Can someone explain to me the nomenclature of ammo

[userfriendly]

A little birdie said that all 338LM brass is made at the same factory.

So what is the best 1000 yard round? 300 Rum, 338LM, 26 Nosler or _____?

Edit; M777 is not an answer.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly
A little birdie said that all 338LM brass is made at the same factory.

So what is the best 1000 yard round? 300 Rum, 338LM, 26 Nosler or _____?

Edit; M777 is not an answer.


IMHO, for 1000 yards, the .338LM is just getting warmed up. And a lot of the brass (except Hornady) is all the same. Hornady makes their own and there were issues with some rifles and it feeding. I had feed issues with my 110BA, but my CDX-33 doesn't seem to care what you feed it.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Originally Posted By: userfriendly
So what is the best 1000 yard round? 300 Rum, 338LM, 26 Nosler or _____?

Edit; M777 is not an answer.


6.5 Creedmoor

 

[userfriendly]

Your friends at www.black-hills.com only show 260 Rem. Close enough?

 

[bunnspecial]

Originally Posted By: Falken
White Box - Winchester Wildcat with Super X stamped on the bottom of the shells.


I have a non-reloader friend who shoots almost nothing but Winchester White Box(WWB) and current brass is stamped "Winchester" along with the caliber. At some point in the not too far back past, it was stamped W-W(for Winchester-Western) and the caliber.

 

[BrocLuno]

Originally Posted By: Astro14
That's good to hear, Bill!

I've gone through quite a bit of Prvi Partizan ammo recently and been very pleased with it. 9mm, 10mm, 5.56mm, 7.62mm, 8mm mauser, and 7.5mm Swiss...it's all been clean, accurate and reliable.


+1

 

[BrocLuno]

Originally Posted By: GeorgeKaplan
Originally Posted By: userfriendly
So what is the best 1000 yard round? 300 Rum, 338LM, 26 Nosler or _____?

Edit; M777 is not an answer.


6.5 Creedmoor


6.5 in a number of flavors

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: BrocLuno
6.5 in a number of flavors


The 6.5's are the current flavor of the month up to 1,000 yards with a lot of the benchrest boys. Beyond that the .338's and .50 BMG's shine far brighter. If you look at the longest kills in the military, most all were made by either the .338's or the .50 BMG rounds. And all were in excess of 2,000 yards.

 

[punisher]

Originally Posted By: billt460

The 6.5's are the current flavor of the month up to 1,000 yards with a lot of the benchrest boys. Beyond that the .338's and .50 BMG's shine far brighter. If you look at the longest kills in the military, most all were made by either the .338's or the .50 BMG rounds. And all were in excess of 2,000 yards.


I just have not been able to figure out the popularity of the 6.5 to be honest, maybe I lack imagination. 7mm, sure. 7mm has better BCs than 6.5s in normal match weights (140-145gr for the 6.5, and 160-170gr for 7mm), sectional densities are comparable. I realize bullet weight plays a part at longer distances, but at 1000 yds as long as your bullet stays supersonic the whole way, 6.5 through .308 do the job without excessive recoil.

Like I said, I may be missing something.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: punisher
I just have not been able to figure out the popularity of the 6.5 to be honest, maybe I lack imagination. 7mm, sure. 7mm has better BCs than 6.5s in normal match weights (140-145gr for the 6.5, and 160-170gr for 7mm), sectional densities are comparable. I realize bullet weight plays a part at longer distances, but at 1000 yds as long as your bullet stays supersonic the whole way, 6.5 through .308 do the job without excessive recoil.

Like I said, I may be missing something.


No, I don't think you're missing anything. It's just the result of this months "hot caliber" popularity contest. We went through much the same thing when all the short fat wonder cartridges came out. They lasted about 15 minutes before their popularity started to peeter out. Now, with many of them you have to hunt for ammo, and the guns chambered for them aren't selling. Many are offered at extreme discounts.

I'm not condemning the 6.5's. They're fine. I'm just not seeing anything they can do that a .300 Magnum, .338 Magnum, or a .50 BMG cannot do better, and do it further. Especially when you go with the heavy, high sectional density bullets. 220-240 grain Berger's in .30 cal., 300 grain Sierra's in .338 cal., and 750 grain Hornady A-Max in .50 BMG. All will perform well beyond 2,000 yards. With the 6.5's, 2,000 yards is pushing it at best, beyond it's effective range in fact.

