I decided to do run #'s on 6.5/284 vs 270

Here is the breakout with 200 yds zero:

6.5 mm 130 gr accubond 3100fps bc .488

300 yds -6.1, 1851 ft lb
400 yds -17.5, 1607
500 yds -35.3, 1389

142 gr 3000 6.5mm bc .585 MATCH BULLET

300 -6.2, 2005
400 -17.8, 1785
500 -35.5, 1586

270 140 gr accubond 3000 fps .456 BC

300 -6.7, 1803
400 -19.3, 1545
500 -39.0, 1315

What I see is about 3.7" in drop difference at 500 yds, 1.8" at 400, between using hunting bullets.

Energy, only 74 lbs difference in energy at 500 yds.


I believe this is a fair comparison of the real field differences in one using a standard 270 vs 6.5/284 using bullets of similar construction for hunting, with a slightly higher bc advantage to the 130 6.5mm, so fair balance was maintained.

My view is anything the 6.5/284 will do in the field, a 270 with good bullets can virtually duplicate, the difference coming down to ranging and shooting ability.

I have to imagine a longer barreled 270 with 140gr at top loads with slow powder might do a tad better, which is how many people shoot a 6.5/284.

That said, VERY similar results on game should be completely had whether using Jack O'connor's favorite, or the modern 6.5/284.

I realize there are some variables, but the above results should be typical and I believe valid.

The results were very interesting/enlightening.

That said, I myself like the standard 260. At 2950 with 130 accubond, it drops a mere 39.4" retaining 1240 lbs at 500 yds.

Top a 260 with 140 amax, 2850fps, 40.8"/1344 @500.

VERY close to a 270 with an optimum hunting bullet.

That said, if I were strictly talking deer hunting at long range, say 500 yds or less, a good range finder with an accurate rifle AND shooter that has practiced can do well with any of the above combo's, and I would be surprised any difference in killing effect would come down to bullet choice.

My purpose doing the analysis was to see what real 'improvement' is had in using a 6.5/284 vs a 260 or 270 at common ranges, or less common to 500 yds.

Not a slam on the 6.5/284, but upholding what 'lesser cartridges' can do side by side when all are at their best. What take away is how 6.5mm's are VERY efficient in moderate capacity cases like 260 or 6.5x55. It is diminished returns to significantly improve upon them so one must ask, just how far are they really planning to shoot, and is it hunting or paper.

Yep, within normal hunting ranges of less than 300 yards there really no need for anything over a 260, 7-08 or 308 but I built my 6.5x284 to shoot past 600 yards.

6.5, I agree with your methods/results and conclusions. I am a 270 nut, so I'll never get away from them. At really long range, I get to shoot a fair amount on a range at 600, I tend to have better groups with my 6.5x284's. Both they and my 270's are well within hunting accuracy tolerances though for sure. The barrel length and overall setup are indeed important considerations, but having a cartridge that is more designed around accuracy concerns that rivals 270 Win performance is just pretty cool IMO.

I, like Frank, tend to put the call on my 6.5x284 for longer range duties and mid-size deer or smaller game.

If I can ever get properly headstamped brass, I would really consider a 6.5/300WSM........

I would have to agree that a 6.5/284 at very long range is a tough one to beat overall, especially given the moderate recoil which is a bonus.

I think the 6mms and 6.5's do well at long range esp. in accuracy due to the quality of good bullets, which obviously is limited in 270 bore, and going to 7mm's and 30's just require that much more powder to get the heavier high BC bullets started fast enough, which adds more recoil, and on game to deer a proper 6mm or 6.5mm will do well with shot placement.

Again, not to flame 6.5/284 owners, for it's intended purpose its a top choice.

Given that there are specialized 50 BMG sniper rifles in military use, and perhaps some specialized 338 Lapua and others perhaps Chey Tac cartridges, IF the military ever converted their standard 308 M40 platform to something with better trajectory, etc. in a typical round, what do you think would be the top choice, honestly.

I think a good 6.5mm would have a lot to offer.

