New Weatherby Cartridge!

• 127-grain Barnes LRX @ 3,531 fps
• 130-grain Swift Scirocco @ 3,475 fps (approx.)
• 140-grain Swift A-Frame @ 3,395 fps
The ammunition will sell for $95 for a box of 20 rounds.

The Accumark will sell for $2,300; the Accumark RC for $2,700; and the Ultra Lightweight for $2,400.

Sounded good till you look at ammo/rifle prices for a barrel burner. Nice for the deep pocket.
 
It's overbore! Same old stuff recycled here:

- they will be barrel burners. Well ya. This is intended as a hunting round and a shooter might see 30 rounds a year of use. Good therefore for only about 25 years of accurate hunting;
- they "need" a 26" barrel. Really - my 6.5 RUM has a 24" barrel and outshoots the 6.5X55 by 500 fps with a 140 gr bullet. A 26" barrel would widen the gap by less than 50 fps;
- ammo will be expensive. I pity those who are still slaves to the ammo manufacturers. May I recommend the 22LR?; and
- they are inefficient - they use a lot of powder and there are diminishing returns. Yes they are less "efficient" than a smaller capacity round. As a result you might only get 75 rounds from that pound of powder (two years' worth of shooting), instead of 150 rounds (four years'). That's $20 you just wasted.
 
I question how many hunters on this forum have burned out the throat on their hunting rifle? Who will purchase enough Weatherby ammo @ $100.00 a box and perform that task?
 
Andy said:
It's overbore! Same old stuff recycled here:

- they will be barrel burners. Well ya. This is intended as a hunting round and a shooter might see 30 rounds a year of use. Good therefore for only about 25 years of accurate hunting;
- they "need" a 26" barrel. Really - my 6.5 RUM has a 24" barrel and outshoots the 6.5X55 by 500 fps with a 140 gr bullet. A 26" barrel would widen the gap by less than 50 fps;
- ammo will be expensive. I pity those who are still slaves to the ammo manufacturers. May I recommend the 22LR?; and
- they are inefficient - they use a lot of powder and there are diminishing returns. Yes they are less "efficient" than a smaller capacity round. As a result you might only get 75 rounds from that pound of powder (two years' worth of shooting), instead of 150 rounds (four years'). That's $20 you just wasted.
Click to expand...


How dare you introduce "perspective...!"

How can we can we maintain a decent arguement over meaningless minutia with you putting "logic" on the table.
 
todbartell said:
Joe sixpack will still go with a 7mm Rem Mag with CorLokts

6,5-300Wby = epic fail
Click to expand...

Interesting, how many of Weatherby's cartridges have been a commercial flop? The .375 Weatherby is still considered by many to be the best of the breed, but was usurped by the .378, so cannot be considered a failure. The small bores continue to enjoy overwhelming popularity, and since the 6.5-300 outperforms the .257 by a significant margin, and will do so with the advantage of heavier big game bullets, it will be irresistible to the Weatherby speed junkies. Sounds like another epic win for Team Weatherby an d their enthusiasts.

Joe sixpack is no more part of Weatherby's target audience than he is Nosler's. He owns a single hunting rifle, buys a box of cheap factory ammo every other year, and from that, he has 15 rounds remaining to confirm the following year's zero. He's been told that a 7 magnum shoots as flat as a laser beam, and he believes it, but in reality he couldn't exploit the difference between his 7 mag and a 7X57 with the 175 gr load. These cartridges are for folks who enjoy a broader interest in the shooting sports.
 
Last edited:
track said:
I question how many hunters on this forum have burned out the throat on their hunting rifle? Who will purchase enough Weatherby ammo @ $100.00 a box and perform that task?
Click to expand...

I did, well Dad and I did over about 13 years of owning and shooting a particular 300WM that didn't want to group. Lots of rounds put down the barrel trying to develop a suitable hunting load. By the time we did it didn't have many years left of shooting before it was cooked.
 
I cooked the throat on a 25/06.
I'd be interested in this cal for several reasons. One I want a long range coyote wolf deer round. Second I could hunt all Ontario game and pretty much everything else in the country with it except bison and big bears. Third its under the caliber restriction for my home area. The range of bullets is great and it will shoot flatter and hit harder then my loved 25/06. A new weatherby rifle is still on par or even cheaper then a full custom rifle. I think it will sell. It's cooler then the old 264 wm which is my other choice
 
BigUglyMan said:
I did, well Dad and I did over about 13 years of owning and shooting a particular 300WM that didn't want to group. Lots of rounds put down the barrel trying to develop a suitable hunting load. By the time we did it didn't have many years left of shooting before it was cooked.
Click to expand...
OK, that's two so far..... anyone else? I personally think that throat erosion is most uncommon with hunting rifles, therefore, why the concern about this issue, or is it an issue?
 
they "need" a 26" barrel. Really - my 6.5 RUM has a 24" barrel and outshoots the 6.5X55 by 500 fps with a 140 gr bullet. A 26" barrel would widen the gap by less than 50 fps;
Click to expand...

Having worked a great deal with the STW and RUM cartridges, in about a dozen rifles in total, I have found that each additional inch of barrel is worth about 50fps, so 2" of barrel would be worth around 100fps. If I am going to go to put up with the short barrel life and increased muzzle blast of an STW or a RUM, I am going to utilize that extra 100fps. As well, that extra 2" of barrel will decrease barrel rise and muzzle blast.

OK, that's two so far..... anyone else? I personally think that throat erosion is most uncommon with hunting rifles, therefore, why the concern about this issue, or is it an issue?
Click to expand...

I replaced my original 7mmstw barrel after about 1500 rounds, but it was my go to rifle, and I shot it year round for a few years. I still have a 7mmstw as my go to big game rifle, but these days, it only sees about 50 to 100 rounds per year. I do most of my target shooting with my other rifles.
 
Last edited:
track said:
OK, that's two so far..... anyone else? I personally think that throat erosion is most uncommon with hunting rifles, therefore, why the concern about this issue, or is it an issue?
Click to expand...

I've cooked two barrels... both hotrodding in my intemperate youth... a .243 and a .220 Swift... it made sense to hotrod the Swift as it was a loooong range coyote rifle... with the .243 I was just being dumb...

It is unlikely that I will burn out another barrel... I just don't get to shoot as much anymore and they tend to not stay around as long before this monkey sees something else shinier.
 
stubblejumper said:
Having worked a great deal with the STW and RUM cartridges, in about a dozen rifles in total, I have found that each additional inch of barrel is worth about 50fps, so 2" of barrel would be worth around 100fps. If I am going to go to put up with the short barrel life and increased muzzle blast of an STW or a RUM, I am going to utilize that extra 100fps. As well, that extra 2" of barrel will decrease barrel rise and muzzle blast.



I replaced my original 7mmstw barrel after about 1500 rounds, but it was my go to rifle, and I shot it year round for a few years. I still have a 7mmstw as my go to big game rifle, but these days, it only sees about 50 to 100 rounds per year. I do most of my target shooting with my other rifles.
Click to expand...
For your first comment on barrel length, I'm an advocate for more barrel length as well. I had two custom rifles made with a 27 1/2 and 28 inch barrels where velocity well exceeded any reloading manual, and with a custom rifle the accuracy was superb as well.
It's quite remote to hear or witness a hunting rifle with throat erosion. Therefore, if a person has deep pockets to bang off hundreds of rounds then a barrel burner is a non-issue, just rebarrel it. Hunters without deep pockets will utilize the firearm with minimal shooting activity, hence the cost of ammo.
 
hoytcanon said:
I've cooked two barrels... both hotrodding in my intemperate youth... a .243 and a .220 Swift... it made sense to hotrod the Swift as it was a loooong range coyote rifle... with the .243 I was just being dumb...

It is unlikely that I will burn out another barrel... I just don't get to shoot as much anymore and they tend to not stay around as long before this monkey sees something else shinier.
Click to expand...

Isnt this the truth. I also like Boomers post. I have two Ultra's a 375 and a 300. I just dont, and wont shoot enough to realistically ever burn the barrels. Where i think the barrel burner issue arises is in the true target guys, shooting literally thousands of rounds a year. Most guys doing that would have something like a 308 for the volume. My 375 has a MB, but it is still not a plinker.

Now a .264 would be considerably cheaper to shoot, projectiles are the most expensive component but they dont get really expensive until north of say .338. I would see most commercial rifles for the 6.5-300wea being hunting rifles, more rounds/year than Joe Six pack but less than a competitive shooter. Long, high BC, heavy for caliber projectiles for .264 really dont exist. If they did, they would also have to withstand 3500 ft/sec, be available in bulk, and may not have good terminal performance on game for hunters.

Compare reloading to say golf. Much cheaper than green fees, even with the price and lack of availability of reloading components. Barrels like powder, primer, brass, and projectiles are just a expendable part of shooting.
 
track said:
For your first comment on barrel length, I'm an advocate for more barrel length as well. I had two custom rifles made with a 27 1/2 and 28 inch barrels where velocity well exceeded any reloading manual, and with a custom rifle the accuracy was superb as well.
It's quite remote to hear or witness a hunting rifle with throat erosion. Therefore, if a person has deep pockets to bang off hundreds of rounds then a barrel burner is a non-issue, just rebarrel it. Hunters without deep pockets will utilize the firearm with minimal shooting activity, hence the cost of ammo.
Click to expand...

If your pockets aren't deep enough to be able to afford to shoot the 6.5-300 on a regular basis, to learn the cartridge and to get comfortable using it, you shouldn't buy one in the first place.
 
If a long heavy high BC bullet did come along in the 6.5's I don't think there is a powder available that would be slow enough to utilize all the space available in a 6.5-300 weatherby to get sufficient case fill before hitting pressure. At least in a rather temperature stable powder suitable for long distance shooting

The only reason I have shot out barrels in my hunting rigs is that I like to shoot long range and put in a fair amount of time practicing but I don't believe the average person would ever run into throat erosion issues. Nor would the average hunter even benefit from the added extra reach a 6.5-300 wby would allow them.
 
I picture Roy Weatherby in a Reno Nevada casino in 1968, sitting at the bar suckin on a fat cigar. Greasy comb over hair, wearing a suit with one of them leather string ties

Big wad of cash in his pocket .Driving a Cadillac, surrounded by ho's with poodle skirts and big hair doos

Weatherby shooters = Greasy ol geezers
 
todbartell said:
I picture Roy Weatherby in a Reno Nevada casino in 1968, sitting at the bar suckin on a fat cigar. Greasy comb over hair, wearing a suit with one of them leather string ties

Big wad of cash in his pocket .Driving a Cadillac, surrounded by ho's with poodle skirts and big hair doos

Weatherby shooters = Greasy ol geezers
Click to expand...

That sounds like the dream....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom