6.5 x 55 Sweed

[WayneO]

Does anyone know what the reasoning is behind the .270 being the minimum caliber for Red deer and Sambar deer?
There is very little difference in ballistics between the two, except that the 6.5 has a much higher B.C than the .270 and that you can get heavier bullets for the .270.

[No1Mk3]

Those in authority decided at one time to draw a line in the sand about what constitutes an "ethical" calibre for humane hunting. After many submissions, they decided that the 270 would be the minimum as the 150g Sierra delivered 3000+ ft/lbs of energy and that's that! Never mind that the Venerable Swede has taken moose in Europe, or that the 264 Win Mag delivers 3110ft/lbs with the 140g Nosler Partition, the line was drawn and we have to put up with it. You can argue ballistics till the cows come home, tell them about 6.5x54 taking hundreds of elephant etc, but the bureaucratic mind does not care about Reason, Cheers.

[<<Genesis93>>]

the 270win was probably one of the most common deer rifles years back, as well as the 303, the 30-06 then the 308.... so they said what the heck, lets make it the 0.270 calibre with a 308win length case.... what they should have done was set the 270win with average mass projectile 130 or so grain, and set a minimum ENERGY level....

That was too hard for the brains trust of parliament, on advice of the cardigan brigade...

With the hope of streamlining the system they then removed the case minimum length which meant that a 310 Cadet became 'deer legal' while the 6.5x55SE was a non starter....

There should have been an energy minimum and calibre minimum... but that would have meant the enforcers, the rangers and popo would need to understand numbers....

[Chronos]

I'd be interested in seeing some numbers showing a 6.5X55 has anything on a .270 for energy. Remembering the 6.5x55 is generally under powered due to down loading factory ammo for surplus rifles. Handloads in a modern rifle would greatly level the playing field.



Yes a 6.5mm pill would have a BC advantage over a .270 pill of the same weight but BC has absolutely nothing to do with killing at common Victorian deer ranges


Chronos

[Title_II]

Sectional density. Historically famous penetration regardless of expansion.

[WayneO]

I'd be interested in seeing some numbers showing a 6.5X55 has anything on a .270 for energy. Remembering the 6.5x55 is generally under powered due to down loading factory ammo for surplus rifles. Handloads in a modern rifle would greatly level the playing field.
Yes a 6.5mm pill would have a BC advantage over a .270 pill of the same weight but BC has absolutely nothing to do with killing at common Victorian deer ranges
Chronos

I cant remember when last I shot a single factory load in any of my rifles. I have been reloading for the past 22 years, and with quick-loads, my 6.5 x 55 and 6.5 creedmore ballistics are on par and exceed the .270. Using peregrine premium grade bullets, makes them both brilliant forest and long range calibers.
So this decision is the same as the African game departments decision to make the .375 the minimum caliber for dangerous game, which left the brilliant and well trusted 9.3 x 62 out in the cold.
Like a race time cut off, 1 second behind the time and you are out.
But the law is the law and the law needs to be obeyed.

[Lorgar]

There should have been an energy minimum and calibre minimum... but that would have meant the enforcers, the rangers and popo would need to understand numbers....

Aye. I'm not opposed to a minimum requirement for game hunting but arbitrarily drawing a line based on calibre is highly flawed to say the least.

Some examples for Wayne (and whoever else is interested), at 200 metres...

A 130gr load from a .270 Win will be running around 2,600 FPS and carrying 2,000 ft lbs of energy. Legal.

A 140gr load from a 264 Win Mag will be running around 2,500 FPS and carrying 2,000 ft lbs of energy. Not legal.

A 130gr .260 Nosler will be running around 2,900 FPS and carrying 2,600 ft lbs of energy. Not legal.

You're observation is spot on Wayne, calibre is arguably the least important part of the equation compared to projectile mass, BC, velocity and retained energy. There are smaller calibre cartridges which are more powerful than larger ones and vice versa.

The existing system basically implies (as one example) that a 30-30 Win and .300 Win Mag are comparable because of the calibre

Ausc previously posted some info which says it all really. .243 is the minimum for the 3 smaller species, .270 for the larger 3, yet the .243 can produce equal or more energy at some 'normal' hunting distances in the right circumstances.

Have a read here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3617&start=30#p50378

[<<Genesis93>>]

BC has zero to do with energy or bullet performance, in fact a higher BC projectile would possibly translate into a poor hunting proj, at least compared to a low BC soft point........

As mentioned..... they tried to 'improve' the regs, I think with so many messages from the hunting community it was all too hard so the change they made in Vic, was to remove the minimum CASE length of 2inch while maintaining the 6.85mm/0.270 calibre min which legalised the 310Cadet...... while keeping the 6.5SE out.... effing pure stupidity.... but if the asked them to 'fix' this obvious mistake today; better things to do would be the response more or less.

It must be changed to Energy minimum.... but given time, once the Sambar start edging closer to suburbia.... they'll say eff it... shoot them with anything ya got!!!

