308 vs6.5 creedmore

They open rather violently dont they? Lol

Now if you were to do the integral of all of those little pieces of fairy dust as de/dt they'd add up to something very unimpressive compared to how a projectile going at a very fast speed just violently changed its shape in a mostly liquid

Still no mechanism behind how tiny particles with barely any force behind them cause massive damage.
 
Joel said:
They open rather violently dont they? Lol

Now if you were to do the integral of all of those little pieces of fairy dust as de/dt they'd add up to something very unimpressive compared to how a projectile going at a very fast speed just violently changed its shape in a mostly liquid

Still no mechanism behind how tiny particles with barely any force behind them cause massive damage.
Click to expand...

They do... and they turn internal organs into liquid... as was said. The same as 30, 40, or 50 grains of bullet will, as shed from a 180 grain bullet will after hitting a rib. Not sure what you're on about with fairy dust et al... or what point you're trying to prove. Anyone has that shot anything much, has seen this, Bullet fragments wreck stuff, as do the bone fragments that are carried with along with them.
Read up on how Berger bullets work... then you'll see how shed bullet fragments work, especially in an organ cavity.

R.
 
Rman said:
Nice ballistic gack spew... Shooting, especially when shooting at distance, is all about managing variables. Velocity, is a constant. More, is better. Because it helps reduce a variable. Wind. Time of flight. This is simple stuff. Recoil? Don't care. Powder? Don't care. Barrel life? Don't care. Case life? Don't care. Difference to the animal? Don't care.
Performance? Absolutely, 100% care. Whatever gives the best, most consistent result, with the least amount of risk.

Don't run 30 cals either, or 6.5's. Don't see the need. Can't stand 308's, 30-06's, or 270's. Not the games... the players. The 6.5 is rapidly making that list.

Shooting under 400 yards?
None of the above matters. Pick what you like. Go shoot stuff. The result matters. That's it!

R.
Click to expand...

lol, you make this too easy, relax, if you hate on a 6.5 because people poke the bear while speaking the truth then that's all on you and you might miss shooting a real gem because you were easily turned against it

pretty much agree with everything else you said except where emphasis to reduce variable comes before your list, and that's about placement trumps displacement, so you have to be able to shoot it really well and most shoot well under 15 ft/lbs recoil energy, if your limits are higher that's great, I've certainly made higher work as well, but do better more consistently with less, and having kids was no brainer to hit the lighter end of spectrum, but I'll stay there even when kids all grown up and gone, no reason to shoot more

and you talk who cares under 400 and I agree, then you bring long range into it, well ok, lets go there too then, we're like a pair of yo-yo's lol, all over the place ;)

1/2 second tof is limits for most shooters on game, give or take 450-500 yards, same in archery it relates to about 50 yards, 3/4 second tof's there are a moderate amount of people consistent within, give or take 600 yards for most decent set ups, and 70 yards for the archery guys, beyond that a minuscule percentage of population can consistently kill at, beyond these distance/tof limits it comes down to everything but the cartridge/combo/rifle/scope combo, you're fighting natural field position accuracy potentials for most mortals, ~2 moa, you're fighting wind hold limits up to about 20", you're fighting a totally different kind of pressure than what is at the range, ie; you can try and get a 1/4 minute rifle but you will not kill any better any further with it over a 1.5 moa rifle, so you wasted a lot of time past the point of diminishing returns chasing accuracy that doesn't matter in the field, most simply cannot show any advantage in hit probability due to that, wind will limit most to inside a 20" max window for both ability to read it close enough and still have acceptable margin of error to land in the pie plate on an animal for real, so still a lot of your parameters you listed as very important aren't really that important, something you can shoot really well is far more important, efficiency of bullet allows you to really improve this aspect while extending distance performances on game, that's what 6.5 does over ANY 30 cal

and I do pick what I like and shoot stuff, a little wee 6.5 Grendel, kids lobbed them in there to 355 so far like rockstars, 420 for me, 6.5 ft/lbs recoil energy in a 8.25 lb rig, watch it all in the scope, 2386 fps launch...elevation isn't a concern, tof under .5 seconds so not a concern, high bc, barely nudge reticle into the wind for most shots but still in kill zone, not a concern, but recoil/muzzle blast/noise...much bigger risk for shoot ability, I can shoot a lot more just as well, but see no point now, the extra hp won't help me if I shoot poorly and more likely to make me shoot poorly, so much more goes into this than velocity, as covered before, 2500 fps is very fast

if I wanted a 1000 yard rig today it would be off the shelf of course, it would be a tikka or ruger in 6mm creedmoor and run factory 108 eld-m's, it would end up in an mdt chassis, it would pinwheel things with highest hit probability over all other choices, a little shy on bullet weight for my preference but know the sd is there and construction ideal for maximizing performance at the longer distances, also a little tougher on barrels but as a hunter that's ok, I'd get a lifetime out of it and shoot other things for volume, if I wanted a 600 yard rig today it would be 6.5 Creedmoor, it checks off every single box better than anything else off the shelf period, as it is I no longer care about having 600 yard rigs, I'm down to 400 yard rig...so I went down to that lol, progress and 21st century formula made it possible for me to do that with only 30 grains of powder per touch of the trigger, 15 head, 5 seasons, family success batting 1000, there's no replacement for placement ;)

6.5cm is the hands down winner for a 600 yard combined big game playtime rig over a 308, on recoil alone it wins but it runs circles around it ballistically as well.
 
blakeyboy said:
lol, you make this too easy, relax, if you hate on a 6.5 because people poke the bear while speaking the truth then that's all on you and you might miss shooting a real gem because you were easily turned against it

pretty much agree with everything else you said except where emphasis to reduce variable comes before your list, and that's about placement trumps displacement, so you have to be able to shoot it really well and most shoot well under 15 ft/lbs recoil energy, if your limits are higher that's great, I've certainly made higher work as well, but do better more consistently with less, and having kids was no brainer to hit the lighter end of spectrum, but I'll stay there even when kids all grown up and gone, no reason to shoot more

and you talk who cares under 400 and I agree, then you bring long range into it, well ok, lets go there too then, we're like a pair of yo-yo's lol, all over the place ;)

1/2 second tof is limits for most shooters on game, give or take 450-500 yards, same in archery it relates to about 50 yards, 3/4 second tof's there are a moderate amount of people consistent within, give or take 600 yards for most decent set ups, and 70 yards for the archery guys, beyond that a minuscule percentage of population can consistently kill at, beyond these distance/tof limits it comes down to everything but the cartridge/combo/rifle/scope combo, you're fighting natural field position accuracy potentials for most mortals, ~2 moa, you're fighting wind hold limits up to about 20", you're fighting a totally different kind of pressure than what is at the range, ie; you can try and get a 1/4 minute rifle but you will not kill any better any further with it over a 1.5 moa rifle, so you wasted a lot of time past the point of diminishing returns chasing accuracy that doesn't matter in the field, most simply cannot show any advantage in hit probability due to that, wind will limit most to inside a 20" max window for both ability to read it close enough and still have acceptable margin of error to land in the pie plate on an animal for real, so still a lot of your parameters you listed as very important aren't really that important, something you can shoot really well is far more important, efficiency of bullet allows you to really improve this aspect while extending distance performances on game, that's what 6.5 does over ANY 30 cal

and I do pick what I like and shoot stuff, a little wee 6.5 Grendel, kids lobbed them in there to 355 so far like rockstars, 420 for me, 6.5 ft/lbs recoil energy in a 8.25 lb rig, watch it all in the scope, 2386 fps launch...elevation isn't a concern, tof under .5 seconds so not a concern, high bc, barely nudge reticle into the wind for most shots but still in kill zone, not a concern, but recoil/muzzle blast/noise...much bigger risk for shoot ability, I can shoot a lot more just as well, but see no point now, the extra hp won't help me if I shoot poorly and more likely to make me shoot poorly, so much more goes into this than velocity, as covered before, 2500 fps is very fast

if I wanted a 1000 yard rig today it would be off the shelf of course, it would be a tikka or ruger in 6mm creedmoor and run factory 108 eld-m's, it would end up in an mdt chassis, it would pinwheel things with highest hit probability over all other choices, a little shy on bullet weight for my preference but know the sd is there and construction ideal for maximizing performance at the longer distances, also a little tougher on barrels but as a hunter that's ok, I'd get a lifetime out of it and shoot other things for volume, if I wanted a 600 yard rig today it would be 6.5 Creedmoor, it checks off every single box better than anything else off the shelf period, as it is I no longer care about having 600 yard rigs, I'm down to 400 yard rig...so I went down to that lol, progress and 21st century formula made it possible for me to do that with only 30 grains of powder per touch of the trigger, 15 head, 5 seasons, family success batting 1000, there's no replacement for placement ;)

6.5cm is the hands down winner for a 600 yard combined big game playtime rig over a 308, on recoil alone it wins but it runs circles around it ballistically as well.
Click to expand...


Question . You land in Alaska for a guided moose hunt and you're 15m into it . The guide walks up and says , here are your choices . This 6.5 (.264) or this 308 win . It's all I have left for today . You're gonna tell me you grab the 6.5 ... You are going in circles.. I guess is why the 6.5 took off ..Speculation and keyboard
 
blakeyboy said:
6.5cm is the hands down winner for a 600 yard combined big game playtime rig over a 308, on recoil alone it wins but it runs circles around it ballistically as well.
Click to expand...

The 6.5 just doesn't have enough azz at 600 yards to cover all of the bases under all of the conditions for a combined big game rig. And an argument that the 308 would either...

R.
 
Spruster said:
[/B]

Question . You land in Alaska for a guided moose hunt and you're 15m into it . The guide walks up and says , here are your choices . This 6.5 (.264) or this 308 win . It's all I have left for today . You're gonna tell me you grab the 6.5 ... You are going in circles.. I guess is why the 6.5 took off ..Speculation and keyboard
Click to expand...

The right answer is neither...or request another guide!

R.
 
blakeyboy said:
…soon as you start talking about reloading the conversation goes out the window, the versatility one can add to any cartridge with reloading about quadruples, easiest way to compare is off the shelf standards against off the shelf standards at off the shelf ratings, to demonstrate the appropriate perspective best (apple/apple)

and for others, yes, for most to 400 this conversation isn't really for you, but for recoil alone sake and improving hit probability maybe it should raise an eyebrow? as we all agree that there's no replacement for placement so hit probability should be something to look at, then there's future proofing and even resale considerations, versatility of the 6.5 is simply higher than the 308 even if you have no intention of using it to it's potentials
Click to expand...

The biggest logic problem with the modern 6.5 comparisons, is your selecting .30 cal loads with tech from more than half a century ago to compare against modern Hornady developed 6.5 LR loads. If that’s the way it’s gonna be played, pick 160gr round nose 6.5x55 loads. The same modern ballistics benefit is just as available in .308 and .300, and you can’t deny those rounds the same modern ammo.

Here’s Hornady’s Hunter / Match 178gr .308 load, equal tech and development, against the 6.5 Creed 147 ELD-M. Both these are factory, both with the same modern load development. So even as far as 1000, the .308 is by no means left in the dust. A .300 leaves both far, far in the distance. This is pick em territory if you don’t believe in energy. I’ve shot 1000 against 6.5s with .308, and all that mattered was the shooter.

A neat round, it is, but the revolution has occurred in bullets and ballistics in general, not in 6.5 alone.

Va1tUta.jpg
 
Spruster said:
Joel .. you really look and sound like a HAPPY guy .. and I enjoy your post .. get off that juice . lol
Click to expand...

Just one more before I'm cut off? ;)

Just tell me if it doesn't make sense...

A bullet fragment split off of the bullet cannot be expected to be going as fast or faster than the bullet that it is being ejected from. Especially not since it actually starts its journey in a medium much denser than air, no? It also weighs next to nothing. So we have a fragment, one grain or less and perhaps much, much less of a shape not particularly suited to penetration, going slow.

We have a bunch of em, sure...

These are going to cause massive internal damage, and liquify organs? A speck of metal that stops very quickly, with next to no force behind it, because it weighs as much as a fly turd?

I dunno guys. I really don't. Again, we're talking about essentially a load of tiny shot being fired inside a big game animal's body like 22 rat shot, if even.

It seems a lot more reasonable to me that a bullet that produces fragments (or hits a rib) is going to be opening with much more suddenness and violence than one that does not, and in doing so, creats a much larger/stronger pressure wave within the body than one that opens slower (see above photo in gel)

Given that organs, tissue, etc can only take so much stretching before they tear or be destroyed, this is what happens. More so the faster the bullet upsets.

This is a mechanism.

Pointing and saying "Look! I shot it with a fragile bullet and this happened, so it MUST be the fragments!" is not. It is observing a phenomenon and coming to the conclusion that the side effect is what caused the damage.

Unless suddenly projectile physics has changed and tiny, tiny slow moving, oddly shaped particles with next to no kinetic energy do massive damage.

*shrugs and pours another*
 
Last edited:
Joel... a couple of things. I didn't invent this stuff, nor did I make it up. So if it's a me thing. you're definitely barking up the wrong tree. Slow moving particles? The bullet fragments are going the same speed as the bullet... they only begin to shed that speed once separated from that bullet. This is how hand grenades, and shrapnel work. Not exactly known for being harmless. Also, when cleaning various animals, and observing various cavities filled with bone and bullet fragments, as compared to those without, it's very obvious what has caused what kind of damage and what hasn't. There is no guessing. Again, the interweb is full of this information from guys using Berger bullets and others. I sure as hell didn't invent this. This same thing happens when hitting a rib with a tougher bullet as well. The shrapnel damage is obvious.

You haven't ever seen this for yourself?

R.
 
Rman said:
Joel... a couple of things. I didn't invent this stuff, nor did I make it up. So if it's a me thing. you're definitely barking up the wrong tree. Slow moving particles? The bullet fragments are going the same speed as the bullet... they only begin to shed that speed once separated from that bullet. This is how hand grenades, and shrapnel work. Not exactly known for being harmless. Also, when cleaning various animals, and observing various cavities filled with bone and bullet fragments, as compared to those without, it's very obvious what has caused what kind of damage and what hasn't. There is no guessing. Again, the interweb is full of this information from guys using Berger bullets and others. I sure as hell didn't invent this. This same thing happens when hitting a rib with a tougher bullet as well. The shrapnel damage is obvious.

You haven't ever seen this for yourself?

R.
Click to expand...

Rman,

Let me respond with a question in kind.

Its like you think I am saying the damage does not take place, and your replies to me are "But the damage is there, haven't you ever seen it?"

Why is that?

I've proposed a mechanism through which hydrostatic shock from the bullet impact has done the damage, and the fragments themselves are largely uninvolved. These replies are very hard to understand because I am clearly not saying the damage did not occur. I am saying it occurs because fragile bullets at speeds over 2200 or so FPS cause hydrostatic shock. And the faster they upset/yaw,open etc the more hydrostatic shock occurs because it creates a bigger, more forceful wave.

You're pointing at fragments in damaged tissue and saying "see, they are in there! They did it!" with no demonstrated reason for it.

I'm really getting absolutely no feedback as to how tiny, nearly weightless particles starting their trip inside a medium much denser than air, with an extremely low energy to start with and almost no ability to maintain that energy over any distance are going to cause massive damage. Just pointing at the phenomenon and saying "Look, this happened!" I'm sorry, I really don't know how to make it more plain than that.


I'll admit a hit to bone does create a lot of secondary projectiles and do more damage but the same is true of FMJ hitting bone, so the involvement as a wounding mechanism is a separate issue.

We're talking about 30 grains of bullet fragments "liquefying organs"

Please, in terms of physics, how do 30 grains of bullet fragments cause massive damage and liquefy organs?

Why isn't 17 HMR the ultimate big game round?
 
And you realize that hand grenade and other shrapnel are actually propelled by an explosion right? Not the initial velocity of the parent object they broke off of because it hit something?

I have a slight feeling that the blast due to the explosive filling may, just may, project shrapnel faster than the speed at which you threw the hand grenade lol

Or else I'm really missing something else here too. Last I checked you don't throw a hand grenade at someone so fast that it hits them and pieces break off and fly. Unless you have one hell of an arm lol
 
Joel said:
Rman,

Let me respond with a question in kind.

Its like you think I am saying the damage does not take place, and your replies to me are "But the damage is there, haven't you ever seen it?"

Why is that?
Well, it's because most people have shot any number of animals have seen it
I've proposed a mechanism through which hydrostatic shock from the bullet impact has done the damage, and the fragments themselves are largely uninvolved. These replies are very hard to understand because I am clearly not saying the damage did not occur. I am saying it occurs because fragile bullets at speeds over 2200 or so FPS cause hydrostatic shock. And the faster they upset/yaw,open etc the more hydrostatic shock occurs because it creates a bigger, more forceful wave. When a bullet does not hit anything, like a rib, or does not fragment, then yes, of course, this is exactly what happens, along with punching holes through vital organs

You're pointing at fragments in damaged tissue and saying "see, they are in there! They did it!" with no demonstrated reason for it. I have explained this several times, the bullet fragments are travelling FAST, not slow as you seem to believe for some reason? They lose speed, of course, but again, not as fast as you think

I'm really getting absolutely no feedback as to how tiny, nearly weightless particles starting their trip inside a medium much denser than air, with an extremely low energy to start with and almost no ability to maintain that energy over any distance are going to cause massive damage. Just pointing at the phenomenon and saying "Look, this happened!" I'm sorry, I really don't know how to make it more plain than that. Again, it's SPEED, they aren't going slow, they aren't exactly tiny, or weightless. I'll let the folks at Berger explain it better?


I'll admit a hit to bone does create a lot of secondary projectiles and do more damage but the same is true of FMJ hitting bone, so the involvement as a wounding mechanism is a separate issue.

We're talking about 30 grains of bullet fragments "liquefying organs" Again, most people have shot any number of animals have seen this

Please, in terms of physics, how do 30 grains of bullet fragments cause massive damage and liquefy organs? Speed, Velocity, Energy

Why isn't 17 HMR the ultimate big game round?
Click to expand...

Hopefully this video will help you out:


Skip the fluff and go to 1:00
The picture is worth 10,000 words. In fact, I'll save you the trouble. Here it is:

Berger Shrapnel.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Berger Shrapnel.jpg
    Berger Shrapnel.jpg
    15.3 KB · Views: 78
I know exactly what kind of damage you're talking about. It has nothing to do with me not being familiar with it and everything to do with me thinking it is caused by a different reason.

And in that picture of the gel, I think just the bullet opening on its own would have made just as much happen to the gel and that light pieces of metal that do a terrible job of retaining speed and have very little KE to begin with don't cause much wounding beside the very little tissue they actually displace. All that picture proves to me is that soft point bullets lose pieces of themselves after they open up and expand, in the process shedding a lot of energy that becomes tissue disturbance.

If KE is 1/2MVsquared and it barely has any M and it loses the Vsquared very quicly because irregular shaped things that weigh next to nothing are poor penetrators then it sure ain't doing much in the way of damage. It simply isn't imbued with enough energy to do much.

Consider:

1 grain piece of copper (or 0.065 grams...right?)

Speed 2400 fps (or 800 m/s) and I think I am being very charitable with that! because I really doubt a tiny piece of copper or lead that gets broken off of an opening bullet is doing anywhere near that speed.

Put that into 1/2MVsquared to get an answer in joules.

KE = 21 Joules.

how many foot pounds is that?

14.5 whole foot pounds.

So a 223 bullet that generates nearly 100 times that much KE, hitting at 2900 FPS is not a great moose bullet? Why not, it has the ability to generate so many of those super lethal mini projectiles lol

Definitley not moving fast enough to cause hydrostatic shock and if its oblong or rectangular and traveling broadside on, it really isn't going anywhere far and doing nothing besides hurting tissue it happens to touch...which is likely already damaged by the shockwave of the bullet having passed through.

Weighing almost nothing it will do a horrible job of retaining that little energy it already has, and it will bleed off exponentially fast...Because you're supplying absolutely no proof of reasoning as to why little little bits of something moving in a thick medium retain KE lol.

Still laughing at the hand grenades part tho.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom