6.5 SAUM vs 6.5 PRC

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • 4g64loser

    Bad influence
    Jan 18, 2007
    6,381
    maryland
    yep. diminishing returns is really the best way to say it. I own some severely overbore wildcats for use on groundhogs and other pests but I can't say that I favor them for target or match use. I also have learned through bitter experience not to chamber up anything that overbore in a tight twist barrel. My favorite 6mm round is still the 6br in its unmodified form. The hot 6s so popular today in PRS and across the course matches have definite advantages. Sadly, I buy my own barrels. With that in mind, I won't be competing with anything that I won't see at least 2500 rounds out of a tube.
     

    Jerry M

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 13, 2007
    1,688
    Glen Burnie MD
    IMHO the 6.5 PRC is a product of great marketing. As said above it give similar 140 gr velocities as the 6.5-06, 6.5x284, and 6.5 Remington Magnum. Hyper velocity cartridges like the 6.5x300 Weatherby and 26 Nosler give you higher velocities, but at a price in barrel life.

    My 6.5 Rem Mag barrel has about two hundred round more through it and is still shooting acceptable groups, then my 6.5-06 did when I pulled the barrel. Both had/have more then my 7 MM Remington Mag did when it started blowing up bullets. Individual barrels will also influence the end results.

    Good luck

    Jerry
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,881
    Great marketing is why the .243 Win is hugely popular, and .244 Rem aka 6mm Rem is a trivia question .
     

    4g64loser

    Bad influence
    Jan 18, 2007
    6,381
    maryland
    I'm a wildcat lover so the 244/6rem Ackley is far from a trivia question. My partner just had Doc set him up a full custom on a long action in that chambering. It's a nail driver. The 243 enjoys one advantage: factory ammo availability. In a wildcat, that's irrelevant as there is no factory ammo. He considered the 243AI but, based on experiences with a 6rem and Doc's experiences with the 6AI, he went that way. It has been a dream to tune loads for. Not the experience I have heard from 243 AI guys. That case can be more cantankerous unless your throat is set up precisely for the bullet you want to use. The 6 offers more seating depth variation without sticking the bearing surface at the bottom of (or, worse, out past) the bottom of the neck. One of the major advantages the 222 enjoys over the 223. These problems go away if your reamer is specific to your intended projectile but most people don't have custom reamers made and, thus, can benefit from a bit of seating flexibility.

    As far as marketing goes, well, thats the nature of a business venture. convince people that your product does the job better than what they are using now. That's why, just like politicians running for office, you rarely get hard stats and comparative analysis from the marketing department. Do your own research and select what works for your needs within the limits of your resources.
     

    Jerry M

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 13, 2007
    1,688
    Glen Burnie MD
    Great marketing is why the .243 Win is hugely popular, and .244 Rem aka 6mm Rem is a trivia question .

    Tighter twist and the ability to hunt deer and varmints also had something to do the the .243 Win's popularity over the original 6 mm Rem.:D

    As proven many times since Remington can ruin a good dream: 6mm Rem, .280, .260 rem just off the top of my head:sad20:

    Good luck

    Jerry
     

    E.Shell

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 5, 2007
    10,244
    Mid-Merlind
    Heck , at one point the 6.5- 300WM ( full length) was a hot set up for the 1,000yd benchrest guys .

    But the two limiting factors are throat errosion , and powder speed . The really, really overbore ctgs are dependent upon small lots of intermittently available surplus powders . Limiting oneself to standard commercially available powders in the same class as H1000 sets an upper limit of very diminishing returns .
    I built a 6.5-300 Weatherby (6.5WWH) in the 90s for 1,000 yard work and it was amazing. 19 MOA from my 100 yard zero to 1,000 yards. I used H-870 mainly, but also 50BMG. There are several very good powders now, commonly available. Forming cases was a PIA, going from .300 to .264 required two steps and neck turning.

    Also amazing was the fouling, and this cartridge required cleaning about every 20 rounds or pressures would start climbing rapidly. I was introduced to hard carbon deposits in the throat and as the throat roughened, copper fouling of biblical proportions. Even more amazing was barrel life. By the time I got to 750 rounds with it, the throat was so rough, it would kill a brush with one cleaning. This is about the time Marc 357 introduced me to Wipe-Out, but up until then I was still brushing with ammonia-based crap solvents.

    At 750 rounds, I had the barrel set back. The gunsmith, Sid Goodling, had to take over 2" from the chamber end to get past the throat erosion and another inch off the muzzle due to crown erosion. My barrel went from 30" down to about 27" and never could get the velocity back. I fooled around with it for a while longer, till my brass started to go, and had it rebarreled to .300WinMag.

