Back when the 222 hit the market on the following day someone necked it to 6mm thus the birth of the 6/222, shortly thereafter the 6-222 Magnum hit the wildcat market and became known as the 6x47, then the 6-223 to be known as the 6x45, that followed by the shot fat bench rest 6mm rounds on on it goes...
My choice was and is to this day the 6x45 (6-223) a round I have used on pinheads to Mule deer with 100% success. A 75 gr. Barnes X is a sure killer of deer and antelope in open country. I say open country because no 6mm or 22 cal. can be depended on to leave a good blood trail everytime.
Posts: 41833 | Location: Twin Falls, Idaho | Registered: 04 June 2000
Has anyone chambered an AR15 for 6X45? The brass is uber cheap, and I'm not that far from Sierra either. I'm thinking about building a 20" A2 rifle on my Cav Arms lower.
Posts: 546 | Location: Oklahoma City, OK | Registered: 29 November 2002
I was considering the same thing, I want to build a rifle in National Match guise, green furniture, 20" A2, free float tube under the handguards, NM sights, etc. Just a little bit more under the hood...
Posts: 546 | Location: Oklahoma City, OK | Registered: 29 November 2002
From a historical perspective, the 6x47 was always considered much more accurate. Remington (Mike Walker) pushed it when the 40X was "the" benchrest gun. Supposedly, the long neck was a real aid to accuracy and the reason for its superiority over the 6x45(223). They were the kings until the PPC's came along.
From a practical standpoint, there is little difference in a field rifle. However, there is one pragmatic difference. I just set back the barrel of a 6x47 and converted it to 6x45. The little extra in OAL is just enough to make the round too long to work effectively through the action of a lot of Sako 461's and Mini Mark X's. These are generally the actions of choice for these cartridges, and a lot of 6x47's end up being single shots, as mine was.
Posts: 1233 | Location: Lexington, Kentucky, USA | Registered: 04 February 2003
