Throat a saum with the same 195 freebore as the prc so usable case capacity is apples to apples. Once that's happens the saum has 3gr more powder space. This will equate into about 100-150fps more velocity. My saum has a 150fb for 150smk and 156 Berger bullets, 7.5 twist. I really like this rifle! I also got my dad a Havak in 6.5 prc. It's a shooter but handloads are 177 fps behind my rifle, there is a 2" barrel difference. This is fps comparison at the accuracy node with RL26.
6.5 prc vs 6.5 GAP
- Thread starter DJ Fergus
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Bigeclipse
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,969
That is exactly why SAUM will not win in longevity compared to PRC. You have to do "too" much to get the awesome speeds. PRC will hit shelves with fast over the counter ammo and factory rifles built to spec.
BrentM
Well-Known Member
So both are handloads. What are the barrel lengths and speeds of each with a 156?
Well the prc doesn't have any "awesome" speed, it's a short action 6.5x284. Gap was the original designer of the 6.5 gap 4S, they advertise 2000+ rounds accurate barrel life. The couldn't get anyone to persue saami approval so they talked to Hornady and ruger and built a 6.5 version of the ruger compact mag and went and got saami approval and it became the prc. Had someone been willing to pay Remington royalties on the saum parent, the PRC wouldn't exist. Idc what you think, if performance is what you're after go saum. If factory ammo is all you want to shoot go PRC. There are factory options for the saum as well. The PRC works, but the only thing it does better is availability!
6.5 prc is pushing a 147 eldm at 2938, 24" 1:8 tube with 268 rounds.
6.5 saum 150 smk @ 3117fps, 26" tube 1:7.5 with 96 rounds on it.
I have a few boxes of 156 but haven't worked them up yet.
BrentM
Well-Known Member
I ran 140 vlds in my saum, 26" at 3200 using retumbo. When I ran the 140 at book max in my 22" PRC it was 3115. I'd didn't go over book in the testing. Pretty similar.
Sounds like that PRC has a slightly slow barrel. I am seeing similar numbers with a 22" but have not finalized a load. I tested 140 vld and eld, 143, 147, and working on 156's. The 156's are showing 2900-2950 currently. 147's are about the same ironically. The difference in bearing surface is about .035-.040 thou. As a result I think the 156 might be a better choice for hunting.
In the end, I would think most people are going to see 50-100 fps more in the saum and the prc is going to be 50-100 more than the 6.5-284. I have multiple 6.5-28's and enjoy that cartridge a lot. However, I spent the coin on a custom sa so I am playing with the prc as a result for hunting and then swap barrels for PRS comp to a 6mm variant like the BRA.
I'm running reloader 26 out of a 26" barrel. With brass from once fired federal factory ammo. I've run it up over 3000fps before I saw traditional pressure signs.
I assume 2938 is your accuracy node for the 147? Just checking cause that's where I found a node for the 147 also
Indeed, accury node. Who cares if it goes 3150 with 2" groups right! Only accurate rifles are interesting to me!
Right on Brother, My groups @ 2940 do occasionally open up to 2" but that's at 500yds. I can live with it.
NeoConShooter
Well-Known Member
When I was loading the .264 the 140 grain bullet left a M 700's 26" BBL at 2950 in true FPS. It was advertised at 3200, but as far as I knew, it never came close to that in real life. It was sure medicine for elk out to about 400 yards or so, but I was a very young man back then and did not know any better.
NeoConShooter
Well-Known Member
I was never able to shoot groups that tight at those types of ranges as a civilian with any of three Rem 40-X rifles before I turned 18. While the lighter rifle would group at, or under 3/4" at 100, the groups opened up at 500 to around 5-6" but the two big guns, a 6.5/.300 and a .30/378 shot into less than an inch at 100 and >6" at 500. They both shot into a foot or less at 1000 yards. In the ASA I used an M-21, or M-24 bolt gun with LCM issue 7.62X51 NATO match ammo. IIRC, it used a 172 grain bullet at about 2600 FPS. I favored the -21 with the standard 147 grain bullet at 2810 FPS because it was much easier to get hits at ranges well under 500 yards/meters most of the time. While my new gun used to put 5 Berger 190 VLDs into under an inch at 100, the best I have done in the last twenty years is a schooch under 4" at 500 meters for four out of five shots.
NeoConShooter
Well-Known Member
"Traditional" pressure signs are not reliable indicators of true pressure!!! You seem to spend huge money of guns, ammo and reloading gear, but are two cheap to get an Ohler with piezo pressure gage to find out the true MV and pressure! Anything less is not reliable. You can glue the sensor head under the BBL of any gun and lead the wires out between the BBL and stock when you need to know how hot your load is! You can have a head for every gun and pay to have it calibrated true. Otherwise you are just guessing! Before you ever bought the second rifle, you should have bought the pressure-chrono! Do not try to sell me a Radar either. I use to work on them in the Army when there were not enough Commies to go around before the IFTs volunteered to fill the void. Live Calibration is everything and you can't afford to pay them to come out to your range to do it right. So Radar is iffy at best and incandescent screens are the only practical way to get true numbers from a calibrated chrono!
Have you ever blown a primer, leaked gas around a primer or ruptured a case in any fashion?
