Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
6.5 opinions
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mikecr" data-source="post: 1076382" data-attributes="member: 1521"><p>Case improvements are not solely about capacity, as results are not muzzle velocity only. </p><p></p><p>Often improvements lead to reducing capacity.</p><p>Like If I were improving a 6.5x284, I'd immediately reduce it to 260AI capacity, take out body taper, and increase shoulder angle. I'd also set my chamber clearance to mitigate case yielding across the board. This would be a LR cartridge for 140gr bullets, given sustainable ACCURACY as the goal. </p><p></p><p>If I were designing the most accurate mid-range 26cal, I'd improve a 260Rem to end up at the 6.5x47L. Well that was easy, someone already did it for me and it provides an edge, for it's purpose, over all other 26cals.</p><p>This is why we have a 6.5x47L, even while we could have stuck with 260 or 6.5x55 or 6.5x284.</p><p></p><p>I don't have a problem with the 6.5x55.</p><p>But given a choice, I'd pick an improved version at best capacity for bullet and powder desired.</p><p>With this, if I improved a 6.5x55, I would hold the capacity right where it is. The last thing I would want is to alter that capacity or velocity one way or another -as that would not be an improvement.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mikecr, post: 1076382, member: 1521"] Case improvements are not solely about capacity, as results are not muzzle velocity only. Often improvements lead to reducing capacity. Like If I were improving a 6.5x284, I'd immediately reduce it to 260AI capacity, take out body taper, and increase shoulder angle. I'd also set my chamber clearance to mitigate case yielding across the board. This would be a LR cartridge for 140gr bullets, given sustainable ACCURACY as the goal. If I were designing the most accurate mid-range 26cal, I'd improve a 260Rem to end up at the 6.5x47L. Well that was easy, someone already did it for me and it provides an edge, for it's purpose, over all other 26cals. This is why we have a 6.5x47L, even while we could have stuck with 260 or 6.5x55 or 6.5x284. I don't have a problem with the 6.5x55. But given a choice, I'd pick an improved version at best capacity for bullet and powder desired. With this, if I improved a 6.5x55, I would hold the capacity right where it is. The last thing I would want is to alter that capacity or velocity one way or another -as that would not be an improvement. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
6.5 opinions
Top