Low Drag Hunting Trend?

[westernrover]

I have rifles chambered in a few different cartridges like 6.5 Grendel, 6.5 Creedmoor, and 6.5 PRC. All these are capable of shooting relatively lightweight bullets of ~100 grains as well as long, low-drag bullets. Their set-back shoulders distinguish them from older cartridge designs that favored greater case capacity, and even older designs that would have been more tapered. The proposition of these 21st century cartridge designs is that they fit the long, low-drag bullets and fire them efficiently. Because we are supposed to have laser rangefinders, the drop from initially lower velocities due to heavier bullets and smaller case capacities from set-back shoulders is claimed to be worth the tradeoff because of the prospect of preserving velocity out to longer ranges.

Light, Midweight, or Low Drag
Let me take 6.5 Creedmoor for a single example. For all my calculations, I am using Barnes' published load data. I can load 100 grain TTSX (.359 G1 BC) to a muzzle velocity of about 3200 fps. I can load 127 grain LRX (.468 G1 BC) to about 2900 fps. I can load a 145 grain Match Burner (.703 G1 BC) to 2700 fps. The 100 grain TTSX is proven as an excellent hunting bullet for Mule Deer. It's not too light. Yet because it is light, the modest Creedmoor cartridge will deliver high velocity and flat trajectory. In fact, it is faster and flatter than the others out to 1000 yards where it will have dropped as much as the Match Burner. It won't drop as far as the LRX until 1500 yards.

Velocity, Trajectory, Energy
For hunting bullets like the TTSX or LRX, the latter's advantage in lower drag doesn't result in a flatter trajectory. Does it have more energy? Whether energy is a meaningful measurement or not is another debate, but in this case, I think it represents the heavier, lower-drag bullet's ability to maintain effectiveness over time and distance. At the muzzle, the 100 grain bullet starts off with a slight advantage in energy due to the formula for energy greatly favoring velocity. At 100 yards, they even up. By 200 yards, the slight advantage has gone to the 127 grain bullet. Even though the 100 grain TTSX still has a significant velocity advantage of 270 fps at 200 yards, it has lost more of its energy to drag at this point and has fallen below the energy level of the LRX. Even so, those first 200 yards covers most hunting situations. By 500 yards, the TTSX is still higher than the LRX, having dropped only 34.5" vs. 42.3". It still has more velocity and 88% as much energy. After 500 or 600 yards, both are dropping below 1000 ft. lbs. of energy, but neither will go transonic until well after 1000 yards.

The advantage of the low-drag hunting bullet doesn't seem very remarkable. What's more is that that same bullet could be used in a traditional cartridge like 260 Remington. In fact, I would argue that an 80 to 95 grain bullet in 243 Winchester would be faster, flatter, and do everything needed at least as well or better than the new-fangled extreme low-drag optimized cartridge.

The reason for this is because a .468 G1 BC is not that sleek. It's not the kind of bullet that is unique to the Creedmoor or PRC cartridges. For that, we need a bullet with a .700+ G1 BC. Looking at a 145 grain Match Burner in 6.5 Creedmoor, at 500 yards, it has 50% more energy than the hunting bullets. It doesn't drop below 1000 ft. lbs. of energy until nearly 1000 yards or almost twice as far as the hunting bullets. But it isn't a hunting bullet and can't be expected to have the terminal effect of a hunting bullet. The energy on a paper target doesn't really matter or it doesn't matter to me.

Overbore Belted Magnums
If we go back to the Belted Magnum era, flat trajectories were the thing. Nobody had laser rangefinders, most scopes weren't setup to dial, and hunters shot MPBR. We had big overbore cartridges that shot lightweight bullets on laser-like trajectories. The 257 Weatherby exemplifies this trend, but so did the 300 Win Mag., and pretty much all the small-bore Weatherbys and Win Mags -- and it was a trend like I think the current low-drag Creedmoor/PRC thing is.

Shooting the 100 grain TTSX out of a belted magnum case will produce 3600 fps at the muzzle. For the mid-weight bullets, it's about the same as the PRC but it cannot shoot the really long heavyweight bullets like PRC. While the PRC could shoot the lightweight bullet, the magnum has been doing it for 60 more years. Did they get it right all those years ago? Well, it shoots flatter than anything, even the 700 G1 BC Match Burner, out to a mile. More importantly, consider the MPBR for a 6" target with a 200 yard zero:

TTSX Creedmoor 290 yards
LRX Creedmoor 305 yards
MB Creedmoor 285 yards
TTSX Magnum 325 yards

Ok, so maybe it gets 25 more yards MPBR. That's probably more useful than 100 ft. lbs. of energy, but it's not a game-changer. The fact is any of these cartridges would suffice for shooting deer, antelope, or big-horn MPBR out to 275 yards which is quite good indeed. Since the Magnum has been doing it for a half-century longer, I've got to tip it the hat. We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Creedmoor/PRC do something the older cartridges don't -- they shoot those super low-drag bullets. That just doesn't do anything for me since all I do is hunt.

Old School Tapered Cases
Now of course some people will say we should go all the way back to the Mauser, but that's un-American, so I'll take it back to the 270 because like I wrote, I think the belted-magnum thing was a trend started by Weatherby and then Winchester (I know it originated with H&H but they originally had a practical purpose for the belt, and they did not instigate the hyper-velocity small bore craze). The 270 will shoot the 110 grain TTSX (.377 G1 BC) at 3400 fps. It shoots it with an 6" MPBR of 315 yards. It's flatter than the Match Burner out to 1400 yards. It maintains 1000 ft. lbs. of energy out to 675 yards (the same as the Magnum). I guess the Magnum's advantage is there on paper, it might be a bit more with a 26" barrel vs. the 270's 24" (which are typical lengths respectively, but the data was for 24" on both). Still, I can't imagine it making enough difference to make a difference.

Short Action
I suppose there was a difference when short-actions were a thing, but nowadays, a factory producing short-actions would cut themselves off all the sales of PRC and the one or two belted magnums that remain popular (300 and 7mm). Do popular rifles like the new Ruger American Gen 2 even come in a short action or are they all the same? I know Tikka are all the same. I think if you want a shorter rifle, the trend now is just to lop off the barrel to 16 or 20". Aren't different size actions mostly a "factory-custom" thing at this point?

Mini Action
I mentioned the Grendel in my opening. I've hunted with it and it's fantastic. It's been around longer than the Creedmoor, and for hunting, it does everything the Creedmoor does with either a slightly lighter bullet or just a bit less velocity. It's still got an MPBR out to 285 yards and holds 1000 ft. lbs. of energy out to 340 yards. If it gives up anything, the concession happens at a distance well beyond my hunting ranges. I think this is why we see the 6mm ARC and the 22 ARC also popular -- they play on the strengths of the Grendel, not to mention all the other PPC cartridges that preceded them. I love the CZ 527 that shoots the Grendel, except that it doesn't fit me well. The action is so short it forces the scope too far back. Maybe cantilever rings would fix it because the extreme short action is like a Ruger No. 1. Either of those would be better with irons, but I only hunt with optics.

Here's link to tables and trajectory graphs I used in my examination: http://www.shooterscalculator.com/ballistic-trajectory-chart.php?t=8201c3dc

Conclusion
My conclusion is that the low-drag trend does not offer anything for me in a hunting rifle or cartridge. I can see how it makes an incredible difference in the ballistics when the G1 BC is over .700 and beyond, but I don't hunt with those kind of bullets. So if the low-drag trend isn't for me, is there anything new that does? I suppose the incredibly inexpensive but accurate rifles are a good thing. They allow me to spend more money on the optic. I think there is something to the minimalist trend. Maybe it started with the desire to chamber AR-15's with effective hunting cartridges, but now we have 6.5 Grendel, 6 ARC, 22 ARC. The thing is, we might just be getting closer to proving that with the right bullet, .223 is just fine for hunting. I just started reloading 223 this year (for a non-hunting rifle), but as I've learned more about it, I would totally hunt with it (with a bunch of caveats). The thing is, all it offers me are the mini-actions that don't fit me, and the AR-15 that doesn't appeal to me for hunting. I suppose the other trend I should mention is the minimalist big-bores: the 450 Bushmaster, 350 Legend, and all the other Legends that are coming. I say "minimalist" because they're sized down to fit into an AR-15 magazine and action as opposed to the ample big bore cartridges of the past from the black powder 45-90, to the cordite fueled 470 Nitro, to the double-based belted magnum 458 replicant thereof (whether Win or Lott), the Rigbies and Jeffreys and Weatherbys or even the Rugers. I get the attraction to the short straight-wall cartridges where others are prohibited, but that doesn't apply to me. Because I can realistically expect shots to 300 yards and most will be over 200, I don't see the Legends doing anything for me.

What do you make of the current trends, or the trends of the past? Can one of the new cartridges do anything for your hunting?

 

[earlthegoat2]

I’m on this trend.

Low drag? Not needed in my corner of the world.

2 of these cartridges came out in the last year.

 

[Anchorite]

You raise a lot of excellent points in your OP. I would just add that the proliferation of these newer cartridges has clearly altered the action landscape.

Seems everything is a “universal length” action nowadays and they are all repeaters. I sure miss the Model 7 and a solid single shot short action (ie, 40x). One has to look custom for that sort of action.
I think you hit the nail on the head with your comment that todays trend is to just lop inches off your barrel. Will be following this thread.

 

[jmr40]

Low drag doesn't just affect trajectory. If you load one of the very high BC 180 hunting bullets in a 30-06 @ 2800 fps and compare it to a 180 gr RN in a 300 WM @ 3000 fps the high BC bullet from the 30-06 will surpass the 180 gr RN fired from the 300 WM at only 75 yards. At any range greater than 75 yards the 30-06 load will hit with more velocity and energy even though it started 200 fps slower. And 75 yards isn't exactly long range. And there are several options for high BC bullets designed as HUNTING bullets. Not just match bullets.

That same high BC bullet loaded in a 308 @ 2600 fps will catch and surpass the RN bullet fired from a 300 WM at 175 yards. If we look at trajectory, the 300WM load will still shoot flatter than the 30-06 or 308 even with the round nose bullets out to any reasonable hunting range.

I realize this is an extreme example. But even with a more realistic example comparing a high BC bullet to a comparable weight Nosler Partition, the high BC bullet will eventually hit with more velocity, it just takes it a little longer to catch up.

Maybe a better example; comparing the 6.5CM to the old school 270. The 270 will shoot 130 or 140 gr bullets about 150-200 fps faster at the muzzle. But by the time each bullet has traveled 200 yards the more aerodynamic 6.5 bullet has caught up and will hit with the same speed. The 270 is 3/10's of a millimeter larger in diameter. Anything a 270 will do, a 6.5CM will do.

The 270 BTW still shoots slightly flatter. But with modern optics it is easy enough to compensate for trajectory. MPBR just isn't important anymore.

Being able to shoot a smaller, lighter recoiling rifle and still get the same downrange results is appealing to a lot of people. Why lug around a heavy 300 WM or 270 when I can get basically the same results from a 308 or 6.5CM with significantly less recoil and usually better accuracy.

My conclusion is that the low-drag trend does not offer anything for me in a hunting rifle or cartridge.

For a lot of hunters this is true. But the number of hunters has sharply declined in recent years while the number of shooters has expanded. Hunters needs are no longer the driving force behind which rifles and cartridges are being made.

 

[someguy2800]

You overlooked the most important part of this for long range shooting. Wind drift.

 

[Chuck R.]

Low drag doesn't just affect trajectory. If you load one of the very high BC 180 hunting bullets in a 30-06 @ 2800 fps and compare it to a 180 gr RN in a 300 WM @ 3000 fps the high BC bullet from the 30-06 will surpass the 180 gr RN fired from the 300 WM at only 75 yards. At any range greater than 75 yards the 30-06 load will hit with more velocity and energy even though it started 200 fps slower. And 75 yards isn't exactly long range. And there are several options for high BC bullets designed as HUNTING bullets. Not just match bullets.

That same high BC bullet loaded in a 308 @ 2600 fps will catch and surpass the RN bullet fired from a 300 WM at 175 yards. If we look at trajectory, the 300WM load will still shoot flatter than the 30-06 or 308 even with the round nose bullets out to any reasonable hunting range.

I realize this is an extreme example. But even with a more realistic example comparing a high BC bullet to a comparable weight Nosler Partition, the high BC bullet will eventually hit with more velocity, it just takes it a little longer to catch up.

Maybe a better example; comparing the 6.5CM to the old school 270. The 270 will shoot 130 or 140 gr bullets about 150-200 fps faster at the muzzle. But by the time each bullet has traveled 200 yards the more aerodynamic 6.5 bullet has caught up and will hit with the same speed. The 270 is 3/10's of a millimeter larger in diameter. Anything a 270 will do, a 6.5CM will do.

The 270 BTW still shoots slightly flatter. But with modern optics it is easy enough to compensate for trajectory. MPBR just isn't important anymore.

Being able to shoot a smaller, lighter recoiling rifle and still get the same downrange results is appealing to a lot of people. Why lug around a heavy 300 WM or 270 when I can get basically the same results from a 308 or 6.5CM with significantly less recoil and usually better accuracy.



For a lot of hunters this is true. But the number of hunters has sharply declined in recent years while the number of shooters has expanded. Hunters needs are no longer the driving force behind which rifles and cartridges are being made.

Dude again, your grasp of external ballistics is messed up. Do you even own a ballistic calculator? Or do you enjoy posting flawed data?

A 140grn 6.5C isn't catching a 130 grn .270 till around 500yds.

https://www.sportsmans.com/6-5-creedmoor-vs-270-cartridges (and this is a pretty weak loaded 130grn)

A 140 grn 6.5C isn't catching a 150grn .270 till around 800 yds:

I've included ranges to ridiculous distances for hunting (in my opinion) to clearly show how the superior Ballistic Coefficient of the 6.5 Creedmoor bullet enables it to begin catching up to the velocity of the 270 Winchester bullet. The Winchester's 250 fps velocity advantage at the muzzle has been reduced to just 54 fps at 800 yards. Note that, even though the .277" bullet leaves the muzzle with 497 foot-pounds more energy than the 6.5 Creedmoor, the superior aerodynamic shape of the .264" bullet enables it to conserve more energy. By 800 yards the 6.5 Creedmoor has cut the 270 Winchester's energy advantage to just 78 f-p.

6.5 Creedmoor Versus 270 Winchester — Ron Spomer Outdoors

In a 6.5 Creedmoor versus 270 Winchester ballistic competition, which wins? Drop, drift, retained energy, velocity, and recoil are compared.

www.ronspomeroutdoors.com

I can run the same loads in Strelok and get the same results. Now IF you've got some other data, by all means post it, don't scurry away as you so often do when your "facts" are challenged.

 

[someguy2800]

Dude again, your grasp of external ballistics is messed up. Do you even own a ballistic calculator? Or do you enjoy posting flawed data?

A 140grn 6.5C isn't catching a 130 grn .270 till around 500yds.

https://www.sportsmans.com/6-5-creedmoor-vs-270-cartridges (and this is a pretty weak loaded 130grn)

A 140 grn 6.5C isn't catching a 150grn .270 till around 800 yds:

6.5 Creedmoor Versus 270 Winchester — Ron Spomer Outdoors

In a 6.5 Creedmoor versus 270 Winchester ballistic competition, which wins? Drop, drift, retained energy, velocity, and recoil are compared.

www.ronspomeroutdoors.com

I can run the same loads in Strelok and get the same results. Now IF you've got some other data, by all means post it, don't scurry away as you so often do when your "facts" are challenged.

I think what the 270 vs 6.5 comparison really points out is that if you already have a 270 and like it, there is not much reason to part with it, but if you’re starting from scratch and buying a new rifle why wouldn’t you pick the one that does the same thing with 15 grains less powder in a smaller lighter rifle?

 

[md7]

I enjoy watching and reading Ron Spomer’s take on cartridges and ballistics.

Last night, I watched him and Joseph Von Benedikt discus the 7 PRC, and they raised a point that I had not considered.

Newer cartridges, like the 6.5 CM, the PRC’s, etc., are being manufactured with tighter specs and rifle chambers are being built to these tighter specs compared to older cartridges and chambers being built around looser specs to ensure ammo function across a wide range a manufacturers that have varying degrees of tolerances in their chambers.

The end result is a cartridge and rifle combo in these newer loadings that are supposed to help reduce the need to search for ammo that runs well in a particular rifle (due to tighter, more consistent tolerances in ammo and chamber).

The 6.5 CM. That was a plug and play solution for an off the shelf rig that any regular non reloader could walk in, buy, and get started on long range.

Long range was the emphasis, and then hunters took to it. Perhaps my thinking is incorrect, but it seems like a lot of the long range characteristics that shooters desired bled into and helped to grow the popularity of long range hunting. That’s how I perceive it, anyway.

I can see how these newer cartridges with their higher BC and low drag design can be helpful at the far ends of the shooting spectrum. And if a hunter is the type to engage a deer at 600 plus yards then maybe it’s an idea worth looking at. Not that the old 7 mag and 300 mag and others couldn’t do it also I think they certainly can in the right shooters hands. Just that these high BC, elongated and aerodynamic bullets make it a bit easier per Spomer and Benedikt.

Anyway… that’s my poor attempt to paraphrase Spomer and I’m sure I’ve managed to butcher it. I’m NOT the most knowledgeable on ballistics like many at THR are.

For me… the newer loadings and high BC, low drag bullets aren’t helpful for game I shoot at the distance I shoot them at. I’ve got an 18” barrel 308 with suppressor and plots that extend no further than 300 yards with many less than that.

And per Hornady ballistics calculator, I’ve got enough punch in that rig to go on out to 400 with many cup and core, lower BC offerings. That’s irrelevant, though as that’s not a distance available to me currently and personally I don’t want to go beyond 400 yards even if I could. That’s just my personal preference.

 

[Chuck R.]

I think what the 270 vs 6.5 comparison really points out is that if you already have a 270 and like it, there is not much reason to part with it, but if you’re starting from scratch and buying a new rifle why wouldn’t you pick the one that does the same thing with 15 grains less powder in a smaller lighter rifle?

While I agree.. it depends.

IF you put together a fast twist .270, it will run with the 6.5PRC and hold an extra round in the mag. 6.5C isn't going to do it. For a lot of guys 1/2" or so in action length isn't that big a deal. I can than also tout my cheaper brass etc.

IMHO in hunting there are still situations when there isn't time to laze and dial, knowing you're drop doesn't help much with a botched wind call, so the flatter shooting cartridges still have their place.

Recoil is a personal thing to some extent, and personally in a hunting rifle I don't sweat it as I'm not going to notice a few lbs here or there while shooting game. A target rifle, with long strings of fire over the course of a match is a different matter.

The issue I so often have with JMR40's BS, is that it's just that.. BS.

Apparently in the strange-azz ballistic world he lives in physics don't apply; SD trumps bullet construction and higher BCs trump capacity and MV at normal hunting distances.

 

[md7]

While I agree.. it depends.

IF you put together a fast twist .270, it will run with the 6.5PRC and hold an extra round in the mag. 6.5C isn't going to do it. For a lot of guys 1/2" or so in action length isn't that big a deal. I can than also tout my cheaper brass etc.

IMHO in hunting there are still situations when there isn't time to laze and dial, knowing you're drop doesn't help much with a botched wind call, so the flatter shooting cartridges still have their place.

Recoil is a personal thing to some extent, and personally in a hunting rifle I don't sweat it as I'm not going to notice a few lbs here or there while shooting game. A target rifle, with long strings of fire over the course of a match is a different matter.

The issue I so often have with JMR40's BS, is that it's just that.. BS.

Apparently in the strange-azz ballistic world he lives in physics don't apply; SD trumps bullet construction and higher BCs trump capacity and MV at normal hunting distances.

I’ve found many times that a game animal will not grant you the time to laze it. Especially in rut… them fellas are moving and on a mission.

I still prefer MPBR or 200 yard zeros, put cross hairs on hide, and sending it.

To be fair, some of that is how we’ve always done it and the other is there’s not much call to laze and dial in the shorter areas we hunt.

All that to say, spot on with your comment on time to dial, etc.

 

[Hookeye]

Don't think I need the latest and greatest to shoot critters.
Some stuff indeed works better than others.
Certainly am not in the Fudd camp.

HOWEVER.......for my usage, I still want a .257 Weatherby Magnum LOL

Think the 6.5 Grendel a cool looking little cartridge.
Nothing I want chambered in it though.

 

[Hookeye]

Increased accuracy and range, dialing scopes. adjustable stocks.
Yup, that stuff can be of advantage.

But there is something to just carrying a cool rifle.
I rather enjoyed toting my Ruger #1 A in .308.
Scoped w a boring set and forget variable.........a simple uncluttered rifle.
A joy to tote in the field.

Of course, I'd have some synth stocked hot rod for other types of hunting

 

[illinoisburt]

For a lot of hunters this is true. But the number of hunters has sharply declined in recent years while the number of shooters has expanded. Hunters needs are no longer the driving force behind which rifles and cartridges are being made

The most popular rifles being sold right now are AR variants, and indeed most are likely not sold primarily as hunting tools. The vast majority of rifle ranges in the country are not more than 200 yards, with many limited to 100 or even less if indoor. So although the idea of long range shooting using high magnification optics combined with rangefinders and barometric meters is tantalizing (and certainly people are buying gear marketed for it), it's not reality for much of a swath of the shooting public.

I do appreciate that many rifles now are heavier with significantly less recoil than in the past. Even more so, the level of out of the box accuracy from low cost guns/optics/ammo is something most people take for granted but was absolutely not reality in the past century.

To be honest, when it comes to hunting most people are chasing deer at relatively short distances. As @westernrover pointed out, there isn't really a huge advantage to one cartridge over another for that purpose. But then without the marketing hype and excited utterances of fans one way or another, people might be happy with using whatever old smoke pole is taking up space in the corner and that would certainly not be much fun.

 

[d2wing]

I agree with the OP. At normal ranges just about any centerfire is effective on deer. I have shot several big deer with a .223 with proper expanding bullets. I do feel it is limiting. My favorite is 7-08 but to me anything from .243 to 30-06 is good deer medicine. Any of the new target oriented cartridges are great also, and many find them to be the Goldilocks cartridge for them. But with any cartridge proper bullets rated for the animal you are hunting is the main requirement along with being able to place the bullet properly. Of course, once you get beyond 3-400 yards the choices get more critical, but I am not a big fan of shooting game beyond 400 yards. There is a group that does advocate long range hunting. They tend toward Custom rigs shooting wildcat or specialized cartridges. Not my cup of tea. Of course, we tend to split hairs over some cartridge comparisons and have bias all over about what we like. But if you have an accurate cartridge that is effective at the range you shoot game, changing is to satisfy an itch that we tend to have as well.

 

[wombat13]

someguy2800 hit the nail on the head. The big advantage of the high BC bullets is they reduce wind drift. Even then, it only matters if you are shooting beyond 400 yards. Look at the example posted he posted. I'm guesstimating based on the graph but it looks like the wind drift for the lower bc bullet is about 4" or less at 400 yards, so you're still in the kill zone on an elk at 400 yards even if you misjudge wind speed by 10mph. Its not until beyond that range that the higher bc bullet is needed to keep you in the kill zone.

All my hunting rifles are "overbore" - .300 win mag, .280ai, and .25-06. Why? Well, I started with the .300wm because I wanted one rifle that I could hunt all of NA. Over the years I bought quite a selection of powders to load for the .300wm and now I prefer to buy rifles that thrive with those powders. Particularly with today's powder prices I don't want to have to start stocking up on powders in a different burn range.

 

[Gun-Reck]

A 150 gr. Speer Grand Slam (or Nosler Partition) at 2800 fps out of a .270 Winchester will take any game I care to shoot, at any range I care to shoot it at.

Same goes for the 140 gr. TSX at 2925 fps from the same cartridge.

 

[westernrover]

You overlooked the most important part of this for long range shooting. Wind drift.

View attachment 1185322

It's a good point that BC affects how much wind deflects the bullet, but are there hunting bullets with a .703 G1 BC? My data showed that there is substantial advantages to be gained in several factors when doubling the BC, but given that traditional cartridges seem to be compatible with bullets like .468 or more, the case for Creedmoor/PRC/6.8Western etc. seems to be with much higher BC's still.

 

[westernrover]

Low drag doesn't just affect trajectory. If you load one of the very high BC 180 hunting bullets in a 30-06 @ 2800 fps and compare it to a 180 gr RN in a 300 WM @ 3000 fps the high BC bullet from the 30-06 will surpass the 180 gr RN fired from the 300 WM at only 75 yards. At any range greater than 75 yards the 30-06 load will hit with more velocity and energy even though it started 200 fps slower. And 75 yards isn't exactly long range.

What is "very high BC"? While I think it's fair to compare to RN in the Legend cartridges, we've had spitzers in 30-06 for over 100 years.

And there are several options for high BC bullets designed as HUNTING bullets. Not just match bullets.

What is high BC? I mentioned the Barnes LRX which is a "long range" bullet with a higher BC than the more traditional TTSX, but all these terms are relative.

That same high BC bullet loaded in a 308 @ 2600 fps will catch and surpass the RN bullet fired from a 300 WM at 175 yards. If we look at trajectory, the 300WM load will still shoot flatter than the 30-06 or 308 even with the round nose bullets out to any reasonable hunting range.

I realize this is an extreme example. But even with a more realistic example comparing a high BC bullet to a comparable weight Nosler Partition, the high BC bullet will eventually hit with more velocity, it just takes it a little longer to catch up.

Maybe a better example; comparing the 6.5CM to the old school 270. The 270 will shoot 130 or 140 gr bullets about 150-200 fps faster at the muzzle. But by the time each bullet has traveled 200 yards the more aerodynamic 6.5 bullet has caught up and will hit with the same speed. The 270 is 3/10's of a millimeter larger in diameter. Anything a 270 will do, a 6.5CM will do.

No, it doesn't. I compared the Creedmoor to the 270 and the Creedmoor with a .703 match bullet does not match the velocity of 270 with a .377 hunting bullet until 600 yards. That's just the range at which the velocities are equal, but the match bullet does not "catch up." It's way behind at 600 yards. For it to actually catch the 270 bullet takes a little over 1.5 seconds at happens at almost 1200 yards.

The 270 BTW still shoots slightly flatter. But with modern optics it is easy enough to compensate for trajectory. MPBR just isn't important anymore.

I don't agree that MPBR and flat trajectories aren't important. Experienced hunters make ranging errors even with lasers. The flatter the trajectory, the more forgiving the outfit is, especially within hunting ranges (<400 yards).

Being able to shoot a smaller, lighter recoiling rifle and still get the same downrange results is appealing to a lot of people. Why lug around a heavy 300 WM or 270 when I can get basically the same results from a 308 or 6.5CM with significantly less recoil and usually better accuracy.

The thing is, the rifles are mostly all the same today. They're chambering the same rifles in 6.5 Creedmoor as they chamber in 300 WM. Unless you get a factory-custom action, they don't make different receivers for different cartridges and since long-action PRC are as popular as 270, 30-06, and 300WM, the popular rifles that are selling more than any others are all long-action.

For a lot of hunters this is true. But the number of hunters has sharply declined in recent years while the number of shooters has expanded. Hunters needs are no longer the driving force behind which rifles and cartridges are being made.

I think there is truth to this. I've heard the number of hunters has declined, but I'm more certain that the number of rifles sold is vastly outpacing the number of hunters being added. People that haven't learned anything about hunting yet, decide they want a rifle and they figure they might as well get one of those new ones that can shoot 1000 yards because they're supposed to be good for hunting too.

 

[Random 8]

It's a good point that BC affects how much wind deflects the bullet, but are there hunting bullets with a .703 G1 BC? My data showed that there is substantial advantages to be gained in several factors when doubling the BC, but given that traditional cartridges seem to be compatible with bullets like .468 or more, the case for Creedmoor/PRC/6.8Western etc. seems to be with much higher BC's still.

Let's not forget, the reason for the invention of the 6.5 CR was as a high powered target shooting round using said super high BC bullets. Made absolute sense. Hornady found or anticipated it's possible use as a modest recoiling, hard hitting hunting cartridge originally in a pretty standard "deer rifle" with pretty standard "deer" bullets having ballistics on par with the venerable 6.5x55. Made absolute sense.

Then something happened. Marketing, internet, gun writers, people who want to sound smart? Not sure which was first, the chicken or the egg, but the target shooting aspects of the round became conflated with the hunting aspects and the rest is history. Now we're stuck with a bunch of BS and guys who couldn't put 3 rounds into 12" at 300 yards but think they have a Lazer gun in their hands because Creedmoor and I can't find a proper 2-7 heavy reticle compact scope on the market anymore because all these snipers need a Hubble mounted. My opinion, but it is what it is. I do feel better now though!

 

[someguy2800]

It's a good point that BC affects how much wind deflects the bullet, but are there hunting bullets with a .703 G1 BC? My data showed that there is substantial advantages to be gained in several factors when doubling the BC, but given that traditional cartridges seem to be compatible with bullets like .468 or more, the case for Creedmoor/PRC/6.8Western etc. seems to be with much higher BC's still.

That would be pretty far on the extreme end for hunting bullets but the Hornady ELDX, Nosler accubond LR, Barnes LRX, and Berger VLD Hunting can be bought with G1's in the .6's and even .7's

AccuBond® Long Range Bullets

AccuBond Long Range bullets were developed in response to the escalating demand from long-range hunters who were asking for a hunting bullet that could keep up with today’s level of high-grade optics and ultra-high velocity cartridges in order to stretch practical shooting yardages past 1,000 yards.

www.nosler.com

ELD-X® (Extremely Low Drag - eXpanding) - Hornady Manufacturing, Inc

The ELD-X^® bullet is a technologically advanced, match accurate, all-range hunting bullet featuring highest-in-class ballistic coefficients and consistent, controlled expansion at all practical hunting distances.

www.hornady.com

LRX - Barnes Bullets

www.barnesbullets.com

VLD Hunting Bullets

Berger VLD hunting bullets are produced with one very important feature in mind: Performance. The Berger VLD bullets have a boat tail and secant ogive.

bergerbullets.com

I just used those numbers since they were the examples you used, but even looking at more traditional hunting bullets there is a big difference between a .350 bc and a .550 bc when we are talking about shooting at the ranges you mentioned and farther. Especially when you get to shooting 500+ yards either at game or targets. That's why people winning in PRS are using fairly modest cartridges like 6mm dasher with very high BC bullets. I'm not comparing hunting to PRS competitions but you get my point. I do take your point that today everyone thinks they are Kyle the sniper but the reality is very few people are shooting deer past 200 yards. There are people that do though and their is legitimate benefit to modern equipment and modern bullets that can't be replaced by just going faster.

 

[someguy2800]

The thing is, the rifles are mostly all the same today. They're chambering the same rifles in 6.5 Creedmoor as they chamber in 300 WM. Unless you get a factory-custom action, they don't make different receivers for different cartridges and since long-action PRC are as popular as 270, 30-06, and 300WM, the popular rifles that are selling more than any others are all long-action.

Most rifles are made in at least 2, sometimes 3 action lengths. 6.5 creedmoor goes in the "short" action, same as a 308. 270 win or 300 wm would be in a long action. I can think of 2, the tikka T3 and Savage axis, which they put everything in the same long action and just make a different bolt stop and a magazine with a spacer in the back for 308 or 223 length cartridges. I'll leave it up to the internet about whether they care about that 1/2" difference. Opinion vary.

