fastest 6.5?

jon12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Messages
67
What is the very fastest 6.5? The fastest one i know of is the 6.5 STW, but is there any, or could there be any that shoot the 120 or heavier bullets at close to or over 4000 fps in a 26 to 28 inch barrel, something practical for a medium weight LR hunting rifle? Has anyone done a 6.5 RUM Improved, a 6.5/378 Weatherby or 6.5/378 Weatherby improved, a 6.5 on the long magnum Lazzeroni or Laupa case, or anything larger? Are there any hunting bullets with relatively high BCs in 6.5 such as sirocco bonded or something like that that might old up to extreme velocities? I know it would be a barrel burner, but could this possibly be very accurate(maybe need a slower twist barrel??)? What kind of trajectory and wind drift would you get out of somethin glike this?

Just wondering.

Thanks.
 
The problem with the big cases is effeciency of the powder burning. I have a friend that built a 6.5 Wolf. It's basically the 378 Wby necked to 6.5 mm. I have a 6.5-06AI that will do everything the Wolf does, but more effeciently. The fastest we could push the 142 SMK's out of the Wolf was a shade under 3400 fps. and that was with a 40" Christensen Arms carbon wrapped barrel. I have a 26" Montana Rifleman that can push the 142's @ 3100 fps.. The extra powder and barrel length really hindered the rifle. Stick with something efficient in the powder department.
 
I use a 6.5/300 Yuma ( 264 Win body with long neck ) at full load in a 31 inch barrel I am at 3350 fps with the 139 gr Lapua , I am close in velocity of the 6.5/300 Wea but I start to get carbon fouling ( strong carbon fouling ) with BMG powder ( Nobel SP13 ), increase powder capacity is the the way to follow except to built a true one shot one clean rifle .

I think that possible with same capacity to try to make more efficient case design base on fatter case or perhaps the new MacPherson shoulder design on a 338 LM shortened or 338/378 Wea case shortened too .

good shooting

DAN TEC
 
Warning! This thread is more than 21 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