Calibres That Interest You The Most

Cavan duck buster

I would love to to get a 303 Enfield and a savage 308 both for targets and deer

johnfaul

I would like a 17remington or one of the 20 cals probably 20 practical, complemented with a 6mm or 6.5x47 or even a .284 winchester

dev110

Who's gonna go mad and get a .30-338

Kramer

I have a 6.5x47 & have hunted with it. Does that count Dev?
I also have a .338 (& have hunted with it) but apparently that doesn't qualify as it's restricted?
Nicest "exotic" calibre I've fired recently was a 6mm Remington Ackley Improved. I actually took a nice 10pt Whitetail buck with it & he's currently sitting on my living room wall.

dev110

Will you do abit of a review on the 6.5x47? I would love to hear some first hand info on it.

Tease us with a few photos also :cool:

It wasn't me!

dev110 wrote: »

Who's gonna go mad and get a .30-338

.30-338 Win Mag or .30-338 Lapua?

The former was a premier long range cartridge for a while as a wildcat, as its longer neck made it more compatible in many eyes with heavy 200gr+ bullets than the .300 Win Mag, though the latter has a hefty track record of success as well. It's dimensionally identical to the .308 Norma Mag, as far as I know.

dev110

30-338 Lapua.

It would just be my fun gun.

It wasn't me!

Actually, on the lower end, I'd have to have a .220 Swift as well. Just a round I have an awful, awful lot of respect for. A proper old dinosaur.

Jonty

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Actually, on the lower end, I'd have to have a .220 Swift as well. Just a round I have an awful, awful lot of respect for. A proper old dinosaur.

They really don't make them like those anymore. Just raw velocity - no bullsh1t.

silverfox1

dev110 wrote: »

Will you do abit of a review on the 6.5x47? I would love to hear some first hand info on it.

Tease us with a few photos also :cool:

What's the attraction to the 6.5x47. I've only ever heard of it and never really looked into it.

dev110

Its just a calibre that I have wanted for awhile now.
I have just taken a liking to it.

It wasn't me!

Jonty wrote: »

They really don't make them like those anymore. Just raw velocity - no bullsh1t.

Hells yes. It's one thing to have some ear-splitting fire-breathing monstrosity that doesn't give you the returns, but the swift gives you a big bag of return for your investment! Would love to do some field shooting with one, never had the privilege, but it really is the king of the fast .22s.

Jonty

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Hells yes. It's one thing to have some ear-splitting fire-breathing monstrosity that doesn't give you the returns, but the swift gives you a big bag of return for your investment! Would love to do some field shooting with one, never had the privilege, but it really is the king of the fast .22s.

Shot a mate's one at 200m, turning old cans of paint inside out. The Pink Mist, except more like the Dulux Mist!!

It wasn't me!

Jonty wrote: »

Shot a mate's one at 200m, turning old cans of paint inside out. The Pink Mist, except more like the Dulux Mist!!

Would love to take one and play out to five hundred or so, blowing up stuff like that! Been around a few, but not shot one myself. Have shot a .22-250 though and it just seems like more of the same good stuff!

Jonty

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Would love to take one and play out to five hundred or so, blowing up stuff like that! Been around a few, but not shot one myself. Have shot a .22-250 though and it just seems like more of the same good stuff!

very little difference in the two, but they both stem from an era which is long lost to shooting history.

TBH, and I'm not trying to start a row, but I still think these 2 chamberings will outperform a 204, or any 20 calibre or 22 calibre chamberings.

They are the gods of velocity.

PS savage craic vaporising things with them!!

johnfaul

Jonty wrote: »

very little difference in the two, but they both stem from an era which is long lost to shooting history.

TBH, and I'm not trying to start a row, but I still think these 2 chamberings will outperform a 204, or any 20 calibre or 22 calibre chamberings.

They are the gods of velocity.

PS savage craic vaporising things with them!!

Now a fast twist 22-250 shooting a 75grain amax at 3300fps would leave any 20 cal for dead , im surprised no-one has mentioned a 22br its meant to be a serious efficient round

zeissman

johnfaul wrote: »

Now a fast twist 22-250 shooting a 75grain amax at 3300fps would leave any 20 cal for dead , im surprised no-one has mentioned a 22br its meant to be a serious efficient round

A mate of mine has a 1/8 twist 22-250 and is shooting 75 and 80 grain bullets at 3400fps. Great rifle for long range stuff , He lives in N I though so reloads for it.
I had a swift for years and they are great but I still prefer my 204.

Glensman

johnfaul wrote: »

Now a fast twist 22-250 shooting a 75grain amax at 3300fps would leave any 20 cal for dead , im surprised no-one has mentioned a 22br its meant to be a serious efficient round

For how much extra powder?
How much more expensive are the heads?

