6.5x47 Lap Bullet choice

[gbal]

Interesting conundrum !

If Amax is legal for shooting deer then by definition it's 'expanding' under the 'deer act' - yes/no?

If 'yes' then it would need to be entered onto your FAC and only sold to you if you had permission to squire expanding bullets/ammunition in your FAC - yes/no??

Think this has been a subject of significant discussion before?

T

Terry,absolutely-it keeps coming up,and no surprise.Conumdrum indeed. I have no direct interest-ie dont use Amax on deer.

 

Put slightly differently,Unless it's "designed to expand" it seems not legal,and there is the rub- somettmes a succinct well intentioned legal phrase is confounded by subsequent technology. The idea,I'm sure was to have soft point/hollow point bullets for deer in the older designs-ie that 'mushroom' progressively on moderate,controlled penetration -and very effective too,if used on appropriate quarry.

But 'hollow point' has some BC advantages for 'target bullets' too,which are not designed to 'expand'-at all.Some apparently do-and very well,and A max might be good examples.

So we can have 'hollow point' bullets that are not designed to expand (much though I'd have liked some to do so on paper and clip the xring :-) .Hornady et al, understandably are somewhat coy on this-not recommending some 'hollow points' (Amax) for large game-but they are supplying the US market,not priarily pandering to the different niceties of the UK legislation/market.

(a solid bullet with a hole drilled into the point is not legally a 'hollow point" by (manufacture's design,surely?) In "sporting" use,seem more like Dumb- dumbs-and don't work effectively)-key issue is,'not so designed" by manufacturer.

 

The 'ballistic tip' muddies the already murky waters more-they have to have some 'hollowpoint' for the plastic tipto fit into,but may/not be designed as hunting bullets in US (and deer ok in UK,on that criterion if they are so designed.)

 

It must be of concern to those in UK who find excellent deer performance,with some bullet,yet lack of complete confidence in the transparency of it's legal status...very understandable,but wholly an unintended consequence of the generally sensible Deer Act/FAC legislation (which are not exactly the same..). attempting to minimise improper bullet use.

 

Shooters hardly help matters when refering to 'frangible' bullets...has no legal status,but many such 'varmint' bullets are simply inappropriate for large quarry....a spray of lead in meat also raises health issues,even if game is somehow harvested(see 'lead free")

 

cf 17 rim fires are not legal,but not by aforethought decision-at the time of legislation,there were nonesuch in UK....22 was specified.Personally,I doubt that legislation meant to make life difficult for stalkers with the classic 6.5 M/S either-a rifle/ammo with an exemplary record of UK hill stalking; a case of

"the greater good" mostly?

 

I have a lot a sympathy with both/all sides-not just ethical shooters-some bullets work very well,though seldom uniquely well,yet some uncertainty may remain,as to legal status. At least ,there are unambiguously acceptable alternatives,and 'convenience' has seldom been a sufficient reason in the short term...nor a black ball to pursuing the ...'hobby' ( I understand for some ' football is indeed more important than religion,"but you get the point-bullet specs do not prevent legal deer shooting).

 

These are the sort of issues-among others- that I was reminded of this week,when my BASC sub was renewed-we need that kind of sensible,balanced and non partisan organisation to progress such issues. And advise us meanwhile,of best practice at least.I hope some of the £74 (? I don't check/begrudge) goes to sorting this out,at least as accepted best practice,that allows conscientious stalkers to do their thing).

 

gbal

[MJR]

Gary, as well you know this is not about doing a three day course. This is about specific information regarding the legal use of Amax bullets on Deer.

You were quite willing to publicly disclose the advice given to you from the BDS, I have asked for verification and now you are trying to divert my request with some nonsense about doing a course. I am already suitably qualified to cull/stalk Deer and I currently use SST bullets to do it.

So can you supply the said guidance or not? A simple yes or no is all that is required.

[baldie]

These are simple FACTS.

 

A-max are legally classified in the UK as non expanding bullets [ its completely irrelevant whether they do or not ] That makes them section 1 and able to be posted and used on a range.

 

If they were classified as expanding, they would be section 5 and would have to be entered onto a users certificate. Plus, they could not be posted, nor used on a range.

 

I do not know the deer act. If it stated expanding ammunition must be used, then legally, A-max would contravene the act.

 

The only points the law will allow are the facts. We all know what bullet will do what, but in law, its black and white.

 

Bullets are categorised for sale into section 1 and section 5, its as simple as that.

 

Can someone put into layman terms what the act actually says, as I did not understand the point made above on the act.

[The_Dogge]

Interesting conundrum !

 

If Amax is legal for shooting deer then by definition it's 'expanding' under the 'deer act' - yes/no?

Surely there is no such thing, the word "expanding" does not occur in the deer act, the wording is there: "soft-nosed or hollow-nosed bullet", as long as it's one of those you are ok.

 

The "designed to expand" thing is from a totally different piece of legislation with no link to the deer act. There is no direct link between the two pieces of legislation, while it would be logical to us to equate the two conditions, that is not the legal position, they are two completely independent definitions. (Caveat; I am not a lawyer).

[Offroad Gary]

Gary, as well you know this is not about doing a three day course. This is about specific information regarding the legal use of Amax bullets on Deer.

You were quite willing to publicly disclose the advice given to you from the BDS, I have asked for verification and now you are trying to divert my request with some nonsense about doing a course. I am already suitably qualified to cull/stalk Deer and I currently use SST bullets to do it.

So can you supply the said guidance or not? A simple yes or no is all that is required.

Mike, the answer is I can, but I choose not to. lets leave it at that. next time I'm at Diggle (or some other comp/place) i'll bring the original for you to look at if you're there but I wont be circulating any copies.

 

I'll even show you the video I have on my phone of the BDS lecturers answering my questions on the matter, but that's my get out of jail card, not yours.

[Offroad Gary]

it would be easier if the deer act were amended to read "thou shalt not shoot deer with FMJ ammo", because that's what it really means.

[baldie]

"soft nose or hollow point bullet "

 

If thats all it says then thats a right can of worms. It means anyone using a plastic tipped bullet of any kind is breaking the act. It also means that sierra match kings and lap scenars are legal to shoot deer with.

 

A ridiculous situation, and given the massive changes in the deer population, and the amount of new people talking up stalking since the act was drafted, its high time it was overhauled.

 

I dont envy you stalkers.

 

The whole laws relating to shooting are one giant cluster**k

[gbal]

Gary,maybe it did,but would it now?

 

V maximus varmit grenades?

 

The point (sic) is that highly frangible varmint bullets are not suitable for most deer species-how to legislate against their use?

While such advances are probably good for small varmint shooters,the use of such bullets for larger quarry species would be...contentious. And rightly so.

 

It's just not that easy to get right in a phrase....or a list....FMJ should be excluded,but.....?

 

gbal

[gbal]

Dave, Is it not that the technology of bullet manufacture has become more varied-rather than the number of possible quarry?

After all,a soft point 160g 6.5 would not be any more of a handicap now than it was 100 years ago,for deer stalking in UK.

 

Perhaps the Acts (Deer and Firearms) are directed ,if not completely coordinated ,towards public and species safety and best dispatch respectively. Perhaps not with complete success either,retrospectively.

 

Hindsight is hard to predict. (as far as we know hinds can't see bullet construction :-)

 

gbal

[force64]

Lets not forget that the Barnes TTSX have a plastic tip and they are classed as expanding. Where I help cull fallow we have to use non toxic so choice is limited.

 

We have found that the TTSX do not expand very much and go virtually straight through. I have now stopped using them in the 6.5.

 

I now use the 308 win with RWS Bionic Yellow. These expand very well, they also have a plastic tip and shoot extremely accurately in my Sako 85.

 

Andy

[adriandavidb]

Lets not forget that the Barnes TTSX have a plastic tip and they are classed as expanding. Where I help cull fallow we have to use non toxic so choice is limited.

 

We have found that the TTSX do not expand very much and go virtually straight through. I have now stopped using them in the 6.5.

 

I now use the 308 win with RWS Bionic Yellow. These expand very well, they also have a plastic tip and shoot extremely accurately in my Sako 85.

 

Andy

Might give the Bionic Yellow a go; my Sako 85 shoots 150 grain cone points by the same manufacturer extremely badly! Sierra Game Kings do 1/4 moa in the same rifle; wonder why?

[terryh]

Dogge

 

That is why I put 'expanding' in ' '

 

I wrote my two sentences specifically to point out the problems with what's in the 'deer act' which gives reference to soft or hollow point bullets i.e. 'expanding' and what's on your FAC etc.etc.

 

But as Dave pints out Amax are target bullets and not classified as expanding.

 

If is a bit questionable at best - yes?

 

This could go round and round, bottom line, do as you see fit, caveat emptor (sp?)

 

Terry

 

Terry

[MJR]

So Gary, it turns out you have a piece of paper and a video of 'a man that said I could' use a legally classified target bullet for Deer.

Yes I'd like to see them both and good luck with using you your 'get out of jail card' as justification of your actions should you fall foul of the law.

[FGYT]

Dogge

 

 

But as Dave pints out Amax are target bullets and not classified as expanding.

