SMK 6.5's ????

Discussion in 'Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics' started by Varmint Hunter, Jan 28, 2004.

  1. Varmint Hunter

    Varmint Hunter Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,529
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2001
    SMK 6.5\'s ????

    Why does Sierra make their 6.5 Matchking bullet in a 140gr and a 142gr weight?

    What would be the intended applications? [​IMG]

    VH
     
  2. eb

    eb Active Member

    Messages:
    44
    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Re: SMK 6.5\'s ????

    When i had the guy at sierra on the phone i asked him about that it didint make sense to me either. He said that the 140 smk was for older guns that didnt have 8 or 8.5 twist, and it was designed to stabilise in those guns. I think he mentioned match shooters shooting the Swede Mausers. ebb
     
  3. LDO

    LDO Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    251
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Re: SMK 6.5\'s ????

    makes sense to me.the 140g cant compare to 142 though,my-2-dave
     
  4. chris matthews

    chris matthews Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    838
    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Re: SMK 6.5\'s ????

    Actually, it is a little easier to get the 140 mag length for a short action than the 142s.
    Same reason they make a 77 and 80gr for the 223.
     
  5. Brent

    Brent Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,537
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2001
    Re: SMK 6.5\'s ????

    The 9 twist 6.5 WSM my Dad has shoots the 140 SMK and the 140 A-Max better than the 142 SMK FWIW.

    The 140 A-Max and 142 SMK are the same length I believe.
     
  6. milanuk

    milanuk Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    806
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2002
    Re: SMK 6.5\'s ????

    OK, this may be dumb, but I gotta ask: For some reason, I seem to recall that there was an issue regarding Sierra having a contract w/ a large customer (Swedish nat'l gov't rings a bell) that involved some proprietary rights to the bullet design for one or the other of the 140/142gr 6.5mm MatchKing, hence the creation of the other one to provide something for the domestic USA market. Eventually that contract lapsed/expired, and now both are on the market here. For some darn reason I remember reading that in a gun mag years ago (like 10-15) but btwn the source, and my memory, it could be completely B.S.

    ???

    Monte