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
My .260 died - need to pick a new 6.5 for Africa!
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="WindTrax" data-source="post: 195216" data-attributes="member: 2606"><p>MagnumManiac - calm down! I've been doing this stuff a while too. Hey, completely get it's about the bullet construction. You are entirely wrong on the bullet weight. I was using a 130-grain Barnes X on the first deer, and a mere 120-grain Barnes X on the second (went to the lighter to try and get better velocity and expansion in fact, not for accuracy), both loaded to max velocity by the way. And both deer were shot at less than 75 yards. I would certainly not choose a 150 gr failsafe out of a 7mm-08 unless I was hoping for near-solids performance. I fully agree it's about bullet construction, intended design velocity envelope, terminal velocity and the like. The reason, my friend that I point at the caliber is if you were a bullet manufacturer wanting to construct a bullet for 7mms, with the 7mm Mag being a very big favorite amongst big game hunters, and wanting avoid the potential crashing of your reputation if you're bullets blew up on contact under some circumstances, would you build your jackets/bullets to expand at an envelope primarily centered around the 7mm-08 velocities? Or would you ensure that you built a bullet that wouldn't go to pieces on an elks shoulder at ranges as close as 20 yards with a 7mm Rem Magnum? I'm guessing that indeed it was the bullet construction - but I suspect that all bullet manufacturers have to pick their target velocity envelope, as well as ensuring that the bullet won't blow up for users with the most popular cartridges in that caliber range. After seeing 2 deer suffer needlessly given well-placed shots at close range, at max 7mm-08 velocities, I wasn't going to risk that bet again and went to .263. I also - until recently - refused to buy the Barnes X bullets for game; I don't think it's without coincidence my friend that the latest Barnes offerings boast of a redesigned nose cavity that promotes "faster expansion." Just thought I'd clear the air on the reasoning behind my earlier comments. That being said, others have had great luck with the 7mm-08, I'm sure. I just didn't. Completely agree though, it's the bullet construction, combined with velocity/expansion and placement that kills animals. These were (each) 2 lung shots, not gut shots, then 2 through the neck (in both cases, my fault as I was flustered they were still standing and missed the spine on the first shot.) 2 different years, 2 different bullet weights.</p><p>My only real disagreement with what you stated so emphatically is that it does indeed matter what caliber you hit them with. All other things being equal, a properly designed bullet, placed accurately, operating within its target velocity envelope, of a larger caliber is going to wreak more damage than a smaller one. That being said it does not take much to kill about anything in North America if you put all of those things together. Ackley was part of a culling operation for zebra in yesteryears with a high velocity, fast twist 22 with very high SD bullets and said it killed them like the hammer of Thor. In any case I don't think I need to move up in cartridge size Mm, this .260 has killed 10 head of big game in a row with 1 shot, including black bear, cougar, deer and also a bobcat at 12 paces. None told me that I needed a bigger caliber gun afterwards. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> A taxidermist friend of mine has cleanly taken eland (up to around 2000 pounds) a number of times apparently with a .243, good bullets and a single shot with good placement. A guy has to know he will stay within responsible limits and only take just the right shot with a marginal round, but that being said, the Swedes have killed moose for around a hundred years with the 6.5x55. What's not to like. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WindTrax, post: 195216, member: 2606"] MagnumManiac - calm down! I've been doing this stuff a while too. Hey, completely get it's about the bullet construction. You are entirely wrong on the bullet weight. I was using a 130-grain Barnes X on the first deer, and a mere 120-grain Barnes X on the second (went to the lighter to try and get better velocity and expansion in fact, not for accuracy), both loaded to max velocity by the way. And both deer were shot at less than 75 yards. I would certainly not choose a 150 gr failsafe out of a 7mm-08 unless I was hoping for near-solids performance. I fully agree it's about bullet construction, intended design velocity envelope, terminal velocity and the like. The reason, my friend that I point at the caliber is if you were a bullet manufacturer wanting to construct a bullet for 7mms, with the 7mm Mag being a very big favorite amongst big game hunters, and wanting avoid the potential crashing of your reputation if you're bullets blew up on contact under some circumstances, would you build your jackets/bullets to expand at an envelope primarily centered around the 7mm-08 velocities? Or would you ensure that you built a bullet that wouldn't go to pieces on an elks shoulder at ranges as close as 20 yards with a 7mm Rem Magnum? I'm guessing that indeed it was the bullet construction - but I suspect that all bullet manufacturers have to pick their target velocity envelope, as well as ensuring that the bullet won't blow up for users with the most popular cartridges in that caliber range. After seeing 2 deer suffer needlessly given well-placed shots at close range, at max 7mm-08 velocities, I wasn't going to risk that bet again and went to .263. I also - until recently - refused to buy the Barnes X bullets for game; I don't think it's without coincidence my friend that the latest Barnes offerings boast of a redesigned nose cavity that promotes "faster expansion." Just thought I'd clear the air on the reasoning behind my earlier comments. That being said, others have had great luck with the 7mm-08, I'm sure. I just didn't. Completely agree though, it's the bullet construction, combined with velocity/expansion and placement that kills animals. These were (each) 2 lung shots, not gut shots, then 2 through the neck (in both cases, my fault as I was flustered they were still standing and missed the spine on the first shot.) 2 different years, 2 different bullet weights. My only real disagreement with what you stated so emphatically is that it does indeed matter what caliber you hit them with. All other things being equal, a properly designed bullet, placed accurately, operating within its target velocity envelope, of a larger caliber is going to wreak more damage than a smaller one. That being said it does not take much to kill about anything in North America if you put all of those things together. Ackley was part of a culling operation for zebra in yesteryears with a high velocity, fast twist 22 with very high SD bullets and said it killed them like the hammer of Thor. In any case I don't think I need to move up in cartridge size Mm, this .260 has killed 10 head of big game in a row with 1 shot, including black bear, cougar, deer and also a bobcat at 12 paces. None told me that I needed a bigger caliber gun afterwards. :) A taxidermist friend of mine has cleanly taken eland (up to around 2000 pounds) a number of times apparently with a .243, good bullets and a single shot with good placement. A guy has to know he will stay within responsible limits and only take just the right shot with a marginal round, but that being said, the Swedes have killed moose for around a hundred years with the 6.5x55. What's not to like. :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
My .260 died - need to pick a new 6.5 for Africa!
Top