Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

Get or give advice on equipment, reloading and other technical issues.

Moderator: Mod

Message
Author
Shobby
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 11:26 pm

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#31 Postby Shobby » Fri Jan 06, 2023 3:07 pm

Send me a PM not discussing on Forum.

willow
Posts: 567
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#32 Postby willow » Fri Jan 06, 2023 8:41 pm

macguru wrote:Can I have some advice about starting loads with 6.5prc, 2213 and sierra 140s please ?
I was thinking 53gr and work up to 55gr but am I being conservative ?


Talk to Alpy mate, he's working one up right now. I'd be looking at 2217 in the 6.5 variant though.

heritage5
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#33 Postby heritage5 » Sun Jan 08, 2023 8:54 am

My load for the 156 eol bergers is between 55 and 57 gr of 2217 i found that hornady 140 147 and 153 all were blowing up at speeds of above 2980 fps.
Hope that is of some use.

Guy

heritage5
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#34 Postby heritage5 » Sun Jan 08, 2023 9:02 am

Sorry forgot the barrel is 1in8

macguru
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:49 am

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#35 Postby macguru » Fri Jan 13, 2023 4:32 pm

I have my 6.5 prc now so I am going to give it a go ... I just wish I had found some lapua brass, the nosler stuff looks lovely but I dont know how tough it will prove to be ....
id quod est

PeteFox
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:20 pm
Location: 7321 Tas.

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#36 Postby PeteFox » Fri Jan 13, 2023 4:38 pm

Nosler brass is made by Norma
Pete

macguru
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:49 am

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#37 Postby macguru » Fri Jan 13, 2023 4:48 pm

Yes, I know, thats why I am concerned
id quod est

macguru
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:49 am

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#38 Postby macguru » Sun Jan 22, 2023 8:00 pm

I can make a few observations from my testing of the tikka UPR 6.5PRC
1. The rifle is very light for a cartridge burning 50+ grains of powder. You would need a muzzle brake for PRS, the creedmore might be a better bet. (I am going to run 2 configurations, a factory stock and an MDT stock to bring the weight up where permissable)
2. It gets HOT , I am going to try 2217 as advised by willow or cut my 2213 load. I have not chronoed it yet but its quick enough.. (3000 is my guess, will find out soon)
3. The brass is holding up better than I expected, but if I ever try another calibre I am going to hoard the lapua brass first like rolls of toilet paper during covid.
4. The tikka trigger was too heavy (2kg) but its easy to adjust and i have fixed that.
5. My next barrel(s) will be 26" rem varmint profile 7.5 twist to try heavy pills, when I can find some :)
id quod est

macguru
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:49 am

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#39 Postby macguru » Wed Feb 01, 2023 4:42 pm

Screen Shot 2023-02-01 at 5.55.42 pm.png
This is NOT from an overloaded case, 2 firings. I also have a couple of neck cracks .... nosler brass. I have sent a box back for refund or replacement at the seller's suggestion..... but I was wondering, would AMP annealing the necks BEFORE firing help ? obviously its not lapua :)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
id quod est

heritage5
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:19 pm

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#40 Postby heritage5 » Wed Feb 01, 2023 7:42 pm

Is your sizing Die clean and not binding it looks like a Die problem.

macguru
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:49 am

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#41 Postby macguru » Wed Feb 01, 2023 7:50 pm

good point , although i am not sure what 'binding' means. do you mean i'm pulling the neck up ? Its clean but its an rcbs all in one die,
i have another type of die coming and i'm holding off on using this resizing die on the next batch
but i think the necks are kind of brittle
id quod est

PeteFox
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:20 pm
Location: 7321 Tas.

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#42 Postby PeteFox » Wed Feb 01, 2023 8:13 pm

What die lube are you using?
Pete

macguru
Posts: 1618
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:49 am

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#43 Postby macguru » Wed Feb 01, 2023 8:15 pm

imperial, but very sparingly. when i get my redding body die ill stop using the rcbs all in one and do some careful measuring, and i have a forster neck die thats easier on the necks
id quod est

Tim N
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:18 pm
Location: Branxton NSW

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#44 Postby Tim N » Fri Feb 03, 2023 7:45 am

It may have been like that from the factory
We don't rise to the level of our expectations, we fall to the level of our training. Archilochos 680-645 BC

PeteFox
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 5:20 pm
Location: 7321 Tas.

Re: Why not 6.5 PRC for 'midrange' F-class?

#45 Postby PeteFox » Sat Feb 04, 2023 12:26 pm

macguru wrote:Yes, I know, thats why I am concerned


I don't understand the issue with Norma brass. I've found it to be excellent

It's difficult to tell from the photo but that looks like the brass has folded inwards from an accumulation of lube, or is it a split. I would expect the neck to split first
Pete


Return to “Equipment & Technical”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 42 guests