6.5x47 lapua barrel length

[6x47 lapua]

hi guys i'm going to get a 6.5x47 lapua what do you think about barrel length

i no where there's one for sale with a 22'' barrel do you think this will be ok

or will i lose to much volocity going to use it for long range plinking,varminting,

and maybe some deer shooting what do ye think thanks for looking

 

cheers stu

[tackb]

Buy it and crack on !

[Ronin]

22" is fine, you will still attain good velocity with this length barrel.

[brown dog]

Personally, and I can see I'm at odds with the previous two, I'd say the barrel needs to be longer. The 'whole deal' with 6.5x47 is about getting a decent MV. You don't want to be stoking your rounds like detonators; I think getting, say, a 25-26" barrel gives you more chance of getting the sort of MVs you'll be after for long range plinking - well, that's if you want to see significant benefits over a 308 (which is what attracted me to the round).

[terryh]

Stu,

 

I would have thought a longer barrel for the 47 but here is a set of posts related to the same subject that might be of interest?

 

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2178378&page=7

 

Brgds

 

Terry

[rabbit fingers]

Some rough figures that may help.

800 yds 123amax @2900fps

5.8mils drop1.9mils 10mph deflection

 

123 amax@2700fps

6.9drop 2.2 deflection

 

308 155 amax @2700

7.5mils drop 2.6 deflection

 

I'm not saying that these figures are what you will get. Its purely for comparison BUT You should easily get more than 2700 with a 21" barrel. My preferance would be for a longer barrel for your stated purpose but if the rifle you have in mind is at the right price I don't think you'll lose too much performace.

[6x47 lapua]

thanks for the reply's lad's i already hav a 308 with a 20'' tube that i fire 155 amax

at 2715 fps over the crono and 125 nosler's at 3050 fps i was wanting something else to play with

to fire 123g or 140g out of what about a 260 rem or a 6.5x55 thanks for all the reply's :)

 

cheers stu

[Offroad Gary]

Mine was built by ronin, 25 1/4" to boltface (24" to front of action), i get 2876 with 38gn varget and 123 amax. Lw barrel. A friend has a 21 1/4" (20" to front of action) kreiger built by prs, same load he's about 50 fps slower. Both insanely accurate, and consistent, hit the same gongs/targets/deer, just different clicks on scope values.

 

Neither is better than the other for what we do with them, but one did cost a little more....and it werent mine.

[baldie]

I remember barrelling a rifle for a friend with a 30" tube, and his actually ran slower than mine did with the same load in my 28" tube. The law of diminishing returns took over.

 

I,ve just built myself a 20" barrelled one, and its shoots amazing well so far. Not ran loads over the chrono, but the usual loads of 123 grain scenars and reloder 15/varget and vhit 540 are producing the bug holes that this cartridge is famous for. Its also famous for NOT producing these groups when run slowly, so i,m guessing that mine must be "up there".

 

The chrono will tell next weekend hopefully.

 

The reason i went with a 6.5 x 47 and not a .260 again , was simply the shorter barrel, smaller case, and smaller powder charge.

[jimmy milnes]

Stu,

 

I would have thought a longer barrel for the 47 but here is a set of posts related to the same subject that might be of interest?

 

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2178378&page=7

 

Brgds

 

Terry

 

thanks for that link terry, ive a 18in 6.5/47 being built as we speak and that along with speaking to folk in the know has put my mind at ease

regards

jimmy

[Tuck]

I remember barrelling a rifle for a friend with a 30" tube, and his actually ran slower than mine did with the same load in my 28" tube. The law of diminishing returns took over.

 

I,ve just built myself a 20" barrelled one, and its shoots amazing well so far. Not ran loads over the chrono, but the usual loads of 123 grain scenars and reloder 15/varget and vhit 540 are producing the bug holes that this cartridge is famous for. Its also famous for NOT producing these groups when run slowly, so i,m guessing that mine must be "up there".

 

The chrono will tell next weekend hopefully.

 

The reason i went with a 6.5 x 47 and not a .260 again , was simply the shorter barrel, smaller case, and smaller powder charge.

 

dave please let us know your findings nxt weekend if you do get the chrony out

[foxing2night]

My 6.5x47 filled with varget with the 123scenars runs at 2914

 

same load but with jlk 130 bullets is around 2900

 

The problem that i found was that different chronographs gave different readings,,,

 

Start loads low at keep a lookout for pressure signs

[Grouse]

The problem that i found was that different chronographs gave different readings,,,

 

I have often wondered about the variation between chronographs, especially when I hear some of the MV quoted for some set ups.

 

It would be an interesting experiment to run the same load through several chronographs and see the results. Also how many fps do users add on to the results due to it not being right at the muzzle? 15, 30, 50??

[brown dog]

The fact that some bloke in the US has built something doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea:

 

I don't get the short barrel take on 6.5x47 at all for a long range plinker.

 

The fact that some 'have' shorter 6.5 barrels doesn't, to my mind, make it a good idea for a long range plinker.

You can cut the barrel on any bolt action centrefire and it'll still work; you just won't be getting all the MV you could.

 

I see 20" .243s and they 'work'...but I'm left thinking..hmmm.

We've bought minimi with 16" barrels and they work - but the loss of power and performance is tangible.

 

So, I suppose the main issue is to define "Why 6.5x47?" If the answer includes 'long range' I'd have thought retention of max MV important, if it's for short range then mv becomes less important.

 

Earlier some deflections were quoted, no idea if they're right, but I think it's always important to turn angular deflections (which look deceptively small) back into miss-distance-at-the-the-target

- the difference given between 2900 and 2700 works out at 22cm more drift for the slower bullet at 800yds for a 10mph wind.

 

Looked at another way, that means you get 2.2cm (lets call it an inch for ease)of 'MISS' per mile per hour of wind with the slower bullet.

 

Is that important to what you're doing? Wind changes by an unnoticed 3mph, your shot goes 3 inches wider of the mark with the slower bullet.

 

Which comes back to 'why 6.5x47?' I'd be extremely peed off with a 6.5x47 only doing 2700 for long range plinking, to me it unpicks the round's raison d'etre -which is to kick the butt of a 308 'further out', not by a smidge but by a country mile -without building a barrel burner.

 

As before, you can shorten any barrel as much as you want and it'll still 'work', but that to my mind, doesn't necessarily make it a good idea for a long range plinking rifle.

[jimmy milnes]

hi BD,

my 18in build is for "stalking" 99% roe out to absolute max 200yrd "if its further away ill "stalk it" and the reason for the short barrel idea is ease of carrying about "for me." it will be moderated so that will ad another approx 2in onto the rifles oal, but the thing is at the min i have a 25/06 which is 4in longer and i find it a bind, tapping on stuff when in woodland and the like, i did try carrying it butt up but didnt like this method either.

so in my case an 800yrd shot into a piece of paper isnt an issue "although may have a go at some point"

 

kind regards

jimmy

[brown dog]

hi BD,

my 18in build is for "stalking" 99% roe out to absolute max 200yrd "if its further away ill "stalk it" and the reason for the short barrel idea is ease of carrying about "for me." it will be moderated so that will ad another approx 2in onto the rifles oal, but the thing is at the min i have a 25/06 which is 4in longer and i find it a bind, tapping on stuff when in woodland and the like, i did try carrying it butt up but didnt like this method either.

so in my case an 800yrd shot into a piece of paper isnt an issue "although may have a go at some point"

 

kind regards

jimmy

 

Jimmy, with your defined purpose for the rifle it makes perfect sense

I'm just trying to say that for someone having a rifle put together for plinking further out it makes less sense

[gbal]

The fact that some bloke in the US has built something doesn't necessarily mean it's a good idea:

 

I don't get the short barrel take on 6.5x47 at all for a long range plinker.

 

The fact that some 'have' shorter 6.5 barrels doesn't, to my mind, make it a good idea for a long range plinker.

You can cut the barrel on any bolt action centrefire and it'll still work; you just won't be getting all the MV you could.

 

I see 20" .243s and they 'work'...but I'm left thinking..hmmm.

We've bought minimi with 16" barrels and they work - but the loss of power and performance is tangible.

 

So, I suppose the main issue is to define "Why 6.5x47?" If the answer includes 'long range' I'd have thought retention of max MV important, if it's for short range then mv becomes less important.

 

Earlier some deflections were quoted, no idea if they're right, but I think it's always important to turn angular deflections (which look deceptively small) back into miss-distance-at-the-the-target

- the difference given between 2900 and 2700 works out at 22cm more drift for the slower bullet at 800yds for a 10mph wind.

 

Looked at another way, that means you get 2.2cm (lets call it an inch for ease)of 'MISS' per mile per hour of wind with the slower bullet.

 

Is that important to what you're doing? Wind changes by an unnoticed 3mph, your shot goes 3 inches wider of the mark with the slower bullet.

 

Which comes back to 'why 6.5x47?' I'd be extremely peed off with a 6.5x47 only doing 2700 for long range plinking, to me it unpicks the round's raison d'etre -which is to kick the butt of a 308 'further out', not by a smidge but by a country mile -without building a barrel burner.

 

As before, you can shorten any barrel as much as you want and it'll still 'work', but that to my mind, doesn't necessarily make it a good idea for a long range plinking rifle.

 

 

Would a gentleman stalk with a minimi-even at full performance?

 

But seriously,nice to read a sensible well informed and articulated discussion between yourself and Jimmy.And of course,you are both correct.A stalking rifle with short barrel keeps clear of more branches-or snow dislodged down your neck (appeals to latte softies like me),but at serious distance you need all the MV you can get.Baldie's experience is odd ,though.2 inches should not produce negative returns-diminishing maybe.My shorty was a 243 rem,then a 1910 M/S in some oddball 6.5 calibre,but not x47,and incredibly light too. No wonder they don't make them anymore.To be fair,both worked fine,and I decided I just didn't need the 6.5 rem mag model.( little fat cartridge-not surprised it didn't catch on.)

Hill Billies are notoriously inbred,incidentally,and some still have 'thutty thutty' rifles.

 

george

[baldie]

The barrel length difference in muzzle velocities could well have been the barrel brands George. Mine was a border archer, my friends , a truflite. Both button rifled however. There must come a barrel length point where the bullet actually starts to decelerate due to to friction though.

 

Having owned a couple of 47,s and built God knows how many, i would categorise its use as the perfect 600 yards cartridge...sure it is more than capable out past 1000 yards, but personally, when i get a customer in for a 6.5 cartridge for 1000 yards, i push them towards the .260 and 140 grain bullets.

 

It is , however, a delightful little cartridge in a 20" barrel. Mine is braked, and it doesn,t lift at all.

 

I would imagine it is a sweet deer round with 129 SST,s.

[gbal]

The barrel length difference in muzzle velocities could well have been the barrel brands George. Mine was a border archer, my friends , a truflite. Both button rifled however. There must come a barrel length point where the bullet actually starts to decelerate due to to friction though.

 

Having owned a couple of 47,s and built God knows how many, i would categorise its use as the perfect 600 yards cartridge...sure it is more than capable out past 1000 yards, but personally, when i get a customer in for a 6.5 cartridge for 1000 yards, i push them towards the .260 and 140 grain bullets.

 

It is , however, a delightful little cartridge in a 20" barrel. Mine is braked, and it doesn,t lift at all.

 

I would imagine it is a sweet deer round with 129 SST,s.

 

Thanks,Dave-but see Garry's strange case of reduced,not just diminishing-fps in his 6.5 284.What's going on in middle England? And of course,you are right about ultimate friction effects-but it would have to be an unfeasibly long barrel...

Yes,600y is just fine for this dandy little cartridge.I rather think the 6mms are indeed capable of competitive performance at longer ranges under ideal conditions,if we were ever to get them.But such conditions won't embarass the 260r (etc) either.Scotland doesn't have this 'sweet' deer species,but the tougher old reds would probably appreciate the 260 ! It's just more bang for your buck!

george