6.5 creed magnum

[Bluefish]

I see that.

But if you think about it, all the pressure has to come out the end of the barrel. It has no where else to go.

So it must just come out slower with a longer barrel, stretching out the peak impulse.

No matter the length of a barrel, the exact same total amount of energy must come out the end of the barrel.

See what I’m saying?

You are correct the total energy of the powder as to come out the barrel, but how much of the energy is in the bullet and how much is still in the expanding gases? If you take a say 60g powder charge and a 10” barrel vs a 20” barrel, what’s the difference in bullet speed? That difference in energy put into the bullet has to be contained by the can.

If run Quckload or GRT, they give the pressure left at the end of the barrel and how much powder is burned as a %. TLDR version is lots of powder and short barrels don’t burn all the powder and have higher pressure.

 

[omicron1792]

Thanks guys. Makes more sense now.

 

[HandgunHTR]

You are correct the total energy of the powder as to come out the barrel, but how much of the energy is in the bullet and how much is still in the expanding gases? If you take a say 60g powder charge and a 10” barrel vs a 20” barrel, what’s the difference in bullet speed? That difference in energy put into the bullet has to be contained by the can.

If run Quckload or GRT, they give the pressure left at the end of the barrel and how much powder is burned as a %. TLDR version is lots of powder and short barrels don’t burn all the powder and have higher pressure.

Another thing to keep in mind is a considerable amount of the "energy" is transformed to heat that is transferred to the barrel and is expelled at the muzzle. Not all "energy" is converted into momentum of the gasses or bullets, or "pressure".

That is why these discussions about "physics" and "energy" get dicey if all one has is a rudimentary understanding of physics and fluid dynamics.

So, getting back to what started this, Dan is implying that the uncorking pressure in these higher peak pressure cartridges must be higher because the peak pressure is higher. As you can see from the graph, that may or may not be true. For a cartridge that uses a slower burning powder, the peak is elongated and the slope of the tail is usually longer. This is why you want a longer barrel, so that that pressure can work on the bullet longer. However, in these newer cases that don't have a large powder column, you can use a faster burning powder, achieve a higher peak pressure, but it is going to drop off fast as that bullet moves down the barrel and the volume that available for the gases gets bigger (for a bit more information on why this happens look up Boyle's Law), and there is no continued burn to replenish those gases. So it is very possible that the uncorking pressure of a 300WM, 7PRC, or 6.5 PRC in a 20" barrel will be significantly higher than the uncorking pressure of a 7BC or 6.5+peak with that same 20" barrel length.

 

[R@crx37372]

We all know faster is deader is gooder. More gooder is betterer.

As a hunter killing critters between 30 yards and 400 yards, with the vast, vast majority inside of 250, how exactly is this helpful for me compared to a standard 6.5cm?

I would say there's a couple of advantages first you can push bullets much faster out of a shorter barrel, second there's a 155 fusion tipped and a 156 berger option that a standard creed cant push fast enough to make viable. A 155 grain bonded bullet at 2900 fps out of a 6.5 cm is a whole another level allowing for larger animals or larger margin for error.

 

[nm.otter]

in these newer cases that don't have a large powder column, you can use a faster burning powder, achieve a higher peak pressure, but it is going to drop off fast as that bullet moves down the barrel and the volume that available for the gases gets bigger (for a bit more information on why this happens look up Boyle's Law), and there is no continued burn to replenish those gases.

...and if powder is still burning (as it will be when shooting overbore cartridges from short barrels) the ejecta are screaming hot and still expanding inside the suppressor.

 

[The Guide]

I would say there's a couple of advantages first you can push bullets much faster out of a shorter barrel, second there's a 155 fusion tipped and a 156 berger option that a standard creed cant push fast enough to make viable. A 155 grain bonded bullet at 2900 fps out of a 6.5 cm is a whole another level allowing for larger animals or larger margin for error.

What do you mean that a brass cased 6.5 Creedmoor can't push a 156 to a speed that makes "viable"? My 22" Howa 6.5 Creedmoor pushes factory Berger 156 ammo @ 2528 fps. This means @ 2500' DA (just my local DA right now) it is @ 2000 fps @ 460 yards and 1800 fps @ 655 yards. That is way further than most people can shoot accurately at. The 156 class bullets are already a viable option for the 6.5 Creedmoor in brass cased factory loaded ammo. Hand load and get another 100fps and you'll be at 500 and 700 respectively. For most people the +PEAK cased ammo wont change their lives but it will sure make shooting in the wind easier and allow brass cased 22"+ velocities in shorter barrels.

