Thread: L.R Rifle

i am looking for a longrange rifle, but don't want to go down the magnum road, i shoot mainly reds and am looking for a rifle to shoot out to about 700m, there is quite a bit being written lately about the 6.5x55, what is it about this calibre that makes it a good L.R rifle, is it a good choice to start with? is there another calibre that would be better suited?
cheers Hunty.

700m and Magnum are hand in glove. With a good brake most magnums can be tamed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You could go for a 260 rem which matches the ballistics of the 300win mag. May be a little small for 700m but there is always the 308. Scott has a 308 which has second round hits at 800m with a 13 inch barrel. 2700fps with a 13"barrel. So a rifle from SSRNZ would give excellent results out to and past 700m. Scott could make a rifle for what ever calibre you want.

Worth a look, could even go 50 cal with 20"barrel if you are keen.

Check out SHOOTING SYSTEMS RESEARCH NZ Ltd - Home for a look at his rifles.

Originally Posted by jim160

You could go for a 260 rem which matches the ballistics of the 300win mag.

Exterior maybe, but a far (far) cry from terminal.
Why shy of the magnum?

Originally Posted by HUNTY

i am looking for a longrange rifle, but don't want to go down the magnum road, i shoot mainly reds and am looking for a rifle to shoot out to about 700m, there is quite a bit being written lately about the 6.5x55, what is it about this calibre that makes it a good L.R rifle, is it a good choice to start with? is there another calibre that would be better suited?
cheers Hunty.

Speaking in very broad terms:
6.5mm projectiles (in the higher weights 130/140 grain) have quite high 'Ballistic Coefficients' for their size/weight. As a result they shoot reasonably flat (relatively speaking) and buck the wind well (again, relatively speaking). They can be pushed to reasonable speeds without as much recoil as almost anything else that can keep up with them in terms of trajectory/wind bucking. They also have high scores in terms of 'Sectional Density', this means that (bullet construction aside) they have the potential to penetrate well.

-To perform the same (in terms of trajectory only) a 7mm/.30 cal/.338 cal projectile has to be in a heavier weight (to match the BC) and generates considerably more recoil. For example, in 7mm there are very good projectiles in the 168/180 grain weights that will perform even better than the 6.5mm offerings, but at the cost of more recoil. (I'm factoring in recoil here, as you said you wanted to avoid magnums).


BUT (and it's a big but): If you take recoil out of the equation, you are a lot better off with a chambering in 7mm and above, pushing a bigger pill just as fast: They will have higher BCs and carry A LOT more energy. It's the relative lack of energy that let's the 6.5mm down for shooting game at long range (IMHO).

For long range target shooting (with lower recoil) the 6.5mm is great, and takes some beating. But to be hunting ethically at that range (and 700m is a hell of a long way), you really need something with magnum power (unfortunately). As KiwiJames said, you could consider a muzzle brake, but then you must take good care of your hearing.

Hope that helps

Originally Posted by jim160

You could go for a 260 rem which matches the ballistics of the 300win mag. May be a little small for 700m but there is always the 308. Scott has a 308 which has second round hits at 800m with a 13 inch barrel. 2700fps with a 13"barrel. So a rifle from SSRNZ would give excellent results out to and past 700m. Scott could make a rifle for what ever calibre you want.

Worth a look, could even go 50 cal with 20"barrel if you are keen.

Check out SHOOTING SYSTEMS RESEARCH NZ Ltd - Home for a look at his rifles.

C'mon mate. Don't go putting up stuff like that. Someone inexperienced might actually believe that is true.
-On Red's at 700m

-and he said he wanted to avoid magnums, so I doubt he'll be keen on a .50

I am having a .260 imp barrel made for me cannon. Hope to get 2900+ with 130-140's and would have no concerns at all, about its ability to kill up to 700.

Originally Posted by R93

I am having a .260 imp barrel made for me cannon. Hope to get 2900+ with 130-140's and would have no concerns at all, about its ability to kill up to 700.