Sure, you will take a bit more recoil with them over the 6.5's. But with todays highly effective muzzle brakes it isn't that noticeable. My Bushmaster BA-50 has less recoil than my .30-06 Browning A-Bolt. My .338-378 Weatherby Accumark with the Accubrake is like shooting a .308 sporter. Like I said, most all of the military long range record setting kills were accomplished with either .50 BMG's or else .338 Magnum's. And I certainly don't see the military ditching them for 6.5's anytime soon.

 

[hatt]

Seems easy for me to see the appeal. 6.5s are a cheap and effective way to punch paper at 1000 yards. Sure, you can also do the same with a twenty pound four feet long $5000+ cannon chambered in $5 bills but a hole is a hole.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: punisher
Originally Posted By: billt460

The 6.5's are the current flavor of the month up to 1,000 yards with a lot of the benchrest boys. Beyond that the .338's and .50 BMG's shine far brighter. If you look at the longest kills in the military, most all were made by either the .338's or the .50 BMG rounds. And all were in excess of 2,000 yards.


I just have not been able to figure out the popularity of the 6.5 to be honest, maybe I lack imagination. 7mm, sure. 7mm has better BCs than 6.5s in normal match weights (140-145gr for the 6.5, and 160-170gr for 7mm), sectional densities are comparable. I realize bullet weight plays a part at longer distances, but at 1000 yds as long as your bullet stays supersonic the whole way, 6.5 through .308 do the job without excessive recoil.

Like I said, I may be missing something.


From what I've observed it comes down to reduced recoil over those comparable cartridges, which means quicker follow-up shots. This would be important for competition, not so much for other stuff. I'm much quicker with a follow-up with my .308 than I am with my .338LM. But the .338LM is more accurate and has far better range. I would choose the .308 if I was trying to get tight groups at reasonable range within a limited time frame. This is the logic behind the selection of the 6.5 stuff. Even less recoil than the .308.

I don't see it as something I'd seek out for the kind of shooting I do, and the only reason it has 1/2 taken off in the retail sector is all the fawning over the use in PRS and the like.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: hatt
Seems easy for me to see the appeal. 6.5s are a cheap and effective way to punch paper at 1000 yards.


There is no way to be, "cheap and effective" when shooting at 1,000+ yards. By the time you factor in a trued up blueprinted action, a match grade, hand lapped barrel, good high quality optics, rings and mounts. Not to mention stocks, (or as they are now termed "chassis"), along with range finders, bench rests, bipods, ballistic programs and calculators, and other expensive equipment, (ALL of which are required to obtain any kind of competitive, accurate shooting at 1,000+ yards), you're not going to be much, if any cheaper in 6.5 than you are with either a .300, or a .338 Magnum. And as far as ammo, it's going to be the least of your worries in shooting long range. Getting into long range shooting and worrying about the cost of ammo, is like buying a Gulfstream G-650 and worrying about fuel cost. Besides, most everyone in the long range game who is accomplishing anything is handloading, and has been for years.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

The 6.5 has been this month's hot caliber for over a century. If 1000 yards is the maximum expected distance, why have a caliber good for twice that distance? What do I care what the military uses if the main purpose of the rifle is for white tail deer at less than 200 yards?

I'm going to buy an F-450 to tow a jet ski.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: GeorgeKaplan
What do I care what the military uses if the main purpose of the rifle is for white tail deer at less than 200 yards?


Because we're talking 1,000 yards PLUS. Now go back to pulling your jet ski. Perhaps Hatt can help you. He doesn't seem to be doing much these days.

 

[GeorgeKaplan]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: GeorgeKaplan
What do I care what the military uses if the main purpose of the rifle is for white tail deer at less than 200 yards?


Because we're talking 1,000 yards PLUS. Now go back to pulling your jet ski. Perhaps Hatt can help you. He doesn't seem to be doing much these days.


We were talking nomenclature of ammo when a member asked, "So what is the best 1000 yard round?", not 1,000 PLUS. Maybe you didn't see that from way up on your pedestal.

No boat today. I let my neighbor borrow my F-450. He's picking up a couple bags of mulch from Home Depot. Me and Hatt will take my Bugatti Veyron to downtown NYC. I read someone in the military does that and has intention on changing.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: GeorgeKaplan
We were talking nomenclature of ammo when a member asked, "So what is the best 1000 yard round?", not 1,000 PLUS.


Try again. I was replying to Punisher's post. If both of you adolescent's could read and comprehend as well as you fantasize, you would have seen that. Punisher wasn't missing anything... You were. Now go back to your fantasy land. Perhaps you can let Pokémon drive your F-450 while you chase him down the sidewalk.

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: punisher
I just have not been able to figure out the popularity of the 6.5 to be honest, maybe I lack imagination. 7mm, sure. 7mm has better BCs than 6.5s in normal match weights (140-145gr for the 6.5, and 160-170gr for 7mm), sectional densities are comparable. I realize bullet weight plays a part at longer distances, but at 1000 yds as long as your bullet stays supersonic the whole way, 6.5 through .308 do the job without excessive recoil.

Like I said, I may be missing something.


No, I don't think you're missing anything. It's just the result of this months "hot caliber" popularity contest. We went through much the same thing when all the short fat wonder cartridges came out. They lasted about 15 minutes before their popularity started to peeter out. Now, with many of them you have to hunt for ammo, and the guns chambered for them aren't selling. Many are offered at extreme discounts.

I'm not condemning the 6.5's. They're fine. I'm just not seeing anything they can do that a .300 Magnum, .338 Magnum, or a .50 BMG cannot do better, and do it further. Especially when you go with the heavy, high sectional density bullets. 220-240 grain Berger's in .30 cal., 300 grain Sierra's in .338 cal., and 750 grain Hornady A-Max in .50 BMG. All will perform well beyond 2,000 yards. With the 6.5's, 2,000 yards is pushing it at best, beyond it's effective range in fact.

Sure, you will take a bit more recoil with them over the 6.5's. But with todays highly effective muzzle brakes it isn't that noticeable. My Bushmaster BA-50 has less recoil than my .30-06 Browning A-Bolt. My .338-378 Weatherby Accumark with the Accubrake is like shooting a .308 sporter. Like I said, most all of the military long range record setting kills were accomplished with either .50 BMG's or else .338 Magnum's. And I certainly don't see the military ditching them for 6.5's anytime soon.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: hatt
Seems easy for me to see the appeal. 6.5s are a cheap and effective way to punch paper at 1000 yards.


There is no way to be, "cheap and effective" when shooting at 1,000+ yards. By the time you factor in a trued up blueprinted action, a match grade, hand lapped barrel, good high quality optics, rings and mounts. Not to mention stocks, (or as they are now termed "chassis"), along with range finders, bench rests, bipods, ballistic programs and calculators, and other expensive equipment, (ALL of which are required to obtain any kind of competitive, accurate shooting at 1,000+ yards), you're not going to be much, if any cheaper in 6.5 than you are with either a .300, or a .338 Magnum. And as far as ammo, it's going to be the least of your worries in shooting long range. Getting into long range shooting and worrying about the cost of ammo, is like buying a Gulfstream G-650 and worrying about fuel cost. Besides, most everyone in the long range game who is accomplishing anything is handloading, and has been for years.
Pretty clear I said 1000 yards when you replied to me. You even put it in bold. You're arguing with yourself.

My post was very specific AND ACCURATE. Punching paper at 1000. Not shooting enemy miles away. Not taking out armored vehicles.

 

[hatt]

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/10/14/rifle-calibers-what-the-pros-use/

Quote:
Well, the data is in for the 2014 “What the Pros Use!” For the past 3 years, we’ve collected data on the equipment the best precision rifle shooters are using. The Precision Rifle Series tracks how top shooters finish in major rifle matches across the country. The highest ranked shooters qualify to compete in the PRS Season Championship Match. This data is based on the gear those elite shooters used in 2014. For more info on the Precision Rifle Series and who these guys are scroll to the bottom of this article.

Rifle Calibers
The previous couple years have shown a trend towards the 6mm caliber. Many were anxious to see if this was a fleeting fad, or a permanent evolution in precision rifles. 2014 gave a clear answer: 50% more shooters were using a 6mm than a 6.5mm. While there were a handful of competitors using a 7mm or 30 caliber in previous years, in 2014 100% of the top shooters were either using a 6mm or 6.5mm. Of the shooters who finished in the top 50 in the PRS, 60% were using a 6mm cartridge, and 40% were using a 6.5mm cartridge.


460, you better get in contact with these guys and tell them how flavor of the month they are for not using 7mm mags and 300s.

 

[OVERKILL]

Yup, as I said earlier, in PRS, it makes perfect sense due the ability to make very quick follow-up shots. Hence the trend. 6.5CM was the "choice de jour" for quite some time because of its lack of recoil and flat trajectory relative to the .308. 6.5 Lapua is another one, though not as popular for whatever reason.

I'm using the same scope as the majority of the PRS guys, the Gen II Razor in 4.5-27x56, however that doesn't make it the world's best scope, just the most popular in PRS. The rifle it is mounted on will likely never be used in that series due to its calibre (.338LM).