bullets..

Thx
Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Grenadier]
      #304504 - 26/08/17 03:55 AM

Quote:

Any ballistic advantage the 6.5mm has over the .277 caliber is based solely on bullet availability. The Ballistic Coefficient (BC) of a bullet is it’s sectional density (SD) divided by its form factor. Compare a group of different caliber bullets that have the same shape and those with the highest sectional densities will have the highest BCs, i.e. the largest calibers. Using bullets of the same shape, any .277 caliber bullet would have a higher BC and a SD than its 6.5mm counterpart. It is the same with .257 caliber bullets compared to 6mm.

Consider the example of the Hornady 147 gr 6.5 ELD-match bullet given above. That bullet has an SD of 0.301. A 161.5 gr .277 gr bullet would achieve the same 0.301 SD and if made to the same shape as the 6.5 mm ELD bullet their BCs would be equal. On the other hand, it would be more comparable for Hornady to make something like a 168 gr .277" ELD and that would trump the BC of the 6.5.

But the market is what it is and bullet makers are not being called upon to make match bullets in diameters between 6mm and 6.5mm or between 6.5mm and 7mm.




Agree with your comments to a point..however in your example above, you are comparing a 147gr bullet with a 161.5 for a 270....my argument is when you compare the same weights the 6.5 clearly wins..furthermore when you increase the weight of the bullets the velocity in that calber also decreases..so now you are behind as soon as the trigger is pulled..if you have two bullets leaving the barrel, both having similar bc & sd, but on is traveling 200fps faster, the faster bullet will have the advantage 90% of the time..agree typically the heavier bullet carriers its energy longer, but.....

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grenadier
.375 member


Reged: 20/02/08
Posts: 570
Loc: North of the Columbia, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304509 - 26/08/17 05:02 AM

Now you are contradicting yourself. Which is it, 6.5 bullets are better because the long, heavy VLD bullets have higher BCs or because the short, light bullets with lesser BCs can be driven faster? Using your latest logic the 6mm Creedmoor would be the ballistic superior to the 6.5 Creedmoor and the .22 Creedmoor is the ballistic superior to both. Why the .22 Creedmoor isn't dominating competition remains a mystery.

--------------------
~


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Grenadier]
      #304513 - 26/08/17 07:41 AM

Quote:

Now you are contradicting yourself. Which is it, 6.5 bullets are better because the long, heavy VLD bullets have higher BCs or because the short, light bullets with lesser BCs can be driven faster? Using your latest logic the 6mm Creedmoor would be the ballistic superior to the 6.5 Creedmoor and the .22 Creedmoor is the ballistic superior to both. Why the .22 Creedmoor isn't dominating competition remains a mystery.




NOT contradicting myself at all..its as simple as comparing same vs different bullet weights..

You attempted to make a point that the 270 in a higher bullet weight was as good of a bc as the lighter grain bullet in a 6.5..MY point was/is thats an unfair comparison as in that you are attempting to stack the longer heavier bullet in the 270's column to match the bc of the 6.5..IF BOTH the 6.5 and 270 are 140 gr bullets the 6.5 wins every time...in both bc and sd, period..

Other point is the fact the lighter bullet will in fact have a higher mv..and with the already good bc/sd of a 6.5, the 270 in the higher weight would never make up the difference at its reduced mv..

Your comment of the 6 creedmoor and 22 creedmoor is just plain ignorant ..as they are much different bc/sd's than the 6.5 --so no, not superior...

No matter how you fry an egg its still an egg.. logic 101...

One thing the 270 does have going for it..its a great caliber for a younger person starting out or women. Low recoil and closer shots..will work great.. have at it

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304516 - 26/08/17 08:25 AM

http://abesguncave.com/sectional-density-all-important-and-almost-ignored/


sectional density calculator...
http://www.realguns.com/calculators/sectionaldensity.html

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Grenadier
.375 member


Reged: 20/02/08
Posts: 570
Loc: North of the Columbia, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304519 - 26/08/17 09:04 AM

You did it again.

