6.5 PRC what bullets we using?

[Midnight Mallard]

I had used eldx for the last couple years out of 6.5 prc, tried ELDM this year due to a tighter group and from info ive gathered from this site as well as from listening to various podcast. Below are the photos from this year's antelope harvest. Ranged at 502 while the buck was bedded, dialed and waited for a shot. Buck stood up and moved quartering away. Settled in for the shot and he dropped on the spot. Noticed some death thrashes as approached. Impact was about 5 inches higher than what I wanted and had entered thru front should before going thru the neck and exiting. Re ranged to shooting location and was closer to 475 than 500 yards which explained the bullet placement. Was more than impressed with the 147 ELDM and the carnage that it imposed. Tiny hole on entrance and then about 2 inches into impact you can see where the bullet expanded and carried a solid 2-3 hole completely thru and exited. Will be using going forward for the amount of hide, meat and bone it went thru it will have no problem on anything in North America when put in the proper location.

 

[Rmusgrove]

Shot every thing for Eldm, burger, hammer 125, and went back to Barnes 127lrx win n560 and lapua brass.

 

[JGRaider]

That 127 LRX sounds like a great choice.

 

[JO.]

156 berger has been a hammer in mine. I have about 1200 other 6.5 bullets and I won't be switching to them anytime soon.

 

[omicron1792]

140gr tipped fusion.

 

[62flint]

I have had good luck with a 156berger,

 

[jlchester5045]

If you were just hunting deer, you could get away with about anything that shoots well. If you intend to shoot elk at some point, find a monolithic that shoots well in your rifle. 127 LRX, 130 CX, 125 HHT, etc. You will always get the needed consistent penetration while cup and core projectiles can sometimes come up short. As an added bonus, your meat doesn't have lead fragments scattered all throughout it lol.

 

[Mark B]

147 ELDm
140 Berger Elite Hunter
125 Cutting Edge Laser if you need an all copper. Which I do on one ranch I hunt Whitetails, owners request as they love raptors.

 

[Harvey_NW]

If you were just hunting deer, you could get away with about anything that shoots well. If you intend to shoot elk at some point, find a monolithic that shoots well in your rifle. 127 LRX, 130 CX, 125 HHT, etc. You will always get the needed consistent penetration while cup and core projectiles can sometimes come up short. As an added bonus, your meat doesn't have lead fragments scattered all throughout it lol.

So you'd rather put a .5" diameter hole through the cavity than a coke can sized hole?

Yeah, they might "come up short" on the "penetration" metric for people that don't understand terminal performance, but in reality for short to mid range broadside shots they still penetrate the entire cavity, and either exit completely, or get trapped under the hide. The difference is they deposit most, or all, of the beloved "energy" into the tissue and vitals in the cavity, instead of the dirt behind the animal.

 

[JGRaider]

I'm not a diehard small bore advocate, but I sure don't want a "coke can sized hole" either.

 

[Harvey_NW]

I'm not a diehard small bore advocate, but I sure don't want a "coke can sized hole" either.

I do. Here are the exits on the 2 bucks my wife and I killed last week at 100 and 210 yards, both with the 143 ELD-X out of a 6.5 PRC. One of them likely fragmented more and has 2 exit wounds, something I have seen before. But neither buck made it further than 50 yards from where they were standing, both dead in seconds. Very little usable meat damage.

 

[JGRaider]

I'll take quarter sized all day, every day.

 

[zlew25]

Gonna be reloading for my 6.4 PRC. What are roksliders fav bullets to use in the 6.5 PRC

Will be hunting mostly whitetail, with Mule Deer and Elk occasoinally when i can afford/have time to go out west.

Leaning towards Accubonds, but what about Hornady? or others?

What has been your experiences?

124 or 131 Hammer Hunters. FYI you need a 7.5 twist or faster for the 131.

 

[Luke Acquistapace]

Barnes Vortex

 

[jlchester5045]

So you'd rather put a .5" diameter hole through the cavity than a coke can sized hole?

Yeah, they might "come up short" on the "penetration" metric for people that don't understand terminal performance, but in reality for short to mid range broadside shots they still penetrate the entire cavity, and either exit completely, or get trapped under the hide. The difference is they deposit most, or all, of the beloved "energy" into the tissue and vitals in the cavity, instead of the dirt behind the animal

He asked for everyone’s opinion which we are both entitled too, not rebuttal each others opinions. Referring to terminal performance while referencing a .5” hole with monolithics seems a bit exaggerated. No argument that cup and core can achieve the end result but I find more consistent results from monolithics. Your mileage may vary and that’s ok.

 

[Harvey_NW]

He asked for everyone’s opinion which we are both entitled too, not rebuttal each others opinions. Referring to terminal performance while referencing a .5” hole with monolithics seems a bit exaggerated. No argument that cup and core can achieve the end result but I find more consistent results from monolithics. Your mileage may vary and that’s ok.

Your opinion would be that you've gotten more consistent results using a certain type of bullet. Your advice was to use one less terminally effective because it would deliver the "needed penetration" where the other could "come up short", which are both false. As well as .5" hole being exaggerated. Most monolithic wound channels have a permanent crush cavity (what the bullet actually touches) the size of the frontal diameter of the expanded bullet. So however big that "mushroom" ends up, .4", .5", .6", etc., is how big the actual wound channel is through the animal, all surrounding tissue was likely not physically damaged. It may have gotten stretched (temporary stretch cavity), or bruised, but not actually torn and damaged, like the fragments from a frangible bullet will do.

I won't dispute your opinion, but I think it's fair to address statements that aren't factual in these discussions.

 

[jlchester5045]

Your opinion would be that you've gotten more consistent results using a certain type of bullet. Your advice was to use one less terminally effective because it would deliver the "needed penetration" where the other could "come up short", which are both false. As well as .5" hole being exaggerated. Most monolithic wound channels have a permanent crush cavity (what the bullet actually touches) the size of the frontal diameter of the expanded bullet. So however big that "mushroom" ends up, .4", .5", .6", etc., is how big the actual wound channel is through the animal, all surrounding tissue was likely not physically damaged. It may have gotten stretched (temporary stretch cavity), or bruised, but not actually torn and damaged, like the fragments from a frangible bullet will do.

I won't dispute your opinion, but I think it's fair to address statements that aren't factual in these discussions.

I hear what you’re saying. Agree to disagree that your information are the facts and mine are false.

 

[omicron1792]

I hear what you’re saying. Agree to disagree that your information are the facts and mine are false.

Lots and lots of pictures and data here to prove it though. Going on “this is what I’ve seen” is generally a very limited POV.