 

 

Terry

 

Terry

 

As i posted earlier the Deer act section Expanding is not mentioned at all

 

the Only bullets allowed are Soft point or hollow point

 

so in some ways any Tipped bullet dosn't comply not even V Max unless you consider the plastic End as a Soft point however its not described as such

 

so you could have a hollow point bullet that does not expand thats deer legal

 

I use SGK 140gn and 130 gn one is described as SPBT (Soft point Boat Tail) one is HPBT (Hollow Point Boat Tail)

 

So all Bullets/Ammo designed to expand predictably is Section 5

 

but not all Section 5 bullets/ammo is necessarily Deer legal

[FGYT]

So Gary, it turns out you have a piece of paper and a video of 'a man that said I could' use a legally classified target bullet for Deer.

Yes I'd like to see them both and good luck with using you your 'get out of jail card' as justification of your actions should you fall foul of the law.

I have an Email from My Fire arms Dept confirming from an FEO that its ok for me to shoot Outside the conditions/restrictions of my FAC i.e. I can shoot on land not cleared for my caliber ( ive a closed ticket) as long as im accompanied by some one with an open ticket who has permission

 

I would rather believe in Unicorns than rely on that in a court of law

[Offroad Gary]

So Gary, it turns out you have a piece of paper and a video of 'a man that said I could' use a legally classified target bullet for Deer.

Yes I'd like to see them both and good luck with using you your 'get out of jail card' as justification of your actions should you fall foul of the law.

I also use sst's (same performance as amax), prohunters, tsx's (they dont kill quickly) and 50gn .224 cal varmint bullets on muntjac (legal, but possibly not the most ethical in the eyes of some).

[banus02]

gentle men ,it is up to the individual to comply or not to the laws of the land,many people break or bend the law every day providing the animal concerned is killed as humanely as possible i.dont see this as a problem as we know most firearms laws are a mess.so if it works for you and you know the law you take your choice,

[MJR]

Wrong. It is the responsibility of the individual to comply with the law.

[terryh]

As i posted earlier the Deer act section Expanding is not mentioned at all

 

the Only bullets allowed are Soft point or hollow point

 

so in some ways any Tipped bullet dosn't comply not even V Max unless you consider the plastic End as a Soft point however its not described as such

 

so you could have a hollow point bullet that does not expand thats deer legal

 

I use SGK 140gn and 130 gn one is described as SPBT (Soft point Boat Tail) one is HPBT (Hollow Point Boat Tail)

 

So all Bullets/Ammo designed to expand predictably is Section 5

 

but not all Section 5 bullets/ammo is necessarily Deer legal

That is my point (no pun intended) soft and hollow point implies 'expanding' = not plastic tipped (but there are a slew of plastic tipped 'expanding' bullets = it is not clear EXCEPT Amax are not considered expanding otherwise folks without that stipulation on their FAC could not purchase them.

 

Yes, if they are designed to expand e.g. Vmax, SGK etc. then they are section 5

 

Back in a big circle, if you are happy to use Amax then do so, I'm not your keeper nor will be involved in any court case (how ever unlikely that may be)

 

T

[maltbuck]

Gentlemen,

 

When I logged on this evening and saw 43 replies I thought great I will have some really useful info.

 

Much as I enjoy reading various posts on Uk Varminting, I will point out that the original post was was posted in the target and F-class section and referred to the Scenar and the Berger bullets.

 

I did not want to start the age old argument about A-max and their use on deer.

However, as has been pointed out, they are legally classed as non expanding, in a court of law the judge will refer to their legal classification to draw his/her judgement.

The judge may "call" for a review of their status and potentially the Deer Act, but the judgement will be made in light of the current Act and bullet classification.

 

Would you want to put your FAC at risk and potentially your freedom?

 

Please can we close the arguments, and either get back to the OP or close the thread.

 

Many thanks to those who have replied to the original question.

 

ATB,

 

MB

[terryh]

MB

 

apologies for detour!

 

re. your OP the 123g Scanar has always worked well over R15 in my '47' but if I was going to be going to 1000 yards on a regular basis I would look at something different.

 

Biggest 'problem' would be starting with a bullet and powder I knew I could get hold of for the foreseeable future, Scanars are no problem but I'm looking at an alternative to R15 when my current stock runs out - a Vit or Swiss offering perhaps?

 

T

[terryh]

MB,

 

You've probably seen this but the 6mmBR section re. the 6.5x47 has some ideas? : http://www.accurateshooter.com/cartridge-guides/65x47/

 

T

[maltbuck]

Thanks for the replies Terry.

 

Yes I have seen the article and it does give some very useful info.

 

When you said if you were going out to 1000 yards you would use something else, did you mean a heavier bullet, or did you mean a different calibre? Calibre wise I am fairly set on 6.5x47 but do keep on derive about a 6.5x284 using a Berger 140 hybrid or 140 scenar.

