Deer Rifle looking to become a project

I've did some reading up by searching around the web ,and lilja recommends at least a #5 for a 28" finished barrel.
That comment was directed towards a .284 caliber -i think.

For a 30" finished length i'd go w/a .750" at the muzzle as a minimum.

Kirby recommended a sendero contour .830" for 30" finished length in a 7mm.

Something like a 5.5 medium varmint / sporter in a broughton would be nice in a 6.5 gibbs.

I have a rem 700 270 that i want to turn into the same style gun you are building -heavy sporter 6.5 gibbs -8 twist 30" broughton w/a break shooting 140 bergers/amax's..

I'm still not sure about the whole plain barrel verses fluted barrel -as to which is more rigid ?

I have read some debate and some think a #5 is more rigid than a fluted #6 =which makes sense to me =you peel out some metal =you peel out some stiffness.
I think it was Varmint Al -who did a test of sorts and he said the fluted barrel was less stiff.He's nearly a rocket scientist by the way.

Myself flutes are cool but i don't show my rifles to anybody accept wily coyote and he doesn't care one way or the other..

Good luck
 
So, I ordered a barrel the other day in 6.5 Gibbs but am really debating if I should go back to 270 since berger is coming out with VLD bullets for it. I like the idea of having a fast bullet with as much powder as possible but I also like the idea of using all the reloading stuff I already have and not having to use special cases or fire forming a bunch of stuff. Oh, the decision!

I don't know what to do.
 
So last night I finally got the chance to run some numbers on exbal with the 6.5 gibbs verse the 270 win. I used Sierra game kings to keep things as equal as possible and the 6.5 gibbs had about a 150 foot pounds of energy at 1000 yards. If I change the 6.5 gibbs over to berger VLDs if has about twice as much energy at 1000 yards verse the 270 win. I think I am going to stick with the 6.5 gibbs. Thanks guys for the input and suggesting that round.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 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.
Top