[happyhunter]

BC has zero to do with energy or bullet performance, in fact a higher BC projectile would possibly translate into a poor hunting proj, at least compared to a low BC soft point........

The bullets that give superior wound ballistics are the ones that yaw post impact, regardless of construction.

[WayneO]

[quote="<<Genesis93>>"]BC has zero to do with energy or bullet performance, in fact a higher BC projectile would possibly translate into a poor hunting projectile, at least compared to a low BC soft point........


I must disagree at least in part to this statement. The higher the BC, the less wind drag the less speed lost and the less bullet drop you experience. So out at 400m the bullet with the higher BC will be traveling faster and dropping less.
With most expanding bullets, be they expanding monolithic's or soft points, they tend to expand better at medium to high velocities. So choosing a bullet that keeps the most speed out at a distance makes more sense.

[Chronos]

BC has zero to do with energy or bullet performance, in fact a higher BC projectile would possibly translate into a poor hunting projectile, at least compared to a low BC soft point........


I must disagree at least in part to this statement. The higher the BC, the less wind drag the less speed lost and the less bullet drop you experience. So out at 400m the bullet with the higher BC will be traveling faster and dropping less.
With most expanding bullets, be they expanding monolithic's or soft points, they tend to expand better at medium to high velocities. So choosing a bullet that keeps the most speed out at a distance makes more sense.

Yep, once you step out beyond 300m BC has everything to do with energy and bullet performance. Edit: just not at normal hunting ranges

Also bullet SD may help penetration (6.5mm for example) but a 6.5mm with a mushroom will never create a wound channel like a .30 cal and that's important when the shot is a few inches off or the animal is 50kg bigger

Chronos

[Title_II]

BC has zero to do with energy or bullet performance, in fact a higher BC projectile would possibly translate into a poor hunting proj, at least compared to a low BC soft point........

The bullets that give superior wound ballistics are the ones that yaw post impact, regardless of construction.

If you are shooting large or horizontal animals you need straight line penetration. Yaw causes either fragmentation or tumbling. Both are useful for some purposes. Shooting medium and large game is not one of them.

[<<Genesis93>>]

Horizontal animals.... like as in snakes??

But 'yaw' and 'superior wound ballistics' ?? Someone's been reading Mil technical document A23.56 part 1 concerning the reasoning for adopting the 5.56x45 over the redundant 7.62x51, because the terminal performance involving the yawing of the tumbling projectile created more damage..... all this because they find the bullet would conveniently destabilise on impact with soft (or other) tissue....

I'd prefer to use a big fat chunk of lead that expands and wounds conventionally.... mind you, its possible that more animals the globe over have found there 'end' with the aid of FMJs, mostly from a 39mm case.... of differing diameters.

[Title_II]

Horizontal animals.... like as in snakes??

Non-human. Walking primarily on 4 legs.

Not everything is a shark, a snake, croc, or that giant friggin spider you have over there

Humans are somewhere between medium game and varmints. Their rules do not apply to most hunting.

[happyhunter]

Horizontal animals.... like as in snakes??

But 'yaw' and 'superior wound ballistics' ?? Someone's been reading Mil technical document A23.56 part 1 concerning the reasoning for adopting the 5.56x45 over the redundant 7.62x51, because the terminal performance involving the yawing of the tumbling projectile created more damage..... all this because they find the bullet would conveniently destabilise on impact with soft (or other) tissue....

I'd prefer to use a big fat chunk of lead that expands and wounds conventionally.... mind you, its possible that more animals the globe over have found there 'end' with the aid of FMJs, mostly from a 39mm case.... of differing diameters.

The document I have is paper and specific to 7.62mm BTHP. No copies online. Keep googlng though

[<<Genesis93>>]

Are you googling the Mil technical document A23.56 part 1??...... this IS a fictitious title you know right?

[<<Genesis93>>]

For the swede fanboys/girls

no matter its not the rifle on the image.....The non-shooters, who would regardless have no-idea about what the name meant, would think blokes were expressing some man-love...while the shooters would give the wearer a brotherly up-nod

[Chronos]

The top's ok but the thing holding it up is a bit rough



Chronos

[<<Genesis93>>]

Not the best example.... but I've seen a lot rougher..
Anyway, didnt seem right posting the other option - a pic with a muscly bloke

[WayneO]

Horizontal animals.... like as in snakes??

But 'yaw' and 'superior wound ballistics' ?? Someone's been reading Mil technical document A23.56 part 1 concerning the reasoning for adopting the 5.56x45 over the redundant 7.62x51, because the terminal performance involving the yawing of the tumbling projectile created more damage..... all this because they find the bullet would conveniently destabilise on impact with soft (or other) tissue....

I'd prefer to use a big fat chunk of lead that expands and wounds conventionally.... mind you, its possible that more animals the globe over have found there 'end' with the aid of FMJs, mostly from a 39mm case.... of differing diameters.

Now this i fully agree with because I am a big bore fan at heart. Powder was made to be burnt not spared.

[samf]

The top's ok but the thing holding it up is a bit rough

Are we looking at the same picture?