Thoughts? Just curious, as this topic seems to be getting more coverage and I hear Black Hills may be coming out with match grade 260 i.e. 142 or similar, and there has been factory 6.5/284 so I will be interested to see if they military sees enough benefit to change to a different tactical/sniper round, or if the 308 is so engrained, and being a NATO round, going to stick around a long time, since there is so much our there developed around it like optics, ammo, etc.?

One might think the military would take interest in what the long range shooters have learned......those outside the military who have access to a multitude of options, that have 'been there and done that'. I am sure there must be an exhange of info between the two to some degree.

6.5, interesting thoughts to be sure. I will be curious to see if some of our military experienced members comment. I would think that on top of the points you made considering accessories etc. portability of the ammo might be a factor, in other words, is it easier to carry 100 rounds of 308 instead of 338 Lapua. I think the 338 Lapua is certainly a more lethal cartridge at long range, although I absolutely don't profess to have much knowledge about the topic. I think accuracy is still the key, so what is necessary vs best probably plays into it.

I have made some really long, precise shots under field conditions with mild recoiling rounds like 270, 6.5x284 and 308, but also with some boomers, and due to the rush of adrenaline -IMO- couldnt tell much difference in my shooting capability re: more recoil.

Interesting to ponder the options......

we need somebody to build a 270-284 and make the comparative data available. Benchresters have proven, that the phrase "short and fat is where it's at" applies to accuracy cartridges. The 270 never offered anybody any reason to build one for LR shooting. The 6.5-284 dominates the Perry matches I believe. The 6.5 got a jump because the europeans make some awesome bullets with a high BC, and the 284 case is the same approximate size capacity as the 30-06 in a short(er) case/action length.

Rich
DRSS

I would have to agree with your camparisons.
I would sugjest you could throw a .280 30,06 and mabye even the 25,06 in there too.
You would get a little more drop with the 30,06 , and a little less energy with the 25,06
But the animals shot would not notice the differene.
All that being said, I,ll tke 3 of each...tj3006

Just buy a 270 WSM and kick ass

Thomas Jones makes sense. A 30/06 with ballistic efficient 180gn@2650 will have about same downrange energies as 130/6.5-284,140/270win...and out to 300+yds or so,I feel its more important to know your rifle than worry about +/-??" at 400yds.
Plus the 06 will do it without highhigh pressures in the boiler room.
I thing a man is best served in alot of cases with a 30/06 and 260rem for lighter tasks.

I personally think 7x57-154IB is a great middle of the road combo too!

As to recoil, yes fired under some stress, whether on game, or enemy fire, is not as noticable, to a point perhaps, I'd hate to fire a 30-06 all day if I were a soldier, I guess most fire 223, and the sniper's mostly use 308, save the very specialized ops people using those 338 Lapua, 50BMG,

Accuracy is the issue, and a flatter say 260 would make for better hittability all things equal vs 308, but fact is those shooters know their weapon system and when ranged do very well I am sure. I just think it would be a 'better way' of doing things.

And a 6.5 Grendel, would be better in an AR-platform than the 223, IMHO.

As to Woodjack, a few inches in drop variance at 400 yds is no excuse for anyone to blame a cartridge, or limit a shot, any decent SD bullet of sufficient weight fired at standard cartridge (i.e. non magnum) are enough, but the shooter must be up to it, agreed, knowing the gun.

I'll tell you, the closer it gets to hunting season each year, I quit playing around so much with so many loads and guns, settle on a load or two for a few guns I want to take afield, zero them, practice, and am ready. Preparation is key.

To think HOW many times I hear stories about hunters missing/wounding game and THEN checking their gun, instead of test firing and practicing...well, those do not represent the average forum member I am sure. I never do stop getting ticked hearing of needless wounded game, and seemingly higher ratio of misses than hits, of average hunters, who need more range time-again AR members and the like are the exception I can imagine.

All the emphasis on high tech guns, ammo, and optics has de-emphasized the most critical component, the shooter.

