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
6.5 PRC 156 load development
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="BrentM" data-source="post: 2173712" data-attributes="member: 61747"><p>Never said it wasn't. The problem is that everyone claims it is a massive change it's not unless you are seating on the extreme side which is what the article refers too. I've done the testing and know that .050 is not doing much in the prc. Sure .250 is worthy of consideration and exactly why the Winchester got the Norma treatment. I'm all ears if anyone has the numbers to show .050, actually gained x over y in the prc. Would love to see someone else actually take the time to do it like I did. In the end, I see zero reason to run anything else than a 2.950 coal and short action until proven otherwise. I'm not</p><p>Trying to be difficult, just want someone step away from an article being taken out of context about minimal seating depth changes. Now, if you run a long action and a 240 throat, yeah now you have a lot to work with over a 188</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BrentM, post: 2173712, member: 61747"] Never said it wasn’t. The problem is that everyone claims it is a massive change it’s not unless you are seating on the extreme side which is what the article refers too. I’ve done the testing and know that .050 is not doing much in the prc. Sure .250 is worthy of consideration and exactly why the Winchester got the Norma treatment. I’m all ears if anyone has the numbers to show .050, actually gained x over y in the prc. Would love to see someone else actually take the time to do it like I did. In the end, I see zero reason to run anything else than a 2.950 coal and short action until proven otherwise. I’m not Trying to be difficult, just want someone step away from an article being taken out of context about minimal seating depth changes. Now, if you run a long action and a 240 throat, yeah now you have a lot to work with over a 188 [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
6.5 PRC 156 load development
Top