quote:

Originally posted by Yale:
Again, thank you all for your cogent and intelligent responses. I will just have to take Mr. Shoemaker's advice; build a 6.5 (probably a 6.5x57 or 256 Newton), and see how it works.

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

Chris
If Mr. Shoemaker gives you advice consider it gospel.
If you use that TSX as he says and ensure proper bullet placement the jigs up for your target.
Besides he will be standing right beside you with ole ugly or one of its kin to back you up proper...so no worries.

/

Alf
We do not all have the royal luxury of 7 of this caliber and 9 of that caliber and to be able to allocate a bullet weight to each rifle and caliber. I have one rifle and it has to do as much as what is possible. I have tried slow and heavy lead core bullets for more than 15 years before being introduced to turned copper bullets. My biggest regret is that I wasted so much time and money not to talk of the frustration. My 130grain turned bullets do anything the lead cores could do out to 150 meters and after that it is a no contest. The 130 just walks all over the lead cores. I dont have the time or the inclination to try this that and the other. I want to get out into the veld and enjoy the time there and take whatever shot is within my ability. My 130 grain turned high tech expensive bullets are cheap at the price given how they have improved the collective ability of me and my rifle. This will be my fourth season with them.

I have a military 6.5 swede built in 1914 that was intended as a beater, but over the years has been caried more than any of my other rifles simply because it always works and is there when I am busy fiddling with other rifles, trying to make them accurate, reliable, find ammo, etc.... (I did make do without it one winter when I lost in off the snowmachine, only to be found the folowing spring in the ditch by my old man).
I have faced down several brown and grizzly bears with it, never had to fire a shot, but in most cases it is the confidence factor that counts.
Every animal I have shot with it has died quickly (nothing larger than a caribou) probably because it is more accurate than most of my rifles, and I shoot it better than most rifles (not difficult). But the old 140grn X bullets have always shot right though, including 'Texas heart' shots, and leave a sufficiently wide wound channel. It never seemed to kill things any diffently from any calibre up to quite large bores, which do seem to have some advantage. For the most part we are talking of death by degrees, and the percentage differnence in caliber between .264 and .277 or .30 is relatively small. I have only once witnessed the effects of large calibre 'energy' or what you will making a difference on large game, and that was with a 458. Of course, energy works quite well on hares, ptarmagin, and cats.
I have even carried the 6.5 as my backup rifle while guiding hunters in the Brooks Range of Alaska, which equates to mainly bear protection in extreme circumstances. Never had to use it for such, but I had as much confidence as in most rifles, because it always works, and always puts a hole in things several feet long. I would have no reservation on using it on any game in NA.

Dear Mr. Shoemaker:

Thanks for your cogent response. I have a 1909 Argentine, a bit bubba'ed with rear scope base holes drilled by the drunken alignment method, that is screaming for an original cartridge. It will be a 6.5x57.

I have to ask, are you related to Mr. Phil Shoemaker?

Sincerely,

Chris Bemis

Well, I have been accused of being his son a time or two. Just don't belive everything that he writes about me, regardless of whether it is true.
Back on the subject of old mausers, mine had the barrel lopped off, most of the military wood removed, and an old reciever sight mounted, all by bubba method. Nothing is straight, but it must be crooked together becuase it seems to always shoot straight, even when soaked by Kodiak rain, parched by interior summers, or frozen and thawed by the side of the road for 4 months. Those sweedes must have known something about wood quality.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
..I can tell you now and I have some good buddies in South Africa who regularly hunted with us down in "my africa" will attest that my 6.5's with a conventional 160 RN soft kills as good as many others, In fact there is no difference between 6.5 and the 7x57.

this is getting interesting!..
6.5 kills as good as 7x57,
add to that, highly experienced Ray Atkinson has found that he can tell no great difference in the field between 7x57 and 300mag,
add to that, Gerard from gsc has found the 7mm 120gnHV monometal penetrates&offers a wound channel as well as if not better than the much heavier lead core pills up to 175gn.
like wise, a 6.5mm 110gnHV should do as well or better than leadcores up to 160gn.

from the above, Im must deduce that, there is no noticable difference in the field between
the 6.5 and .300magnum.
Now, no intended , but I do want to learn,
Whats the real world difference between
a 6.5x55-160rn leadcore at 2500mv & .300magnum-160hv monometal at 3300mv???

quote:

Whats the real world difference between a 6.5x55-160rn leadcore at 2500mv & .300magmum-160hv monometal at 3300mv?

