Heavy 6.5mm bullet

[gerry]

Ok Nosler you make a large selection of 6.5mm bullets that cover just about everything but there is one gaping hole now in your line up especially since you have come out with your 26 Nosler last year.

That 26 Nosler and my favorite the 264 Win Mag (I hope you don't drop your 264 WM brass like some companies do when introducing a similar round) are begging for a tough, heavy bullet of around 150 gr to compete with rounds like your own 28 Nosler.

I would be happy with either a:

150 gr Bonded solid base that has a similar shape to your old Solid Base bullets
150 gr Partition
150 gr AccuBond

What do you think Nosler?

 

[Wis65x55]

I don't remember who it was, but one of the big bullet makers had made a 6.5mm 160gr RN. Since then, I have never been able to make the m38 Swedish mauser shoot anywhere near that good.
Keith

 

[gerry]

Hornady still makes the 160 gr RN and Sierra used to make one but neither were tough at all and won't stand up to magnum speeds. A long, tough and sleek heavy option just isn't out there right now.

 

[Africa Huntress]

156 gr Norma Oryx and if my daughter has not mislead me there just happens to be some working there way toward you.

also 160 gr woodleigh and you wont need supersonic speeds for these to work properly for you

However, I think wis6.5 x 55 and I have responded to a thread that was directed specifically to Nosler and if so please disregard this post

A

 

[truck driver]

Glad to see you posting again A. Welcome Back.

 

[SJB358]

I'd be in for something in that weight class as well. A 150 Bonded Solid Base would be something though. Everyone of them I've seen looks pretty danged good.

A is right though, you will have some 156's in your hands shortly. Well, relatively shortly!

 

[gerry]

156 gr Norma Oryx and if my daughter has not mislead me there just happens to be some working there way toward you.

also 160 gr woodleigh and you wont need supersonic speeds for these to work properly for you

However, I think wis6.5 x 55 and I have responded to a thread that was directed specifically to Nosler and if so please disregard this post

A

Yes they are coming and I really appreciate it, hopefully by the time those bullets run out Nosler will finally have a nice sleek heavyweight bullet out

 

[Horsethief]

I'll play devils advocate: What is a 150gn bullet or heavier going to do to big game that a well placed 140gn bullet cannot do in .26 caliber? I realize this line can be put to every bullet weight in every caliber. I think the not-quite-yet demand for a heavy .26 caliber bullet will get its wish after the other (smaller) weights are selling stronger. How much is stronger? That's for the marketing and sales number crunchers to decide.

 

[gerry]

It would basically match the 175 gr 7mm and 200 gr 308 Partitions in sectional density and have a better b.c. as well. I realize the 140 gr Nosler bullets are excellent but a good 150 gr bullet would just add a bit more penetration on bigger animals. Maybe I am out of step with some other 6.5 mm shooters but the bigger rounds have the case capacity to push those heavy bullets fast and penetrate deep when they get there.

 

[Horsethief]

Gerry: I won't be surprised when the big .26 caliber bullets are made. I also won't be surprised when they're used a lot because they're effective.

 

[SJB358]

I would rebarrel my old 264 Win Mag to accommodate a heavier bullet. It does fine as is for the 140 PT's and AB's, but if a 150-160 class hunting bullet were available, I'd use it. A long bullet like that would have some incredible numbers and even the Win Mag would have the ability to run them up over 3K.

 

[Dwh7271]

Can you imagine a 160 AB with the kind of BC and SD those 264s have? Bet that thing would drill through.
Wonder what I could drive that out of a 6.5-06 at?

 

[nvbroncrider]

Guessing 2750-2850. AI'ed 2900-2950. A 150 would be 3k is my guess. Be pretty awesome.

 

[Dwh7271]

Yes, I imagine those would be right.
Wow. That would be cool.

 

[SJB358]

Dewey, I figured this might be something you could ponder a bit?

Cartridge : 6.5 x 68
Bullet : .264, 160, Woodleigh PP 80A
Useable Case Capaci: 77.227 grain H2O = 5.014 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.405 inch = 86.49 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-33

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 77 60.40 2400 2046 30899 12701 90.9 1.855
-18.0 79 61.91 2466 2161 33200 13139 92.3 1.808
-16.0 81 63.42 2533 2280 35686 13558 93.7 1.761
-14.0 83 64.93 2601 2403 38370 13956 95.0 1.708
-12.0 85 66.44 2668 2529 41228 14331 96.1 1.650
-10.0 87 67.95 2735 2658 44278 14679 97.1 1.594
-08.0 89 69.46 2803 2791 47551 14999 97.9 1.540
-06.0 91 70.97 2870 2927 51067 15288 98.6 1.489
-04.0 93 72.48 2937 3065 54844 15543 99.2 1.439
-02.0 95 73.99 3004 3206 58905 15762 99.6 1.391 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 97 75.50 3071 3350 63275 15945 99.9 1.345 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 98 77.01 3137 3496 67982 16087 100.0 1.301 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 100 78.52 3202 3643 73058 16200 100.0 1.258 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 102 80.03 3267 3793 78539 16305 100.0 1.217 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 104 81.54 3332 3945 84466 16405 100.0 1.178 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 106 83.05 3396 4098 90885 16497 100.0 1.139 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 97 75.50 3219 3682 77993 15312 100.0 1.229 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 97 75.50 2853 2891 49010 15822 95.3 1.502


I think you were thinking of something in that ballpark..

I am fairly impressed with what I see from the 264 Win Mag as well.

Cartridge : .264 Win. Mag.
Bullet : .264, 160, Woodleigh PP 80A
Useable Case Capaci: 74.509 grain H2O = 4.838 cm³
Cartridge O.A.L. L6: 3.340 inch = 84.84 mm
Barrel Length : 26.0 inch = 660.4 mm
Powder : Alliant Reloder-33

Predicted data by increasing and decreasing the given charge,
incremented in steps of 2.0% of nominal charge.
CAUTION: Figures exceed maximum and minimum recommended loads !

Step Fill. Charge Vel. Energy Pmax Pmuz Prop.Burnt B_Time
% % Grains fps ft.lbs psi psi % ms

-20.0 78 59.20 2388 2026 30520 12334 90.2 1.849
-18.0 80 60.68 2455 2141 32797 12767 91.7 1.801
-16.0 82 62.16 2522 2260 35257 13182 93.2 1.755
-14.0 84 63.64 2590 2383 37922 13577 94.5 1.703
-12.0 86 65.12 2658 2510 40805 13949 95.6 1.644
-10.0 88 66.60 2726 2640 43896 14296 96.7 1.588
-08.0 90 68.08 2794 2774 47200 14615 97.6 1.534
-06.0 92 69.56 2862 2910 50753 14904 98.4 1.482
-04.0 94 71.04 2930 3050 54580 15160 99.0 1.432
-02.0 96 72.52 2998 3193 58704 15382 99.5 1.384 ! Near Maximum !
+00.0 98 74.00 3065 3338 63153 15566 99.8 1.337 ! Near Maximum !
+02.0 100 75.48 3132 3486 67958 15712 100.0 1.293 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+04.0 102 76.96 3199 3636 73153 15820 100.0 1.250 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+06.0 104 78.44 3265 3788 78779 15914 100.0 1.208 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+08.0 106 79.92 3331 3942 84882 16002 100.0 1.168 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
+10.0 108 81.40 3396 4098 91513 16084 100.0 1.129 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!

Results caused by ± 10% powder lot-to-lot burning rate variation using nominal charge
Data for burning rate increased by 10% relative to nominal value:
+Ba 98 74.00 3217 3677 78186 14940 100.0 1.221 !DANGEROUS LOAD-DO NOT USE!
Data for burning rate decreased by 10% relative to nominal value:
-Ba 98 74.00 2844 2873 48730 15387 94.8 1.494


Yeah, I think I could behind a big 160

 

[wildgene]

...@ some point you hit the threshold of diminishing returns,a 150-160gr. 6.5mm w/ an aerodynamic shape & high BC is getting too long to be practical. Sierra discontinued their 155gr. SMK because the 142gr. had better BC's & could be push considerably faster...

 

[Dwh7271]

Thanks Scotty!
Gene, agree w what you say but wonder if a 8 twist would make a difference?

 

[gerry]

...@ some point you hit the threshold of diminishing returns,a 150-160gr. 6.5mm w/ an aerodynamic shape & high BC is getting too long to be practical. Sierra discontinued their 155gr. SMK because the 142gr. had better BC's & could be push considerably faster...

In the smaller 6.5's like the 6.5 Creedmoor, 260 Rem and 6.5x55 a 150 gr bullet could break 2600-2650 fps and a 160 goes over 2500+ and penetrate like crazy from those. At the range most moose and elk are taken it would work well.

It would be quite useful in the mid sized 6.5's like the 6.5 Rem Mag, 6.5-06 and 6.5-284 and like was mentioned earlier.

In the big 6.5's it would shine like Scotty showed earlier, 3000+ fps is possible and would be awesome. I would imagine the 26 Nosler could push a 150 gr to 3200 fps pretty easily and 3100 with a 160 gr bullet.

 

[hunternyny]

gerry and others, would you be so kind as to tell us where you found the 156 g Norma Oryx bullets. I have found boxes of loaded ammo for sale occasionally but no bullets, I am another that would like to try them in a 6.5.

I think the only loaded norma oryx I found was 270 and that was a while back

thank you

 

[wildgene]

...not saying it can't be done, Gerry, just that there's a lot more to it than just making a heavier bullet. How much more bearing surface are you going to have, & how much sooner will you hit peak pressures, how long can you stretch a bullet out to get a high BC while retaining a useable dimension, how much faster are you going to have to rotate it to stabilize it???