New Hornady 6.5 PRC

[MudRunner2005]

My question is... Why another 3000 fps 6.5?
Why not a modern 7mm a efficient 7mm 162 ELD @3000 fps in a short action would be great!!

Because everyone wants a piece of the pie that is whatever the current trend is... And right now, it's the short-action 6.5's... 2015/2016 it was the super-6.5's like the .26 Nosler and 6.5x300 Wby. It will become something else sooner or later.

 

[Creedmoor shooter]

My question is... Why another 3000 fps 6.5?
Why not a modern 7mm a efficient 7mm 162 ELD @3000 fps in a short action would be great!!

I was thinking the same thing. No need for another 6.5

 

[Predator 22]

My guess this is a deal between Ruger and Hornady to do a middle of the pack magnum 6.5mm that they don't have to give any credit to George (6.5gap) or Remington for the parent case (saum). My $.02

 

[elkaholic]

I know a lot of you get this, but for those who do not, here is an example:
I just don't understand why major manufacturers don't get this! More likely they do, but won't change for reasons unknown to me. We keep talking about why the available rifles in a short action configuration do not match up with cartridges they are chambering for, and the need for the long bullets being used in todays world. Another way to put it is the COAL for a PROPERLY loaded round would not fit in factory magazines (and they do not)! The 6.5 PRC holds around 66 grains of H20, but when the boat tail, and approx. .165" of bullet body intrude into the case, you loose a couple more grains of capacity more than when the bullet is loaded properly (should be just the boat tail, or most of it, into the case below the neck) This is why the SAUM, WSM, 6.5 REM MAG, and others are leaving performance on the table and why so many people have to single load to reach their potential. Below is a rough sketch of what I am describing. The PRC measurements are approx., but very close. The drawings are very close to scale. You can easily see what I am getting at.

 

[elkaholic]

My guess this is a deal between Ruger and Hornady to do a middle of the pack magnum 6.5mm that they don't have to give any credit to George (6.5gap) or Remington for the parent case (saum). My $.02

You may well be correct on that one!.......Rich

 

[Jud96]

Looks like a pretty cool round. I wish they would have made the O.A.L. a little shorter, similar to the Creedmoor, so it will fit and feed in a SA Remington without the bullets being seated so and deep taking up powder space. I think Hornady should have standardized something like the GAP 4s or the Sheman Short, something that's been out there and is proven and fills the niche. The biggest thing I dislike is the case length, unless you are running a Wyatt's box, you are not going to feed these shells out of a Remington or 700 clone at the COAL that they list. I know it will feed if you seat them deeper, but are the SAAMI spec reamers going to have a long throat, making accuracy loads hard to find if you are limited to mag length? Definitely will be interesting to follow and see what more information turns up.

On a different note, I believe Hornady chose the RCM case because it is of their own creation and they use the same basic design, just longer, on their .375 Ruger. I for sure would be using my own design and not someone else's if I created something previously and was improving or building from it. Hornady put a lot of time and effort into creating the RCM cartridges and I don't think they will just throw that away. Dave Emory and all the guys working at Hornady are very smart and I really think they do their homework and come up with great ideas. For them, it makes sense, they created the basic case design the PRC is based on, so why change it in their lineup of cartridges?

I like to see new products and see companies trying to release cool stuff. Though I think it could be better, seeing the 6.5 PRC come out of SHOT Show is a lot more interesting to me than the bazillion "new" ARs or all the tacitcool furniture for them. One thing I am waiting for is Hornady to embrace the 7mm LRM designed by Gunwerks that utilizes the .375 Ruger case. There are plenty of cartridges out there today, but the beltless, standard length 7mm LRM or something similar to it would be awesome. They would offer a small advantage or equate their belted brothers such as the .264 Win Mag, 7mm Rem Mag, .300 Win Mag, etc. but do it in a smart and efficient case that all the current belted mags should have originally been designed as. I have no problems reloading for a belted case, but it truly is old technology that we need to leave in the 20th century and move on from. There are so many cartridges out today and we really don't need anymore, but a good lineup of magnum cartridges, similar to the Gunwerks LRM design, could be the next step forward and could have the potential to become the next generation of long action magnums if marketed right and actually chambered in a wide selection of factory guns.

 

[toddc]

I thought they had learned something when they built the Creed.....MAG LENGTH. Evidently not as Jud pointed out.
A lengthened 6.5 WSSM or shortened WSM (same thing) would make a lot more sense with a proper COAL.
Of course probably 90+% of people shooting a Creed or this new rig wont reload anyway and the $$$ isn't there UNLESS they buy Hornady ammo.
I supported the Creed because it made sense on a COAL level....this doesn't. And never will.

 

[Jud96]

I thought they had learned something when they built the Creed.....MAG LENGTH. Evidently not as Jud pointed out.
A lengthened 6.5 WSSM or shortened WSM (same thing) would make a lot more sense with a proper COAL.
Of course probably 90+% of people shooting a Creed or this new rig wont reload anyway and the $$$ isn't there UNLESS they buy Hornady ammo.
I supported the Creed because it made sense on a COAL level....this doesn't. And never will.

I agree, I was not a Creed fan when it initially came about because I thought, what's the point, there's already a .260 Rem? But I have since wrapped my head around COAL and really understand that better now and view the Creedmoor as one of the very best modern case designs. This new round just takes everything Hornady has learned and developed and throws it all aside.

The 6.5 PRC is touted as a "Precision Rifle Cartridge" aimed towards PRS guys and shooters of that nature, it should have been built with mag length as one of the major goals for the project. I mean even if it was the same length as the Creed, it's fatter so should at least gain 100-200fps more than the Creedmoor all while being a true short action cartridge. It will work in a short action, but definitely will be leaving performance on the table like Rich mentioned earlier. If they were planning to make it the size it is now, they would have been better off making it the same length as the 6.5-284 and running with that.

 

[toddc]

Since I am a Savage guy I always build SA cases on LA actions. I have a 7SAUM running 175ELDX over 3100 FPS with a loooong COAL. I have built 6 & 6.5 & 284s on LA that run 200+ faster than a SA build will run. Also accuracy with VLD style pills is usually easier to find. The Nosler lines WHOLE marketing strategy revolves around a package that will fit into a LA with some seating leeway. I was floored when I saw the length on the PRC and immediately wondered how Hornady learned NOTHING from their OWN SUCCESS. IDK, I have seen some really silly designs over the yrs. I also love the marked over 1200 on barrel life, 2200 is a lot to get from a 3k 6.5 with 140+gr pills. Especially running hot at a PRS match.

 

[Jud96]

Since I am a Savage guy I always build SA cases on LA actions. I have a 7SAUM running 175ELDX over 3100 FPS with a loooong COAL. I have built 6 & 6.5 & 284s on LA that run 200+ faster than a SA build will run. Also accuracy with VLD style pills is usually easier to find. The Nosler lines WHOLE marketing strategy revolves around a package that will fit into a LA with some seating leeway. I was floored when I saw the length on the PRC and immediately wondered how Hornady learned NOTHING from their OWN SUCCESS. IDK, I have seen some really silly designs over the yrs. I also love the marked over 1200 on barrel life, 2200 is a lot to get from a 3k 6.5 with 140+gr pills. Especially running hot at a PRS match.

I am a Remington guy, and with today's bullets and cartridges, there really isn't much out there that I can build on an unmodified SA 700 and get top notch performance with and fit loaded shells in the mag box. I like the 6mm and 6.5 Creedmoors because they address this issue. But if I am going to build anything on a long action, it's not going to be a 6.5 PRC because it is barely longer than a Creedmoor yet doesn't yield a huge gain over any long action cartridge. I agree about Nosler, I think they did great with their new cartridges, I really think the component and ammo cost is what is holding them back.

The 6.5 PRC is just one of those weird designs that doesn't fit anywhere. If they wanted short action it should have been the length of the Creedmoor, if they wanted long action it should have been the length of a .284 or even more. The barrel length thing is also odd. I think 2200 rounds seems a little high, I have heard of 6.5-284s going that far when using Retumbo but not sure about this new round.

 

[300stw]

how about the kimber action for this cartridge, seems they might be made for each other

 

[Edd]

Why wouldn't Hornady just sell the 6.5 gap 4s rebranded as prc? They already have been working with George for his brass why build it off the rcm case?

I can't answer your question but I can add that when George built his 4s he said he used the SAUM case because it was easy. He said if he had done what he really wanted to do he would have used an RCM case with the shoulder pushed back slightly to lengthen the neck.

This is one of the comments he made.......

Anyway the 6.5 Saum case is near perfect because it allows you to throw a 6.5 140gr at 3100 at about 53,000 PSI with H1000. Other cases have too much capacity or not enough. The Saum case was picked not because its magical , because it is the perfect fit. In a perfect world I would take the the RCM case and shorten it a tad and give it a longer neck. That would truly be perfect!!!!

 

[Danny1788]

I can't answer your question but I can add that when George built his 4s he said he used the SAUM case because it was easy. He said if he had done what he really wanted to do he would have used an RCM case with the shoulder pushed back slightly to lengthen the neck.

This is one of the comments he made.......

Now that makes sense to me. But why would they advertise 2.960" COAL? that doesn't appeal to anyone. And as Rich has already said and shown in his drawing you loose case capacity with the bullet seated in the case that far. Just seems like a bang flop from the start to me. But who knows maybe they have something else planned as well,,, Ruger MED length action?

 

[Edd]

Now that makes sense to me. But why would they advertise 2.960" COAL? that doesn't appeal to anyone. And as Rich has already said and shown in his drawing you loose case capacity with the bullet seated in the case that far. Just seems like a bang flop from the start to me. But who knows maybe they have something else planned as well,,, Ruger MED length action?

The bullet extended into the case does use up some of the case capacity. But moving the shoulder back, on a 6.5 caliber and a SAUM diameter case, to prevent the bullet from extending so far into the case decreases the capacity about 3.5 times as much.

The reason to shorten a case is to make the bullet properly fit the chamber. You will never gain powder capacity by shortening the case to prevent the bullet from extending into it.

A 2.960" cartridge OAL will limit your bullet choices to those with a nose length of about .800" or shorter. All of the Berger 6.5 hunting bullets have a nose shorter than .800".