Federal 6.5 Backcountry?

[Andouille]

I think we will find that it will perform very much like a 6.5 PRC or 270 on bigger game like Elk. That will eliminate the "needs-more" issue.

Exactly, and maintaining reasonable effective range for shorter barrels used with suppressors.

Anyone saying that +Peak is not needed for 6.5 CM is also implying that any larger 6.5mm cartridge (6.5 PRC, 6.5 RPM, 6.5-300) is also irrelevant. Ironically, those criticizing +Peak probably also own larger "unnecessary" calibers. Last I checked, we're in a capitalist, free market economy where you can buy the V8 truck even if a V6 is available. Nobody is being forced to buy +Peak ammo, so why all the butthurt feelings?

 

[Andouille]

Does anyone have any knowledge on if the higher pressure will affect wear on a suppressor out of short barrels (16")?

Likely has a muzzle pressure near that of 6.5 PRC with similar muzzle velocity. One could plug both into quickload or GRT and get a better idea of muzzle pressure, though 6.5PRC may have a longer impulse because of the higher powder capacity and slower burn speed.

 

[HandgunHTR]

Frontal diameter of an expanded 6.5 is 35% smaller compare to a 30 caliber bullet. This is the only issue IMHO. 6.5 has much better ballistics otherwise...which is why it is so awesome for deer sized game and target.

6.5 is absolutely an awesome projectile for deer, sheep, goat and lope. I love it with all my heart.

All of my Swedish, Finnish, and New Zealander friends are going to be so disappointed to find out that they are using such inferior bullets out of their 6.5X55 rifles to kill all of the moose and red stags that they kill every year.

 

[HairyScandinavian]

Frontal diameter of an expanded 6.5 is 35% smaller compare to a 30 caliber bullet. This is the only issue IMHO. 6.5 has much better ballistics otherwise...which is why it is so awesome for deer sized game and target.

6.5 is absolutely an awesome projectile for deer, sheep, goat and lope. I love it with all my heart.

Now do the wound channel diameter from a 26 caliber 130 TMK compared to a 30 caliber mono. I'll give you a hint, you're under-gunned with the 30 cal.

 

[gretch6364]

All of my Swedish, Finnish, and New Zealander friends are going to be so disappointed to find out that they are using such inferior bullets out of their 6.5X55 rifles to kill all of the moose and red stags that they kill every year.

6.5x55 is great if you are only shooting 500 lbs red stag and moose. Not the same as a mature bull elk.

 

[TxxAgg]

 

[Remington92]

Took longer than I expected for the foot pound of energy and 6.5 can’t kill elk to show up.

 

[BLJ]

6.5x55 is great if you are only shooting 500 lbs red stag and moose. Not the same as a mature bull elk.

Do you know what a moose is?

 

[bnewt3]

Things always have to devolve dont they?

The world just cant work without willful ignorance showing up.

 

[Andouille]

Mouse, not moose?

Yukon moose (1200+ lbs) downed by 100 gr 25-06 ttsx by my Alaskan friend who hunts every year with this rifle. And yes, he shoots them in the vitals. If 25 cal can do it, then 6.5 mm ....?

End of discussion and back to +Peak topic?

 

[swampy14]

Why does another 250 muzzle velocity suddenly make it appropriate?

The same logic that people say the 6.5prc is an elk gun but not a 6.5cm

 

[swampy14]

I would be curious to know from Federal if the whole concept revolves around shooting further or getting more velocity out of short barrels. Likely both played an equal part. I'm excited about more velocity out of a shorter suppressed set up, I'm just afraid as soon as I get that dialed in, we'll see the 6mm CM +PEAK come along. If this tech takes off like it should, there are a lot of us who are going to get caught up in a continual upgrade loop!

The goal was to keep MV in short barrels. Similar to the 7BC. Designed with intent to be run 20” or shorter with a can. The added distance is a bonus for sure especially with the big heavies they are loading. 153, 156, and 155

 

[z987k]

Balance what you shoot well and limit your range. Some over excited dude from south carolina sees his first bull ever at 500 yards....I bet you can guess what happens next with his 6.5CM.

+Peak will absolutely lower wound rates. I 100% hope every elk shot at is killed dead in its tracks and found. Hopefully the overweight hunter that has never been above 7,000 ft of elevation isn't too far from his two wheel drive pickup.

It's really common for people to have absolutely no idea how bullets kill animals, or basically what is the actual mechanism of death due to a bullet wound. That seems to be the issue here.

How does a bullet(literally any bullet) at say 1800fps in the vitals not kill something, but one at say 2200fps does?

How does any bullet nowhere near the vitals(let's say in and out a muscle in the lower leg) at a faster speed kill an animal quickly?

 

[z987k]

30 cal is inherently limited by that logic relative to 338 or 50 cal. The evaluation needs to be anchored to a functional outcome, not simply an arbitrary diameter (ie. there must be a justification why certain diameter is the minimum that is sufficient).

50 cal is limited relative to 20 mm. Somewhere along the gradient “sufficiency” is reached for a given outcome (eg. killing an elk well). It’s sounds like for killing elk you think sufficiency is not yet reached by 6.5 mm but it is at .308 cal. How about 6.8 mm or 7 mm? And why?

Right now your argument is some numbers and mostly feelings. For example, there is no logic there saying why it is enough for deer but not elk. Given its smaller expanded size than 308, why is it awesome for deer?

And to further point out the absurdity of it, people think a copper 308 at 1.5x expansion is plenty, while a lead 264 at 2x expansion isn't enough. While the latter actually makes the larger hole.
Even more absurd is thinking .044" or even double that if they're both 2x expanders at .088" makes any difference whatsoever.
Oh, my 308 gives me .088" margin of error. Good thing I can shoot groups that tight to matter.

 

[z987k]

I think we will find that it will perform very much like a 6.5 PRC or 270 on bigger game like Elk. That will eliminate the "needs-more" issue.

The 6.5PRC and 270win are for all intents and purposes at hunting ranges, identical. But they're both only doing one thing, giving you more distance. Nothing else.
So if a 6.5prc/270win are good on elk at 500 yards, then the 6.5cm was always good at 300. Because they are the exact same thing. Is your kid taking shots that far? If no, then nothing was gained. Except recoil and likely less accuracy.

 

[General RE LEE]

The 6.5 Plus Peak has definitely piqued my interest.

As others have mentioned, I can see shooting my standard 6.5 CM loads at the range but building a DOPE profile in my Burris Veracity PH and using the + P for hunting. Hopefully my Bartlein barrel likes the 130 grain Terminal Ascent because I don’t want to spend a ton of money trying the different projectiles.

For me, the added velocity is nice in that 10-300 yard range where a little extra speed helps when pointing and shooting vs dialing.

 

[Frozenlead]

Came across this today. I don’t know anything about the guy, but I’ve seen some other videos where he was shooting some reloaded + peaks and 135 a-tips @ 3188fps. Scanned through the comments, he wasn’t revealing anything about the process.

 

[wyosam]

Energy....more energy.

If a bunch of midwesterner's want to continue coming out here and wounding our elk with their need more's...I guess that is their choice.

That’s not going to play well on this forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wyosam]

That would likely be for the best if you are taking 400+ yard shots on elk. None of this even considered the discussion of expanded diameter and the inherent weaknesses of a 6.5mm projectile.

People like LongWayAround an d PredatoronthePrairie are why this new ammo is so exciting. Saves the elk from some of them.

I’m betting this thread hits legend status by Monday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bbckfh]

I think something we’re not considering is the blast and concussive force at the muzzle.

Take this from a guy who believes in suppressors. I believe that if I’m polite enough to put a muffler on my car, I should put one on my firearm.

That being said, the inherent problem for many will be that concussive force.

If you push higher pressure out of a shorter muzzle/barrel length (I’ll assume that a large measure of the “why” for the shorter barrel is to run suppressed while maintaining an overall package length that is handy enough to run around in the wild with), it begs the question whether the longer barrel at lower pressure or the shorter barrel + can + higher pressure equates to an overall improved operator experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk