6x45 good for deer?


PDA






lobo9er
September 29, 2010, 07:44 AM
6x45 how would this be for deer so far I have gotten mixed reviews anyone here use one? Really think about building an upper in this caliber.

If you enjoyed reading about "6x45 good for deer?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
SaxonPig
September 29, 2010, 08:33 AM
Too light IMO.

AR15 platform? Not the best choice in a hunting rifle.

68wj
September 29, 2010, 09:01 AM
Too light IMO.

AR15 platform? Not the best choice in a hunting rifle.
What is the best choice in a hunting rifle?

627PCFan
September 29, 2010, 09:14 AM
If a 223 will bag a deer, a 6x45 will as well.

Here comes the 223 for deer debate again.....

NCsmitty
September 29, 2010, 09:16 AM
IMO, the 6x45 is marginally adequate for the smaller deer species. Proper bullet selection, coupled with proper bullet placement, would make it a better choice for deer than the original 5.56/223.
Penetration to the vitals at varying shot angles is the challenge for the smaller capacity rounds, and every one wants a humane kill.



NCsmitty

ArmedBear
September 29, 2010, 09:17 AM
The "best"?

Depends on conditions.

Out here in the mountain West, it's a scoped bolt action. I'm not sure I've seen anyone with anything else.

But, around the world, everything from huge-caliber double rifles to lever-action carbines to drillings (shotgun/rifle 3-barrel combo) are considered the "best." That depends on the terrain, vegetation, and obviously the quarry.

A coworker of mine shot a local mule deer at close to 400 yards, and it yielded about 400 lbs. of meat. It was an unusually large specimen, but you don't shoot an animal like that at 400 yards in the steep mountains with a .223 or a 6x45.

Now when I used to go out after the few "deer" down by the Mexican border, the things were a small fraction of the size, and often in thick chaparral. A 100 lb. deer at 50 yards? I'm sure a .223 would work. But an AR is sure a bulky peashooter. In that country, also rough and steep, if I were going to carry a .223, I'd opt for a nice light little rifle instead, think CZ527 Carbine. I made the mistake of lugging around a heavy .30-06 down there...:)

And of course, if you drive up to and sit in an elaborate stand over a field or something, you can shoot whatever you want. Weight, bulk, etc. don't matter much. I'm thinking strictly of hunting on foot.

rbernie
September 29, 2010, 09:18 AM
AR15 platform? Not the best choice in a hunting rifle. The suitability of the AR platform to hunting uses was not the question asked. Let's address the OP rather than immediately dragging the thread in a totally different direction.

I have been using 6.8SPC and 7.62x39 AR uppers for my deer and hog hunting needs for almost a decade now, and they work well. I have not tried the 6x43; I would expect it to be as approximately effective as heavy-for-chambering 223 rounds (e.g. 75gr-77gr), which is to suggest that neck shots would be favored over heart/lung shots.

68wj
September 29, 2010, 09:34 AM
The numbers that I have seen haven't been anything to excited about. Yes, it is a step up from the .223 with its more efficient bore diameter pushing heavier bullets to similar velocities. However, I just don't see the advantage in conversion outside of the availability of .223 brass that you can neck up if you are a loader.

To directly answer the "good for deer" question, sure, if you are using the right bullets and have good shot placement within the appropriate distance. There are other calibers out there that are better suited that will make fine uppers though. If you just want to use 6x45, go for it.

mbogo
September 29, 2010, 09:57 AM
It's a little light for large-bodied deer, but with an 85gr. Nosler Partition and proper shot placement it will work.

I've seen deer taken with all sorts of rounds, from .218 Bee to .45-70, and shot placement and bullet construction have been the critical factor.

Personally, I'd select the 7.62x39 if using an AR15 platform. Its ballistics are similar to the venerable .30-30 (but with pointed bullets, trajectory is flatter) and ammunition is widely available.

mbogo

Gordon
September 29, 2010, 11:26 AM
My wife has been using the little Sako Vixen in 6.5 TCU Ugalde (6.5x45) for 15 years with 120 grain bullets at 2400 fps from a 22" barrel. It flat out nails the local blacktail DRN to the 331 yards her longest shot. Just saying.

SaxonPig
September 29, 2010, 12:23 PM
"The suitability of the AR platform to hunting uses was not the question asked. Let's address the OP rather than immediately dragging the thread in a totally different direction."

Is not the 6x45 typically used in the AR15 type? If so, is not a discussion on the rifle appropriate when considering the caliber?

68wj- "Best" for hunting would be something designed for sporting purposes rather than military use. I like my black rifles but there are better choices for hunting.

68wj
September 29, 2010, 10:15 PM
"The suitability of the AR platform to hunting uses was not the question asked. Let's address the OP rather than immediately dragging the thread in a totally different direction."

Is not the 6x45 typically used in the AR15 type? If so, is not a discussion on the rifle appropriate when considering the caliber?

68wj- "Best" for hunting would be something designed for sporting purposes rather than military use. I like my black rifles but there are better choices for hunting.
That is "best" for you. I see nothing wrong with using a lightweight, reliable, accurate rifle in the appropriate caliber of your choosing. If that rifle happens to be an AR style rifle, what is the issue. Is a bold action .223 best next to an AR in .223? Many deer have been harvested with military designed firearms through the years, long before the black rifles (they're just not as pretty).

I used to be of the opinion that the bolt guns went to the woods and the AR went to the range. This year, based on some loading, shooting, and thinking, I don't know if that will be the case. My stinkin' .270 just won't settle down and my 6.8 AR just puts nice tight groups with very little load development. The AR weighs the same, is more compact, and is more than adequate for whitetail at any range I could hope to shoot. I just don't know.

lobo9er
September 29, 2010, 10:21 PM
all interesting points. I can see 5.56 vs 6x45 vs 6.5 or 6.8 to be kinda similar to 9mm, 40, and 45. which one is to small, which one is only marginally bigger than the other or which one is just right and so on.

snakeman
September 29, 2010, 10:30 PM
Just use a Barnes X bullet or something similar and you should be just fine. It's adequate for deer if you shoot broadside and straight in the heart. It should penetrate just fine and deliver enough internal damage to have a properly shot deer down within a few yards if you do your part. Just practice! And good hunting!

browningguy
September 29, 2010, 10:35 PM
Having actually hunted with a 6x45 in an AR for a couple of years I will second the opinion that it is marginally adequate. I used mine primarily on cull hunts when shooting does at 100 yards and less, and I would not use it for anything more than that. With 80 or 85 grain bullets you can get enough velocity to kill deer, but no one will ever call it overkill. The magazine length on an AR is to short to fit the 100 grain bullets with any kind of powder charge so those are out of the question.

For deer hunting I think the 6.8 is a better round, the 6.5 Grendel even a little better than that. But my .50 Beowulf does a great job also.

W.E.G.
September 29, 2010, 10:58 PM
If you think .223 is a good deer round, then you will be happy with the 6x45.

My nephew shot a doe with one at 40 yards.

Deer dropped like somebody tipped over a department store mannequin.

I use a 30-06, because I know it will penetrate end-to-end if that is the shot I have.
I wouldn't try that with the 6x45.

Kernel
September 29, 2010, 11:17 PM
Gordon, that's impressive performance. What kind of OAL do you load to? I'm guessing it's a bit more than the 2.260" ARs are limited to.

LoonWulf
September 29, 2010, 11:27 PM
Im running a 6x47 that has worked well on goats so far, they are smaller then deer running 50-80lbs. I shot one in the chest week before last and the round went thru and broke the off hip before exiting.

75grn sierra hp at 2850ish. Ive clocked my 100s at around 2400 and im short of maximu loads.
24" tube, coal of 2.4ish

millertyme
September 29, 2010, 11:38 PM
I don't think you'll get the velocity out of the loading to use a Barnes X-Bullet. You can load a 90gr SGK up to about 2600fps in the 6x45 out of a bolt gun with a 22" barrel, I imagine an AR would be a hundred or so FPS slower than that. Even at 2500fps I wouldn't think anything wrong with it for deer found in the lower 48 as long as you could keep the distances relatively short. Big muleys in the Rockies? Not so much. Whitetails in Texas? No problem.

nalioth
September 29, 2010, 11:58 PM
So, is the 6x45 easier to make/obtain than the 6.5 MPC (http://forum.novarata.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=548) ?

Kernel
September 30, 2010, 12:45 AM
So, is the 6x45 easier to make/obtain than the 6.5 MPC ?
To make 6x45 you just neck size .223 brass. No trimming. Case lengths are the same -- 45mm.

From what I just read....

6.5MPC is a shorter case. It has to be trimmed downed to 43mm, then neck sized. Otherwise, (dispite caliber) they're about the same, both use the same shoulder location and angle as the .223.

Takes about 2 seconds to make 6x45 cases from .223 brass. Would take, maybe, one minute to make a 6.5MPC case from .223 brass.

If you enjoyed reading about "6x45 good for deer?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!