.....This is true (currently) but if Blackjack can make a 131 at .339 b.c., they can make a 140 in 6.5 at .350!!
Which is how it's supposed to move forward, more see-saw than linear. One player raising their game, causing others to up their's.
Everybody has their preference, all can be made to work. I haven't been a fan of .257 caliber, but certainly a fan of Blackjack for moving this forward. Well done guys!
I thought he compared the flattest shooting combos?One if the lowest in class 140 6.5 bullets vs the 2 highest in class 6mm and 25 cal bullets. Not a fair comparison, but I also get the berger is the most popular. If you put the 150 smk in the sst I think the 6.5 will be whistling a different tune. Not to take away from the 131 it's an impressive bullet.
Not even the best bc 140 vs the others. The rebated dtac has a better bc and a much easier bullet to tune in 6mm. The added mass and bc of the heavy 6.5s give them a better down range performance envelope as well.I thought he compared the flattest shooting combos?
If he wanted flat shooting to 1000 then the 140 berger is definitely not the best choice. A 130 would probably be flatter. I think he was just going with an popular bullet which just happens to have a low in class bc . But they work so people use them and there's nothing wrong with that. It's just if your going to compare rounds like that you have to make it apples to apples. IMO that's not apples to apples in comparison. If you take a 6mm sst, 25 sst, and a 6.5 sst, all loaded to full potential they're all going to be so close just toss a coin. I believe the 6.5 will still have a very slight advantage over range, but probably not enough so you'd notice the difference.I thought he compared the flattest shooting combos?
Also, I think we should make a .257 Shermanized (low taper, shorter neck, 40º shoulder) version of the 6.5 Grendel with the 131 ACE for LR varmints and deer hunting, and target shooting with excellent barrel life. Ballistically it should be far superior to the 6.5 Grendel with the 130 and heavier bullets.
If you do, I'll be more than happy to rebarrel my 6.5 Grendel DMR for testing. I got all the right powder and stuff. All I'd need is a new barrel chambered in the new cartridge, but headspaced for a 6.5 Grendel type-II bolt (.136" headspacing).
Good luck, that is a long bullet; It will crowd your powder space.Also, I think we should make a .257 Shermanized (low taper, shorter neck, 40º shoulder) version of the 6.5 Grendel with the 131 ACE for LR varmints and deer hunting, and target shooting with excellent barrel life. Ballistically it should be far superior to the 6.5 Grendel with the 130 and heavier bullets.
If you do, I'll be more than happy to rebarrel my 6.5 Grendel DMR for testing. I got all the right powder and stuff. All I'd need is a new barrel chambered in the new cartridge, but headspaced for a 6.5 Grendel type-II bolt (.136" headspacing).
Don't you know that how bullet comparisons work? Look at any 6.5 creed vs 308 tableNot even the best bc 140 vs the others. The rebated dtac has a better bc and a much easier bullet to tune in 6mm. The added mass and bc of the heavy 6.5s give them a better down range performance envelope as well.
Do you work for nosler by chance?Don't you know that how bullet comparisons work? Look at any 6.5 creed vs 308 table
According to field testing results, they are saying .339 now.BJ is stating .330 G7?
130 VLD 6.5 sst @3300'Here is a comparison of the Sherman Short Tactical cartridges running at or near top velocity using the flattest shooting bullet combos which might be used in competition. You can draw your own conclusions to other chamberings or for hunting applications. These chamberings are all under 2.9" coal.View attachment 116231
This is true, but in a bolt-action platform it would shine.Good luck, that is a long bullet; It will crowd your powder space.
This 2506 shooter would also like some high BC bullets.Hmmm, I believe there once was a man that repeatedly stated that a heavy high BC .257 caliber would whoop up on a 6mm 110, and a 6.5mm 140, and you just proved that all the way out to 1000 yards...
You basically just disproved the thought lines of the entire bullet market "geniuses" for the last 30+ years that refused to bring .25 cal technology up to everything else.
Thank you for proving that Rich. Vindication by hard evidence is a very sweet victory indeed...Especially for us 1/4-bore shooters.