    I went to a 6.5-284 Norma, which was just becoming popular as I was working with the 6.5WWH. The 6.5-284 gave me much of the performance of the WWH, but there was no case forming, fouling wasn't nearly as bad and barrel life was much better. I got to about 1,700 rounds and groups started to open slightly. I took it to just over 2,100 and it went from slightly larger groups into shotgun mode and one never knew exactly where the next one would land. I still have that barrel, removed from the action and sectioned on the mill to show the effects of throat erosion to students.

    As time went by, the 6.5-284 gained a bad reputation for short barrel life and heavy fouling (undoubtedly by someone who had never had a 6.5-300 Weatherby) and it began to fall from favor.

    Then, we had the .260 and 6.5 Creedmoor, which seemed a very good balance of barrel life, fouling and exterior ballistics. The Creedmoor was essentially an exact duplication of the .260, but with better factory loads. I have a .260 with over 3,000 rounds through it and it still shoots 1/2 MOA. I'd anticipate the same barrel life from the 6.5 Creedmoor.

    With the popularity of long range shooting at unknown distances, the need for speed returned and now we're back into a group of cartridges that either emulate the 6.5-284 (but with fancy new names), or fall between the 6.5-284 and the 6.5 Voodoo (6.5-300WinMag)

    I find it interesting that we can come full circle, abandoning cartridges due to certain aspects, but then invent something new that does exactly the same thing. Fouling will be on par with whatever cartridge it emulates, as will throat erosion and exterior ballistics.

    The 6.5 PRC is about 100 fps short of the 6.5-284, while the 6.5 SAUM is 150 faster. I find it amusing that while these exciting new cartridges straddle the 6.5-284's performance, the "ancient" 6.5-284 is no longer workable. I suppose it is because they are "short action cartridges", there is a new attraction. Because these cartridges are so close to the 6.5-284, I would have to expect similar barrel life and similar fouling.

    The difference between long action rifles and short action rifles, in Remington and RemClones, is 3/4" and somewhere along the line, somebody decided they couldn't make that long a bolt stroke, and that a rifle 3/4" longer cannot be carried as easily. IIRC, both Winchester rifles and Savages will use the same length action length and thus length overall, but bolt stroke is limited by changing bolt stops.

    Technically, the 6.5-284 is also a short action cartridge, designed to provide 6.5-06 ballistics in a short action lever gun, but it was found that by running it in a full length action, we could seat the bullets out and get more powder in it. I wonder how long it will take everyone to decide that these new 6.5s will run better in long actions too and we complete yet another full circle.
     

    E.Shell

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 5, 2007
    10,244
    Mid-Merlind
    Tighter twist and the ability to hunt deer and varmints also had something to do the the .243 Win's popularity over the original 6 mm Rem.:D

    As proven many times since Remington can ruin a good dream: 6mm Rem, .280, .260 rem just off the top of my head:sad20:

    Good luck

    Jerry
    Truer words were never spoken. They sabotaged the 6mm (equal to the .243 AI) with a slow "varmint bullet" twist, downloaded the .280 to 7x57 levels and gave up the ENTIRE .260 marketshare to the 6.5 Creedmoor by never offering match grade ammunition or rifles.

    Error Message :ID10T
     

    PoPo3

    Active Member
    Oct 26, 2009
    364
    Hagerstown, MD
    Here is why I think the PRC is, I hate to say this, but a better cartridge. I agree that there are other offerings out there that can/will do roughly the same thing. The challenge is finding a loaded box of ammunition that doesn't cost an arm an a leg if you do not reload. I will admit it is not what I would consider "cheap", but a loaded box of match PRC ammunition can be found for just south of $30. The other problem is that some of those offerings are more challenging to reload for (ie case forming, neck turning, etc). So, cheap, loaded, ammunition kicks the 6.5x284 to the curb as well as most of the cartridges mentioned.

    I would also argue that the PRC is not slower than the 6.5x284. Factory offerings run a 147 grain bullet at 2910. Most reloaders are pushing that envelope to close to 3100. I'm not sure the 284 could make those speeds safely. Most 6.5x284 140 gran factory offerings are in the ballpark of 2750-2850. The 6.5 GAP/SAUM is a nice round too, but lacks the "cheap" ammunition/availability and the extra 50 FPS does nothing for me when I can close to or at 3100 with the PRC.

    Again, I can't argue that it is a barrel burner. There is no way around that in this class of cartridges. I like it because it is backed by a reputable manufacturer, can be loaded very close to the allowable limits for most competitions, isn't a pain to reload for, and I can get a box or two of loaded match ammunition off the shelf if I'm in a pinch (that won't cost me an arm or a leg).
     

    4g64loser

    Bad influence
    Jan 18, 2007
    6,381
    maryland
    popo--the availability of high quality, affordable, factory match ammo is what made the 6.5creed what it is. I won't argue that the PRC is supported by ammo in a more reasonable price bracket than some of its competition. I will, however, state that I have watched people chrono rifles and come up short of factory claims (this is not a dig at the PRC, as it is a fact of life in many chamberings). I will also agree very strongly with Ed when he posits that eventually people will realize that the long actions are the way to go for longer ranges. The only place I differ is in the PRS type matches where recoil mitigation is just as important as external ballistic performance. In belly matches or "traditional" paper matches, you are either a) in better, solid, position to observe your impacts or b) have some nice person putting sighter pins in your target and running it back up for you to spot where you hit. The super flat, high performance, 6 and 6.5 short action rounds with mid capacities (such as the creed) offer acceptable performance with lighter recoil than their long action (and better powdered) kin. An example I use regularly to illustrate the difference to friends new to precision rifle work is to let them shoot my .308 with 155Palmas and my .30-06 with 210ABLRs at 1000yd. The 06 only has a 1mil (depends slightly on conditions) drop advantage over the .308 and that usually results in some comment from those that know a bit about sending bullets further away. The comments change, however, when they realize the huge wind advantage a 210 at 2730 has over a 155 at 2910. The number of shots off the plate with the .308 is invariably higher on days with any wind. The recoil of the 06, burning 10gr more powder and using a much heavier bullet, is the price. Both rifles are custom builds. The 06 wears a brake and the 308 a can, but it is much easier to keep the 308 on target to observe impact. The 06 must be "driven" much harder with no errors in position to observe all impacts at 1000.

    This can be translated to the PRC and its midsize relatives. While both short action, a friend of mine has a shiny new PRC (seekins Havak), and a Warlord 260. His comment on breaking in the PRC was something to the effect of "That has a good bit more recoil than my 260."

    What we have to ask ourselves is: What do I need to do? This will set the base parameters for the weapon and the round in which it is to be chambered.

    As a friend of mine is fond of saying, "What's old is new again." Ed has pretty much already covered this. Powder capacity and pressure levels are the primary drivers of external performance.
     

    PoPo3

    Active Member
    Oct 26, 2009
    364
    Hagerstown, MD
    I agree that most of these rounds are better suited for a long action (i'm doing the PRC in one). I also have a 6.5 creedmore that does very well for what I need it to do. What it won't do is drive a 150 SMK or the like at 3000+ fps. I'm building a gun to do just that. I'm sure I can get a 6.5-06 AI or a 6.5-300 WM or 6.5-300 weatherby to do the same, maybe even better. However, I like simple and those rounds aren't what I would consider simple. It is nice to order brass and not have to form it/neck turn. The PRC fills this bill.
     

    4g64loser

    Bad influence
    Jan 18, 2007
    6,381
    maryland
    This thread is turning into a great debate.

    Can't argue with that "simple" characterization. I am a wildcat shooter so I am unperturbed by the idea of forming cases. Any gun that abuses barrels that badly (some of my varmint rounds over the years come to mind), however, I am unconcerned with ammo availability as I am culling down large amounts of brass into small lots anyway and not a round will be fired that hasn't been carefully prepped, then sorted.

    Different tools for different jobs.

    Let us know how the PRC does for you. I am curious how it feeds through a long action AICS mag. I have observed it in a short action mag and it seems to work ok. No word on anyone trying AW or AX mags though. Another question: is your long action a plunger or a mechanical ejector? I had some interesting experiences getting a 6-284 to work correctly as a repeater in a pushfeed long action. Last .284 based wildcat long action i played with was a CRF and never had any trouble. One of my shooting buddies blamed the short case/long action for the issue. I have had similar troubles getting 6br and its wildcats to work in a pushfeed short action. Going to CRF solved that problem too.
     

    PoPo3

    Active Member
    Oct 26, 2009
    364
    Hagerstown, MD
    I love debating/discussing stuff like this. It’s hard to entertain my wife with fire forming issues. Lol. Anyway, I’m building this rifle off a 700 long action, grayboe stock and bottom metal. I do have a concern with feeding through a long action magazine. Time will tell, but I do have a buddy with a 3D printer and I have an idea for a fix....if it is necessary
     

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,881
    It's kind of a brave new world , with the existence of ( at least semi commonly available ) high accuracy ammunition . ( Particularly beyond .308 & .223 which have built in gov't market). Usta be loading your own was an inherent prerequisite for anything extreme accuracy/ long range .

    And once the threshold of handloading is crossed , there are gradients of wild cats .

    Tied for simplist depending on perspective are :

    Improved ctg , fireformed w/ no other changes.
    Necked up\ down , w/ no other changes .

    And from there go down a rabbit hole of combinations of shortening , totally moving shoulders , manditory lathe work, rare parent brass, etc .
     

    4g64loser

    Bad influence
    Jan 18, 2007
    6,381
    maryland
    popo----if you discover that you have a LOT of extra room in the magazine, I will give you some ideas. I have AICS pattern mags modified to run 6BR/6Dasher/.22-250AI varmint rounds (short throat chamber, the long throat loads work fine in a standard magazine). The modification consists of a grooved rear spacer, new follower, and new spring. I didn't have to mess with the feed lips. The same idea would work for a long action. Just got to find someone that can make you the required parts. If the 6.5PRC in long action becomes a popular choice, you may convince one of the guys already doing conversions on short action mags for BR cases to make a run of the parts. Josh at Patriot Valley or the guys from Primal rights would be my first calls. Solid folks. As I mentioned, in a plunger gun, I'd be testing ejection reliability very carefully. The larger case size relative to the action ways may help you out and no issues may present. I'm interested either way.

    Biggfoot, The days of mandatory handloading are dead. ABM produces ammo so consistent that many cannot match its vertical dispersion at long range with their handloads. I have seen it hold under 1MOA of vertical at 1000yd on paper. A couple guns I've seen will keep it under half inch at 100yd as long as the shooter can do his or her part. I shot some through my custom 308 and while it didn't shoot in the .3s and high .2s like the 155 handloads can do (when I do my part) it was around .5 for most groups. Very good performance for those that do not wish to load their own. Seeing the tight verticals at long range from factory ammo is what really impresses me. That is a critical point of control for effective shooting beyond conventional ranges. As for wildcatting, I'm one of those nuts that has tried some odd wildcats. A couple just to see if I could do it. Some I have sold. Some I have kept. Most of the ones I sold went to friends who saw them shoot and wanted to buy. They could have the cachet of shooting a wildcat and already have brass made, load workup done, and rifle ready to shoot. I don't mind. If someone would pay me good money to make wildcat brass, work up loads, and true out guns, I would be doing it. Til then, I have to work for a living!!!
     

    PoPo3

    Active Member
    Oct 26, 2009
    364
    Hagerstown, MD
    Update on the 6.5 PRC. Just got it back from Ed Harron (great gunsmith by the way). Finished barrel at 25.5”. With .188” freebore, the 150 SMK are 3.090” to the lands. Once the scope gets here (Athlon ETR 4.5-30) I’ll keep the page updated I load workup.
     

    4g64loser

    Bad influence
    Jan 18, 2007
    6,381
    maryland
    Ed Harren is the man. With that freebore, how much bearings surface do you have in the neck? is it still nearly full?

    I am looking forward to seeing the results.
     

    PoPo3

    Active Member
    Oct 26, 2009
    364
    Hagerstown, MD
    Looks like I’m settlling with the 147 ELDM and retumbo. The 150s wouldn’t shoot. This load is 59.0 grains of retumbo loaded to 2.971”. Don’t have a speed yet.
     

    Attachments

    • E890BDF7-BC11-4152-9C98-CB520B882574.jpg
      E890BDF7-BC11-4152-9C98-CB520B882574.jpg
      31.3 KB · Views: 304

    PoPo3

    Active Member
    Oct 26, 2009
    364
    Hagerstown, MD
    A little bit about the rifle/cartridge I have found so far. I am shooting a REM 700 LA with a bartlein barrel 7.5 twist sitting in a grayboe stock. The barrel finished at 25". I planned on shooting 150 SMK and loaded them behind H1000 from 56 grains up to 59 grains (hot). Couldn't get a load much under 1 moa so I switched to Retumbo and tried a few loads. Again, same thing. Thinking maybe it was the gun, I tried a different bullet (147 ELD-M) behind Retumbo to see what happened. Ended up with a sub .25 moa group. It was the first load I tried. Needless to say, I am going to be loading up a few more to test velocity and will end up ditching the 150s. Which means I have 460ish 150 SMKs I will be getting rid of. I am playing with a new scope (Athlon ETR 4.5-30x56) and I'm liking it so far. However, that is for another thread. More to come....
     

    4g64loser

    Bad influence
    Jan 18, 2007
    6,381
    maryland
    I have been down the rabbit hole of chasing high BC before. Once in a while, I have found that the highest BC bullet will bughole at close range. The more common experience has been a bullet in the middle of the BC range in a given weight class gives the best, and most consistent, performance with regard to close range precision. The performance at "extended" ranges is generally concerned with controlling vertical dispersion. In this area, the BC is less relevant than case prep and bullet consistency (sorting may be required). For KD match, I would rather have consistent and reliable. I will dial a bit more elevation or, if I just can't get the performance, go to a larger case volume.

    Trust the rifle. Shoot what it likes.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,132
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom