Under one inch at 600 yards

[foxing2night]

53 minutes ago, terryh said:

Regardless of the method used and its pros/cons etc. And back to original couple of post.

1” or 1 1/4” group at 600 yards is nothing to sneeze at, I’d be quite happy with either and to me it is getting to the limits of the ‘systems’ involved as in rifles, bullet etc. - taking out the nut behind the butt 😏

But here is a question to Al - and I’m not trying to spark a which is best ‘debate’ free for all - that’s been done to death. Al, you appear to have built a few 6.5’s, so what have you found to be the easiest to tune on the assumption that they all shoot as well/consistently once their load’s been tuned? Or put it another way - which 6.5 cartridge would you choose if spending your own money?

Cheers Terry

Well I would say 6.5x47,, but there again I’ve only used it for the last 11 year’s 😂😂👍

[terryh]

Only 11?? 🤔 😉

[meles meles]

Give 'im a chance, ooman.  x47 is but a babe in arms whereas 6.5x55 Norsqueagian is into its third century of nailing the bull's eye...

[Big Al]

On 12/23/2019 at 1:01 PM, terryh said:

But here is a question to Al - and I’m not trying to spark a which is best ‘debate’ free for all - that’s been done to death. Al, you appear to have built a few 6.5’s, so what have you found to be the easiest to tune on the assumption that they all shoot as well/consistently once their load’s been tuned? Or put it another way - which 6.5 cartridge would you choose if spending your own money?

I find the discussion on 6.5s usually narrows down to the 6.5x47 Lapua and the 6.5 Creedmoor Terry.

If its about killing things then both will do that as good as the other. There is the argument that the Creedmoor has a bit more speed but others would argue the 47 has the edge on accuracy and fast misses are useless.

From a competition perspective I think its easier to separate the two.

I have only built three 6.5x47s with the sole intention to be benchrest rifles and all three have won at both 600 and 1000yds. I hold the 1000yd UKBRA small group and aggregate records with 2.778" and 5.5" and Darrel holds the UKBRA 600yd small group and aggregate records with his recent 0.944" and 1.8", I also built a rifle for Simon Mearns that won its share of comps and held the 600yd small group record at around 1.1" before Darrel lowered it to just over 1" and then again to his current 0.944"

I haven't tested a 47 and a Creedmoor back to back to benchrest standard but the fact that I also dont know of anyone in the US benchrest scene that is shooting a 6.5 Creedmoor with any success suggests to me its been tried and hasn't cut the mustard. The 47 started life as 300yd competition round and then people started stretching its legs right out to 1000yds with success. Ive heard some people say that the 47 isn't big enough to shoot the heavy for caliber 140gr bullets and above. My own experience is that it will shoot the 147gr bullets just fine with the highest levels of accuracy, its ok pushing them harder with a Creedmoor and demonstrating impressive ballistics but if they dont all group closely then its of no interest to me. 

Ive built and shot enough 47s to be certain that when it comes to accuracy and consistency a well tuned one will take some beating. As for the 47 (or any other case for that mater) being this magic caliber that always shoots small and is easy to tune Im not as sure, every barrel is different and all need to be treat as individuals and given what they want as opposed to what you want them to shoot. Good load development and a high degree of shooting consistency is needed to get any load really well tuned and more importantly repeatable. In that respect then I wouldn't say its any easier to tune a 47 than any other well known accurate case.

Here is an example that will always stick in my mind from a couple of years ago.

I had four 6.5x47 rifles to build from scratch, all were using 4 groove .256"/.264" Bartleins from the same batch of barrels, all were 8 twists. Over the course of about three months during the summer all four rifles were given to Simon Mearns for load development, Simon is meticulous and if a gun has the capability to shoot small he will exploit it. The first three all shot 140gr Berger Hybrids (from the same batch) into sub 0.25" five shot aggregate groups. Each was running very similar velocities and the charge weights were within 0.2gr and the seating depths were within 0.005" of each other. The fourth rifle wouldn't shoot that same batch of Bergers for toffee, groups were more around the 0.4" aggregate. A change of bullet on that fourth rifle to Hornady 147 ELDX and that barrel came alive, it joined the other three in the sub 0.25" five shot aggregate club.

Ive got a soft spot for the 6.5x47 so that would be my choice of the 6.5s if ultimate accuracy was your goal, I also think there is enough evidence out there to back my feelings up.

 

[terryh]

Miles,

Concur the 55 is a nice old cartridge, even better when loaded to Skan levels, I used one for years as my deer rifle. But I do not think anyone now chooses a large capacity case if a smaller more efficient owner is available e.g. 6x47/6mmSwiss match vs a 243 and I believe during transition to 308 for TR and folks, mainly US, had the option of still using the 30-06 no one choose to keep using the 30-06. all down to efficiencies. My current sporting rifle is in 6.5x47 as I saw no advantage in the 55 over the 47, very accurate factory rifle and as a bonus shoots target bullets well for sporting rifle comps. 😎

Al,

Thank you for your detailed response. sort of supports my own decision(s) in sticking with the 47, had 4 barrels on my current rifle over quite a few years, different makes on occasions, and it has always shot, easy to get shooting. Had the opportunity to change cartridge with each replacement barrel but when looked could not see a valid reason to swap.

Brgds T

[pengo]

On 12/23/2019 at 11:15 PM, Big Al said:

I find the discussion on 6.5s usually narrows down to the 6.5x47 Lapua and the 6.5 Creedmoor Terry.

If its about killing things then both will do that as good as the other. There is the argument that the Creedmoor has a bit more speed but others would argue the 47 has the edge on accuracy and fast misses are useless.

From a competition perspective I think its easier to separate the two.

I have only built three 6.5x47s with the sole intention to be benchrest rifles and all three have won at both 600 and 1000yds. I hold the 1000yd UKBRA small group and aggregate records with 2.778" and 5.5" and Darrel holds the UKBRA 600yd small group and aggregate records with his recent 0.944" and 1.8", I also built a rifle for Simon Mearns that won its share of comps and held the 600yd small group record at around 1.1" before Darrel lowered it to just over 1" and then again to his current 0.944"

I haven't tested a 47 and a Creedmoor back to back to benchrest standard but the fact that I also dont know of anyone in the US benchrest scene that is shooting a 6.5 Creedmoor with any success suggests to me its been tried and hasn't cut the mustard. The 47 started life as 300yd competition round and then people started stretching its legs right out to 1000yds with success. Ive heard some people say that the 47 isn't big enough to shoot the heavy for caliber 140gr bullets and above. My own experience is that it will shoot the 147gr bullets just fine with the highest levels of accuracy, its ok pushing them harder with a Creedmoor and demonstrating impressive ballistics but if they dont all group closely then its of no interest to me. 

Ive built and shot enough 47s to be certain that when it comes to accuracy and consistency a well tuned one will take some beating. As for the 47 (or any other case for that mater) being this magic caliber that always shoots small and is easy to tune Im not as sure, every barrel is different and all need to be treat as individuals and given what they want as opposed to what you want them to shoot. Good load development and a high degree of shooting consistency is needed to get any load really well tuned and more importantly repeatable. In that respect then I wouldn't say its any easier to tune a 47 than any other well known accurate case.

Here is an example that will always stick in my mind from a couple of years ago.

I had four 6.5x47 rifles to build from scratch, all were using 4 groove .256"/.264" Bartleins from the same batch of barrels, all were 8 twists. Over the course of about three months during the summer all four rifles were given to Simon Mearns for load development, Simon is meticulous and if a gun has the capability to shoot small he will exploit it. The first three all shot 140gr Berger Hybrids (from the same batch) into sub 0.25" five shot aggregate groups. Each was running very similar velocities and the charge weights were within 0.2gr and the seating depths were within 0.005" of each other. The fourth rifle wouldn't shoot that same batch of Bergers for toffee, groups were more around the 0.4" aggregate. A change off bullet on that fourth rifle to Hornady 147 ELDX and that barrel came alive, it joined the other three in the sub 0.25" five shot aggregate club.

Ive got a soft spot for the 6.5x47 so that would be my choice of the 6.5s if ultimate accuracy was your goal, I also think there is enough evidence out there to back my feelings up.

 

Hi there Al. Just to add my two penneth to the above statements of records held by the 6.5x47 Lapua, I can also agree that they really are everything and more you can expect in terms of accuracy, as I hold the current UK Benchrest record for the highest score at 1,000 yards, with a 98 ex 100, with 11 x V-Bulls, again this was done with my 6.5x47.

[JamieDickinson]

Holy Smokes! That is impressive! How long have you been shooting for? I fear I'll never end up that accurate!

[lambsey]

Nice Shooting mate 

 

[Fifty_seven]

Excellent shooting!

[VarmLR]

Great shooting Darrel!  That's quite an achievement and one to be proud of.

 

I'm scratching my head over a UK record for factory rifles (open class??) set at Bisley a few years back where a chap with a Tikka TAC A1 in 260 Rem shot 2.7", which I thought was remarkable then for a non-benchrest rifle, but your group puts that into some perspective!