 

[brewer12345]

I have actually adopted two of your recent cartridges in the last few years: 350 Legend and 6.5 Grendel. Yes, they add a lot to my hunting.

I started looking at these offerings as I started having some shoulder issues. Months of physical therapy and narrowly avoiding surgery make you start reconsidering the merits of 30-06, especially when you are recoil sensitive to begin with. I picked up 350L first. Good to 200 yards, ammo in every walmart/Cabelas/Sportsmans/whatever, relatively cheap to get into and cheap to shoot. Very modest recoil. Even better, easy as heck to reload and I have even fooled around with cast bullets in this cartridge with good results. It is a 35 Remington with ammo and components everywhere for as cheap as something like this gets, what is not to like? I shoot quite a bit of it, although I mostly use it in a hunting setting for splitting beavers' wigs out to 50 yards.

I picked up the Grendel because I live in a state where tags are through a lottery for the most part and freely available tags are limited and generally not desirable. The crap tags I can get and have figured out how to fill tend to require long shots in a windy place. I have now killed deer there at 175, 200, 250 and 325 yards. I could have taken a 500 yard shot at a motionless, broadside doe this winter, but I passed on the shot as I try hard to keep it to 350 yards. The Grendel is ideal for this. I use hunting bullets with a BC of a bit over .5, and terminal performance has been excellent. The cartridge is very thrift to reload, as my favorite hunting load takes a wee 26 grains of powder. It is flat shooting enough that holdovers to 400 yards are not excessive, and I won't take longer shots. The low recoil helps me a lot with shoulder issues, but it also has an unexpected benefit. With the rifle on sticks, it does not recoil enough that I lose my sight picture like with 30-06. That means I can see what happens as I shoot and when I missed (as I did a couple times on the 325 yard shot), I can see where the bullet went and adjust.

The Grendel in particular is what I will hunt big game with until I am too old to hunt. Its a perfect kid and old man cartridge that gives absolutely nothing up to heavier, harder kicking cartridges when it comes to deer, pigs, etc. The 350 Legend is just easy to load for, cheap to buy factory ammo for, duplicates my favorite 35 Rem, and more than adequate for deer and hogs at moderate distances.

 

[westernrover]

Most rifles are made in at least 2, sometimes 3 action lengths. 6.5 creedmoor goes in the "short" action, same as a 308. 270 win or 300 wm would be in a long action. I can think of 2, the tikka T3 and Savage axis, which they put everything in the same long action and just make a different bolt stop and a magazine with a spacer in the back for 308 or 223 length cartridges. I'll leave it up to the internet about whether they care about that 1/2" difference. Opinion vary.

Do you think the Ruger American Gen 2 will be in more than one length?

 

[westernrover]

...

I picked up the Grendel because I live in a state where tags are through a lottery for the most part and freely available tags are limited and generally not desirable. The crap tags I can get and have figured out how to fill tend to require long shots in a windy place. I have now killed deer there at 175, 200, 250 and 325 yards. I could have taken a 500 yard shot at a motionless, broadside doe this winter, but I passed on the shot as I try hard to keep it to 350 yards. The Grendel is ideal for this. I use hunting bullets with a BC of a bit over .5, and terminal performance has been excellent. The cartridge is very thrift to reload, as my favorite hunting load takes a wee 26 grains of powder. It is flat shooting enough that holdovers to 400 yards are not excessive, and I won't take longer shots. The low recoil helps me a lot with shoulder issues, but it also has an unexpected benefit. With the rifle on sticks, it does not recoil enough that I lose my sight picture like with 30-06. That means I can see what happens as I shoot and when I missed (as I did a couple times on the 325 yard shot), I can see where the bullet went and adjust.

The Grendel in particular is what I will hunt big game with until I am too old to hunt. Its a perfect kid and old man cartridge that gives absolutely nothing up to heavier, harder kicking cartridges when it comes to deer, pigs, etc. The 350 Legend is just easy to load for, cheap to buy factory ammo for, duplicates my favorite 35 Rem, and more than adequate for deer and hogs at moderate distances.

Love the Grendel. I agree with everything you wrote about it. What rifle do you use chambered for it?

 

[brewer12345]

Love the Grendel. I agree with everything you wrote about it. What rifle do you use chambered for it?

I have been using an AR thus far, but I picked up a Ruger American Predator and my project this summer will be to wring it out and see how much advantage I can take of the 22" barrel with 100 grain TTSX bullets just so I have an all copper option in the cartridge.