200 grain 6.5 revisited (Attention Elkaholic, and Hammer)

[RockyMtnMT]

Here he is.

 

[Pdvdh]

Here he is.View attachment 216280

Very nice, and congrats.

I could be wrong, but that 'lope looks more dead than most!

 

[HARPERC]

The other 2 bucks from the trip scored better, but fellow who checked the teeth from F&G thinks this one is older. Not many presenting the jaws for analysis. The staff was very helpful, and interested. Good info for management. Just a plug to do it if you can. I was reluctant initially to deal with government, but if you can, it was really easily done.

The trophy in the picture is the man behind me, and another friend.

If I look unhappy in the picture, it took 2 of them to get me in behind, and up after the picture.

Good people make it work.

 

[HARPERC]

.......Best of luck and God Speed on recovery. An amazing project............

It's a different direction than I've gone before-I hope your project comes to life!

 

[swe123]

A trophy and hunt to remember forever!

 

[Mike D Texas]

I may have missed it throughout the thread but why were the 200 grain bullets unsuccessful?

 

[HARPERC]

.......I may have missed it throughout the thread but why were the 200 grain bullets unsuccessful?........

I titled the thread poorly. There was a thread reminiscing about an original Barnes lead core bullet. 6.5 200 grains. It raised the question of how heavy/long could a mono 6.5 be made to perform. Rather than hijack that thread, this one was started.

Steve put together a 168, but found issues of dynamic stability. The extreme's seem to reveal things, being a project of education/entertainment we switched gears to drive the 124 hard.

Previous experience with the cartridge was less than desirable due to lack of a suitable powders. So far time seems to have resolved that issue.

 

[Mike D Texas]

I titled the thread poorly. There was a thread reminiscing about an original Barnes lead core bullet. 6.5 200 grains. It raised the question of how heavy/long could a mono 6.5 be made to perform. Rather than hijack that thread, this one was started.

Steve put together a 168, but found issues of dynamic stability. The extreme's seem to reveal things, being a project of education/entertainment we switched gears to drive the 124 hard.

Previous experience with the cartridge was less than desirable due to lack of a suitable powders. So far time seems to have resolved that issue.

I guess the all copper mono bullets don't allow for a good balance due to the length? Would be nice if some type of heavy metal could be in the front of the bullet to help balance it out. I wonder if a tip like the Hornady A-tip but with a heavier metal like tungsten would work.

 

[HARPERC]

There are a variety of variations to contemplate. A different material in the tip could work, but I think simpler is the better way to go, meaning one piece. Something that can be completed in the machine itself.

Eliminate the the HP might be an option for flight, but likely ruins any potential for hunting.

Hollow point the rear to change balance?

Move in smaller increments, something just a bit longer than the existing 137 HH?

Some place along the way it was stated that a 1-6 ratio, caliber to length, was about the limit. All the current "heavy" mono 6.5's that I've looked at fit roughly there, and end up about 140 grains.

Steve's currently playing with shape for other purposes, perhaps that change in ogive will permit a longer/heavier 6.5?

 

[Short Case]

Been there, done that since 2012 with the 6.5 Prometheus at 105 gr H20 and still doing it with the 6.5 Skuldryl at 110 gr H20 with Peterson and Lapua brass, the coolest 6.5mm cartridge on the planet, 6.5 SKULDRYL
View attachment 199488View attachment 199489

Have you ever shot a Deer or Elk with 6.5 Skuldryl and 150 Match King, I was wondering if they would open up, that bullet has some good numbers