High velocity chamberings known for having exceptional accuracy.

[Max Heat]

The 6RM is for short action then? Maybe I will consider it. I don't have a SA rifle yet.

Is pre-formed 6RM brass available? What about dies?

 

[MudRunner2005]

The 6RM is for short action then? Maybe I will consider it. I don't have a SA rifle yet.

Is pre-formed 6RM brass available? What about dies?

If you want good available brass in a short-action caliber, go with the .260 Remington. Or .260 Rem AI.

 

[Max Heat]

If you want good available brass in a short-action caliber, go with the .260 Remington. Or .260 Rem AI.

But now your talking 6.5mm (or is .260 considered 6.8mm?). At this point I'm pretty much settled on 6mm/.243cal.

 

[Trickymissfit]

A .284 case will not hold that much powder, even with it spilling out of the case mouth...

Maximum H2O capacity for a 6.5-284 case is 68.33 grains. So, that guy was full of crap as a Christmas turkey...Or he didn't know his *** from a hole in the ground. I'm leaning towards the latter. There's alot of idiots out there with reloading equipment, playing with primers and powder...Scary thought, huh?

Ackley never did much of anything with the 284 case, as it was rather uncommon in his era. He didn't think highly of the 6-284 due to it's excessive over bore condition, but did catalog it in his books. He modified the .243 Winchester case to help fight some of it's designed in issues. Wasn't a complete fix, but did help somewhat. He preferred the 6mm Ackley, but interestingly he also liked the 6x55AI quite a lot. He did a 6.5x55 improved round, but often said it was no better than the 6.5x55 Arch. The 6x55 Arch is very similar to the 6mm Vias, and probably the fastest 6mm out there ( almost 4200 fps with a 70 grain bullet), and still group very well. Yet most end users of the Vias went with the 100+ grain bullets. I like the 6BG personally. It's really nothing but a 6BR that head spaces off a .300 Savage gauge. Similar in velocity to the .243, but uses a lot less powder with a much better neck and shoulder design. There are two versions. One is reamed with the Savage taper, and the other uses the .243 taper. Think the latter one is what Bob finally settled on.

The 6.5-284 is popular with long distance shooters these days, but there are a few shooters starting to do some serious experimenting with the 6.5x57AI built off the .257 case. It'll push a 140 grain bullet close to what most get out of the .284 case (3000fps area), but they claim it groups better. There's also a newer design built off the 30-06 case that is 60mm long instead of 64mm long. That one looks very interesting. (also done in 6mm). Myself, I like the 6.5WSM.
gary

 

[elkaholic]

But now your talking 6.5mm (or is .260 considered 6.8mm?). At this point I'm pretty much settled on 6mm/.243cal.

6.8 is .277" and 6.5 is .264".......Rich

 

[Max Heat]

6.8 is .277" and 6.5 is .264".......Rich

I thought the 6.5 is supposed to be .257". I recall someone correcting me on that a year or 2 ago, when I (mistakenly, or was it?) mentioned that .264" was 6.5mm, just as you did.

Using window's calculator, .277 (aka the 270) converts to OVER 7mm. But since the "official" 7mm designation (.284") is actually 7.21mm, if you take away approximately .2mm from that, it DOES actually come out to 6.8mm for .277cal, even though THAT conversion is likewise, not a "true" one.

Could it be that the entire range from .257" through .264" is considered 6.5mm, and the person who originally "corrected" me didn't know that, and hence "wrongly" corrected me?

 

[AZShooter]

Max Heat,

You are going to have to educate yourself instead of asking us endless questions. The internet is a great source of information as are the manufacturer's loading books.

I think the thread you generated with fired brass from an old barrel not sizing to fit a new chamber is appropriate.

Your questions in this thread shouldn't be asked without doing some research on your own.

 

[Jud96]

Max Heat,

You are going to have to educate yourself instead of asking us endless questions. The internet is a great source of information as are the manufacturer's loading books.

I think the thread you generated with fired brass from an old barrel not sizing to fit a new chamber is appropriate.

Your questions in this thread shouldn't be asked without doing some research on your own.

Yea I agree, need to do more research on basic stuff before you get into wildcats, long range hunting, and reloading. It would be much easier and safer for you to do this.

 

[elkaholic]

I thought the 6.5 is supposed to be .257". I recall someone correcting me on that a year or 2 ago, when I (mistakenly, or was it?) mentioned that .264" was 6.5mm, just as you did.

Using window's calculator, .277 (aka the 270) converts to OVER 7mm. But since the "official" 7mm designation (.284") is actually 7.21mm, if you take away approximately .2mm from that, it DOES actually come out to 6.8mm for .277cal, even though THAT conversion is likewise, not a "true" one.

Could it be that the entire range from .257" through .264" is considered 6.5mm, and the person who originally "corrected" me didn't know that, and hence "wrongly" corrected me?

One of the problems you are having is bore and groove diameter. For ex: a .308 rifle is bored .300" and then the rifling is cut to a .308" groove. The metric designation is 7.62mm which is .300" (the groove size) .257" and .264" are obviously only .007" difference so sometimes the designations are not exact but rounded somewhat. The BORE diameter of a .264" is .256" which is 6.5 mm. (thence the old .256 Newton) Anyway, Arizonas' advice is good, you will learn a lot by doing some homework. This may generate more questions, but you will learn more in the process. Good luck...........Rich

 

[Max Heat]

I see what you are saying. The information IS out there, and google IS only a click away. My mouse finger needs to stop being so lazy. Didn't mean to get on your nerves.

 

[Thesound176]

Objective evidence?

Yes, I know where the PPC cartridges are used. However, are there studies showing the superiority of the design?

I've never seen objective evidence for the .308 based cartridges. In my experience the most inaccurate rifle I ever owned was one of these (7mm-08).

I know I'm not going to convince anyone about the urban legends regarding "inherent accuracy." But, no one will convince me it exists without proof.

Must have been your rifle. My T3 in 7-08 shoots sub MOA with factory ammo, and after ladder testing hand loads it only got better. One note... PRVI Partisan can't be considered factory ammo. My 168 gr. Sierra MK bthp are all touching on a bad day at 100 yards, and touching at 200 yards on a good day.

For what it is worth........