I'll stick to the .204 pushing 39gr heads at 3750

It wasn't me!

Yes, Glensman, but the likes of a swift or a .22-250 (more the swift, I can't really feel any love for a .22-250) has the advantage of powder capacity and bullet weight. In terms of efficiency, perhaps the .204 wins, but there's no replacement for displacement!

zeissman

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yes, Glensman, but the likes of a swift or a .22-250 (more the swift, I can't really feel any love for a .22-250) has the advantage of powder capacity and bullet weight. In terms of efficiency, perhaps the .204 wins, but there's no replacement for displacement!

All the factory swift rifles are 1/14 twist so they wont shoot any bullet over 55 or 60 grains so trajectory and wind drift will be much the same as a 204 shooting 39 and 40 grain bullets.
The swift bullet will have a bit more energy but you dont need it when the largest animal you will be shooting is a fox.
What I like about the 204 is the fact that they have no recoil and you can see your hits through the scope.

silverfox1

Jonty wrote: »

very little difference in the two, but they both stem from an era which is long lost to shooting history.

TBH, and I'm not trying to start a row, but I still think these 2 chamberings will outperform a 204, or any 20 calibre or 22 calibre chamberings.
They are the gods of velocity.

PS savage craic vaporising things with them!!

Look what your after starting now. All we need now is the 223 boys to get wind of this and the thread will be gone to pot.

Glensman

silverfox1 wrote: »

Look what your after starting now. All we need now is the 223 boys to get wind of this and the thread will be gone to pot.

Well before that happens I just want to quickly say that the .270 is better than the .308 :eek:

Thread officially ruined... Goodnight

On a serious note though. I'm basically decided that funds permitting I'm going to build a 6.5x284 in the summer.
I wanted a 6.5x47 but my donor gun is a long-action...

Jonty

silverfox1 wrote: »

Look what your after starting now. All we need now is the 223 boys to get wind of this and the thread will be gone to pot.

<gets popcorn>

It wasn't me!

Ran the numbers through a ballistic calculator last night. With a Hornady factory load of their 50gr Vmax moly at 3900 (estimate on box is 3850 from a 24" barrel, but let's say a 26" gives a round 3900), zeroed at 260 yards, it won't go beyond 2" high or low until 300 yards. That means you can hold on the centre of a clay pigeon out to 300 yards and still get hits, with a 50gr bullet. That's point and click for you!

clivej

Calibres that interest me are the ones I already have. I don't have the yearn to get anything else just maybe some more firearms.

• .22lr for my rifle and handgun the mainstay of the shooting that I do
• .223 for foxing but have to say I've not been out in a long time, the comps. taking up a lot of my time
• .308 Best deer cal. to own and I'm getting out to use it at least once a week
• .38spl/357mag Lever action rifle great to shoot and fun to own

Glensman

clivej wrote: »

• .308 Best deer cal. to own and I'm getting out to use it at least once a week

!!!COUGH!!!

:D

johnfaul

Glensman wrote: »

Well before that happens I just want to quickly say that the .270 is better than the .308 :eek:

Thread officially ruined... Goodnight

On a serious note though. I'm basically decided that funds permitting I'm going to build a 6.5x284 in the summer.
I wanted a 6.5x47 but my donor gun is a long-action...

have you considered a 284 winchester

patsat

Glensman wrote: »

!!!COUGH!!!

:D

I had to bite my tongue I read that part!

Glensman

johnfaul wrote: »

have you considered a 284 winchester

I hadn't...

What are the benefits?

silverfox1

[QUOTE=clivej;
[*].223 for foxing

Didn't i tell ye. Thread is now officially gone to pot.
seriously though its hard to argue against it as a fox round.

johnfaul

have a look here
http://ukvarminting.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14207&hl=.284%20winchester&st=0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GV_-PvP3eIw
Have a little look at this he is using 162 amax in the 284
I think it has better barrel life than the 6.5x284 and theres loads of good 7mm bullets around now

zeissman

johnfaul wrote: »

have a look here
http://ukvarminting.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14207&hl=.284%20winchester&st=0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GV_-PvP3eIw
Have a little look at this he is using 162 amax in the 284
I think it has better barrel life than the 6.5x284 and theres loads of good 7mm bullets around now

I would also pick the .284 over the 6.5 version for the same reasons

Glensman

johnfaul wrote: »

have a look here
http://ukvarminting.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14207&hl=.284%20winchester&st=0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GV_-PvP3eIw
Have a little look at this he is using 162 amax in the 284
I think it has better barrel life than the 6.5x284 and theres loads of good 7mm bullets around now

I was looking at that gun a couple of days ago...
I didn't realise when Baldie said .284 he didn't mean 6.5x284.

I'm going to need more info on this! Luckily time is on my side

tac foley

Glensman wrote: »

I was looking at that gun a couple of days ago...
I didn't realise when Baldie said .284 he didn't mean 6.5x284.

I'm going to need more info on this! Luckily time is on my side

Naw, the .284 Win was meant for the lever-action Winchester Model 88, and autoloading Model 100, but it has proved to be a gun-store flop.

The 6.5-284 NOT 6.5x284 [that means that the case is 284mm long] is THE definitive barrel-burning long range target round.

Back to the .284 Win - as you have gathered, it is a short cae, only the size of the .308Win, but a lot broader in the beam and with a far greater powder capacity and suits short stiff actions. I'm not sure that there is actually a factory gun made for it now, but for sure it is going to be classed as an 'exotic' - I've never seen one in my whole life. You'd prolly have to have one made, and import the ammunition as an individual - for sure there's none in Ireland, I'd bet.

tac

Glensman

tac foley wrote: »

Naw, the .284 Win was meant for the lever-action Winchester Model 88, and autoloading Model 100, but it has proved to be a gun-store flop.

The 6.5-284 NOT 6.5x284 [that means that the case is 284mm long] is THE definitive barrel-burning long range target round.

Back to the .284 Win - as you have gathered, it is a short cae, only the size of the .308Win, but a lot broader in the beam and with a far greater powder capacity and suits short stiff actions. I'm not sure that there is actually a factory gun made for it now, but for sure it is going to be classed as an 'exotic' - I've never seen one in my whole life.

tac

Hmm...

My donor action will be a Howa 1500 that is currently in .270- so I will need a LA calibre...

clivej

silverfox1 wrote: »

[QUOTE=clivej;
[*].223 for foxing

Didn't i tell ye. Thread is now officially gone to pot.
seriously though its hard to argue against it as a fox round.

patsat wrote: »

I had to bite my tongue I read that part!

Glensman wrote: »

!!!COUGH!!!

:D

one mans meat is another mans poison
Cough cough ya-self

zeissman

Glensman wrote: »

Hmm...

My donor action will be a Howa 1500 that is currently in .270- so I will need a LA calibre...

The 284 has become popular again in the US for long range target shooting.
Accuracy is supposed to be good and it has better barrel life than the 6.5-284.
A lot of them are being built on long actions so guys can use the long 180 grain bullets seated out to increase powder space.
You can buy .284 win brass but a lot of guys neck up the 6.5-284 lapua brass as its better quality.
A .280 remington would also be a good caliber to consider.
Similar case to your .270 but its a 7mm so you have a great range of bullets to choose from.

dogcityroller

zeissman wrote: »

The 284 has become popular again in the US for long range target shooting.
Accuracy is supposed to be good and it has better barrel life than the 6.5-284.
A lot of them are being built on long actions so guys can use the long 180 grain bullets seated out to increase powder space.
You can buy .284 win brass but a lot of guys neck up the 6.5-284 lapua brass as its better quality.
A .280 remington would also be a good caliber to consider.
Similar case to your .270 but its a 7mm so you have a great range of bullets to choose from.

Plus 1 on the .284. These seem to be the daddy on the f class circuit at the minute. Really high bc 7 mm bullets available at the minute. This would be my choice along with the 6.5x55 Swedish for nostalgias sake. Have shot my friends 1898 Swedish mauser a few times in this caliber and loved it. Light recoiling for its power and will take down any species of deer in the British isles and ireland with clinical accuracy and knockdown power and far flatter trajectory than a 308.

reidy87

I would love to try a 7mm practical or 7mm 300 win mag albeit both these cartriges are very similar. Excellent high BC bullets likes of 162 Amax, 180 berger etc at 3000+fps.....whats not to like!!!

Here's a link:
http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Resources/Articles/The+7mm+Practical.++A+Practical+Magnum..html

Not to hijack the threadbut is there any further updates on the pilot scheme and reloading??

dogcityroller

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Yes, Glensman, but the likes of a swift or a .22-250 (more the swift, I can't really feel any love for a .22-250) has the advantage of powder capacity and bullet weight. In terms of efficiency, perhaps the .204 wins, but there's no replacement for displacement!

Plus 1 on that quote. I've owned a 22 250 and my mate has a 204. If I had the choice of the 2 I'd have a 22 250 any day of the week. Don't get me wrong i love the 204 out to say 400 yards but a 22 250 with a fast twist barrel with say 60 grain bullets will leave it for dead. The 204 cannot buck the wind as well once you extend your range past 400 yards. My choice of the 20 cals would be a 20 practical. Ye can use normal 223 brass and neck them down but it's only an option if you can reload. The sooner you can do that in the south the better.