That may be fine for you R93 I've got a 6.5-284 running the 140's harder than most 6.5s will get them, I make nice holes in paper quite happily at 1000yds (no, I actually do- I'm not just saying that because it's thecurrent cool number of yards) but I limit myself to 500 yds on deer, and happily shoot to 650 on goats. But, if someone inexperienced asked you to advise them about a calibre for shooting Reds at 700m....would you recomend a .260, or even a 6.5mm at all? Given the general quality of your posts I don't think you would

...and would you tell them it "matches the ballistics of the 300 win mag." ...now I KNOW you wouldn't do that.

-In fact, my advice would really be: Buy something you find enjoyable to shoot (like a .260 or a 6.5x55) and shoot a lot of deer/paper at 300yds, then 400yds, then 500yds...and then see what you think about your calibre requirements.

I'm gonna get a Swede. Will cut it off at 600m on deer. After I practice on steel of course.

Originally Posted by James

That may be fine for you R93 I've got a 6.5-284 running the 140's harder than most 6.5s will get them, I make nice holes in paper quite happily at 1000yds (no, I actually do- I'm not just saying that because it's thecurrent cool number of yards) but I limit myself to 500 yds on deer, and happily shoot to 650 on goats. But, if someone inexperienced asked you to advise them about a calibre for shooting Reds at 700m....would you recomend a .260, or even a 6.5mm at all? Given the general quality of your posts I don't think you would

...and would you tell them it "matches the ballistics of the 300 win mag." ...now I KNOW you wouldn't do that.

-In fact, my advice would really be: Buy something you find enjoyable to shoot (like a .260 or a 6.5x55) and shoot a lot of deer/paper at 300yds, then 400yds, then 500yds...and then see what you think about your calibre requirements.

Didnt realise we were dealing with someone new sorry. So yeah I wouldnt advise anyone new to pick up a 55 and shoot animals to 700.
People do get caught up in ftlbs of energy as a guideline on killing power at range. Most 6.5's will kill on reds at that range depending on projectile, thats what I am saying.
Your last bit of advice is sound and I couldnt improve on it at all.

Good call Beavis.I had been target shooting at 700 plus with 6.5x55 and had a chance to shoot a deer in perfect conditions at 740 yds and had a great kill behind the shoulder but consider 600 my general limit with that calibrer,
My tikka is generally 1/2 moa at 600 in good conditions and has minimal recoil with a dan can on it and a limbsaver it came with.you wont go wrong with a 6.5 or 260

Originally Posted by Beavis

I'm gonna get a Swede. Will cut it off at 600m on deer. After I practice on steel of course.

I would go with a 280ai ( like i have just done) or a 284 win shoot the 162 amax around 2850.

Start off slow and build your shooting ability at longer range, Take time and make a good correct drop chart, range finder and scope with target turrets and go from there.

It will take a lot of time and a lot of practice and its a hell of a lot of fun just doing that part not to mention the rest.

Originally Posted by R93

Didnt realise we were dealing with someone new sorry. So yeah I wouldnt advise anyone new to pick up a 55 and shoot animals to 700.
People do get caught up in ftlbs of energy as a guideline on killing power at range. Most 6.5's will kill on reds at that range depending on projectile, thats what I am saying.
Your last bit of advice is sound and I couldnt improve on it at all.

We may not be dealing with someone new- for all I know he could turn around and say he's last years' F-class Champ

...I just made a bit of an assumption because he said: "i am looking for a longrange rifle, but don't want to go down the magnum road, i shoot mainly reds and am looking for a rifle to shoot out to about 700m, there is quite a bit being written lately about the 6.5x55, what is it about this calibre that makes it a good L.R rifle, is it a good choice to start with? is there another calibre that would be better suited?" And most experienced long-rangers wouldn't ask that sort of question.

(NB: no insult to HUNTY intended by that statement: you should see the shit I was asking 2 1/2 yrs ago ).

Hunty, I take it from your question that you are just getting into long range hunting. Assume that you are going to love it and decide what rifle/calibre you are going to end up with, and start there. Also 700 yds will soon become 1000 yds. Think about where you want to end up rather than where you want to start. It gets expensive having to change rifles because you have out grown its capabilities, although for some that is the fun.
My 2c.

Also do you reload? If not then that changes a lot of things. Most of the calibres mentioned aren't exactly common in most hunting shops and to get the most out of them would require handloading. In which case 7mm Rem Mag would suit.