Is a 6.5 PRC enough? Do I need a 7mm?

[Diamondback]

To mirror what others have posted on accuracy and shot placement, this is a nice article from Alaska Fish and Game website on calibers:

Firearms and Ammunition for Hunting in Alaska, Alaska Department of Fish and Game

Information on hunting and trapping in Alaska.

www.adfg.alaska.gov

Firearms and Ammunition
How accurately you shoot is far more important than the type of rifle, cartridge, and bullet you choose. Alaska has some very large game animals, including 1600-pound mature bull moose and 1500-pound coastal brown bears. Moose or brown bear hit in the gut with a large caliber magnum rifle such as the popular .338 Winchester Magnum is wounded and just as likely to escape as if it had been hit with a small caliber rifle such as the .243 Winchester. The bore size, bullet weight, and velocity are of secondary importance to precise bullet placement in the vital heart-lung area.

To be as effective as possible, these cartridges should be loaded with premium quality bullets that are designed to pass completely through a large game animal, if hit in the heart-lung area. (penetrate vitals)

Big Magnums not Needed:
The rifle you bring Hunting should be one with which you are comfortable. Because of the presence of brown and grizzly bears, many hunters have been convinced that a .300, .338, .375, or .416 magnum is needed for personal protection and to take large Alaska game. This is simply not true.

The two most common complaints of professional Alaska guides are:
1. hunters who are not in physical condition
2. hunter who cannot accurately shoot their rifles

Most experienced guides prefer that a hunter come to camp with a .270 Win or 30-06 rifle they can shoot well rather than a shiny new magnum that has been fired just enough to get sighted in.

Since a 6.5 PRC has higher BC premium bullets than a 270 Win at higher velocity and it recoils less than a 30-06, it fits right into what Alaska Fish and Game website has posted online.

 

[Stocky]

This is a nice article from Alaska Fish and Game website on calibers:

Firearms and Ammunition for Hunting in Alaska, Alaska Department of Fish and Game

Information on hunting and trapping in Alaska.

www.adfg.alaska.gov

Firearms and Ammunition
There are no simple answers when it comes to selecting a firearm and accompanying ammunition. How accurately you shoot is far more important than the type of rifle, cartridge, and bullet you choose. Alaska has some very large game animals, including 1600-pound mature bull moose and 1500-pound coastal brown bears. Moose or brown bear hit in the gut with a large caliber magnum rifle such as the popular .338 Winchester Magnum is wounded and just as likely to escape as if it had been hit with a small caliber rifle such as the .243 Winchester. The bore size, bullet weight, and velocity are of secondary importance to precise bullet placement in the vital heart-lung area.

To be as effective as possible, these cartridges should be loaded with premium quality bullets that are designed to pass completely through a large game animal, if hit in the heart-lung area. (penetrate vitals)

Big Magnums Not Needed​

The rifle you bring hunting should be one with which you are comfortable. Because of the presence of brown and grizzly bears, many hunters have been convinced that a .300, .338, .375, or .416 magnum is needed for personal protection and to take large Alaska game.
This is simply not true.

The two most common complaints of professional Alaska guides:
1. hunters who are not in good physical condition
2. hunters who cannot accurately shoot their rifles.

Most experienced guides prefer that a hunter come to camp with a .270 or .30-06 rifle they can shoot well rather than a shiny new magnum that has been fired just enough to get sighted-in.

Since a 6.5 PRC has higher BC premium bullets than a 270 Win at higher velocity and it recoils less than a 30-06, it fits right into what Alaska Fish and Game website has online.

This has to be one of the most thought out government entity based pieces I've ever seen.

 

[North of 60]

Absolutely Stocky...as a retired state employee i can tell you that is about as rare as getting hit by a meteorite.

The flip side is AK fish and game may not be as infected with institutional incompetence as are many state agencies in many states.

 

[nm.otter]

That was refreshingly rational.

I take issue with "bullets that are designed to pass completely through a large game animal" but otherwise -- spot on.

 

[Stocky]

That was refreshingly rational.

I take issue with "bullets that are designed to pass completely through a large game animal" but otherwise -- spot on.

Baby steps.

 

[Dan Carey]

Great, until you try stopping a griz at 10 feet coming at you 30 miles an hour.

 

[Stocky]

Great, until you try stopping a griz at 10 feet coming at you 30 miles an hour.

Im pretty sure ADFG considered that option and dont want people getting eaten/mauled.

Edited as it was little blunt.

 

[Quandary]

Well how about the fact most professional animal culling in NZ occurs with a 223 and the back in the day the forest service almost decimated deer with the .222. That's tens of thousands of animals yearly. Also many are shot running from a chopper so less than perfect placement.

In fact most kiwis that hunt will kill as many animals as guides see per year due to our seasons. Experience means nothing compared to considered experience. Just repeating the same thing teaches nothing, purposefully and methodically testing things is worth 10x just repeating the same thing.

As a guide I would never supply too small a calibre gun even though I think its better as I wouldnt want to risk a bad client making a bad shot and blaming the rifle. When I was guiding BC almost universally everyone with bigger magnums shot worse. Very few actually knew anything about terminal performance except they had used it before and it worked.

There is a wide range of guides some that dont know a thing and just take people to easy animals on private. And some that are great hunters and really are top professionals. Often a dedicated hunter with the same gear will outperform a guide even with less experience. Shit I showed up from NZ to BC with limited horse experience and was packing, and dealing with horses within a week. I'd never claim I was a horse expert but I had no problems guidng horse supported hunts. I had however killed more animals than most North Americans get to and spent alot of time hunting animals in the alpine as we haven't got season or tag limitations.

Where did I ever say there was anything wrong with a small cartridge? I would happily hunt Elk with my 25 Ackley or my 6.5PRC. Or for that matter my 7PRC, 300PRC or 35 Whelen. They will all kill an Elk just as dead. That has nothing to do with the posts I made.

 

[Stocky]

Where did I ever say there was anything wrong with a small cartridge? I would happily hunt Elk with my 25 Ackley or my 6.5PRC. Or for that matter my 7PRC, 300PRC or 35 Whelen. They will all kill an Elk just as dead. That has nothing to do with the posts I made.

Sorry I never said you did. I replied to your comment but alot of it was about this thread in general and the tendency to think professionals in the sector are experts in the field. Id typed half of the reply before I added your quote. My bad about it coming across wrong as I see how it reads now.

It was more about theres lots of people out there with lots of anecdotal evidence that only have a bunch of the same data as thats what they did and repeated. The general kiwi kills everything with whatever they have (they see a fee rodeos so assume anything smaller won't work) so thats what they think they need.

Unless people are trying as many different things experience quality can vary hugely. I professionally dealt with horses and saddled and packed everyday for a couple months a years but im no professional I know the way we did it and that was it. I feel most guides were like this hence why people dismiss the generalized and proven untrue statements about needing big magnums which is what you comment was on wasn't it? Maybe I miss interpreted that.

For years I hunted and shot plenty but never once thought about opening up animals to see how bullets had worked and that maybe more isn't always better. Im still learning lots now through trying to prove things that are discussed here or theories I have.

 

[JackButler]

If the 30'06 did well for you, I don't understand why you are trying to go smaller. Did you simply read too many threads that are suggesting .223 and similar?

I think people suggesting 30 caliber or above are basing it on their experience. You can disagree with their experience, but that doesn't mean it's invalid.

It could be outdated though. Bullet technology has changed significantly in recent years. The 30 cal minimum for elk advice is, in many people’s opinion, overcome by advances. Similar to the ft-lbs of energy guidance many of us were told.

 

[Quandary]

I feel most guides were like this hence why people dismiss the generalized and proven untrue statements about needing big magnums which is what you comment was on wasn't it? Maybe I miss interpreted that.

Actually my original post was in response to a poster who made a post inferring all guides were worthless and their opinions were also worthless. Which of course is a ridiculous statement. I was merely pointing that out. There a knowledgeable guides that know guns and ballistics. There are guides that aren't. To dismiss all guides willy nilly while taking for gospel the postings on the internet of some Joe(s) who you don't know is simply laughable. Of course the biggest irony is the contradiction of those same posters suddenly fawning over guides cited in the ADFG piece above, because well they agree with their myopic point of view. Mmmm I guess there are some guides who know something.......

Listen to people who both agree with your POV and who disagree with your POV. Then assess based on your own experience and experiment, make your own decision of what is right for you and move on. Don't think that you know everything, there is a much higher probability that you know nothing. And for the love of God don't post like you do because every time you do you just make yourself look like a jackass. Unfortunately there is a lot of HeeHawing going on in the world these days.

 

[neandth]

killed two bulls at over 300yds with the 6.5 creed this Fall, mine and my buddies bull both with the same rifle. I liked it so much I went and bought one in the Sako S20. Both were dead after the initial shot, one flipping over on impact.

 

[JackButler]

Absolutely love the 6.5 PRC. Excellent cartridge, versatile and accurate as can be. But do I use it for elk? Nope. 30 or above for me. Physics will tell you that a 22LR is "enough" with superior shot placement, but real-world experience tells you the animal deserves 30 or above.

Real world experience has told me the opposite, that .30 has no magic to it.

 

[Packmansion]

Real world experience has told me the opposite, that .30 has no magic to it.

If i had a choice between 300 win and 6.5 prc... 100% 6.5 prc, way better catridge just as lethal, more accurate, way more efficient. 300 win is no slouch but a 6.5 prc is objectively more lethal in every way possible. These old fudd cartridges are great but they will all fade away into obscurity probably within my lifetime. I own a 300 win and 30-06 etc. Love them but they are all novelty at this point.