 

The rifle will definitely be a 6.5mm though.

 

ATB,

 

MB.

[terryh]

MB,

 

Actually it is for you to answer ? what do you want from the rifle? If say you are looking for something better than a 308 then the 6.5x47 will be a step up. If though you are looking to shoot F-class open then there would be better cartridges?

 

Be honest with yourself, how many times a year are you going to shoot 1000 yards? If only a few times a year and the rest of your shooting is at shorter ranges then the 47's nice. If I was going to shoot predominantly at 1000 I'd use my 7mmSAUM (as well as my 47 ) If I was going to try to shoot say F Class competitively I'd see what the flavour of the day was - 300 WSM??

 

If you are having a rifle built then build it to do what you want?

 

Brgds Terry

 

T

[gbal]

+1 to Terry's advice.

 

The 308 is a decent jack of all trades,but master of rather fewer. It is a decent allround stalking cartridge,especiallly if larger quarry are taken on.(UK large,I mean).

As a Target cartridge,it recoils too much for it's drop and drift,and is really getting out of it's (and your) comfort zone ballistically by 850 yards,with most loadings/bullets.

The 6.5s vary a tad,but are ballistically better,and shoot just a bit easier (less recoil-it's not a mach thing,it's a rifle control issue). A better proposition for most shooters,to sub 1000y and sub top competition.

 

As Terry says though,while you may shoot them reasonably well at long range,you won't be very often competitive-which may/not matter. "I can get to 1000 easy" is simply not the same statement as "I can shoot 1/2 moa at 1000y".Most cartidges-even the 223-will put holes on a 1000y target,unless the wind is extreme,the issue is where on target....that is where the current favourites score heavily-the 7 "mags" -and even some 'straight' 7s are the cartridges that perform considerably better-in heavy rigs,of course,not much use for anything other than well rested long range target shooting.

The little 6BR is an exception,if you always shoot in benign wind free conditions-it is so shootable,it can give the bigger cartidges a run for their money. The 6.5s are -well in between-and a good compromise,but not,as Tery says,if you shoot long range predominantly. If 600 and the occasional fun day at 1000,fine -you won't win at the longer range.

The 6.5x284 was the 'standard' for LR benchrest etc until the light mag 7s became popular,and the superior ballistics of such 7s was recognised (though it wasn't new-cf the7rem Mag as hunting rifle,and Warren Page's advocacy of the then 7s way back in the sixties).

Of course,the price for such performance has always been short (er) barrel life....still is.

Here,yet again,is the guide,for potential LR cartridges,and what they need to match the 6.5x284 's drift at 1000y (which is 70 inches as below): it is a revealing set of ballistic must haves,not often achieved by claimants:

 

224 90G bullet BC .502 3270 fps recoil will be 6.67ftlb

 

6mm 115g BC.585 3065 fps recoil 7.63 weight needed 13.5lb

 

6.5 142g BC .565 2950 fps recoil 9.07 weight needed 16.29lb

 

7mm 175 BC 2800 recoil 10.70 weight needed 18.5lb

 

308 220g BC .627 2650fpsrecoil 13.5 weight needed 23.2 lb

 

These are calibers,not specific cartridges-except for the 6.5 which is close to the 6.5x284 standard.

Each variable can be tweaked-within limits-to compensate for another,a bit;but somehow the above has to be matched.

I have included the rifle weight needed for parity (shootability?). Ther will have to be considerable compromises/changes somewhere for the heavier calibres (esp 308) as the weight is over most competition limits....it gets real tough to meet these parameters...

...that's why the 7mms are so dominant,the 224 a non starter,and the 308 not for those with dentures.

The better 6.5 (iex284) isn't too far off....but others are pushed hard indeed...hence 'pressure sign' are important...maybe ok in strong custom actions,but at what price?

 

Don't let this put you off at all,just be realistic about what you want-and can get,and remember,on paper is one thing,consistently in the v bull is quite another,as is 5 inch groups at 1000y. Some cartridges,in suitable rifles,give you more chance/hope-eventually expectation - when you can read the wind,as they they are better than the 70 inch baseline from the getgo.

Pure enjoyment,however,has several other components...and most any reasonable cartridge/rifle will clang 2moa gongs at 600yards-here is the 308,excellent shooter,1/2 moa ammo,hits on 10 inch :

 

600 yards 99%;

800 " 79%

1000 " 40%

 

The medium 6.5 (X47,Creedmore,260rem- and these necked to 6mm are the current favourites of the gong shooting 'precision' shooters- 500y+/- 200y,1-2 moa targets,irregular shooting positions and mainly first shot counts),which is very relevant for the 'club' shooter-they are enough,at those ranges.Not 1000 though.

 

Ding,dong ...what fun,great hobby.

 

gbal