Thread: 6.5 v 7mm

I shot the 147 and 156 in my 6.5 saum and the 168 in my 7saum I get far more bang flops with the 168 but it’s considerably heavier so it’s apples for oranges .260 and 7-08 with 143 eldx and 140 NBT would probably be as close in weight as you could get for a decent comparison I find my 7 kills faster but same thing heavier pill so it’s a little more forgiving . I had endless bangflops on Tahr with my 6.5x55 with 139gn sp probably more than any other rifle iv had

With the absolute non existent supply of 7mm projectiles its a fairly easy choice to go for something that actually has projectiles available. So with that you've got 6.5, .277 and 30 cal. Put the rightly constructed bullet in the right place and I'm sure they won't tell the difference.

( I own 2 7mms and It's a shit to shoot them as every projectile counts)

Originally Posted by Rock river arms hunter

With the absolute non existent supply of 7mm projectiles its a fairly easy choice to go for something that actually has projectiles available. So with that you've got 6.5, .277 and 30 cal. Put the rightly constructed bullet in the right place and I'm sure they won't tell the difference.

( I own 2 7mms and It's a shit to shoot them as every projectile counts)

Berger the world

I see youre using a 284.

Maybe you could get a used 6.5-284 barrel brass and dyes from an F Class shooter and make an exact comparison with all the same gear but different bore size.

Only use 10mm and up, because more is better!

I'm not sure but could be to do with barrel diameters, either inner or outer rifling measurement.

So it's not bullet diameter like all the reloading manuals list but approximations and there abouts of the barrel diameter. Except for the exceptions. Well I think I have learned something

But it still doesn't explain why a approximate 7mm projectile is also named 7mm at .284 and not 7.2mm. probably confusing myself now.

Yeah I have learnt a bit too. If you google it there's a lot of info.

Same over here, 7mm are hard to source should you need them. 6.5 not so much except for the 143 eldx.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Greetings All,
The calibre controversy has been going on for a long time. Up until WW2 smokeless rifle cartridges were mostly named for the bore dia (land to land measurement) hence .270 or 27 calibre, 7mm or 276 calibre. Post war some US cartridges started being named for groove dia .243 for 6mm or 236 calibre and .308 for 30 calibre. All this has got hopefully confused and the table in Wikipedia mentioned above is worse than useless in adding any clarity. With pistol and small rifle cartridges that were developed in the black powder era the situation is even worse and I wont even go there.
So sorry Micky your beloved .270 falls about 0.02mm shy of being a true 7mm calibre. It probably owes its existence to the US reluctance to use anything metric (softening lately) and Winchester picking the next calibre down from 7mm as .280 was already in use.
Regards Grandpamac.

Greetings All,
The calibre controversy has been going on for a long time. Up until WW2 smokeless rifle cartridges were mostly named for the bore dia (land to land measurement) hence .270 or 27 calibre, 7mm or 276 calibre. Post war some US cartridges started being named for groove dia .243 for 6mm or 236 calibre and .308 for 30 calibre. All this has got hopefully confused and the table in Wikipedia mentioned above is worse than useless in adding any clarity. With pistol and small rifle cartridges that were developed in the black powder era the situation is even worse and I wont even go there.
So sorry Micky your beloved .270 falls about 0.02mm shy of being a true 7mm calibre. It probably owes its existence to the US reluctance to use anything metric (softening lately) and Winchester picking the next calibre down from 7mm as .280 was already in use.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
The calibre controversy has been going on for a long time. Up until WW2 smokeless rifle cartridges were mostly named for the bore dia (land to land measurement) hence .270 or 27 calibre, 7mm or 276 calibre. Post war some US cartridges started being named for groove dia .243 for 6mm or 236 calibre and .308 for 30 calibre. All this has got hopefully confused and the table in Wikipedia mentioned above is worse than useless in adding any clarity. With pistol and small rifle cartridges that were developed in the black powder era the situation is even worse and I wont even go there.
So sorry Micky your beloved .270 falls about 0.02mm shy of being a true 7mm calibre. It probably owes its existence to the US reluctance to use anything metric (softening lately) and Winchester picking the next calibre down from 7mm as .280 was already in use.
Regards Grandpamac.

piss off Noddykins...take a .270w projectile and your micrometer/fancypants measuring stick....and then tell me its not 7mm.... the projectiles fired from a .270 winchester are closer to 7mm than any other projectile so the rest are fake poser wannabees.

! Mod theres something wrong here.

Originally Posted by Bagheera

! Mod theres something wrong here.

I had trouble posting, hence the two copies

@Micky Duck. Yes the .270 is an awesome cartridge. Just not as awesome as the .280 Rem. That's 'cause the .280 is a a 7mm and the .270 isn't. Hoew do you do an emoji of some one pissing themselves?