The 6.8 Western, By Jesse Werner

[Tumbleweed]

You think I should upgrade to that brake? I have the recoil hawg on there right now it came with.

I'm not familiar with the brake you mentioned, so I can't comment on performance. I do know that the TiPro's have arguably the best recoil reduction on the market right now. No way to go wrong there

 

[Leaf Litter]

The recoil hawg is a pretty effective brake. IMO you'd be hard-pressed to notice a difference between the recoil hawg and more expensive brakes, but everybody has their preferred hardware.

 

[Ryan Avery]

You think I should upgrade to that brake? I have the recoil hawg on there right now it came with.

The recoil hawg is a strange design. A huge non-angled port then two straight baffles. I rear-angled baffle design like the Ti pro will defiantly reduce more recoil than the recoil hawg. But it will be louder.

 

[todd m]

i use the recoil hawg - it reduces recoil almost as well as my Area 419 Hellfire Match. I like it. It's light, it matches the gun, and does the job. I wouldn't spend another $240 looking for 1 or 2 lb less recoil energy because you won't (likely) notice it.

 

[Venandi]

My part was easy since you did such a great job on the article. Nice work!

Thank you both. Great article.

 

[Firemedic710]

Curious if the 6.8 would fit in the prc/wsm short action aics mags?

 

[Tumbleweed]

Curious if the 6.8 would fit in the prc/wsm short action aics mags?

I'm seeing a max COAL for those WITH the front binder plate as 2.870" and those WITHOUT as being 2.960" inside. To work in one with the plate, you'd be jumping .130"+. My load with the 170 EOL's is jumping .090" in that deeper seating node. The version without the plate would work fine if you're jumping .080"-.100".

Curious if the 6.8 would fit in the prc/wsm short action aics mags?

 

[schweinstein]

Great article I enjoyed it.

 

[Balderdash]

Of course the 6.8 is a fine cartridge that will cleanly take game.

But. . . I agree with the posters who pan the comparative dearth of high BC .277 bullets and have taken note of how few ammo and rifle brands have dipped a toe in the 6.8 pool.

Maybe it'll survive through a few new cartridge cycles, but I'd put my money on the very close and seemingly more popular 6.5 PRC being around longer. Not to say I wouldn't pick a 6.8W up if one strikes my fancy for a decent price, just that I wouldn't be surprised to see it swept to the dustbin of history like just about every other short mag cartridge that's been tried. I'm still on the lookout for 325 WSM components.

IMO, they'd have been much better off standardizing a fast twist, long throat 7mm WSM instead of the 6.8W. There's just so many more great .284 bullets available.

While we're on .284's - Why so many 7prc/6.8W comparisons? They share a similar introduction date, but they're otherwise not really that close.

To the dude who's bemoaning the lack of 130 grn 6.8 W factory loadings - Why would you want to deliberately shoot lower BC bullets in a fast twist, longer throat rig? Higher BC billets carry better near and far. And for those who think light and fast is still the bee's knees, there's already a pile of standard .270 Win, 270 Bee, and even almost identical 270 WSM guns out there set up to do so, and you can probably get some good deals on them.

 

[Tumbleweed]

IMO, they'd have been much better off standardizing a fast twist, long throat 7mm WSM instead of the 6.8W. There's just so many more great .284 bullets available.

One of the main things they were after with the 6.8 was to have all of the above in a true short action, which they accomplished. The 7WSM optimized would require a medium length action.

While we're on .284's - Why so many 7prc/6.8W comparisons? They share a similar introduction date, but they're otherwise not really that close.

I agree. I stated this in my article as well. I don't see it as a good comparison. The 7 PRC is a healthy step above the 6.8 Western.

 

[z987k]

But. . . I agree with the posters who pan the comparative dearth of high BC .277 bullets and have taken note of how few ammo and rifle brands have dipped a toe in the 6.8 pool.

People keep saying this, but it's not remotely true.

Hornady makes an eld-x in 277 with a .536G1, though they really should made a better one.
Berger make's a VLD and an EOL with .518 and .662 G1 BC's respectively
Barnes makes an LRX and is rumored to make a better one. .46G1
Nosler makes the BT with a .56 and LRAB at .62
Sierra makes the TGK at .56
Badlands makes a SBD-2 with a .71 G1.

The only BC you can argue is low there is Barnes, but that's not different than their 6.5 or 7mm offerings.

Just curious, what other bullet manufactures are you wanting to put out high BC 277 bullets? Or is .5-.7 not high BC anymore?

I know you can get into the .7's with the 7mm stuff, but to push those heavy bullets at the same speeds you're talking a significant increase in recoil.
For that matter, some 338s and 375s have some really high BC's approaching 1.0.

 

[Balderdash]

People keep saying this, but it's not remotely true.

Hornady makes an eld-x in 277 with a .536G1, though they really should made a better one.
Berger make's a VLD and an EOL with .518 and .662 G1 BC's respectively
Barnes makes an LRX and is rumored to make a better one. .46G1
Nosler makes the BT with a .56 and LRAB at .62
Sierra makes the TGK at .56
Badlands makes a SBD-2 with a .71 G1.

The only BC you can argue is low there is Barnes, but that's not different than their 6.5 or 7mm offerings.

Just curious, what other bullet manufactures are you wanting to put out high BC 277 bullets? Or is .5-.7 not high BC anymore?

I know you can get into the .7's with the 7mm stuff, but to push those heavy bullets at the same speeds you're talking a significant increase in recoil.
For that matter, some 338s and 375s have some really high BC's approaching 1.0.

I didn't state that there isn't any respectable BC bullets available in .277; instead, I pointed out the fact that there are less choices in high BC bullets available for .277 than there are for .284 or .264. Of course there's good bullets available in .277; but that's conflating the basis of my assertion on the 6.8W.

All else being equal, there isn't going to be perceptible or accuracy affecting differences in recoil between a 160-175 ish grain bullet launched over the same fuel tank, wether its in .264, .277, or .284. I've owned and shot multiples of each caliber at similar velocities, and any differences are likely more attributional than actual, and they would more than likely be caused by differences in firing platforms.

 

[Balderdash]

One of the main things they were after with the 6.8 was to have all of the above in a true short action, which they accomplished. The 7WSM optimized would require a medium length action.

I agree. I stated this in my article as well. I don't see it as a good comparison. The 7 PRC is a healthy step above the 6.8 Western.

Tumbleweed:

For starters, a similar weight bullet in a larger diameter is going to be shorter. Additionally, as bore diameter increases, inside barrel area for combustion increases exponentially. In terms of initial velocity, larger bores are more efficient with similar weight bullets.

Had they given the 7mm WSM case the same treatment as they did to the 6.8W, they would've been able to launch 160 and 175's at similar velocities as the 6.8 does in true short actions. There's plenty of data out there from 7mm SAUMs, 7mm WSM's, and 7mm-300WSM's run at short action COAL. As far as being optimized, all the short magnums really shine with more COAL, and the same would be true of the 6.8W.

None of this is to state that the 6.8W is a poor cartridge or that it won't make a good hunting round, just that there's nothing magical in it, and, IMO, it comes with some very real limitations.

It feels a lot like the 325 WSM (which I own) all over again. Nothing wrong with a .323 and there are a few good bullets available for it, but most wanted a .338, for which there is a large selection of good bullets. The engineers/developers tried passing off a lot of the same excuses as to why the 6.8W isn't a .284. Maybe a .338 WSM wouldn't have done any better than a the 338 RCM or the 325 WSM did, but that doesn't change the fact that those sitting with a .338 bore will have more selection in projectiles.

 

[gerry35]

I don't care if there are more bullets in 6.5 mm or 7mm, there are enough already in 277 and more are on the way. Maybe those who want a 6.8 Western don't really want a 7mm Western especially since the almost identical 7mm SAUM already exists and isn't that popular already. Besides Winchester is known for the 270 cal rounds so I can see why they went that way. I love how the round hits a sweet spot in terms of power and reasonable recoil. The more I look at it the more I'm impressed with Winchester came up with and I hope it is sucessful.

I'm committed to the 6.8 Western now, just finalizing a build on a LH Tikka this week. I have piles of 150 gr bullets and it will be pretty easy to duplicate the 270 Win with 4350 class powders which will be perfect for my wife to practice and hunt. I have some 170's and 175's which will be loaded at full power too especially for when we go for moose. The new Barnes 155 gr LRX looks awesome and might end up being our all around load. Going to be a fun rifle!

 

[Balderdash]

Maybe those who want a 6.8 Western don't really want a 7mm Western especially since the almost identical 7mm SAUM already exists and isn't that popular already.

To a certain extent, the exact same can be said vis a vis the 6.8W and the 270WSM.

Good luck with your build. I think short mag cartridges are fantastic in a Tikka. What twist and barrel did you go with? What mags do you plan to run?

Very recently picked up 6.5 PRC barrel for a Tikka. Gave some thought to building a 6.8W, but already have a couple fast .284's and .308's, so figured the 6.5PRC covers at least a little different area. Also figured that since Browning is offering some OEM configurations in 6.8 that I'd be interested in, I'd just pick one of them up at some point.

 

[gerry35]

I actually almost went with a 270 WSM for this project but in the end decided to go with my original choice and go with the 6.8 Western. Looked at the 270 Weatherby as well but it seems a bit crammed in the Tikka action and didn't want to go with new bottom metal and AICS magazines at this time. Also strongly considered sending my other Tikka in for a fast twist 270 Win.

I totally agree on the short mags and Tikka actions, they seem like a perfect match. Going with a Canadian company for the barrel called KS Arms. My gunsmith says they are good and he had one in stock, SS #3 1 in 8 twist @24" A bit easier to get something made here and he had one sitting there. They have never steered me wrong so I'm confident in it.

I picked up a 4 round Tikka 6.5 PRC magazine that can get over 3" internally. It's a bit tight to get in 4 WSM width rounds but it works, not sure why Tikka didn't give it a bit more depth, I'm sure it's flawless with the 6.5 PRC. The 300 WSM donor has the bolt stop set up for the PRC magazine which is nice. Going to get a Mountain Tactical magazine along the way and see how they work. Browning and Christensen both have said no right now to a lefty 6.8 Western and I didn't want to wait another year so went with the Tikka. Browning sure does make some sweet rifles if you go ahead with one at some point.

The 6.5 PRC is a nice round in in all honesty when you see a picture of it and the 6.8 Western side by side they are so similar that you can see where Winchester got their inspiration from. Both are milder rounds that don't burn a ton of powder and are well balanced. We already have a 260 and 6.5x55 so I wanted something a bit different than getting a 3rd 6.5 mm round, kind of along the same lines as your thought process with what you have.

What did you end up going with for your 6.5 PRC barrel?

 

[Balderdash]

I actually almost went with a 270 WSM for this project but in the end decided to go with my original choice and go with the 6.8 Western. Looked at the 270 Weatherby as well but it seems a bit crammed in the Tikka action and didn't want to go with new bottom metal and AICS magazines at this time. Also strongly considered sending my other Tikka in for a fast twist 270 Win.

I totally agree on the short mags and Tikka actions, they seem like a perfect match. Going with a Canadian company for the barrel called KS Arms. My gunsmith says they are good and he had one in stock, SS #3 1 in 8 twist @24" A bit easier to get something made here and he had one sitting there. They have never steered me wrong so I'm confident in it.

I picked up a 4 round Tikka 6.5 PRC magazine that can get over 3" internally. It's a bit tight to get in 4 WSM width rounds but it works, not sure why Tikka didn't give it a bit more depth, I'm sure it's flawless with the 6.5 PRC. The 300 WSM donor has the bolt stop set up for the PRC magazine which is nice. Going to get a Mountain Tactical magazine along the way and see how they work. Browning and Christensen both have said no right now to a lefty 6.8 Western and I didn't want to wait another year so went with the Tikka. Browning sure does make some sweet rifles if you go ahead with one at some point.

The 6.5 PRC is a nice round in in all honesty when you see a picture of it and the 6.8 Western side by side they are so similar that you can see where Winchester got their inspiration from. Both are milder rounds that don't burn a ton of powder and are well balanced. We already have a 260 and 6.5x55 so I wanted something a bit different than getting a 3rd 6.5 mm round, kind of along the same lines as your thought process with what you have.

What did you end up going with for your 6.5 PRC barrel?

The 6.5PRC barrel I'll be using is a factory take off. I've had great luck with Tikka barrels, and try to use them when available in the twist I'm looking for.

I've used the MT long action Billet Mag for short magnums, and function has been flawless. I run them with a long action bolt stop. That set up will yield all the COAL you can use in a short mag. The OEM long action mags might also work well, but as I think about it, I can't recall ever running them with short mags.

I'm running a 7mm RM in a Tikka with 3.715 AICS mags. Functions flawlessly, but I'm not the biggest fan of the mag hanging down on a rifle that gets carried in hand a lot. Would be nice if someone would offer a near flush mount, long action AICS. I know there used to be some available from Curtis Custom, but they appear to be discontinued.

 

[wind gypsy]

Just curious why you'd use Tubb's final finish?

Because once you do mean things to your bore you can offhand yotes @ 700 yards.

 

[Tumbleweed]

Because once you do mean things to your bore you can offhand yotes @ 700 yards.

Alrighty then


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wind gypsy]

People keep saying this, but it's not remotely true.

Hornady makes an eld-x in 277 with a .536G1, though they really should made a better one.
Berger make's a VLD and an EOL with .518 and .662 G1 BC's respectively
Barnes makes an LRX and is rumored to make a better one. .46G1
Nosler makes the BT with a .56 and LRAB at .62
Sierra makes the TGK at .56
Badlands makes a SBD-2 with a .71 G1.

The only BC you can argue is low there is Barnes, but that's not different than their 6.5 or 7mm offerings.

Just curious, what other bullet manufactures are you wanting to put out high BC 277 bullets? Or is .5-.7 not high BC anymore?

I know you can get into the .7's with the 7mm stuff, but to push those heavy bullets at the same speeds you're talking a significant increase in recoil.
For that matter, some 338s and 375s have some really high BC's approaching 1.0.

While there are getting to be more decent choices in .277 they still with few exceptions come with an inferior form factor compared to .264 and .284 options. So fewer options with less efficient bullets = less desirable. Not to mention less component barrels with the right twist and a lack of support with premium brass.