max range 6.5 284
- Thread starter matty ny
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
royinidaho
Well-Known Member
Well over 900 with the proper bullet and rifle pilot is a good number....
That was Jeremy from BOTW. I was surprised at the kill myself because I really didn't know much about the round. Sure killed that elk fine.
I built mine with the 140 VLD in mind and will see what it can do in 2013 hopefully. The question now is what powder will I use and whether or not I'll use a magnum primer.
Those guys started with Retumbo, 59.0 grains I think. Then they moved to H1000. If you read this site: http://www.6mmbr.com/SixFive284.html you will see that the top 2 powders are H4831SC and H4350, both of which are Extreme powders like Retumbo and H1000. So I don't know of the hunters were using the slower powders for a velocity reason or not. I personally choose accuracy and precision over velocity unless there is a ridiculous difference in velocity and not much difference in accuracy among the various powders.
A reliable source who is a bench shooter and long range hunter was testing the Ramshot powders and stated to me that Magnum was just as temp stable as the Extreme powders. I have some of that on the shelf too but do not know the velocity potential. My 6.5x284 bbl is 24".
I have not shot an elk but have taken several deer and antelope out to 1000 yards with my 6.5x284. The terminal performance on all my game shot was quite good, most dropping in their tracks. If the 6.5x284 was my only rifle, I would have no problem using it on elk. While I have no doubt it would kill an elk at 900 yards with good shot placement, I would prefer shots to be closer.
Wingnut
Well-Known Member
Derek,
You are right about using 59 grs of Retumbo for our 6.5x284 set ups with the 140 VLD. There were several reasons we did this. The first being the velocity. We were trying to get 3050 fps with a 26 in barrel and Retumbo was consistantly doing that for us. The second and probably the most important was the temperature stability. We tested hundreds of rounds through several different rifles and found Retumbo to be the most stable powder for minumum of 50 deg changes. Magnum tested well also but just not quite as good. As you know we run the bdc turrets so a stable velocity is what we were looking for. They switched to H1000 because the 59 grs of Retumbo was a compressed load even with a chamber throated for the vlds just into the neck of the cartridge. H1000 gave us velocities in the 3000 to 3025 fps range. I personally like the 4831SC especially in the WSM cartridges. The 6.5x284 with the 140 VLD is a great cartridge for large mule deer on down. It is a good elk cartridge out to 1000 yards just remember not to shoot them in the shoulder. Put it right behind the leg and through the vitals it will do the job every time.
You are right about using 59 grs of Retumbo for our 6.5x284 set ups with the 140 VLD. There were several reasons we did this. The first being the velocity. We were trying to get 3050 fps with a 26 in barrel and Retumbo was consistantly doing that for us. The second and probably the most important was the temperature stability. We tested hundreds of rounds through several different rifles and found Retumbo to be the most stable powder for minumum of 50 deg changes. Magnum tested well also but just not quite as good. As you know we run the bdc turrets so a stable velocity is what we were looking for. They switched to H1000 because the 59 grs of Retumbo was a compressed load even with a chamber throated for the vlds just into the neck of the cartridge. H1000 gave us velocities in the 3000 to 3025 fps range. I personally like the 4831SC especially in the WSM cartridges. The 6.5x284 with the 140 VLD is a great cartridge for large mule deer on down. It is a good elk cartridge out to 1000 yards just remember not to shoot them in the shoulder. Put it right behind the leg and through the vitals it will do the job every time.
What is your load?
I use 59 gr of Retumbo, Federal 215 Magnum Primers, Lapua brass, and 140 gr Berger Hunting VLD's. Seating depths are .075" out of the lands for both my rifles, a Savage and a Cooper. I have tried H4831sc. It produces the good accuracy, but will give velocities 80FPS lower than Retumbo. Using Retumbo, my Cooper produces 2965FPS, my Savage LRH, 3015 FPS. Both rifles consistently produce .25MOA. 3 shot groups at 200 yards.
sdhunterman
Active Member
Not to change the subject but are you guys finding retumbo to be the consistent velocity winner? I'm looking for the max peerformance out of my 6.5x284. Velocity and accuracy.
In my rifles Retumbo is comparable to H4831sc as far as ES, running10-15 fps which is under 3" of verticle deviation at 1000 yards. I have found that the best consistancy is obtained with Retumbo using Fed 215 Magnum primers.
rscott5028
Well-Known Member
If I was intentionally setting out to hunt Elk at 900+ yds, I think I'd take a 300WM or larger just to have a little extra fudge factor.
I suspect most of the wounded Elk videos end up on the cutting room floor.
That said, it's a great long range hunting cartridge.
-- richard
I suspect most of the wounded Elk videos end up on the cutting room floor.
That said, it's a great long range hunting cartridge.
-- richard
T o the OP. A lot of hunters and outdoor publications over the years consider 1500 Energy a good number for elk and 1000 E for deer as a general guide line. This puts a load of 140 vld @ 3000 FT, which was higher than any of my books ,but load posted . T o have 1014 E @ 1000 YRD. And 1410@ 700 yrd. As one put it a perfect lung shot and you are good. I am good with a perfect lung shot @ 100 w/ my bow , but is it a good idea?There was a very long thread on here on a bull lost w/same at 1000, by a very accomplished elk hunter this fall.There are much better elk cartridges for long stuff.
I just received my issue of "Rifle" magazine which had a review of the Savage LRH in 6.5x284. This is about the third publication in the last several months that has reviewed the cartridge, in rifles that are clearly designed for longer range shooting. In all atricles they list the few factory loads available, as well as selected handloads. In just about every case the hand loads chosen use load recipes that in no way brings out the true potential of the cartridge. It is also doubtful that their listed loads generate any less pressure than an optimum load such as the ones listed in this thread. The same is true for most of the common reloading manuals which is likely what's guiding them in their hand load design. This also applies to other cartridges as well, but in the case of the 6.5x284 will likely restrict it's broader acceptance since published results are typically no better then a 270 Win, in some cases a 260 Rem. With the right load this cartridge produces outstanding accuracy and terminal ballistics, with recoil on par with a 308, maybe less. While I havent used it for elk, I can understand why people do. Routinely hitting softball sized targets with this cartridge at 1000 yards is quite attainable given good shooting skills and a proper read on the conditions.
Michael Eichele
Well-Known Member
I find this thread funny!
What is funny to me is that alot of guys are entertaining the thought, and accepting the 6.5x284 as a legitimate 900-1000 yard elk rifle where as if "308 win" was attached it would catch flack from every angle. Now I realize the exterior ballistics are vastly different between the two. Terminally, they can be closer than you think.
I have loads that will hit every bit as hard at 900 yards for my 308 as the 6.5x284. 1000 for that matter, and expand to boot. My point here is not that the 308 is superior or better, but if a thread ever came up "308 for 900 yard elk?", it would get laughed at all the way. 99% of the posts would say how irresposible and stupid it woud be to hunt elk at 900 yards and even dumber to do it at 1K with a 308.
Does either have superior terminal ballistics? Probably not. 1000 pounds of energy with an expanding projectile of similar sectional densities placed in the vitals is going to yield the same results. The elk is not going to know the difference.
So before you nail me to the stake and light it on fire, realize that I am not saying the 6.5x284 is not a viable 900-1000 yard elk cartridge or that it is, or isnt. Nor that the 308 is or isnt. Just that if 308 was attached this thread would never be entertained. Even though from a terminal standpoint, they have the capability to be similar out to 1K.
So maybe the 308 is underrated or the 6.5x284 is overrated. Or maybe they fall right in the middle? Just something to think about from another point of view. That said, if the 308 is not a worthy 900-1000 yard elk rifle, the 6.5x284 should'nt be either. Or if the 6.5 is, then the 308 should be.
My opinion is: Either will and can get the job done but I dont want to use a ball peen hammer to drive a 16 penny nail.
Let the flame begin!
What is funny to me is that alot of guys are entertaining the thought, and accepting the 6.5x284 as a legitimate 900-1000 yard elk rifle where as if "308 win" was attached it would catch flack from every angle. Now I realize the exterior ballistics are vastly different between the two. Terminally, they can be closer than you think.
I have loads that will hit every bit as hard at 900 yards for my 308 as the 6.5x284. 1000 for that matter, and expand to boot. My point here is not that the 308 is superior or better, but if a thread ever came up "308 for 900 yard elk?", it would get laughed at all the way. 99% of the posts would say how irresposible and stupid it woud be to hunt elk at 900 yards and even dumber to do it at 1K with a 308.
Does either have superior terminal ballistics? Probably not. 1000 pounds of energy with an expanding projectile of similar sectional densities placed in the vitals is going to yield the same results. The elk is not going to know the difference.
So before you nail me to the stake and light it on fire, realize that I am not saying the 6.5x284 is not a viable 900-1000 yard elk cartridge or that it is, or isnt. Nor that the 308 is or isnt. Just that if 308 was attached this thread would never be entertained. Even though from a terminal standpoint, they have the capability to be similar out to 1K.
So maybe the 308 is underrated or the 6.5x284 is overrated. Or maybe they fall right in the middle? Just something to think about from another point of view. That said, if the 308 is not a worthy 900-1000 yard elk rifle, the 6.5x284 should'nt be either. Or if the 6.5 is, then the 308 should be.
My opinion is: Either will and can get the job done but I dont want to use a ball peen hammer to drive a 16 penny nail.
Let the flame begin!
My fiends hit targets @ 1000 and have stacks of groups under 3'', w/6mm. But that is not the same as killing ELK @ 1000. I t is funny to me how hard this site pushes shooting elk @ 1000 yrds, WITH RIFLES that carry very small Energy when, bettter stuff has been around my whole life. I grew up at elk camp and here are some observations from back woods MT. A friend of my Dad has taken 58 bulls, 308 norma, I have another acqaintence 45 bulls 300 wby and larger. I have also ran into a guy hunting in mountains alot and has taken about 20 6pt. 30-06 and he does not shoot long. I also have a friend that has taken 35 + BULLS ARCHERY. Any body that I know local, that is a serious elk hunter and shoots distance uses a suitable cartridge. They range from 338 win, 300 win, 300 wby, 340 wby, and into the current ultras, 375 h&h and this is what I have seen for 20 yrs. A high school buddy of mine was national champ @ 13 , 1000 yrd. He has shoot about 12 elk on openong day 3oo WN. The 6.5 is what we would consider a deer cartrige at distance. 140 gr. vrs. 300+ in the 375. I think you are steering new hunters in the wrong direction when you advise them to shoot elk @ 1000 with light tackle.I have hunted my life in Mt mostly elk hunting and I have seen it go wrong, and I have seen big bulls suck up alot of 338 lead and run off. I t is hunting, and I HUNT A thick type terrain where elk get swallowed up.
