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

[huntnful]

Not to get in the middle, however ELD-M’s really aren’t that great of an example. At near muzzle velocity they come apart dramatically, and the larger ELD-M’s create larger wounds. However when both a 225gr ELD-M and a 140gr 6.5mm ELD-M for example, hit at middle to lower velocities, the wounds are so close that they are often oppositely attributed. Sometime the 225gr is very tame, and sometimes the 140gr 6.5mm is violent. Sometimes opposite. The reason is because of jacket thickness and the opening under the tip.

An example. Two elk killed two days apart, near identical placenta and angle. Massively different cartiage and bullets.

.224 77gr bullet at less than 1,400fps impact-

View attachment 933517


View attachment 933516


From left of the knife, all the way through every rib to the right out of the frame- that entire dark red/purple section is destroyed tissue and shattered bone-
View attachment 933518



Conversely, 225gr ELD-M at 2,700fps or so impact. Just left of the white strip of tissue, to the right about where my hand ends-

View attachment 933519



This whole “bigger caliber, bigger wound” would have some meaning if there were any true optimized 7mm plus projectiles- there aren’t. The Hornady Amax’s in certain calibers and weights were about as close as there have been commercially- but ELD-M’s are way less destructive than most AMAX’s on average, and most behave more alike than different beyond muzzle impact speeds.

No worries at all! I always appreciate actual field photos and perspective.

To me, it looks like a smaller, tougher, bullet ran lengthwise along the ribs, below the spine and made a long narrow wound (as expected from that bullet).

And the bigger, softer bullet made a cantaloupe wound (as expected from that bullet), in the softer tissue of the lung area.

Like different bullet structures, different wounds, different actual shot placement, resulting in visually different results.

Has to analyze the 225 picture based off the single photo as well.

I do believe the wound channel differences shrink at longer range/slower impacts, but with the same exact bullet design, there appears to be an incremental increase.

Just personally I’ve seen it on the big game I’ve killed with 80ELDM, 108 ELDM, 147 ELDM, 180 ELDM and 225 ELDM. Not dozens of animal, but enough to see and think “yeah there’s a little difference here” and reaffirm my confirmation bias lol.

Also though, even in the exact same line of bullets, some of them behave differently. Especially the 225. It fragments immediately on impact, and it’s the only bullet in that line up that performed that way for me. Devastating, but not really ideal IMO.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

No worries at all! I always appreciate actual field photos and perspective.

To me, it looks like a smaller, tougher, bullet ran lengthwise along the ribs, below the spine and made a long narrow wound (as expected from that bullet).

And the bigger, softer bullet made a cantaloupe wound (as expected from that bullet), in the softer tissue of the lung area.

Like different bullet structures, different wounds, different actual shot placement, resulting in visually different results.

Has to analyze the 225 picture based off the single photo as well.

I do believe the wound channel differences shrink at longer range/slower impacts, but with the same exact bullet design, there appears to be an incremental increase.

Just personally I’ve seen it on the big game I’ve killed with 80ELDM, 108 ELDM, 147 ELDM, 180 ELDM and 225 ELDM. Not dozens of animal, but enough to see and think “yeah there’s a little difference here” and reaffirm my confirmation bias lol.

Also though, even in the exact same line of bullets, some of them behave differently. Especially the 225. It fragments immediately on impact, and it’s the only bullet in that line up that performed that way for me. Devastating, but not really ideal IMO.

The 175 Xs and 180 Ms have been fantastic for me. The 212 X as well. I saw very similar results to yours with the 225 M.

 

[huntnful]

The 175 Xs and 180 Ms have been fantastic for me. The 212 X as well. I saw very similar results to yours with the 225 M.

The 175 X actually looks like an exceptional killing bullet design. I still haven’t tried it, but I always think about it haha. The BC is low enough that I’d rather just drop to the big 6.5 bullets before shooting the 175. That’s really the only hang up on it for me.

I don’t foresee seriously going back to a 30 cal at the moment or anytime soon. You pretty much have to shoot a 230 A-tip or 245 Berger with N570 in a Lapua BF cartridge to compete with the bigger 7mm ballistics. It’s a tough sell for me at the moment. But 300 NMI’s and 245 Berger’s are shooting some insane groups at long ranges for my hunting partners right now. Stupid consistent pairing. And seem to kill well also.

 

[S-3 ranch]

IMO you can never have enough gun
7mm and trophy bonded tip or barns ttsx should work well

 

[Packmansion]

IMO you can never have enough gun
7mm and trophy bonded tip or barns ttsx should work well

What about a 30mm? Is that enough?

 

[Packmansion]

Let's summarize this:

 

[huntnful]

What about a 30mm? Is that enough?

Squirrel gun.

Terminal report of 6.5-7 PRC and 156 Berger’s at 3100fps. This is a top end animal I’d be comfortable shooting with this combo TBH.

 

[Packmansion]

This thread is getting better.

 

[huntnful]

This thread is getting better.

Just getting started hahaha

 

[BigEd36]

What about a 30mm? Is that enough?

A 30MM??!! What are you hunting with, an A-10 Warthog?!

 

[Greenbelt]

There’s hundreds of photos posted here of elk and moose killed with much smaller bullets, and much slower 6.5s

Just cause you can doesn't mean you should.

 

[Castle Rock]

Just cause you can doesn't mean you should.

Yeah, where did all the WALLOP disappear to.

 

[Packmansion]

Just cause you can doesn't mean you should.

Just because you can shoot a heavy recoiling magnum doesnt mean you should. Same concept. I belive the marginal benefit of a 30 or 7mm magnum is ecplised by all the down sides.

 

[huntnful]

Just because you can shoot a heavy recoiling magnum doesnt mean you should. Same concept. I belive the marginal benefit of a 30 or 7mm magnum is ecplised by all the down sides.

Well said. I’d rather shoot a light 6mm before I get my teeth kicked in by a light 7mm. There’s not enough benefit vs. recoil if you keep them the same weight.

I build my guns incrementally heavier to mitigate the drawbacks of increased recoil.

10lb 6mm
11lb 6.5mm
12lb 7mm
13lb 30’s

The 6mm still has the least recoil (virtually none), but the others are more than manageable as well.

 

[omicron1792]

Well said. I’d rather shoot a light 6mm before I get my teeth kicked in by a light 7mm. There’s not enough benefit vs. recoil if you keep them the same weight.

I build my guns incrementally heavier to mitigate the drawbacks of increased recoil.

10lb 6mm
11lb 6.5mm
12lb 7mm
13lb 30’s

The 6mm still has the least recoil (virtually none), but the others are more than manageable as well.

Using his example of a snowstorm at 16k feet with Michelin suit on. A 13lb rifle sounds awful.

 

[rustyN]

The number of people that understand (or even know about) terminal ballistics vs exterior ballistics is incredibly small. Even smaller yet is the number of people who don't understand it but are willing to listen/learn about it.

I mostly gave up on discussing such things on the internet. That said, find a rifle you can shoot proficiently and a bullet/caliber combo that will perform at the distance you're capable of ethically shooting at and you won't have an issue.

 

[BCDJR]

Well said. I’d rather shoot a light 6mm before I get my teeth kicked in by a light 7mm. There’s not enough benefit vs. recoil if you keep them the same weight.

I build my guns incrementally heavier to mitigate the drawbacks of increased recoil.

10lb 6mm
11lb 6.5mm
12lb 7mm
13lb 30’s

The 6mm still has the least recoil (virtually none), but the others are more than manageable as well.

Yes and all stocks are not created equal.

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

Well said. I’d rather shoot a light 6mm before I get my teeth kicked in by a light 7mm. There’s not enough benefit vs. recoil if you keep them the same weight.

I build my guns incrementally heavier to mitigate the drawbacks of increased recoil.

10lb 6mm
11lb 6.5mm
12lb 7mm
13lb 30’s

The 6mm still has the least recoil (virtually none), but the others are more than manageable as well.

No doubt. The problem is, everyone thinks they need a 7 lb all in rifle or they suddenly can’t hike anymore

 

[huntnful]

Yes and all stocks are not created equal.

Very good point!

No doubt. The problem is, everyone thinks they need a 7 lb all in rifle or they suddenly can’t hike anymore

Hahaha light rifles are cool.. until you actually have to shoot them lol

 

[mxgsfmdpx]

I’ve said it here before a few times. In watching/teaching hundreds of shooters over the years, shooting the same 8ish lb guns side by side with other shooters and shooting the guns back to back; with the only difference being the cartridges. And again, this predates Rokslide or any recent “small caliber” debates that get argued on here constantly…

In an 8ish lb all in hunting gun, 6.5 PRC with heavy high BC bullets is right around the recoil “threshold” for most “skilled” adult males where we start to see a noticeable drop in continuing to maintain proper shooting mechanics, properly spotting impacts through the scope, and hit rates on vital sized targets at range.