Federal 6.5 Backcountry?

[JohnJohnson]

I've heard similar, not sure of validity. But it was an issue and production 6.5 peak ammo doesn't exist for Ted/ARC to validate anything. I'm just saying I can understand why a firearm manufacturer might want to avoid giving a thumbs up to something they dont have actual data on because it doesn't exist yet.

Perfectly understandable but I do wonder about ARC having zero feedback on 7BC in their actions. Given it's been out like 1.5 years now.

 

[omicron1792]

I've heard similar, not sure of validity. But it was an issue and production 6.5 peak ammo doesn't exist for Ted/ARC to validate anything. I'm just saying I can understand why a firearm manufacturer might want to avoid giving a thumbs up to something they dont have actual data on because it doesn't exist yet.

Yeah. I agree. I would be slow too if a firearm manufacturer. High pressure does seem to be the direction the industry is going though.

 

[CMP70306]

Adding a weird note to this, American Rifle Company is withholding their verdict on whether it's fine to use +Peak in their actions. They're somehow acting like this is a new and surprising thing, despite the fact that 7BC has been out for over a year and works off of the exact same concept. The end result will 100% be that it's fine to use in their actions but it baffles me that they seemed so caught off guard by all this.

Ted’s an aerospace engineer by trade, you don’t know until you test as being wrong could get people killed.

That being said if his actions could withstand the case head separation testing he did I can’t see how they wouldn’t take the higher pressures just fine.

 

[Nilefried]

I wonder if the 6.5 creedmor + peak necked down to 6 creedmor will have faster velocities than the 6UM…

 

[bnewt3]

The only rifles they don't recommend them in us break open rifles like the CVA Scout.

I think they are probably fine in any bolt action rifle of a reasonable modern design because the case acts as an independent pressure vessel.

Right, but some people are throwing some comments about rifle age around as though it is definitely a disqualifier for Federal, but I have yet to hear Fed say that, only allude to it. Ryan M of Vortex mentioned it and Fed didnt refute it, but didnt explicitly confirm it either.

My point is MAYBE rifle age is a disqualifier as they decide which cartridges are possibilities and which arent. But AFAIK they havent specifically SAID that.

Im pointing out the difference between assumptions(even reasonable ones) and the facts that we have.

 

[wyosam]

I wonder if the 6.5 creedmor + peak necked down to 6 creedmor will have faster velocities than the 6UM…

Did you just inspire UM’s next product line? RokAlloy cases?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bnewt3]

.338 federal would be the tits! I’d have opposite ends loaded. Subs and zesty stuff.

Vortex Nation guys were pushing for 338Fed +Peak when they had a couple of the Fed guys on.

 

[Andouille]

Vortex Nation guys were pushing for 338Fed +Peak when they had a couple of the Fed guys on.

Let's ponder whether 338 Fed has enough market base to make it a financially viable choice for R&D and tooling costs... a quick Google search indicates it comprises 0.4% of all bolt action rifle ammo sales, whereas 6.5CM is the highest at 26.3%, followed by 308 at 22.5%. I concur that 338 Fed +Peak would be neat, but that doesn't mean its viable financially.

I'd put money on +Peak coming next to highest sales volume, non-magnum cartridges that can accommodate heavy for caliber bullets, especially those with millitary applications. 308/7.62, 7mm08, 223, 556, and maybe some newer and upcoming calibers like 6 CM.

 

[bnewt3]

Spent some time with our AI overlords and arrived at a, admittedly incomplete, list of cartridges that would likely benefit most from +Peak:

Cartridges most “held back” by pressure (top tier):​

• 6.5 Grendel
• 6 ARC
• 7mm-08
• .308 Win
• 6.5 Creedmoor
• .338 Federal
• 358 Winchester
  
  6ARC I think is particularly interesting. super low recoil, legit 600yd big game range, excellent bullet selection

 

[bnewt3]

Let's ponder whether 338 Fed has enough market base to make it a financially viable choice for R&D and tooling costs... a quick Google search indicates it comprises 0.4% of all bolt action rifle ammo sales, whereas 6.5CM is the highest at 26.3%, followed by 308 at 22.5%. I concur that 338 Fed +Peak would be neat, but that doesn't mean its viable financially.

I'd put money on +Peak coming next to highest sales volume, non-magnum cartridges that can accommodate heavy for caliber bullets, especially those with millitary applications. 308/7.62, 7mm08, 223, 556, and maybe some newer and upcoming calibers like 6 CM.

being 308 parent case(assuming 308 +Peak is coming), making cases for 338 Fed *might* be viable.....likely more viable than ammo

 

[Andouille]

being 308 parent case(assuming 308 +Peak is coming), making cases for 338 Fed *might* be viable.....likely more viable than ammo

Necking up for home reloader seems probable, but how would it be profitable for Federal to invest in R&D for a gun that isn't even chambered anymore with tiny sales volume?

 

[z987k]

Doesn't seem that weird to me, just conservative. There is effectively 0 final product that has been available for them to make a fact based decision on. It's not like there wasn't a littany of people with bolt thrust issues from 7 BC.

I don't remember seeing that. What actions and can you point to any examples of leg setback?

The bolt thrust from 7bc is marginally more than from 6.5, 7 and 30 prc.

 

[Treelineasassin]

I don't remember seeing that. What actions and can you point to any examples of leg setback?

The bolt thrust from 7bc is marginally more than from 6.5, 7 and 30 prc.

What makes you assume this?

You gotta remember case head diameter of 473 VS 532. They're pretty close to the same.

I set back the lugs in a well known "custom high end" action in less that 600 rounds with a 300 norma improved. The lapua brass didn't break a sweat, there was no bolt lift, but the lugs took a shit kicking. Going up in bolt face at the same psi of say 60k psi, greatly increases the bolt thrust VS a smaller case head at the same psi.

 

[bnewt3]

Necking up for home reloader seems probable, but how would it be profitable for Federal to invest in R&D for a gun that isn't even chambered anymore with tiny sales volume?

IDK what case sales are vs ammo sales. *might* being the operative word. It assumes there are reloaders making their own.

And would therefore be *more likely* to be profitable than making ammo.

 

[z987k]

Spent some time with our AI overlords and arrived at a, admittedly incomplete, list of cartridges that would likely benefit most from +Peak:

Cartridges most “held back” by pressure (top tier):​

• 6.5 Grendel
• 6 ARC
• 7mm-08
• .308 Win
• 6.5 Creedmoor
• .338 Federal
• 358 Winchester
  
  6ARC I think is particularly interesting. super low recoil, legit 600yd big game range, excellent bullet selection

Who knows how it came to that conclusion. The only reason anything is held back in a brass case is because it's designed for something other than a bolt action. 6.5grandel and 6/22 arc both have bolt action pressure data and semi auto(which they were designed for). The factory ammo uses the semi auto pressures, and is therefor "held back", but it's perfectly safe to run it up to 65kpsi in a bolt gun.

I could sit here and say 45-70 is held back by pressure. Because it is. 20kpsi is about what the black powder loads were and even what the smokeless once it became that was because those actions are made of glass compared to anything today. The 450 marlin exists for factory ammo at 43.5kpsi because that's what the factory marlins can take. You can own the same modern marlin in 45-70 and hand load it to 43.5kpsi and have no issues and blow factory standard pressure loads out of the water.
Or you could chamber a bolt gun in 45-70 and load it to 65kpsi and go even faster.

Speaking of over pressure ammo. Plenty of companies load 45-70 to the modern standard in a +p or something designation. It would wreck your heirloom rifle. This is functionally equivalent to saami 6.5cm and 6.5cm peak. It's already done today. There's no litigation problems.

 

[z987k]

What makes you assume this?

You gotta remember case head diameter of 473 VS 532. They're pretty close to the same.

I set back the lugs in a well known "custom high end" action in less that 600 rounds with a 300 norma improved. The lapua brass didn't break a sweat, there was no bolt lift, but the lugs took a shit kicking. Going up in bolt face at the same psi of say 60k psi, greatly increases the bolt thrust VS a smaller case head at the same psi.

I don't assume anything. I can do the middle school math(area * pressure). And it's inside case diameter that you use, not outside. .385 and .420. ( I think the lapua case is .500, but I'd have to go look).
It's 9005psi for a 65kpsi magnum.
It's 9313psi for a 80kpsi standard.

A magnum loaded to 70kpsi because reading brass doesn't really tell you much and people do all the time and say, I've never had an issue and other such bs, is a lot bigger jump than the peak case is. (9698psi)

 

[wind gypsy]

I don't remember seeing that. What actions and can you point to any examples of leg setback?

The bolt thrust from 7bc is marginally more than from 6.5, 7 and 30 prc.

Nothing about lug setback that i recall. Just frequent bolt lift issues which often comes along with bolt thrust. Maybe bolt thrust wasn't the issue and chamber fit was?

 

[bnewt3]

Nothing about lug setback that i recall. Just frequent bolt lift issues which frequently comes along with bolt thrust. Maybe bolt thrust wasn't the issue..

Which my understanding was a case surface finish issue early that has been resolved. I think I heard a Fed rep talking about that, thats what was said anyway.