6mm Rem continued...
See post:
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=363349
...It wouldn't be the first time Remington landed on their head with a great idea...take the .257 Roberts for instance. That was a great round killed by the 'possibility' that an old Mauser would blow up using one under full power. I load them hot all the time and their performance is outstanding. They did almost everything they could to kill the round.
Remington's other blunder is thinking everything needs to fit in their short action. HELLOOOOOoooo....anybody home??? Long cased 7mm-08's and .308's and 140 gr. VLD type bullets in a .260 need to be loaded out a ways...for that, short actions are a pain.
They did come out with a really good rifle though...the model 30, Oh yeah, and the 700.
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=363349
...It wouldn't be the first time Remington landed on their head with a great idea...take the .257 Roberts for instance. That was a great round killed by the 'possibility' that an old Mauser would blow up using one under full power. I load them hot all the time and their performance is outstanding. They did almost everything they could to kill the round.
Remington's other blunder is thinking everything needs to fit in their short action. HELLOOOOOoooo....anybody home??? Long cased 7mm-08's and .308's and 140 gr. VLD type bullets in a .260 need to be loaded out a ways...for that, short actions are a pain.
They did come out with a really good rifle though...the model 30, Oh yeah, and the 700.
0
-
Nononsense: Is exactly correct. Thats what I get from trying to work from memory at my age. (In my next life I'm going to have more memory and a bigger hard drive installed!!) I've got the 722 in .244, and the only way it handles anything 100gr.+ is to slow them down to the point....well there is no point in doing it. But in defense of the ol .244/6mm I have seen a couple with 1:8.5 and 1:9 that shoot like a house afire at distance with 100 and 105gr. HPBT, and if it wasn't for their susceptibility to crosswinds they could easily be considered quite accurate at 800+meters. But the wind will do them in, serious long range in my humble opinion requires minimum 6.5mm/.270 type heft, (at least for field-work.) But back to the subject at hand, thanks for the course correction, and the time to share your documentation. All in all they are a fine rifle for what they are designed for, trying to make them a 'do-everything' rifle will usually just get you more problems then its worth. (Regardless of make/model/calibur it seems.) It will never be a real popular rifle, but don't turn your nose up at 'em. 0 -
norgexxx,
"But in defense of the ol .244/6mm I have seen a couple with 1:8.5 and 1:9 that shoot like a house afire at distance with 100 and 105gr. HPBT, and if it wasn't for their susceptibility to crosswinds they could easily be considered quite accurate at 800+meters. But the wind will do them in, serious long range in my humble opinion requires minimum 6.5mm/.270 type heft, (at least for field-work.)"
You'll have to repeat that to the 1,000 yard shooters that use the 6mmBR, 6BRX, 6Dasher, 6XC and the 6-6.5x47 Lapua to set National records using the 105 gr. Bergers and the 115 gr. DTAC. They might disagree...
My 6mm match rifle shoots flatter than my 6.5x284 match rifle and only trails that rifle minutely in windage at 1,000 yards in moderate wind speeds. The .270 anything isn't even in the contest.
Best.0 -
Sandwarrior:
Perhaps we could add the minor debacle at Remington regarding the 280 Remington/7mm Express name.
Also, in this regard, it is my opinion that the 280 is probably the ballistic equivalent to the 284 Winchester in most respects, although I will readily admit I am not an expert here. However, I have noticed in much reloading information that the 280 Remington is not loaded up, perhaps for similar reasons that the 257 Roberts was not loaded up. The 280, as I recall, was offered in actions such as the 742, 760, and accordingly, was loaded very conservatively so no one blew these guns up.
Perhaps the theme we are on would indicate that sales and marketing strategies at some of these companies are not much more than brain farts.0 -
norgexxx,
Something amiss here... You shouldn't even be able to stabilize 100 gr. bullets in the original 1-12" twist had in the .244. Slowing them down would only make it worse.
Also, they changed the twist before they changed the name if I remember right. But, no one knew they did the right thing and twisted it 1-9". They finally got that right but then they never followed up on it. It is a superior round to the .243. That shows you that advertising really can work wonders. It's not always the best product that stays available.
Also, I will agree with nn in that the 6mm has tremendous potential as a competition round. It has a good mix of being able to attain high BC's while also capable of getting outstanding velocity. You will find that most high BC 6mm bullets are leaving the barrel 200-400 fps faster than slightly higher BC 6.5 and 7mm bullets.
EDIT:
quote: ...Perhaps the theme we are on would indicate that sales and marketing strategies at some of these companies are not much more than brain farts.
stevecrea,
My point exactly. There is two simple things to make a caliber successful here in the U.S.: The first thing most shooters ask is "Can you kill a deer with it?" That answer must be "Yes!" Then shooters say "Okay!..." and run out and buy one and wildcatters then take the case and do all kinds of crazy things to it so target shooters will like/love it. Sales of brass feed this phenomenon. And you see case becoming legend when other cases languish. The second thing is Don't put it right in the same class as something else. Distinguish it somehow. For instance, the .257 even though loaded light took off because it was "more powerful than that puny little .250-3000... Even though it barely outperformed it at the time due to it's downloading. Remington's missteps with both the .244/6mm and the .280/7mmEx/.280 show they didn't distinguish the round in it's own right. They could've advertised with both that they were faster than the next case down. With the .244 it was the deer issue. But they could've said the .280 was 300 fps faster than the 7mm Mauser...which was popular at the time. Instead of letting it get around that it almost came up to 7mm Weatherby speeds. I'm beginning to think thats where inept kids of millionare moguls ended up...Remington's advertising department.
Remington did do something right when they finally adopted the .25 Niedner as the .25-06. It came out right away with a tight enough twist to stabilize 120 gr. spitzers. And, pushed them out 200-300 fps faster than the .257 Roberts.0 -
Question:
Is it cost prohibitive to use 6mm high BC match bullets for longrange varmint shooting?
And, what are your favorite 6mm high BC bullets?0 -
Friend of mine has a 6mm Remington match rifle, it shoots accurately, flat, and close to the wind. It is probably a little overbore, as witness all the smaller cartridges listed by nononsense.
He loads 107 grain Sierras and H4350.
I wonder about the Legend Of The .257 Roberts, though.
I do not believe Remington was much concerned about loading it light for fear it would be shot in a Spanish Mauser. The earlier 25 Roberts wildcat and G&H propretary chambers were used in anything that was handy to the gunsmith, but they are not interchangeable with the Remington Roberts. After all, nobody ever suggested loading the .270 light for fear it might get into a low number Springfield or Mauser sporter with a big claw mount dovetail cut out of the receiver ring.
I think the Roberts was loaded light because it was offered as an accuracy caliber and in those days, that was the way to improve accuracy with the bullets and powders then available. How many old manuals have you seen that said best accuracy would be with loads below maximum? On the other hand, how many target shooters do you know now using markedly reduced loads?0 -
stevecrea,
Just a quick comment before I run off to these meetings...
Cost prohibitive is relative to the shooter's budget. It also matters what type of shooting you are pursuing because of the number of shots. Attempts to exterminate large populations of prairie dogs could get to be pricey, whereas a couple of ground hogs a day wouldn't both anyone, I don't think.
Lapua still ranks at the top I suspicion. Lots of folks are working with the David Tubb 115 gr. DTAC bullets. I use the Berger VLD bullets the most for competition but for shooting and hunting I've been using the Hornady AMAX. Swampworks makes the JLK VLDs and Bob Cauterucio still makes his VLDs, I think but I haven't talked to him in a while. Sierra Match Kings still have a following.
Best.0 -
NoNonsense:
Thank you for the input. I appreciate it.
I do not believe the email came through, unless I inadvertently deleted it: stevecrea@aol.com.
Thank you again.0 -
Steve,
Seemingly, whatever transition is going on, it's affecting the GB e-mail system again. My apologies, here is a copy of the original message:
Regarding your thread about reboring your barrel:
Optimize is a tough word to get a grip on when it comes to developing loads for rifles. Many times the shorter barrels can be optimized by simply switching to a different powder, bullet or combination of both.
There are 3 or 4 powders that will work with the heavier (140 gr.) bullets if you go with the .240 case necked up to take 6.5mm bullets. The lighter (120-125 gr.) bullets will be able to use probably 6 different powders.
I don't see a problem unless your trying for the Match bullets instead of hunting type bullets. Let me know and I'll try to lend a hand here with your questions and ideas.
Best.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
9 comments