Given equal ability of the shooters, the distance to which you can reach out with them and still hit the spot reliably.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Chris, When you finally book your bear hunt with me why don't you bring your 6.5 with some TSX bullets and find out for yourself?
I'm betting it will work just fine.

Famous Bear guide or not, I hope you're kidding.

Why would you think he's kidding? On the 24H site, there's Charlie Sisk saying something like, "There's a depressingly small difference between the wound channels of a 6.5x55 and a 300 Win Mag."

It's possible that we've bought a pig in a poke regarding the relationship of muzzle blast and recoil to killing capability, and Phil isn't the first to note it. He's just the first I've noticed who plans to put his fundament on the line standing next to the shooter.

Asked earlier about the use of the 270 Win for bear hunting, I believe his response was "Why not? It's his (the client's) hunt." He's also preached as long as I've read his work that a guy should bring what he's accustomed to rather than a biggenboomer, so this is simply an extension of that.

I have a 6.5 Gibbs and it has worked wonderfully on game. I have killed 'yotes, deer, a couple black bear, stone sheep and mt goat with it.

It doesn't do my logical thinking right brain any good to note that it seems to kill out of proportion to its size.

Anyway, it has been very effective, and I would have no issue whatsoever using it on elk, moose or g-bear. That said of course, I would use something bigger for those critters if I had it available....which is exactly why I haven't used my 6.5 on them yet!

Cheers,
Canuck

quote:

it stil haunts me to this day because in Africa I used a whole slew of 6.5's to very good effect.

ALF, It must be because our BC wildlife is much tougher than African game.

LOL....sorry couldn't resist.

While the practice would be deemed foolhardy today, Bell used a 6.5 on a large number of elephants, which only proves that a capable shot, firing a reliable bullet, with descent SD, at moderate velocity can kill virtually anything.

Rocky Gibbs said his 6.5 was the most versatile of his cartridges...capable of gophers to grizzlies!

If you want to hunt Grizzlies with a 6.5 be my guest, with Mr. Shoemaker beside you I know you'll be safe. I just don't get this, lets see how small a gun we can get away with. We had a very average ( 6 1/2' or so ) Grizzly come into our camp this year and creat a bit of a mess. We moved camp so as not to have to shoot him but if actually hunting him I'd be takeing something over .30. Just my opinion and wide open to be slammed.

While I would have no qualms tackling any bear in the open with a 6.5 - if there was something bigger avaliable I would chose it.

quote:

Originally posted by MTM:
If you want to hunt Grizzlies with a 6.5 be my guest, with Mr. Shoemaker beside you I know you'll be safe. I just don't get this, lets see how small a gun we can get away with. We had a very average ( 6 1/2' or so ) Grizzly come into our camp this year and creat a bit of a mess. We moved camp so as not to have to shoot him but if actually hunting him I'd be takeing something over .30. Just my opinion and wide open to be slammed.

MTM, just my 2c, as I don't feel my opinion on this even deserves to be adjacent to Mr Shoemaker's!.....but, lots of g-bears have been killed with 270's and 7mm's. A well placed shot with a 6.5 will work just fine...I don't think anyone is recommending it as a first choice though! Nor do I think it is a "lets see how small a gun we can get away with". As I mentioned above I would certainly take something bigger if I had it available.

Cheers,
Canuck

I mentioned in one of my past columns in Successful Hunter magazine about a young Alaskan hunter who has taken caribou, moose and grizzly with his Mini-14 223. Another bush Alaskan, Heimo Korth, has lived thirty years on the Colleen river and has taken over fifty moose, hundreds of caribou and at least a dozen grizzlies with his 22-250.
it doesn't take a cannon to kill game if the hunter knows how to shoot.
If you can't shoot, choosing a more powerful rifle is akin to a poor driver thinking a faster car will improve his driving.

quote:

If you can't shoot, choosing a more powerful rifle is akin to a poor driver thinking a faster car will improve his driving.

Now that is a highly quotable quote! Hope you don't mind if I use it.

Cheers,
Canuck

Not wanting to argue with anyone here as I have great respect for 458 Win. and Canuck. All I was saying is why choose a small gun when bigger ones work better. Also this, if you can't bla, bla ,bla. Why does anyone asume that if you want to use a big gun you can't shoot. With all due respect thats bull. I shoot my .416 Rem as well as my STW or whatever. Why don't we hear guys going to African getting slammed for useing big guns, cant they shoot well enough to get away with the minimum allowed? I'm sure you can see what I'm saying.

quote:

Why don't we hear guys going to African getting slammed for useing big guns, cant they shoot well enough to get away with the minimum allowed?

Actually, you do hear about it. At least I have. Comes up semi-often on the African forum too. I hear about it from my guide friends all the time about guys coming "over-gunned" for G-bear. By that I mean guys bring a big gun but have trouble shooting it....that may just mean they're bad shots with any rifle, but my friends say most of them flinch.

I have even personally witnessed a helluva nice gent in Africa that brought a 375 and an '06. After a couple misses with the 375 he realized it was too much for him at the time (need more time with it) and switched back to the '06...and made some ultra deadly shots, and never missed again.

So it does happen...doesn't mean everyone that shoots a big gun can't shoot it well. I certainly don't assume that anyone that wants to shoot a big gun can't shoot.

I see what you are saying, and I don't think what we are saying is mutually exclusive.

Heck, I currently use a 375 Ruger for elk/deer. And often carry my 416 Taylor for the same purpose! My "general purpose" gun that the gunsmith just finished is an 8mm Rem Mag.

Anyway, I don't think either 458Win or I were saying anyone should choose a small gun for the job....just saying that if you had one, there's no reason why it wouldn't work.

Cheers,
Canuck

/

Canuck, I reread the whole thing. I see what you are saying. My bad. I get a little hasty sometimes. My .338 has been my general purpose (read Deer) gun for many years. I use bigger ones for Moose and Elk.

Guides and PH's see an awful lot of hunters in their line of work and to hear them tell it most are somewhere between good to great shots.
In truth the average guy can't shoot worth a bucket of warm spit under pressure - and the unarguable fact is that half of us are below average !

All of us, if we are honest enough to admit it, shoot rifles with less recoil better than larger ones.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
All of us, if we are honest enough to admit it, shoot rifles with less recoil better than larger ones.

I'll admit it! It's why there's no rattle sound when you shake my head. My 9.3x64 is my go to gun theses days.

I must admit, while I shoot my 375 and 416 like they were 308s when I sit down behind my 378 it takes a whole lot more mental control to shoot small groups. Sorry for the hijack/rant.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
or then our own local variety, the so called "bakkie" hunter, those boys in their pick -ups!

Throw in a bunch of beer cans and you could have what most locals call "hunting".

quote:

Ken Stewart used to make RN bullets for the 6'5, just simple bonded core RN's. And Hornady's 160 gr RN, nothing special, no big shakes in velocity, but man they kill!

I have no wish or need to use light monos in any of my 6.5's because half the fun is mimicking the original loads, look and feel of the original 6.5

Alf,

The fun part is very important as you say and that is a personal thing. Preserving the look and feel of the traditional does give some of us a kick that some would not understand. As you say, once you experience how effectively they kill, you are sold on them. Both the 6.5x55 and 7x57 made their reputations with high SD conventional bullets (both FMJ & Soft Nose) at modest velocity; ensuring that the bullet holds together. That is really what distinguish these calibers from their much faster rivals. Mr Bell directed these projectitles at elephant - perhaps not fun, but a thrill of a different sort that most of us would not attempt.

In the Anglo-Boer war the Boers limted their shots to 200 yards and if the same rule is applied by our hunters with similar loads, we will be successful. The advantage we have today is firstly that we have telescopic sights that improve our shot placement abililty drastically, and we have much better constructed bullets.

I have shot many Blue Wildebeest with my 7x57 using 170 gr Rhino bullets at 2,370 fps (mild load) to the amazement of fellow hunters telling me how resilient these creatures are and that I am under gunned. I have picked most up within a few yards and no one further than 30 yards.

Warrior

Warrior,

Follow this link and tell us more about your pictures.

Rather funny, don't you think?

.

Alf,

I fully agree with your viewpoint expressed in your post.
However, I think you should follow that link again and show me where I have said anything of what you're blaming me for in your post above.

I found it funny that AR members see the things you referred to in their comments re Warrior - hence me pointing him to that so that he can comment on their reactions.

So friend, you are addressing the wrong person here and I think it calls for an apology from yourself.

/

Alf,

quote:

It's one thing disagreeing with a persons opinion, but to go and try and assassinate his character or person in public serves no purpose and is counter productive to the intent of AR's stated reason for existing.

Warrior deserves to receive the same as he dishes out.

quote:

He means well, as most who visit here do and his heart appears to be in a good place when it comes to shooting, why try and demean him?

This is the appearance he often succeeds in getting across. Fact is that he has been shunned by various sections of the hunting/shooting community in SA. Maybe I am too outspoken on some subjects but GSC has been targeted by his misguided zeal for imaginary fault finding for long enough and he deserves no sympathy, as far as I am concerned. He is in the same class as others on this forum who patently know nothing and are also not prepared to learn and are also ridiculed by others.

quote:

hunting down Warrior every time he makes a post somewhere on AR makes no sense, does it make you feel good ?

Yet, this is what he does with monotonous regularity with me and GSC. I have no problem when others do it with him and think that the tactic should be encouraged. He is unteachable and will probably not figure out why it happens, but it is good for a chuckle.

I apologise for the

Gerard,

Your comments are so one sided and your bad intent is showing clearly, even beyond this AR. You wrote a letter to all hunting magazines in South Africa to bad mouth me. This you did right after you learned that I will publish pressure tests done with various bullet/load combinations for the 9,3x62 mm. What is your fear, it is about loads behind the bullet as tested by a Lab. This incidentally is for the benefit of the shooting fraternity that cries for more information about the 9,3 and I am getting calls regularly from reloaders to help them. All come back satisfied. My track record and dedication at the Reloading Association speaks for itself, and if you differ or question that as you apparently do, then you are called upon to give your evidence.

Smokescreens and rousing of suspicion will not benefit your cause nor discredit me. Your statement about being shunned by the shooting community is laughable to say the least. And if you think your ill-intent to stop me to publish articles then you have it wrong. This has already been confirmed by the publisher. For you comfort, my article has been vetted by top reloaders, including someone who was on the committee with me on RASA, and the interesting thing is that your bullet does not get discussed in any way.

Incidentally I have tested the 230 gr HV bullet again, this time not with your minimum load, but a higher load to attempt getting the 2,800 fps max safe load. It was impossible. We used a compressed load into the neck of the case (a serious hot load with S335 - a fast burning powder) and we only achieved 2,723 fps and the pressure was 7% over P-max. This is about reloading and not per se any bullet. Any 'bad' load behind a 'good' bullet is not the bullet's fault, but the reloader who does it.

Warrior

quote:

You wrote a letter to all hunting magazines in South Africa to bad mouth me.

I did no such thing. No matter how you try to twist and squirm, justify and spin, every time you mention GSC products you lie, exagerate, get the facts wrong and deliberately twist the facts.

Gerard,

Shall I say it comes from GSC?

Warrior

Indeed, exactly as Gerard said:

quote:

Yet, this is what he does with monotonous regularity with me and GSC,

your so-called 'well meaning' Warrior wrote in another thread:

quote:

There is indeed a big difference in boattails that we see in various bullet designs and shapes. Some are sharper and longer, some short and shallow and anything in between. Here is an example of a fairly unique boattail not commonly seen in an attempt to shift the COG point forward, and as a result the angle is way beyond the 9 degrees. I can see the good in that the bullet is better balanced, making it easier to stabilize, but then you may pay a price elsewhere,(with a picture of a GSC boattail bullet added so that nobody can doubt to which make of bullet his suggestion is aimed at!)

again without understanding the facts correctly. (Refer Gerard's comments on that thread.)

This, in that same thread, here on AR where you, Alf, were also blowing bubbles as pointed out here by Gerard:

quote:

Your quote:
they all concur, boattailing of a projectile increases gas blow by and changes boundry flow conditions in gas mass so that more heat is absorbed in the barrel. What is also apparent is that this erosion is not throat erosion but erosion close the muzzle end of the bore.
Gerard wrote:
I have never seen a hunting rifle with erosion at the muzzle that exceeds erosion at the throat. If this is true in the context of what the military do, how is it applicable to our hunting rifles?

Your quote:
if a shadowgraph is taken at high speed of bullet exit from muzzle
also
your quote:
The more friction there is the tighter the fit and less powder can blow by ?
Gerard wrote:
How do you tie these two together? One has nothing to do with the other.

Birds of the same feather flock together

quote:

Shall I say it comes from GSC?

No, you can tell the truth. Gina wrote the letter because she too has come to the end of her tether with your constant arguing about imaginary things, telling lies, bad (or non existant) research and your agenda. She did not bad mouth you, she simply stated fact: Any article submitted by you, that mentions a GSC product, or a product that will be assumed by the reader to be a GSC product, will be scrutinised very carefully for technical accuracy. Should there be any inaccuracy that is to the detriment of GSC or it's products, she will take such action as may be required to protect her interest. She motivated her action by mentioning your past record of slander, all of which she has on record and is provable. No more and no less.

Submit all the articles you like, as long as you stay clear of your agenda you will hear nothing from her.

shun tr.v. shunned, shun·ning, shuns
To avoid deliberately; keep away from

Are you saying no one in the broad shooting community in SA has done this. If you are, it is another lie.

Gerard,

Scrutiny in reloading methodology is absolutely the operative word, especially if the safety of people are on the line. A 'bad' load behind a 'good' bullet (any bullet for that matter) is not the fault of the bullet. Your maximum safe load is over the CIP maximum pressure. That is not the bullet's fault either. So I ask you to scrutinise your own recommended max safe loads, especially if it is given to you on a plate, unless your basic premise is that it is OK exceeding P-max levels for the non suspecting public or novice reloaders. If you subscribe to this reloading doctrine then I guess you can poll your support for this view in the various gun magazines or shooting fraternity.

Warrior

Warrior,

You're talking absolute BS re "Your maximum safe load is over the CIP maximum pressure."

I've seen guys shooting any caliber from .222 up to 416 Rigby and all in between loading up to the maximum velocities as recommended by GSC and absolutely zero signs of excessive pressure were noticed in any of these guys' brass after even a fairly high number of reloads - my own .308 and 7mm Rem Mag brass have now been reloaded for the ninth time without any signs of excessive pressure on them.

So, cut out with your monkey business and stick to your oh so slow and heavy stuff without ever trying to think of something more modern simply because your little brain can't cope with anything more than just this