By the way, yes, there are other combos I could have used, and mind you I made the comparison to illustrate that for the average hunter, they need not think their standard 270 class or similar is 'out dated' and no longer 'competitive' as a top hunting round, under most conditions that most game is taken.

Getting range time, tweaking the rifle, experimenting with ammo/loads/new bullets, having good optics properly zeroed, is where it's at, and the hype the industry puts out about whizbanger cartridges that CAN do X at X yards vs older rounds, well it's a moot point very often.

In perusing a website of a custom bullet mfg of HIGH end hunting bullets, I saw a MAJORITY of hunting photos of success stories on a variety of game, the VAST majority were taken give or take 300 yds, and MANY were under 75! SO go figure, it is sometimes like asking the question:

Do we need the space shuttle fired up to run across the street to the grocery store?

In researching some info, I noticed just how flat the little 25 WSSM was vs the above numbers, granted it's energy is less due to less weight, and again, 500 yds is not the average shot on game, more like half, or much under, and strictly talking hunting applications, the success in the field a hunter has is not usually a matter of choosing the perfect cartridge, just having confidence, and competence when using it.

Many, myself included enjoy the 'data crunching' and I will continue by nature, but I think wading through the vital key elements that make for practicality in the intended purpose is needed, and industry hype causes confusion to many 'not in the know'.

I have to say, that a WSM may not be MY choice, the above poster, hey, I will agree, a 270 WSM for MOST hunting conditions in this country save for the large bears, will serve well, you have slick high bc bullets for long range flat shooting on deer, as well as controlled expanding bullets that are very much up to taking say elk, as have 7mm Mags, long before the rise in popularity of the 338's. I LOVE Mid bores like 338 for stopping/quick kill power on game, and in say 338-06, suits me fine. If I wanted more reach, I'd shoot better I believe with a 270 WSM vs 338 Win Mag, and I think it would get the job done if pushed into needed to stretch a shot, one ethical where you know you have great odds in success. That said, some have said, for the extra gain in speed, how much are you gaining in range (not killing power). I think the industry has really pushed for higher quality premium ammo (must be good at $40 a box right?) and that said, average Joe can do much worse that get a good say 270 WSM and shoot high quality ammo, that gives accuracy and velocity with good bullets, if ole Joe is not a reloader.

We reloaders, can take advantage of the knowledge gained, component choice in powders/bullets, etc., roll our own, and really get top performance in a good standard round whether the ancient 6.5x55, 7x57, 270, 280 or 30-06, not to mention short rounds like 260, 7mm/08,and others.

The very fact that the industry now seems to have swung the pendulum from WSM and STW's to now the 338 federal tells me their is perhaps a shift in the fundamental thinking of today's writer acknowledging the needs of most hunters, and they are praising the 338 federal for being sensible, effective, and practical, at ranges most hunt at 300 or less (thought one writer I saw did a disservice saying under 200!) is a good thing.

I think future hunters/shooter, ones introduced to the sport will be better informed/armed and perhaps not turned off when getting into the shooting/hunting sports which have been declining.

There is always going to be a push to sell new products as hype does sell, and the industry is a business, and if they continue a trend like what I have seen more recently, that is a good thing. Wildcatters and people who carry the sport to the highest level whether competition or long range hunting will continue pushing the performance envelope that can benefit what trickles into the mainstream, if considerations are made for what is suitable for everyday hunters, as I see many more hunters in my area who are not reloaders, and the sheer volume percentage wise that they make up is what drives the ammo and arms mfg industry, I think it will serve everyone best, shooter and industry alike.

Do you have the software to compare, say a 10 mph wind drift at 300, and 500 yds with the 142MK and a 140 accubond? I think this will answer the X count question as to why it is so well liked with the comp shooters.

quote:

Originally posted by Moorepower:
Do you have the software to compare, say a 10 mph wind drift at 300, and 500 yds with the 142MK and a 140 accubond? I think this will answer the X count question as to why it is so well liked with the comp shooters.