You said,
Quote:

MY point was/is thats an unfair comparison as in that you are attempting to stack the longer heavier bullet in the 270's column to match the bc of the 6.5..IF BOTH the 6.5 and 270 are 140 gr bullets the 6.5 wins every time...in both bc and sd, period..

Other point is the fact the lighter bullet will in fact have a higher mv..and with the already good bc/sd of a 6.5, the 270 in the higher weight would never make up the difference at its reduced mv.


One could have said with just as much validity,
Quote:

That's an unfair comparison as in that you are attempting to stack the longer heavier bullet in the 6.5's column to match the bc of the 6mm's . IF BOTH the 6mm and 6.5 are 120 gr bullets the 6mm wins every time...in both bc and sd, period..

Other point is the fact the lighter bullet will in fact have a higher mv..and with the already good bc/sd of a 6mm , the 6.5's in the higher weight would never make up the difference at its reduced mv.




A 162gr .277 bullet made to the same form as the 147gr 6.5mm ELD® Match bullet would have the same BC but could be driven at higher velocities than the 6.5 version. Further, a 165gr .277 bullet made to the same form as the 147gr 6.5 ELD® Match bullet could be driven just as fast as the 6.5 version but would have a BC of .710 (G1)!

There should be little doubt that a 270 Creedmoor would give the 6.5 Creedmoor a run for its money or that a 270-284-Norma would do the same to the 6.5-284-Norma.

But alas, there are no such .277 caliber bullets available. So, the 6.5 Creedmoor and 6.5-284-Norma are in the forefront and in the limelight. Not because the 6.5mm bullet is magical, but because there are no good .277 caliber bullets to compete against them. Not to say the 6.5s are not fantastic cartridges on their own merit. They absolutely are.

And as for a .257 Creedmoor, with proper bullets it would lie in performance right between the 6mm Creedmoor and the 6.5mm Creedmoor. Wouldn't that be nice.

--------------------
~


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
SharpsNitro
.375 member


Reged: 12/08/08
Posts: 729
Loc: Arizona, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Grenadier]
      #304524 - 26/08/17 12:30 PM

Matrix makes a 165gr VLD hunting bullet for the 270, they advertise a G1 of .650. They also make a 160gr bullet for the 6.5 that has a G1 of .675.

http://www.matrixballistics.com/index.html


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rule303
.416 member


Reged: 05/07/09
Posts: 4896
Loc: Woodford Qld
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304529 - 26/08/17 02:54 PM

Ripp, I too would want a bigger caliber, starting at a 358 for the two beasties I mention. For long distance shooting at targets I would prefer a 6.5 for long distance shooting at something that moves I would start with a 300WM, 300RUM even better.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: SharpsNitro]
      #304548 - 27/08/17 03:00 AM

Quote:

Matrix makes a 165gr VLD hunting bullet for the 270, they advertise a G1 of .650. They also make a 160gr bullet for the 6.5 that has a G1 of .675.

http://www.matrixballistics.com/index.html




Weird...

And pretty much says all that needs to be said at this point ..will follow up when I get done fishing up here in Alaska..

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rule303
.416 member


Reged: 05/07/09
Posts: 4896
Loc: Woodford Qld
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304560 - 27/08/17 04:03 PM

Ripp good luck with the fishing.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
HeymSR20
.300 member


Reged: 23/11/11
Posts: 243
Loc: Scotland
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Rule303]
      #304731 - 03/09/17 07:47 PM

I like the look of the 6.5-284, but in the real world of every day hunting is there any real difference between it and a 6.5x55. I am not interested in 400 / 600 or 1,000 yard performance, but an accurate rifle for deer that can reach out to 200 poss 250 yards. I am wanting a low recoil with a bit more thump than a 243.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ripp
.577 member


Reged: 19/02/07
Posts: 16072
Loc: Montana, USA
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: HeymSR20]
      #304738 - 04/09/17 01:37 AM

Quote:

I like the look of the 6.5-284, but in the real world of every day hunting is there any real difference between it and a 6.5x55. I am not interested in 400 / 600 or 1,000 yard performance, but an accurate rifle for deer that can reach out to 200 poss 250 yards. I am wanting a low recoil with a bit more thump than a 243.




NO --for the application you describe..shooting deer at 200 yds--no difference ..the 6.5x55 is a great round...

My post was showing the great combo of BC and SD of the 6.5 bullet..and why it has taken off like it has for shooting competition matches at the longer ranges..

Will it prove to be a fad?? I don't think so..people have been shooting the 6.5 caliber in other parts for the world for a very long time..it has finally really taken hold here in the US in the past 10-15 years and now with the 6.5 CR being chambered by so many different rifle manufacturers, it will probably stick for the foreseeable future..IMHO

Ripp

--------------------
ALL MEN DIE, BUT FEW MEN TRULY LIVE..

Edited by Ripp (04/09/17 01:38 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
szihn
.400 member


Reged: 24/06/07
Posts: 2100
Loc: Wind River Valley, Wyoming
Re: Behind-the-bullet- 6.5-284-Norma [Re: Ripp]
      #304739 - 04/09/17 01:44 AM

Will it prove to be a fad?? I don't think so..people have been shooting the 6.5 caliber in other parts for the world for a very long time..it has finally really taken hold here in the US in the past 10-15 years and now with the 6.5 CR being chambered by so many different rifle manufacturers, it will probably stick for the foreseeable future..IMHO
Ripp
______________________________________________________________________


I agree. But I will say I don't think it will be "ONLY a fad." Let me explain my statement:

All success stories of cartridges are fads ----at first! The ones that last are the ones that have merit enough to stand on that merit, and not just the writings of someone paid to sell products.

The 30-30 and the 30-06 were both fads ----- until the were standards. So were all the 300 magnums.
In fact, so was the 375H&H. That's how they all were in their first 10-15 years of use.

That is not to say that "standards" are always built on superior performance, or that shells with great performance are the ones that catch on and become "standards."

There are exceptions on both sides.

But I think it's safe to say that no cartridge will last long that has a low degree of merit.

A shell that preforms as well (or close to) a world standard, (in this case the 6.5 Swede) which fits a new set of gun standards (in this case a rifle with a Military length detachable mag and still can hold very long bullets) is how I see the 6.5 CM. In other words, barrel for barrel, pressure for pressure, the CM is very close to the 6.5X55, BUT it fits into a magazine that the 6.5X55 won't fit into. So that will open up a place in the market and that's what will make it last.

Like the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC. No new ballistics to either. Both give us ballistics we have had from other shells for 80-100 years and neither will give the top ballistics of those 80 year old shells.
But those other shells would not go into an AR15, or for that matter, a bolt gun that can weight less then 6 pounds with a scope and strap and fully loaded. It's not just the ballistics that make them desirable, but the synthesis of the shell and the gun it's in.

Today the merits of a shell are seldom truly some new set of ballistics. It's old news. What makes them new and excellent is the guns that they give those old ballistics from.

I have done a lot of 6.5X55s with 1-8 twist barrels. Shooting long, slick .264" bullets is very old news to me. Been doing that for 40 years. Some newer bullets of today did not exist then, but the guns were easily within reach of any who wanted such a gun.
Having one that can fit with a detachable 20 round mag however is something I have not done, and from an economic standpoint, I could not do.

The 264 Winchester with a 1-8 twist barrel is VERY old news! I did a few of them way back in the 70s. But speed by itself is not what is making the 6.5CM popular.

It's merit.
The bullets used in the CM do not have to be pushed as fast as the Mag pushes them.
The barrel life is a LOT better,
recoil is a LOT less,
weight of the gun can be a LOT less(If you'd like. Some guns in the 6.5CM weight as much or more than the magnums did, but now the customer gets to choose)

The the 6.5cm IS a fad. SO WHAT?
I think it will be a fad until it isn't. When it isn't it will become a standard. That's really the pattern of all great shells. All great ones develop that way.


Edited by szihn (04/09/17 02:21 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 18 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:   

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Rating:
Topic views: 10779

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved