Need New Bullets for 65G!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • grayfox
    Chieftain
    • Jan 2017
    • 4295

    #16
    '55.... DU???? O yeah, depleted uranium.... hahahahaha!
    Well maybe we could just buy back some of our U that was shipped out via Atomenergoprom from Wyoming to... where? who knows?

    Right; no politics now!!!
    If we could get the right brand of DU they would also "glow in the dark" without adding any tracer materials...?
    "Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"

    Comment

    • grayfox
      Chieftain
      • Jan 2017
      • 4295

      #17
      One more minor thought: even if we can't quite get to the .500 bc it sets a nice goal to shoot for.
      "Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"

      Comment

      • LRRPF52
        Super Moderator
        • Sep 2014
        • 8569

        #18
        What are the intended performance requirements on the target and out to what effective range?

        The advantage I see to a lighter bullet is flatter trajectory, but when you go lighter than 123gr cup and core, you get down into the .4's for G1 BC, which is not good for a target bullet.

        For a hunting bullet, flat trajectory and lighter weight equal less recoil and less range estimation or vertical error, but that really isn't a common problem with 6.5 Grendel for typical hunting distances.

        Let's get some results with the 107gr TMK from Sierra and see how it does. We haven't really done anything with the 130gr TMK yet either, and they just introduced the 107gr TMK.

        Other TMKs have had impressive performance in gel, so it might be a great dual-purpose bullet.

        I'd like to see a rebated BT TMK, shift core a little more forward, increase accuracy potential due to better gas seal.
        NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

        CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

        6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

        www.AR15buildbox.com

        Comment

        • Troutguide
          Warrior
          • Jan 2017
          • 380

          #19
          See this is why this site is so fun. Especially since this brainstorm might actually come to something not just internet babble. Cool to at least watch the evolution. I'm in for a 100-110 hunting bullet that opens at slower speeds (1600) and stays together at max Grendel velocity (3000) and has a good bc. Simple right.
          "I rarely give a definite answer" - TG

          Comment

          • lesbaer45
            Bloodstained
            • Mar 2015
            • 54

            #20
            Originally posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
            Yesterday I "Photo-chopped" Sierra's 6.5mm 150gr MatchKing — the one with that insanely wicked ogive — into what I think a 115gr version would look like. I emailed it to Sierra, reminding them that high BC AND high velocity together are an unbeatable combination and asking them to make it.

            Seems a trend, lately, to offer heavy 6.5mm bullets, but we need a campaign to get the very latest 6.5mm ogives in Grendel suitable weights of 107-123.

            BONUS: Also mocked up a 115gr version of Berger's 6.5mm 140 Hybrid.

            I presume the heavier bullets are for the 6.5 Creedmoor as the current shiny hotness. Although I bet they'd work pretty good in a Swede 6.5x55 as well.

            Is a 115g really that much better than the 107SMK to TMK?

            Comment

            • Cornbread
              Warrior
              • Dec 2015
              • 288

              #21
              The fact that there are so many 6.5 bullets already available for the 6.5 grendel is a blessing and a curse. Because many of the available bullets can work at grendel speeds there is not much incentive to develop bullets specifically for the Grendel.

              Comment

              • BluntForceTrauma
                Administrator
                • Feb 2011
                • 3897

                #22
                LB45, my thinking on the 6.5 107 TSMK is that it's very cool, but I'm looking for these sleeker hybrid ogives pioneered by Berger.

                I'm wanting something that reflects Warner Tool's thinking with their LFP Flatline bullets: "Fly as fast as the next lower class of bullets, with a BC of the next higher weight class."

                Originally posted by LR1955 View Post
                I believe the 1.2" J-4 Jackets I used ended up weighing about 130 grains if I filled them with enough lead to support the ogive. To get the weight down to 115 grains, you would need a lighter core.

                Of that 1.2 inches of bullet length, about .3" must be bearing surface or you will have massive instability problems in bore. That leaves .8" for the rest of the bullet. Looking at a 6 or 7 tangent ogive and a BC of around .4.

                The bullet that BFT chopped off lacks bearing surface and the tip is way too long for it to be stable.
                LR, here's my rationale:

                1) See the attached photo of the Berger .30 200-grain 200.20X bullet. Has a very similar form factor to what I'm proposing; note the longish nose, so I don't think my proposal is too outlandish. Heck, could scale down that bullet to .264 and call 'er done.

                2) I agree this bullet should have a minimum bearing surface of 0.300". The Berger 6.5mm 140 BT bearing surface is 0.328, so 0.300 should be doable.

                3) This bullet would be 1.25" long, about the same as a 6.5 107 SMK. Boattail = 0.210. Bearing surface/"shank" = 0.300. With a Grendel case length of 1.520 and COL of 2.260 or 2.290 max, this allows a bullet nose of 0.740 or 0.770. Berger's existing 140 Elite Hunter has a 0.744 nose and their 140 Hybrid Target has a 0.768 nose. Something really close to either of these noses would work.

                4) Lead fill. Yeah, a bit problematic. HPBTs typically have an air space in the tip, yes, but I don't want to get ridiculous like the Lapua 6.5 100 Scenar, which is almost literally only half filled with lead. (Note lead fill of Lapua .30 155 Scenar, attached.) However, with a sleeker hybrid ogive it would use less fill than a tangent ogive.
                Attached Files
                :: 6.5 GRENDEL Deer and Targets :: 6mmARC Targets and Varmints and Deer :: 22 ARC Varmints and Targets

                :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

                Comment

                • KRWGrendel
                  Unwashed
                  • Feb 2017
                  • 8

                  #23
                  Originally posted by kmon View Post
                  I would like the Longrange accubond at 110 grains or 100 grains. Higher velocity, will open further out than most of us should shoot with a higher BC than the standard accubond

                  Comment

                  • LR1955
                    Super Moderator
                    • Mar 2011
                    • 3355

                    #24
                    Originally posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
                    LB45, my thinking on the 6.5 107 TSMK is that it's very cool, but I'm looking for these sleeker hybrid ogives pioneered by Berger.

                    I'm wanting something that reflects Warner Tool's thinking with their LFP Flatline bullets: "Fly as fast as the next lower class of bullets, with a BC of the next higher weight class."



                    LR, here's my rationale:

                    1) See the attached photo of the Berger .30 200-grain 200.20X bullet. Has a very similar form factor to what I'm proposing; note the longish nose, so I don't think my proposal is too outlandish. Heck, could scale down that bullet to .264 and call 'er done.

                    2) I agree this bullet should have a minimum bearing surface of 0.300". The Berger 6.5mm 140 BT bearing surface is 0.328, so 0.300 should be doable.

                    3) This bullet would be 1.25" long, about the same as a 6.5 107 SMK. Boattail = 0.210. Bearing surface/"shank" = 0.300. With a Grendel case length of 1.520 and COL of 2.260 or 2.290 max, this allows a bullet nose of 0.740 or 0.770. Berger's existing 140 Elite Hunter has a 0.744 nose and their 140 Hybrid Target has a 0.768 nose. Something really close to either of these noses would work.

                    4) Lead fill. Yeah, a bit problematic. HPBTs typically have an air space in the tip, yes, but I don't want to get ridiculous like the Lapua 6.5 100 Scenar, which is almost literally only half filled with lead. (Note lead fill of Lapua .30 155 Scenar, attached.) However, with a sleeker hybrid ogive it would use less fill than a tangent ogive.
                    BFT:

                    It's shape reminds me of the Norma 130 Gold bullet. Not sure why that bullet failed to perform other than the tip was too long for the rest of the bullet.

                    I used to make a 185 grain .30 cal bullet that looks like your picture. Shot great. I attribute its performance to the length of the shank which was a bit longer than your picture.

                    Anyway, why do you think it would perform any better than a 123 or 107 / 108?

                    LR55

                    Comment

                    • StoneHendge
                      Chieftain
                      • May 2016
                      • 2009

                      #25
                      Originally posted by LR1955 View Post
                      BFT:

                      It's shape reminds me of the Norma 130 Gold bullet. Not sure why that bullet failed to perform other than the tip was too long for the rest of the bullet.

                      I used to make a 185 grain .30 cal bullet that looks like your picture. Shot great. I attribute its performance to the length of the shank which was a bit longer than your picture.

                      Anyway, why do you think it would perform any better than a 123 or 107 / 108?

                      LR55
                      I have actually been having great success with the 130Norma GTs in my S’more. Plus, I did my load a good old fashioned 2.800 COAL and found a load that shoots better than me at 2800fps without having to play with seating depth.
                      Let's go Brandon!

                      Comment

                      • BluntForceTrauma
                        Administrator
                        • Feb 2011
                        • 3897

                        #26
                        Originally posted by LR1955 View Post
                        Anyway, why do you think it would perform any better than a 123 or 107 / 108?
                        I'm thinking there are incremental performance gains to be had by having new, sleeker ogives than the currently available 107/108 and 120/123 bullets.

                        Given the 65G's limited case capacity, am trying to balance lighter weight for velocity with sleekness for BC. Have tentatively settled on 115 grains, splitting difference between 107 and 123.

                        Are there custom bullet makers out there who will make a given bullet design?
                        :: 6.5 GRENDEL Deer and Targets :: 6mmARC Targets and Varmints and Deer :: 22 ARC Varmints and Targets

                        :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

                        Comment

                        • Wafavre2
                          Warrior
                          • Feb 2017
                          • 142

                          #27
                          i load and shoot the 6.5G with the Nosler 125 gr Partition out to 200 yards with enough accuracy for hunting. The reason I suggested the Partition at 110 gr with a boat tail and modern ogive and ballistic tip was for hunting applications at extended ranges say to 400 yds. Higher speeds, less drop and the softer frontal part for expansion with the rear to drive penetration. It’s the hunting selection of bullets that I would like to see expanded on.

                          Comment

                          • Makerbullets
                            Unwashed
                            • Mar 2017
                            • 6

                            #28
                            Yes. I will

                            Comment

                            • rickOshay
                              Warrior
                              • Apr 2012
                              • 784

                              #29
                              Paul at Maker Bullets asked me to post these files of his analysis. I'll let him comment.










                              Comment

                              • Makerbullets
                                Unwashed
                                • Mar 2017
                                • 6

                                #30
                                I designed this bullet based on the requirements BFT detailed in the thread. I believe I captured all of the input. This is what we can do in a tipped expanding solid copper. I suspect the real world BC to be slightly higher based on other similar designs we have done. I can do a hybrid ogive as well. I just don't have software to calculate the BC of a hybrid. This should give you expansion close to 750 yds (1600 fps). We have a window of about 800 - 1200fps, depending on a number of factors, that we can shift around in the velocity range. Look it over and give me some ideas what you would want to change. I personally just started playing with the 6.5G, so I am game to do some testing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X