Need New Bullets for 65G!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • BluntForceTrauma
    Administrator
    • Feb 2011
    • 3897

    Need New Bullets for 65G!

    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.
    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 ::
  • grayfox
    Chieftain
    • Jan 2017
    • 4295

    #2
    Amen brother - convert those unbelievers!!!!!
    "Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"

    Comment

    • lrgrendel
      Warrior
      • Jul 2013
      • 662

      #3
      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.

      What powders do you think would work with a “115”?

      Comment

      • Cornbread
        Warrior
        • Dec 2015
        • 288

        #4
        I'll take a 100 gr Accubond. Thank you.

        Comment

        • VikingCruze
          Bloodstained
          • Dec 2017
          • 46

          #5
          Originally posted by Cornbread View Post
          I'll take a 100 gr Accubond. Thank you.

          Comment

          • kmon
            Chieftain
            • Feb 2015
            • 2095

            #6
            Originally posted by Cornbread View Post
            I'll take a 100 gr Accubond. Thank you.
            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

            • grayfox
              Chieftain
              • Jan 2017
              • 4295

              #7
              Some kind of LR hunting-capable 110-115 with bc > .500... I’d expect powders like 8208xbr and cfe223 to be the preferred ones. Others possibly too.
              "Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"

              Comment

              • Sticks
                Chieftain
                • Dec 2016
                • 1922

                #8
                A plus .5 BC in 110 or 115 running 2650 out of an 18... that would be nice
                Sticks

                Catchy sig line here.

                Comment

                • LR1955
                  Super Moderator
                  • Mar 2011
                  • 3355

                  #9
                  Guys:

                  What construction would you think is needed for your "VLD" 115 grain bullet?

                  LR55

                  Comment

                  • olde sarge
                    Warrior
                    • May 2014
                    • 247

                    #10
                    Accubond at 115 grains would suit me just fine.

                    Comment

                    • Wafavre2
                      Warrior
                      • Feb 2017
                      • 142

                      #11
                      How about a Partition style with a boat tail and latest ogive in 110 gr?

                      Comment

                      • grayfox
                        Chieftain
                        • Jan 2017
                        • 4295

                        #12
                        Originally posted by LR1955 View Post
                        Guys:

                        What construction would you think is needed for your "VLD" 115 grain bullet?

                        LR55
                        Not an engineer, however....
                        that size/type would be my ideal I think... would probably need to be lead/copper cup/core to take advantage of the higher density of the lead (shorter lengths possible than for a mono)
                        I imagine it would take a boat tail with secant ogive (long pointy nose)? In 110/115 weight class there hopefully would be enough room length-wise since the 129's measure 1.319 (sst, NAB130) and the ABLR is 1.350... with a 10%+/- weight reduction it's maybe, idk, 1.2-ish inches long like in the Amax/SST?
                        Just brainstorming here.
                        "Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"

                        Comment

                        • VASCAR2
                          Chieftain
                          • Mar 2011
                          • 6219

                          #13
                          I read the way the Partitions are constructed it limits it’s potential accuracy. I’m not sure the bonded core bullets trump a partition bullet but I think the Fusion has proven the merits of a bonded core.

                          One of the advantages of the 6.5 Grendel is it’s inherit accuracy. If your wanting a +.5 BC I think we want a bullet that delivers a commensurate amount of accuracy out of it’s design. Whether we’re forced to use monolithic bullets because of fear of lead in the future is unknown. The bonded core bullets show less fragmentation and less lead left in the wound track.

                          The 105 to 115 grain bonded core tipped bullet sounds like it could prove very effective out of shorter 6.5 Grendel barrels. The bonded core bullet should alleviate the problem of over expansion/fragmentation (under penetration) of cup and core bullets at very close range out of longer 6.5 Grendel barrels.
                          Last edited by VASCAR2; 12-09-2017, 03:11 PM.

                          Comment

                          • LR1955
                            Super Moderator
                            • Mar 2011
                            • 3355

                            #14
                            Originally posted by grayfox View Post
                            Not an engineer, however....
                            that size/type would be my ideal I think... would probably need to be lead/copper cup/core to take advantage of the higher density of the lead (shorter lengths possible than for a mono)
                            I imagine it would take a boat tail with secant ogive (long pointy nose)? In 110/115 weight class there hopefully would be enough room length-wise since the 129's measure 1.319 (sst, NAB130) and the ABLR is 1.350... with a 10%+/- weight reduction it's maybe, idk, 1.2-ish inches long like in the Amax/SST?
                            Just brainstorming here.
                            GF:

                            Trying to remember my 6.5mm bullet swaging days. 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.

                            DU core bullets ought to do the trick.

                            LR55

                            Comment

                            • grayfox
                              Chieftain
                              • Jan 2017
                              • 4295

                              #15
                              Right, what Vascar said...
                              I'm not afraid of the lead/LFP issues, and when I mentioned lead/copper, the bonded core works just fine for that, doesn't have to be a traditional cup/core... and wasn't really thinking of the partition design b/c that's an extra cost type of manufacturing. My only point I was making was that the use of lead will enable shortening the body so that the secant/long-tip can be stretched, thus attaining the higher bc's...
                              So bonded core is great. As for the tip, either a poly or Berger-style (copper) as long as there is good consistency. The poly tips seem to have the more consistent overall lengths.
                              Actually as I write this there are some LFP's that might be in that category: the MKZ's of cavity-back (105, 118), although to retain an economical construction it doesn't have to have the cavity back style. OTOH, eliminating the cavity-back might shorten the LFP length so you might not have the .500-BC you're looking for in the 110/115 class -- and so we're at the point where I confess I don't know how all of these desires would shake out.

                              IMO the bonded core setup is probably the best of most worlds in this. Nosler are you listening? or maybe Hornady??

                              And roger the comment about shorter barrels... I was thinking of using this bullet in my 16"... 12-14's would also benefit!

                              BFT is this what you were thinking?
                              "Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X