Gun and Game Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
736 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The more I look at the 6.5 PRC the more impressed I get.
I compared it against three cartridges I tend to use hunting, 7mm RM, 300 WM, and 338 WM since those are flat shooters that pack a punch (which is more of a concern here in the western states). Did a ballistics analysis based on Hornady ELD-X 143 grain (6.5 PRC), Federal Power-Shok 175 grain (7mm RM), Nosler AccuBond 200 Grain (300 WM), and Hornady Superperformance SST 225 grain (338 WM). I know those are all quite different and not an apples-to-apples, but they are apples-to-apples for me in the sense of choosing a firearm and cartridge to take out the door when I embark on a hunt. I didn't compare hand-loaded cartridges.
I presumed a 200-yard zero. At 200 yards, the 6.5 PRC was 2,794 FPS and 2,479 foot pounds of energy; the 7mm RM was 2,477 FPS and 2,383 foot pounds of energy; the 300 WM was 2,505 FPS and 2,786 foot pounds of energy; and the 338 WM was 2,520 FPS and 3,172 foot pounds of energy. 6.5 PRC retained highest FPS velocity and 338 WM retained the greatest foot pounds of energy. All four rounds had sectional density above .28.
The cost in recoil was quite different. The 6.5 PRC generated 20.1 pounds of recoil, the 7mm RM was 26.2 pounds, the 300 WM was 31.7 pounds, and the 338 WM was 32.3 (that's based on a 6.5 PRC Browning X-Bolt Hell's Canyon, a 7mm RM Mauser M18, a 300 WM Weatherby Vanguard, and a 338 WM Ruger M77 Hawkeye).
I then plotted bullet impacts within a six-inch diameter target at 100 yards, 200 yard zero, and 250 yards. 6.5 PRC was the flattest shooter and here are visual depictions:
6.5 PRC:
upload_2020-2-22_11-21-42.png

7mm RM:
upload_2020-2-22_11-21-59.png

300 WM:
upload_2020-2-22_11-22-25.png

338 WM:
upload_2020-2-22_11-22-45.png


The impressive 6.5 PRC looks like a winning combination between high velocity, retained energy, lower recoil, and flatter trajectory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,368 Posts
Like you said, not an apples to apples comparison. You could compare the ELD-x in all the cartridges listed and have a better comparison.

With that said, i've read really good things about the PRC. Some say it's what the Creedmor should've been.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
736 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
run a 7mm 162 A-max at 2900 fps and see what the difference is. and you can kick it over 3000 fps if wanted. no one I know runs a 175 gr bullet in their 7mm mags.
Yes, I'm with you. I've always felt 162 gr was most ideal for 7mm RM. Unfortunately, have had trouble getting commercial ammo in that size where I shop. However, I was intrigued by Palladin's suggestion to compare Hornady ELD-X bullets, so did an analysis of 162 and 175 grain ELD-X bullets for 7mm RM. Up to 250 yards their flight trajectory was virtually identical. At 500 yards still very close (less than an inch difference in drop). Energy a different story. By the time they hit 500 yards the 162 grain had 1,981 foot pounds of energy, while the 175 grain is 9% higher at 2,156 foot pounds. Is that a relevant difference? Even for Elk I'd say no. Both bullets have sectional density above .285 and plenty of velocity/energy left over at 500 yards to make a humane elk kill. Picture below is how the 162 grain ELD-X plotted.
upload_2020-3-9_16-30-40.png
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
Yes, I'm with you. I've always felt 162 gr was most ideal for 7mm RM. Unfortunately, have had trouble getting commercial ammo in that size where I shop. However, I was intrigued by Palladin's suggestion to compare Hornady ELD-X bullets, so did an analysis of 162 and 175 grain ELD-X bullets for 7mm RM. Up to 250 yards their flight trajectory was virtually identical. At 500 yards still very close (less than an inch difference in drop). Energy a different story. By the time they hit 500 yards the 162 grain had 1,981 foot pounds of energy, while the 175 grain is 9% higher at 2,156 foot pounds. Is that a relevant difference? Even for Elk I'd say no. Both bullets have sectional density above .285 and plenty of velocity/energy left over at 500 yards to make a humane elk kill. Picture below is how the 162 grain ELD-X plotted.
View attachment 138706
I Use the 162 gr. in my 7mm mag. Hand loads. Tried the 139 gr. once and blew up on a deer's shoulder and had to track it. Never went back to less than 162 gr. And a real bonus is I can buy almost anywhere if necessary. The .338 mag was too much for me and I like my .375 H&H better. Less felt recoil. .300 mag is a real kicker too and I am comfortable with my 30.06 or 7mm mag. Just my opinion. If I was 25 years younger, yes, I'd try them all.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top