Thread: Seriously underrated 6.5x47 Lapua

Originally Posted by Danny

So tell me straight, same pressures same projectiles, same action, same 21” barrel will the x47 push past the x55?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

same pressure from same barrel it cant....pressure=push so if push is the same so must be velocity to have higher velocity from same barrel it MUST push it harder so would NEED higher pressure. speed of powder wont come into it as barrel is same........is is not????

Originally Posted by Danny

So tell me straight, same pressures same projectiles, same action, same 21” barrel will the x47 push past the x55?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why would the pressure and the action be the same?

Originally Posted by Tussock

Why would the pressure and the action be the same?

I think he is asking if you have the same Action (say Sako A7) and quality brass (Lapua) you could theoretically load to the same pressure. Having the same barrel length would there be any speed advantage of one over the other?

're velocity. A lot of the modern cartidge brass seem to be able to stand around 70,000 psi without showing the traditional signs of pressure. Possibly you'll get away with it in a modern action but if there's a manufacturing flaw or someone with an old mauser gets your ammo by mistake - look out!.

Leade design also plays an important part in velocities - a long leade is the same as seating out.

Follow through is vital. A rifle moves about 1/16" before the projectile leaves the barrel. Can't avoid the laws of physics . . .

Originally Posted by Tentman

Follow through is vital. A rifle moves about 1/16" before the projectile leaves the barrel. Can't avoid the laws of physics . . .

Not questioning the laws of physics, but are you saying you grip the rifle and hold it to prevent that 1/16" movement?

I'm not over selling those groups. Clearly everything went right and I did bugger all (Crzyman did the load development) beyond lie down behind the rifle. It was a still day and we walked the round onto the target and shot groups because it was miles to the targets. Any forum member who has been to one of my LR shoots will recognize the target stands. Clearly everything went right.

My question is, if it is a concrete principle and if the laws of physics say you must control the fore-end and follow through (still not sure what this means), then how is this possible? How can everything go right (frequently) even off makeshift rests, if a critical part of marksmanship is being ignored?

I was always taught to follow thru or dwell after the shot was broken with a rifle.
Pretty sure the projectile is still in the barrel during initial recoil impulse depending on a few things.

I don't have any accuracy issues if I do my part no matter how I shoot my rifles. Bipod, pack or any other traditional position. They all shoot within an acceptable POI inside say 500 yrds.
I only hold/support the front when shooting without a bipod.

It is a concrete marksmanship principle.
Shot must be released and followed thru with minimum disturbance to the rifle or shooters position.


Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

It may be a concrete principle, but I have seen vastly better shooting from people who don't bother. If people are shooting 5 shot round bug hole groups from field rests with no fore end control, what are you expecting to gain?

How is it vital if people are shooting extremely well without it?

These are two three shot groups at 1100m from my old Savage F-Class. This is about 6-12 months after I abandoned trying to control the fore-end. When I tried to control the fore-end, this is what my 100m groups look like.


I can only credit the people who taught me to shoot as before that I was hopeless, but those groups were shot leaning over the back deck of a flatdeck ute. Unless you can come up with a concrete reason, I will stick with being in awe of the concrete principles they taught me.

Originally Posted by Tussock

It may be a concrete principle, but I have seen vastly better shooting from people who don't bother. If people are shooting 5 shot round bug hole groups from field rests with no fore end control, what are you expecting to gain?

How is it vital if people are shooting extremely well without it?

These are two three shot groups at 1100m from my old Savage F-Class. This is about 6-12 months after I abandoned trying to control the fore-end. When I tried to control the fore-end, this is what my 100m groups look like.
Attachment 105916

I can only credit the people who taught me to shoot as before that I was hopeless, but those groups were shot leaning over the back deck of a flatdeck ute. Unless you can come up with a concrete reason, I will stick with being in awe of the concrete principles they taught me.

You miss understood me. I am not saying it is critical to follow thru or hold the fore end. I rarely do either.
Totally agree with you on most parts.
Some people can break most of the principles and shoot awesomely. Just the way it is.

What I meant by concrete is that it is a principle of marksmanship.
I will also bet dollars to donuts you follow thru to an extent without realising it.




Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by R93

You miss understood me. I am not saying it is critical to follow thru or hold the fore end. I rarely do either.
Totally agree with you on most parts.
Some people can break most of the principles and shoot awesomely. Just the way it is.

What I meant by concrete is that it is a principle of marksmanship.
I will also bet dollars to donuts you follow thru to an extent without realising it.




Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Like I said, I don't know what you mean so I can't say one way or another. I want the cross hairs to come back to where they started, is this what you mean? Unless it is a field shot and I'm all twisted up. Realistically you should be able to shoot left handed lying on your back twisted round a tree stump and if you get the important stuff right, still get what you want.

I definitely want the rifle to recoil and return to the same point of aim, or at least field of view.

Should add that with 6.5x47 burning no more powder than it needs, I could self spot with my heavy hunting rifle at 100m on quite high magnification. A Sako stock and a heavy over barrel suppressor help. Little recoil.

Lets see if my new straight stocked sporter weight 7mm Rem Mag with its pencil thin barrel changes my tune. Could only get 175g factory loads locally

F-Class .22 by any chance?

Originally Posted by Gibo

F-Class .22 by any chance?

I don't understand what you mean? 6.5x284

Originally Posted by Tussock

I don't understand what you mean? 6.5x284

I was taking the piss a few here would claim that group at 1100 with their .22

Originally Posted by Gibo

I was taking the piss a few here would claim that group at 1100 with their .22

Big Gav amused himself no end and probably did the barrel life no great favors by hunting blow flies with that rifle. I wanted 140s but he loaded 130s because they were freakish.

Yup. That's pretty much what a follow thru is. Watching the foresight or crosshair after the shot.
If position and everything else is right, your sight picture should return to where it started.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk