Mark Bansner is making me one of his ultimate ovis rifles. I was originally intending to have it chambered in 7mm wsm. I spoke with a cousin recently who suggested I go with a 6.5mm wsm due to the ballistic superiority of the 6.5mm bullet for long range shooting. I reload so having a wildcat cartridge isn't a problem. I'm thinking about loading with Swift scirocco 2 bullets. Swift makes a 6.5mm 130gr scirocco with a SD of .266 and a BC of .571. Swift makes a 7mm 150gr scirocco with a SD of .266 and a BC of .515. I'm not like all the other studs on here shooting goats and sheep at 800 yards or more . I'd like to keep my shooting to 400 yards or less, so this doesn't have to be a 1000 yard gun. Aproximate velocities for the 130gr 6.5mm and 150gr 7mm bullets will be 3100fps. What are your thoughts about the practical differences between the 6.5mm wsm vs. the 7mm wsm for distances out to 500yards?

Brett

If you are shooting at 400 yards or less you will never see the full benefit of the 6.5 ballistics. You may as well go with the 7MM to keep it simple. Or build the 6.5 just for fun.

Brett,

Why a short mag? Why not a .264 Win Mag or a 7mm Rem Mag? .264 will easily get you 3,200fps with the high SD 140gr bullets. Long range killing machine.

Cheers,
Andy

quote:

Originally posted by 458Lottfan:
If you are shooting at 400 yards or less you will never see the full benefit of the 6.5 ballistics. You may as well go with the 7MM to keep it simple.

This normally is good advice....however I think the reduced recoil of the 6.5mm bullets will improve accuracy.....

In fact we have the proverbial "toss up"

Both great rounds....flip a coin.

quote:

Or build the 6.5 just for fun.

two thumbs up on this!!!

quote:

Originally posted by 458Lottfan:
If you are shooting at 400 yards or less you will never see the full benefit of the 6.5 ballistics. You may as well go with the 7MM to keep it simple. Or build the 6.5 just for fun.

That's pretty much what I was thinking.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Cane Rat:
Brett,

Why a short mag? Why not a .264 Win Mag or a 7mm Rem Mag? .264 will easily get you 3,200fps with the high SD 140gr bullets. Long range killing machine.

Cheers,
Andy

They require a longer action (more weight to the rifle.

Brett

Of course if you get the factory loaded round your rifle will always have more value in case you change your mind and want something different. Also living in Alaska something on the order of a 160 gr. nosler would have more authority in case you did run into a mountain grizzly.

If I were considering a 6.5 with the approximate ballistics you're referring to I would choose the excellent 6.5x284. It's pretty standard in accuracy circles, so any quality loading accessories that you might desire are readily available.

quote:

quote:
Or build the 6.5 just for fun.

two thumbs up on this!!!

+1

I have a 6.5 WSM and I love it.

I've only own one 6.5 was a 6.5x284 never hunted with rifle but I've hunted with alot of 7mm. I just had two customs build 284 and 280AI plan on using the 160gr AB be deer/elk rifles. If I decide I want to play around with some LR shooing berger makes a pretty nice target/hunting bullets in 168/180gr.

I like the WSM case got 2 custom 300WSM and 1 270WSM only reason I didn't do a 7WSM I had two action that would work for the 284 and 280AI.

You have a hard choice to make. I think the 7mm is getting better bullet selection over the 6.5 today your about max out at 140gr. Well good luck

Personally I would choose the .270 WSM over either of the rounds you mentioned. Shooting any of the three with 140-150 grain bullets there is not enough difference to worry about out to the ranges you mentioned.

Why the .270 WSM over the over two? Resale value. The 7mm is the least popular of the three main WSM's (270, 7mm, 300) based upon RCBS reloading dies sales. Wildcats are usually even more difficult to resell.

Sheep, black bears, caribou, blacktails, etc..............the 140's out of the 270 would work perfectly. Own one for myself built by Hill Country rifles and just purchased my son a Win 70 stainless in the same caliber for his birthday

I'd greedily trade the imaginary $12 difference in resale value,for the Real World ballistic differences associated with superior BC's.

The 7WSM is king.

Brett,

To answer your question I think for your described purposes there really is not much difference so I'd pick the 7MM. Now if you asked me what I'd recommend for Alaska sheep and goats it would be a 30 cal. something. Super flat trajectory is not really necessary and the ability to shoot a heavier bullet for grizzly is a real advantage. I bet that Bansner can build a 300 mag that will tip the scales at 7 pounds with scope.

Mark

The diameter differences betwixt the 7mm and 30,are less than meaningless,as are the musings of a "heavier" bullet. .284" bullets abound,which will treelength something the size of a Griz...though admittedly I've long had a soft spot for the .308" 165XLC.

Though in 30-8mmRemmag.

I looked at the 6.5-284, 6.5wsm, .270wsm, and 7wsm. I really don't see much difference in bullet weight and performance between the 6.5s and .270. The .270 bullets are the worst for BC and SD, so I kind of narrowed it down to the 6.5s and the 7wsm. I'm just not seeing any great advantage from the higher BC 6.5s at ranges I'm comfortable shooting (and quite frankly anyone has any business shooting at animals). You notice a slight difference at 400 yards and even at 500 yards the trajectory is too similar to really matter. I think I like the idea of the heavier 150 grain bullet from the 20 hundredths bigger bore in bear country. I spoke with Mark Bansner today and he said in the 7wsm with a 24" barrel I should be pushing the 150gr Sciroccos at least 3100fps and maybe a bit more. I think I'm just going to stick with the 7wsm. Thanks for the input guys. I wanted some feedback to see if I was missing something. I have to send him the scope (Swarovski Z3 3-9x36mm) for it and hopefully I'll have the rifle by the end of August/begining of September. I'll post pictures and targets when I get her. Thanks again.

Brett

I shoot 162's at 3100fps+ in (3) 24" 7WSM's ala Re-22,for conversation. My 26" does a CH better,but 24" is where to be.

A victim from this Spring,with said(24") combo.

You will be happy with the Sciroccos. My brother in Alaska has killed a ton of game with his Ruger All-Weather 7MM Rem Mag shooting those bullets. I have never been a big 7MM fan but there is no doubt that they work great on game. I really like my Kimber Montana in .300 WSM. I dropped 11 big game animals with it in 2008. Turning 40 was one of the best years of my life!! Good luck with the new gun. Love to see the results.

I've only had (2) 300WSM's to my (5) 7WSM's...but just like any other race of like capacity,the 7mm Finishes first.

The 7WSM Montucky is the best Killing Rifle ever offered over the counter.

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
I have to send him the scope (Swarovski Z3 3-9x36mm) for it
Brett

You'll like that scope, I have the same scope on my Steyr Mannlicher .243.

Cheers,
Andy

It'd be a shame to hamstring such a capable chambering,in such a manner.

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
What are your thoughts about the practical differences between the 6.5mm wsm vs. the 7mm wsm for distances out to 500yards?
Brett

I don't think there could be any significant practical difference at all.

6.5 bearing surface area is very typically a bitch,which robs speed.

It's ALL about the bullet and Today,the 7mm simply has that edge comfortably in it's corner. Tomorrow is a like forecast...as it has been since inception of same.(grin)

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:
What are your thoughts about the practical differences between the 6.5mm wsm vs. the 7mm wsm for distances out to 500yards?
Brett

The practical differences are far greater than any scale, chronograph, or reason can explain. On the one hand you have the huge .284 bullet with it's extreme diameter, suitable only for the largest of dangerous game. On the other hand you have the pipsqueak .264 bullet, so thin and skinny, suitable only for the smallest of varmints. Therefore, the only sensible solution is the 270 wsm with its .277 bullet. It won't blow a sheep to smithereens like the 7mm and it won't be limited to making bee-sting type wounds like the 6.5mm. We can only thank our stars that these three cartridges are not so similar from a practical perspective.

For this answer you sir diserve a prize!

Brett

You deserve one for "diserve".

I went back and edited my post for the sake of clarity.

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:
It'd be a shame to hamstring such a capable chambering,in such a manner.

I'm guessing you mean by placing a 3-9 scope on this rifle I won't get it's potential. My thought is I just paid 4-5k for a light weight sheep rifle. The last thing I need to do is put a 15-16oz scope on it. My scope choice is 11oz, so I'm saving a 1/4lb. of weight. Since I've shot an impala at 300 yards with a .375 and 6x scope I'm quite sure I can do a sheep or goat with a 9x at 400 to God help me if I can't get closer 500 yards. I just think it's insane to pay that much money for a super light weight rifle and then throw a 16oz 4.5-14x50 scope on it. Kind of seems like defeating the purpose.

Brett

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:
You deserve one for "diserve".

If you look at my signature you'll clearly see my disclaimer:

"Despite an expensive and lengthy education I still can't spell!"

Brett

In fairness a 24" 7WSM will reach 1K with sub 20MOA ele correction,from a 250yd zero and be chooglin' at 1770fps,factoring a worst case sealevel scenario...with less than 5.5MOA windage requisite to correct a full value 10mph wind.

In most circles,that's called a "free lunch" and well beyond significant,given the amount of propellant requisite to arrange such a melding.

then there's the fact that it hits like a literal Freight Train too. Win/win.

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:
It'd be a shame to hamstring such a capable chambering,in such a manner.

I'm guessing you mean by placing a 3-9 scope on this rifle I won't get it's potential. My thought is I just paid 4-5k for a light weight sheep rifle. The last thing I need to do is put a 15-16oz scope on it. My scope choice is 11oz, so I'm saving a 1/4lb. of weight. Since I've shot an impala at 300 yards with a .375 and 6x scope I'm quite sure I can do a sheep or goat with a 9x at 400 to God help me if I can't get closer 500 yards. I just think it's insane to pay that much money for a super light weight rifle and then throw a 16oz 4.5-14x50 scope on it. Kind of seems like defeating the purpose.

Brett

The Leupie 6x42 is far more glass,for less...especially when wearing an M1 ele turret.

I'd be very suprised to learn of anyone having more disdain for Hubble-esque glass than I and the 4.5-14x in particular.

This combo will easily stay sub .5MOA at 700yds+,even when I'm laughing my ass off.





For conversation,here's a.....LINK.

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:

quote:

Originally posted by Brett Adam Barringer:

quote:

Originally posted by Busheler:
It'd be a shame to hamstring such a capable chambering,in such a manner.

I'm guessing you mean by placing a 3-9 scope on this rifle I won't get it's potential. My thought is I just paid 4-5k for a light weight sheep rifle. The last thing I need to do is put a 15-16oz scope on it. My scope choice is 11oz, so I'm saving a 1/4lb. of weight. Since I've shot an impala at 300 yards with a .375 and 6x scope I'm quite sure I can do a sheep or goat with a 9x at 400 to God help me if I can't get closer 500 yards. I just think it's insane to pay that much money for a super light weight rifle and then throw a 16oz 4.5-14x50 scope on it. Kind of seems like defeating the purpose.

Brett

The Leupie 6x42 is far more glass,for less...especially when wearing an M1 ele turret.

I'd be very suprised to learn of anyone having more disdain for Hubble-esque glass than I and the 4.5-14x in particular.

I'll take your word for it, but my problem is I don't relish the idea of bumping into a grizzly in brush with 6x vision for repelling borders. That's just my though.

Brett

Have had 6x's in Brown Country for 25yrs now.

If there was something better,I'd drive it.

What is that ugly looking piece of shit with the fake stainless look?
Butch

bitchlambert,

I'm surprised you've never seen a S/S Montana in the flesh. I've a few more,how many would you like to study,so as to better get a grip on your "skills"?

You will never see one of those in my hands.
Butch

bitchlambert,

Sorry to hear of your affliction. Good luck with the Savage!

Whirlwind clearly don't know Butch.
Mr. Lambert has probably the nicest taste in rifles out there.
I bet that he hunts those customs as well.

Sincerely,
Thomas

Thanks Thomas, I am in Anchorage now. We are headed for Seward for a cruise and sightseeing.
Butch

quote:

Originally posted by butchlambert:
Thanks Thomas, I am in Anchorage now. We are headed for Seward for a cruise and sightseeing.
Butch

Enjoy Anchorage! The Fur Exchange and the Antique gallery are the best places in town to pick up gifts and nice stuff. Simmon & Seaforts, Glacier Brew House, and Orso's are aweful good places to eat. Have fun.

Brett