OK, My turn on the 6.5 Creedmoor

Mach 1 said:
By bringing up the ackley improved argument you prove my point. The 300 ackley improved is inherently more accurate ,by design, than the standard unmodufied 300 case. Whether It be more powder capacity for added velocity for less wind drift at 1000 yards or changingbthe shoulder
Angles to make the case more efficient to help the burn rate of the powder. Either way it makes that cartridge INHERENTLY more accurate than the previous unmodified case.
Click to expand...
It's not inherently more accurate by design, it's just a better design than the standard .300 Weatherby. It is more efficient, it is better for velocity, it is better for preventing case growth. But that doesn't make it more accurate. People are confusing the words "efficient" and "better", with the word "accurate".

Also note, the first link was a 1K record with a regular .300 Weatherby, not the AI version.
 
MudRunner2005 said:
No, it's because I don't have any money. I'm not worried about losing. People lose...If you're not first, you're last. How am I proving your point? You still can't prove to me that cartridges that have been around for 20 years, are now all of a sudden relevant in the last 2-5 years, and cartridges that have been winning and holding records for 60 years, are no longer relevant. So, you're telling me that the precious .300 WinMag is irrelevant because it has a belt and long action body, heavy wall taper, a long shoulder angle, and a short neck? Last I heard, it's still being raved about for long range shooting/hunting...
Click to expand...

Haha no. I'm telling you that's it burns a lot of extra powder for no Reason. Extra powder burnt doesn't help consistency. There is a big difference between long range shooting and hunting vs benchrest competition. The 300 win mag is a great long range deer killer. I have had one for years and probably will continue to. But to say the 300 win mag would be as good as the current competitive cartridges when shooting 10 rounds for score and group in heavy fun after how many sighter rounds is nonsense.
 
MudRunner2005 said:
It's not inherently more accurate by design, it's just a better design than the standard .300 Weatherby. It is more efficient, it is better for velocity, it is better for preventing case growth. But that doesn't make it more accurate. People are confusing the words "efficient" and "better", with the word "accurate".

Also note, the first link was a 1K record with a regular .300 Weatherby, not the AI version.
Click to expand...


You can cherry pick all you want. For one of your records I can find many more records the br case family holds. And they haven't been around nearly as long.

An efficient cartridge makes for a consistent cartridge and will be inherently more accurate than a cartridge that is not.
 
Mach 1 said:
You can cherry pick all you want. For one of your records I can find many more records the br case family holds. And they haven't been around nearly as long.
Click to expand...
Yes, but are you finding the BR case records at 1,000 yards, or are you finding them for 600 and less? I wouldn't think the BR case would have enough *** to buck the wind to stay competitive at 1,000 yards (unless on a perfect day) compared to something like, say a 7mm RemMag pushing a 195 Elite at 3,000 FPS? Comparing a 195 going 3K to a 75gr flat-base going about the same, would be like comparing a Honda Del Sol to a Ferrari, when it comes to aerodynamics and ballistics.
 
MudRunner2005 said:
Yes, but are you finding the BR case records at 1,000 yards, or are you finding them for 600 and less? I wouldn't think the BR case would have enough *** to buck the wind to stay competitive at 1,000 yards (unless on a perfect day) compared to something like, say a 7mm RemMag pushing a 195 Elite at 3,000 FPS? Comparing a 195 going 3K to a 75gr flat-base going about the same, would be like comparing a Honda Del Sol to a Ferrari, when it comes to aerodynamics and ballistics.
Click to expand...

The 6bra the 6 dasher the 6brx are all based on the 6 br case. Who in the world shoots a flat base bullet at 1000 yards. Most all 6mm bullets that are shot at that range are a minimum of 105 grain bullets and they do very well. Look up the equipment used the last few years in the ibs 1000 yard nationals. Use a ballistic calculator and run the wind drift and drop on a 6 br running 2850 fps with a 107 smk or 105 lapua. Not to mention a dasher or brx running a 115gr dtac at 3000 fps. I think you'll be surprised.
 
I saw a guy complete the milk jug challenge at a mile or 1500 yards I cant remember exactly with a 6 br and a 105 Berger at 2800 fps. The newer 6mms are very efficient. I'm not sure where I fall into this debate. I think there are easier to tune and more forgiving cartridges than others, but I think in the proper setup they are all capable of the same accuracy.
 
0BDBABCE-4B4E-4587-BE61-8773D9C4FAE3.jpeg
 
Creedmoor shooter said:
I saw a guy complete the milk jug challenge at a mile or 1500 yards I cant remember exactly with a 6 br and a 105 Berger at 2800 fps. The newer 6mms are very efficient. I'm not sure where I fall into this debate. I think there are easier to tune and more forgiving cartridges than others, but I think in the proper setup they are all capable of the same accuracy.
Click to expand...
Lol that's what I was trying to get across 7pages ago? With a tuned up load they can all be accurate, but with an out of tune load some cartridges display more consistency and precision than other cartridges.
 
MudRunner2005 said:
If certain cases are more accurate, you should test that theory by setting up 2 identical SMOOTH-BORE 6.5mm barrel blank rail-guns chambered in 2 different similar capacity 6.5mm cartridges (6.5CM vs. .260 Rem), loading them to the exact same velocity, and testing their accuracy @ 100 yards. I say rail guns so there's no human error to factor in, because it's bolted into a 75-100 lb. metal sled and fired by remote. If one of them shoots significantly better than the other @ 100 yards, then I'll consider admitting that the theory of "inherent accuracy" is plausible. I said plausible, not definitively. Just wanting to clarify that.
Click to expand...
Still waiting to see if anyone is interested in performing this test to prove a theory...
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

C
My new 6.5 Creedmoor
2
Replies
19
Views
6K
Clayne B
C
L
OK...misfires in my 6.5x47 questions...
2
Replies
14
Views
5K
6.5BR
6
P
My turn to be a whiner.....
Replies
7
Views
2K
lynn
L
montana_native
Who has the quickest turn-around on custom dies?
2
Replies
14
Views
3K
Jinx-)
J
Gone Ballistic
What if the 6.5 PRC had preceded the 6.5 Creedmoor?
2 3
Replies
38
Views
6K
375 JDJ
3

Recent Posts

Top