Jay

 

[nm.otter]

Just ran the numbers on a 153 TMK doing 2900 FPS at my elevation. Wow.

 

[R@crx37372]

What do you mean that a brass cased 6.5 Creedmoor can't push a 156 to a speed that makes "viable"? My 22" Howa 6.5 Creedmoor pushes factory Berger 156 ammo @ 2528 fps. This means @ 2500' DA (just my local DA right now) it is @ 2000 fps @ 460 yards and 1800 fps @ 655 yards. That is way further than most people can shoot accurately at. The 156 class bullets are already a viable option for the 6.5 Creedmoor in brass cased factory loaded ammo. Hand load and get another 100fps and you'll be at 500 and 700 respectively. For most people the +PEAK cased ammo wont change their lives but it will sure make shooting in the wind easier and allow brass cased 22"+ velocities in shorter barrels.

Jay

 

[R@crx37372]

Thats pretty impressive. The + peak just gives you and additional 250-300 yards to the same velocity. Or elk energy (1800 ftlbs) out to 475 yards vs 200 yards with the standard brass load.

 

[nm.otter]

Careful using the 'E' word around here.

1,800 FPS to 1,000+ yards at 6,000 ft. Just wow.

OTOH, I expect widespread LR idiocy is coming.

 

[JohnJohnson]

Or elk energy (1800 ftlbs) out to 475 yards vs 200 yards with the standard brass load.

Roughly how much Wallop™ does that convert to?

 

[RME]

Roughly how much Wallop™ does that convert to?

At least a dollop by my calculation

 

[PaPete90]

Roughly how much Wallop does that convert to?

5.1 Giga-Thumps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wind gypsy]

OTOH, I expect widespread LR idiocy is coming.

Coming?

 

[The Guide]

Thats pretty impressive. The + peak just gives you and additional 250-300 yards to the same velocity. Or elk energy (1800 ftlbs) out to 475 yards vs 200 yards with the standard brass load.

Can you define "elk energy" and derive how the required "elk energy" is calculated? I'm not sure where that number comes from. Thanks!

Jay

 

[R@crx37372]

Can you define "elk energy" and derive how the required "elk energy" is calculated? I'm not sure where that number comes from. Thanks!

Jay

1,500 ft-lbs is the widely accepted minimum for ethical, humane kills on elk-sized game. For deeper penetration on larger bulls, some hunters and guides prefer 2,000 ft-lbs.
Another method is the Taylor knock out factor.The TKO factor is calculated using the following equation:\(TKOF = \frac{M \times V \times D}{7000}\)
Where:M: Mass of the bullet, measured in grains
V: Muzzle velocity of the bullet, measured in feet per second (fps)
D: Diameter of the bullet, measured in inches7000: The number of grains in a pound

 

[nm.otter]

Lemme grab some

 

[The Guide]

So basically it's a makeup number that has no quantitative foundation and isn't real and is more of a guess as to what some magazine writer thought was a good number to sell new cartridges. Guess all these cartridges that don't make that power factor, just can't kill an elk...

Jay

P.S.... STOP-AI scanned your response and says it is 100% AI generated and you didn't include the entire response...

 

[R@crx37372]

So basically it's a makeup number that has no quantitative foundation and isn't real and is more of a guess as to what some magazine writer thought was a good number to sell need cartridges. Guess all these cartridges that don't make that power factor, just can't kill an elk...

Jay

P.S.... STOP-AI scanned your response and says it is 100% AI generated and you didn't include the entire response.

So basically it's a makeup number that has no quantitative foundation and isn't real and is more of a guess as to what some magazine writer thought was a good number to sell need cartridges. Guess all these cartridges that don't make that power factor, just can't kill an elk...

Jay

P.S.... STOP-AI scanned your response and says it is 100% AI generated and you didn't include the entire response...

 

[R@crx37372]

Yeah, so basically both are examples from people much more experienced than you or I. And yes, i used a search engine for the details. Meanwhile morons like you decide to talk shit, but have no real answers of your own or data to support it. Typical fud backbencher. So let's hear your numbers and data to back your argument