W
Wyo37
Guest
Not that many shooters have electron microscopes!
And, as I stated previously, those that insist on using this type of bullet only "immortalize" it's successesā¦..they never speak of it's failures!
Sure.
6.5 prc enough gun for elk
- Thread starter 808hoghunter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Sure.
memtb
Well-Known Member
memtbEvery Bullet manufacture has a "failure" at some point. Some you hear about some you don't. Unfortunately, some folks take less than ideal shotsā¦.. not judging or trying to talk ethicsā¦. And bullets manufactures shouldn't take the blame as to their bullets failing on a "perfect shot ". They don't get a say in how the bullets are used or the situation once the user is in the fieldā¦it's Dooley on the user . Everything has its place. Some use "non-hunting" bulletsā¦. And love em, they kill regularly with them. This whole thread reminds me of the broadhead threads on AT lol. Been an interesting read and valid points on both sides. As far as the 6.5 PRC goes, if you're able to shoot it accurately from field positions and know your limitations, I say use it. Many elk have been killed with the good ol 270 Winchester through the years since its introduction. Better off with a Gun you can handle and shoot accurately than try and make up for it with a big magnum whatever. But on the flip side.. there's no such thing as too deadā¦big holes and big energy will definitely do it too. Lastly, I will say if I could only have one rifle in my house that I currently own, it would be my Remington 700 in 270 Winchester that my father bought when I was a boy and later gave me.. never let me down.
h_1ag
Well-Known Member
These are the same fallacies used to attack cartridge selection too. I believe also by you actually.Not that many shooters have electron microscopes!
And, as I stated previously, those that insist on using this type of bullet only "immortalize" it's successesā¦..they never speak of it's failures!
I admire those that fell for the loud "pontification" of someā¦..to step forth and tell of their disappointment when these bullets failed to live up to the praise heaped upon them"!
I also have "some" respect for those using these bullets that will explain that they "must" be used (placed) very carefully to expect satisfactory results! I don't agree with their choice of the bulletā¦..but, do admire their honesty! memtb
"You never hear about the ones that got away!"
You also don't hear about the ones that got away from guys using other bullets (or cartridges). What you're usually hearing is guys trying to make excuses and blame their failure on said bullet or cartridge.
Dozens of guys showing off dead bulls this fall from their 6.5 with an ELDM won't convince you of anything because you heard a guy lost one one time.
There is no "magic bullet," nor is there a magic cartridge. A 338AllenMag (or whatever cannon you think is invincible) loaded with hammers (or insert any favorite bullet) is absolutely capable of losing an animal. Terminal ballistics is an imperfect and often unpredictable event. Even the most solid projectile can take an angle off a bone and deflect in an undesirable direction.
It's healthy and valuable when this forum respectfully considers the merits and demerits of different bullets and their capabilities, but denigrating entire classes of cartridges or bullets is unproductive and foolish- especially in response to evidence being presented proving that they're perfectly capable.
Then this whole web page is a waste.
It's called discussion....it can make us all better reloaders/shooters/hunters. I respectfully disagree with your assessment.
Phil Rizzo
Well-Known Member
I do think there is sound advice to be considered here.
Like using a big game hunting bullet for hunting big game.
Common sense doesn't seem to be as common as trendy and cool unfortunately.
Especially to someone who hasn't been around to see this transition the industry has undergone in the last 10-15 yrs.
Only the arrogant are incapable of learning. I'm too curious for that
Reloading data and factual information is constructive and can make us better and be informative. This "discussion" is mostly opinions and serves neither. A 6.5 cal guy with a Berger or EldM bullet user isn't reading these 25 pages and saying you know what I'm gonna switch to a 300 and 180 Partition's next year. About as likely as a woke dem voting for Donald Trump!
memtb
Well-Known Member
Please understandā¦..I never implied that the 6.5 PRC is not a capable elk cartridge!
I also never implied that some of the bullets chosen by shooters of this and numerous other cartridges are poor choicesā¦..I'm flat-out, with no apologies stating that some of these bullets are a "**** poor" choices for big game hunting!
Nor will your "ever" hear or see me state that large cartridges/calibers are infallible ā¦..they simply add a degree of effectiveness. Poor shot placement, or a poor choice of bullets, or a poorly constructed bullet advertised for big game hunting (I fell victim to this many years ago) will give similar results as smaller cartridge/bullets!
My heartburn is bullet choicesā¦..not the cartridge choice!
I hope that clarifies my position on this and all other cartridge/caliber/bullet conversations! Please don't take the typical political /MSN path and distort what is being stated! memtb
h_1ag
Well-Known Member
Are you not curious enough to look beyond marketing and consider the construction and experience of a bullet's use? This forum LOVES to crap on Hornady marketing (ever heard of 6.5 Creedmoor?), so if we're going to throw their marketing claims out the window let's just throw them all out.
I originally scoffed at the idea that anyone would consider using an ELD-M on any animal because I (wrongly) assumed it was basically an FMJ and would poke clean holes. Saw videos and photos. Investigated the construction. Learned that it's basically the old (and trusted) A-Max, and now I'm not as harsh on it. Best bullet available for every big game application? I wouldn't go that far. But given the right conditions it seems to do well.
Cartridges are similar. Creedmoor was originally developed as a "target cartridge," so it stands to reason that its big brother, the purpose of this thread, is just a steroid version. But I've come to learn that animals can't read head stamps and they don't know the difference between getting hit with a .264Win from 500 or a Creedmoor at 250. If a cartidge can effectively send a suitable projectile a suitable speed for the given application, I'm excited to hear about it and consider its merits and demerits.
Phil Rizzo
Well-Known Member
When a bullet flies apart mid flight that tells me it's not suited for large game animals. But that's just Me.
Last edited:
h_1ag
Well-Known Member
That tells me you're not using an appropriate twist rate and/or excessive MV beyond its intended use. +300k rpms is going to spin a thin jacket off.
What rifle and load? I have a feeling this isn't a factory rifle/shelf ammo situation here and you're trying to hot rod it.
Phil Rizzo
Well-Known Member
You hit the nail on the head with thin jacket. I dont now nor will I ever use a frangible varmint/target grenade on anything deer sized or larger. You can shoot A-Frames and Partitions at 1000yd steel if you like, but there are better options.
Too many obvious proven performers on game animals for me to use a bullet clearly designed for a totally different task.
regardless of MV
regardless of twist rate.
Too many obvious proven performers on game animals for me to use a bullet clearly designed for a totally different task.
regardless of MV
regardless of twist rate.
Last edited:
LRNut
Well-Known Member
Asking if cartridge "x" or bulley "y" is good enough is like questioning if woman "z" is good enough to marry. If you have to ask, you probably shouldn't.
Confidence matters.
Confidence matters.