Here:
http://www.eskimo.com/~jbm/ballistics/traj_basic/traj_basic.html

If we are talking hunting you're looking at two peas in a pod. Long range target, the 6.5 X .284, but only because more developement time has gone into it which for one thing has given birth to long range target bullets to a much larger extent.

With the right amount of time and delopement behind it and the generation of proper bullets the .270 with the right twist would do just as well as the 6.5 x.284 and maybe a tad better because of the long neck. roger

The 6.5's are finally getting their due in America and its a shame that we have been so blind to such a great caliber. Tactically a .260 will beat a .308, theres an article in shooting times on the very subject with all the numbers to prove it. Moderate case capacity 6.5's just have a perfect blend of great bullets, very good velocity and fairly low felt recoil. I wouldnt give up my 6.5X55 in a 700 classic for nothing, it kills whitetails very efficiently with no fuss and no blood shot meat with the deer running just as far as they did with my 30-06, its a keeper for sure.

270win140AB@2950 & 308win180MRX@2620

LooK them up in the Fed. chart below.
Very little difference in 10mph winddrift.
FEDERAL BALLISTIC CHARTS

quote:

Originally posted by Moorepower:
Do you have the software to compare, say a 10 mph wind drift at 300, and 500 yds with the 142MK and a 140 accubond? I think this will answer the X count question as to why it is so well liked with the comp shooters.

http://www.biggameinfo.com/index.aspx?page=%2fbalcalc.ascx

Have not run numbers but I did consider that before posting, and I reckon there is a good difference at 500, in several inches. Ran out of time to crunch....I do realize the 142 are in a league.....shooting in matches, as the 107 in 6mm. Another reason I use 105 amax/6BR

Oh, and fgulla, I too killed a NICE 8pt, rack in my house, with a classic 6.5x55, beautiful wood, unfortunately, the last two inches of the lands were damaged during production, all of them. As if a crowning tool that had a pilot turning inside the barrel did it. It was sold off, I think of it believe me. Unlike Rems 9 twist 260, the 6.5x55 got the right twist at 8.

2 deer with that rifle, both dropped in tracks with 120 core lokts, reloads, one lung shot, other spine. Deadly, no doubt. Don Zutz got my attention LONG ago in a handloading book, telling how radial damage from friends fast twist military 6.5x55/129gr equalled a 270/130 if not more damage on whitetail. Later, John Wooters I believe wrote 'dream $200 rifle' sporterizing a '96 mauser, and Finn Aaggard, and others. SO much lore on it, perhaps Jack O'Connor missed the boat on that one. With top loads in a modern bolt, it does in my mind give a 270 a very good run for the money, though due to fast twist, long bearing surface, and smaller expansion ratio prefer a tad longer barrel to squeeze top performance.

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
we need somebody to build a 270-284 and make the comparative data available. Benchresters have proven, that the phrase "short and fat is where it's at" applies to accuracy cartridges. The 270 never offered anybody any reason to build one for LR shooting. The 6.5-284 dominates the Perry matches I believe. The 6.5 got a jump because the europeans make some awesome bullets with a high BC, and the 284 case is the same approximate size capacity as the 30-06 in a short(er) case/action length.

Rich
DRSS

Rich,
I have to agree with the lack of quality/match bullets for the 270 even for the .284 caliber as well.I shoot my 270 in NRA Hunter Silhouette and with the exception of the Sierra 135MK the supply is pretty grim.

This info is taken from the Hornady volume 2 fifth edition manual. At 500 yds a .450 b.c. bullet leaving at 3000 fps has 14.2" deflection, at 3000 fps a bullet with .550 bc hA 16.7' AT 600YDS, sorry they do not calculate a match bullet at 500, and a bullet with a .630 bc, Lapua Scenar is .615 has 14.2' deflection at 600 yds. This is not huge for an antelope, but for a ten or x ring it will make a differance in points. For comparison a 178 amax has 23.2' drift leaving at 2600 fps. A 6mm Amax at 3000fps has about 18.7' at 600 yds. Bullet drop is eaiser to deal with than the wind. If you whoot any of them at a Deer size target at 400 yds, they are DEAD!!!!