User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 1:14:27 PM EDT
[#1]
No they didn't...On backorder.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 1:18:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Altair]
[#2]
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
I don't get the value of these odd calibers - or wildcats. I have 5.56, 6.8, 7.62 x 39 and even 7.62 x 54r 6.5 G = I already made my decision and went with the 6.8 300 BO = doesn't offer much the 6.8 doesn't offer Maybe a few years ago, I'd opt for something different, but now I have all I need - EXCEPT a large thumper, say a 450 BM or 458 SOCOM or maybe a .308 Again - I don't see the value . . . just my opinion. The merits of this (and the many other .223 based wildcats) have been stated earlier in this thread. You get more performance than .223 without the proprietary bolts and mags used with alternatives like 6.5 and 6.8 and you can use very cheap and plentiful .223 parent brass. This, like the other .223 based wildcats, won't outperform 6.5 or 6.8 but they will outperform .223. As to whether that is sufficient to choose them over another medium caliber is up to the individual. For me it was (I don't have a 6.5 PCC yet but I do have a 7.62x40, a .25-223, and a 300 BLK). |
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 2:27:35 PM EDT
[#3]
There is value for this wildcat and others based on the 5.56x45mm brass for those stuck in states with hi-cap magazine restrictions, but who own grandfathered hi-cap AR15 magazines. The 6.5G or 6.8SPC are out for me unless I am willing to make do with 10 round mags. If I choose to go with a more effective cartridge for the AR15 platform, I'll go the 6.5PCC, 300 Blackout or 7.62x40mm route. The spares situation (i.e., bolt assemblies) is more convenient, and I have a bunch of 5.56x45mm brass to use for reforming/reloading. It's easier on the pocketbook, especially for reloaders.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 5:13:42 PM EDT
[#4]
Originally Posted By Altair:
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
I don't get the value of these odd calibers - or wildcats. I have 5.56, 6.8, 7.62 x 39 and even 7.62 x 54r 6.5 G = I already made my decision and went with the 6.8 300 BO = doesn't offer much the 6.8 doesn't offer Maybe a few years ago, I'd opt for something different, but now I have all I need - EXCEPT a large thumper, say a 450 BM or 458 SOCOM or maybe a .308 Again - I don't see the value . . . just my opinion. The merits of this (and the many other .223 based wildcats) have been stated earlier in this thread. You get more performance than .223 without the proprietary bolts and mags used with alternatives like 6.5 and 6.8 and you can use very cheap and plentiful .223 parent brass. This, like the other .223 based wildcats, won't outperform 6.5 or 6.8 but they will outperform .223. As to whether that is sufficient to choose them over another medium caliber is up to the individual. For me it was (I don't have a 6.5 PCC yet but I do have a 7.62x40, a .25-223, and a 300 BLK). OK - so I see some value and by all means I am not trying to rain on anyone's parade. Maybe the 6.5 is proprietary, but not the 6.8. It is a very interesting idea - using the .223 parent case - very smart and BTW - the people here are some of the most ingenious bastages I have ever run across - and I have run across plenty in my time. So to summarize - some dies to reform the brass and a barrel - that's it - oh and projectiles. Yes, I can see where it's tempting. I have thought about dumping my 4 rifles in 5.56 - but I am pretty fond of them. The gun safe is stuffed and mommy says when that happens - NO getting a bigger safe 
OK - so maybe I'll swap one over and hold onto the barrel so I can still restore it to original config. I need a damned thumper first though - something that will take down any animal on the planet 
Carry on men - fine work of exceptional minds. Too bad the .mil doesn't think like you all. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 5:21:04 PM EDT
[#5]
Originally Posted By tony549:
There is value for this wildcat and others based on the 5.56x45mm brass for those stuck in states with hi-cap magazine restrictions, but who own grandfathered hi-cap AR15 magazines. The 6.5G or 6.8SPC are out for me unless I am willing to make do with 10 round mags. If I choose to go with a more effective cartridge for the AR15 platform, I'll go the 6.5PCC, 300 Blackout or 7.62x40mm route. The spares situation (i.e., bolt assemblies) is more convenient, and I have a bunch of 5.56x45mm brass to use for reforming/reloading. It's easier on the pocketbook, especially for reloaders. CA allows grand-fathered 30 round mags? Did not know that. Yeah I have 3 rifles in 6.8, so I HAD to start reloading. Decent priced .45 was also getting near impossible to find as well. I can see where a .223 based wildcat would really fit your situation, so again - I see value - perhaps not as much for me as for you. I'll be following along on the ride gents - so best wishes . . . . |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 8:34:36 PM EDT
[#6]
Thanks for your support, we are excited to try all the powder and bullet combos...we are very excited to try the heavy Lapua 144gr. FMJBT pills.
Even at moderate velocities w/ the very high BC of .636 it will go the distance... Computer estimates are in the 2,160 fps. to 2,202 fps.range w/ the 22" Bbl. for the Lapua 144 gr. FMJBT. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 9:32:28 PM EDT
[#7]
What about more common lengths - 16" carbine for instance?
|
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/30/2011 10:01:10 PM EDT
[#8]
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
What about more common lengths - 16" carbine for instance? In due time we will be testing the 16" length barrel as well. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 3:22:07 AM EDT
[#9]
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
Thanks for your support, we are excited to try all the powder and bullet combos...we are very excited to try the heavy Lapua 144gr. FMJBT pills. Even at moderate velocities w/ the very high BC of .636 it will go the distance... Computer estimates are in the 2,160 fps. to 2,202 fps.range w/ the 22" Bbl. for the Lapua 144 gr. FMJBT. Doc, could you get us an estimate of the 144 out of say a 16 or 18 inch barrel, please? After seeing those numbers, I am wondering if maybe the 123gr Scenars are the upper limit for this kind of cartridge through a "standard" length barrel. Thanks! 
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 4:55:37 AM EDT
[#10]
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
I don't get the value of these odd calibers - or wildcats... Again - I don't see the value . . . just my opinion. You see the value of it all right, that's why your trying to talk yourself out of it, prolly cause ur wife would get mad at you for getting another caliber 
I feel the same way, I love it but would have to try hard to justify getting into a nother caliber. I'm not reloading yet, so it is a theoretical future thing for me regardless. However, being that i am so far committed to ARs, if ammo availability wasn't a concern, I would love to have one AR w/ a ca 9" upper in Blk Out and a ca 18" upper in 6.5 ppc. I think they are the best concepts going for the medium power AR envelope. Apparently, the 6.5g & 6.8sp are limited by the bolt strength. Both would be most improved by a slightly larger/stronger assault rifle envelope, or a redesign of the bolt/barrel extension/upper receiver. But if you also have full power rifles in your arsenal, I see less point of the 6.8s/6.5g w/ the developments of the BO and PCC. |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 5:44:46 AM EDT
[#11]
The 68 isn't limited by the bolt strength.....
either way some of these 556 based projects are pretty cool, and that is the thing about wildcats, you dont have to have a need just a want to try something different and go for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 7:49:42 AM EDT
[#12]
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
What about more common lengths - 16" carbine for instance? In due time we will be testing the 16" length barrel as well. I thought you were using simulation software . . . |
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 8:30:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1-Wolverine]
[#13]
Originally Posted By rightwingnut:
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
I don't get the value of these odd calibers - or wildcats... Again - I don't see the value . . . just my opinion. You see the value of it all right, that's why your trying to talk yourself out of it, prolly cause ur wife would get mad at you for getting another caliber
I feel the same way, I love it but would have to try hard to justify getting into a nother caliber. I'm not reloading yet, so it is a theoretical future thing for me regardless. However, being that i am so far committed to ARs, if ammo availability wasn't a concern, I would love to have one AR w/ a ca 9" upper in Blk Out and a ca 18" upper in 6.5 ppc. I think they are the best concepts going for the medium power AR envelope. Apparently, the 6.5g & 6.8sp are limited by the bolt strength. Both would be most improved by a slightly larger/stronger assault rifle envelope, or a redesign of the bolt/barrel extension/upper receiver. But if you also have full power rifles in your arsenal, I see less point of the 6.8s/6.5g w/ the developments of the BO and PCC. I kinda felt he was try to talk himself out of it also. I am wanting to get a PCC in a SBR, somewhere in the 9" to 12" range, I will have to run some numbers before pulling the trigger. It would be a sweet tree-stand, and thick cover deer/hog slayer. |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 8:33:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Dr69er]
[#14]
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
What about more common lengths - 16" carbine for instance? In due time we will be testing the 16" length barrel as well. I thought you were using simulation software . . . Right now we are using actual test barrels in 18" and 22" lengths...We are also using ballistic software to compare to w/ actual field results. So far we are surpassing (getting better velocity) than the computer modeling w/ our field results. We plan to also purchase a 16" barrel for field test, properly break it in and then test for velocity and accuracty. Once that is done to our satisfaction,then maybe offer it for sale. We also plan to do actual pressure testing and ballistic gel testing as well, budget permitting (its quite expensive). |
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 8:39:51 AM EDT
[#15]
Doc, I think Maryland_Shooter is wanting you to run the numbers on a 16" Patriot with the 144 Lapua.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 8:41:54 AM EDT
[#16]
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Originally Posted By rightwingnut:
Originally Posted By Maryland_Shooter:
I don't get the value of these odd calibers - or wildcats... Again - I don't see the value . . . just my opinion. You see the value of it all right, that's why your trying to talk yourself out of it, prolly cause ur wife would get mad at you for getting another caliber
I feel the same way, I love it but would have to try hard to justify getting into a nother caliber. I'm not reloading yet, so it is a theoretical future thing for me regardless. However, being that i am so far committed to ARs, if ammo availability wasn't a concern, I would love to have one AR w/ a ca 9" upper in Blk Out and a ca 18" upper in 6.5 ppc. I think they are the best concepts going for the medium power AR envelope. Apparently, the 6.5g & 6.8sp are limited by the bolt strength. Both would be most improved by a slightly larger/stronger assault rifle envelope, or a redesign of the bolt/barrel extension/upper receiver. But if you also have full power rifles in your arsenal, I see less point of the 6.8s/6.5g w/ the developments of the BO and PCC. I kinda felt he was try to talk himself out of it also. I am wanting to get a PCC in a SBR, somewhere in the 9" to 12" range, I will have to run some numbers before pulling the trigger. It would be a sweet tree-stand, and thick cover deer/hog slayer. Nah - I may get one a bit later, but after just starting in reloading and having 4 calibers, I really don't want another. I have space limitations. My 6.8 performs better, but a bump to a 5.56 would certainly be pretty handy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 8:52:07 AM EDT
[#17]
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Doc, I think Maryland_Shooter is wanting you to run the numbers on a 16" Patriot with the 144 Lapua. That would be sweet - you guys seem intent on dragging me in 
They'll get to it - science moves at the pace it can. |
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 4:03:40 PM EDT
[#18]
AR15performance.com offers "big bolt" parts and uppers on a custom basis for 6.5G/LBC that allows for higher operating pressures; up to bolt action rifle limits or ~55-60 ksi if I remember correctly. The bolt lugs have the look of the KAC SR15 E3 bolt lugs. The big bolt concept is marketed for 6/6.5/7mm BR AR15's and for 7.62x51 and similar envelope cartridges in a lighter upper for the AR10 platform.
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 6:26:20 PM EDT
[#19]
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go....
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 6:56:26 PM EDT
[#20]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... The main differences are that the 6.5mm PCC is Engineered specifically for the AR platform, while the 6.5mm TCU was developed for the T/C Contender single shot pistol and later used in the Remington XP pistols and thus never designed for Autoloaders (the really sharp 40 degree shoulder angle). The 6.5 PCC differs in all dimensions w/ the TCU counterpart like: case taper,shoulder angle and length,neck length and COL etc. The main thing it does share w/ the TCU is the higher case capacity of approx. 33 grs.of water. Its just the added work needed to modify the existing TCU dies that are not designed for the AR platform that can cuase Issues the the road... Anyway, the custom PCC dies are not hardly any more costly than the std.TCU dies... |
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 3/31/2011 10:39:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1-Wolverine]
[#21]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... The biggest problem you would have using a standard 6.5 TCU reamer is that it was not designed to fit in the AR, the TCU OAL is 2.6'', some are set up for 2.7'' and the PCC, and the AR, is set up for 2.26''. The TCU is set up to have the bullet sticking out of the case .34" to .44'' further than the AR mag will allow. so you have to shove the bullet deeper in the case to make it fit 2.26, but the long leed is still there. With long VLD bullets you could conceivably have over a half inch jump before the bullet gets to the lands, and the barrel would group like buckshot. Short chambering would not help the problem, a redesigned is necessary, and that is where the 6.5 PCC came from. No worries, I am not insulted in the least, it is actually a very good question, you are not the only one that has thought about that, we did, that is how this got started. Like Doc stated, the custom dies are only a few bucks more than TCU dies. Thanks, Paul |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 8:59:34 AM EDT
[#22]
Originally Posted By NickOfTime:
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
Thanks for your support, we are excited to try all the powder and bullet combos...we are very excited to try the heavy Lapua 144gr. FMJBT pills. Even at moderate velocities w/ the very high BC of .636 it will go the distance... Computer estimates are in the 2,160 fps. to 2,202 fps.range w/ the 22" Bbl. for the Lapua 144 gr. FMJBT. Doc, could you get us an estimate of the 144 out of say a 16 or 18 inch barrel, please? After seeing those numbers, I am wondering if maybe the 123gr Scenars are the upper limit for this kind of cartridge through a "standard" length barrel. Thanks! Hello Nick, its amazing that for the 16.25" bbl length is shows a very Impressive 2,191 fps. w/ the 144 gr. Lapua bullet w/ Winchester 748 powder @ max.avg.pressure of 55,000 PSI (+/-). Thats the beauty of the 223 Imp. case in shorter barrels ! Even more amazing, the Lapua 123gr. Scenar shows an equally Impressive 2,334 fps. @ max pressure of 55,000 PSI. w/ the 16.25" Bbl. and Win. 748 powder. So it seems you won't be losing that much velocity between the 16" Bbl. and the 20" + Bbl. length, Kurt had very similar results w/ his 223 based wildcats as well. |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 9:10:33 AM EDT
[#23]
We will be field testing the 16" carbine length in the near future, and based on the actual field results w/ Wolverine's(Paul's) 18" Bbl. its looking
very promising at this point. Some of Pauls loads in the 18" Bbl. are only 30-50 fps slower than my 22" Bbl. version ! Of course a lot depends on the powder and bullet combo used for a particular load. There are a lot of bullet and powder combos still to be tried so stay tuned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 9:26:48 AM EDT
[#24]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... This is what I did a couple years ago. I do notice that with custom dies/reamer it draws more interest? |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 10:00:42 AM EDT
[#25]
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... This is what I did a couple years ago. I do notice that with custom dies/reamer it draws more interest? I think you are correct Ron. Ron, is it me or does the QL software offer a very limited amount of bullet choices, especially in 6.5mm caliber ? Maybe I'm not doing something right or have to go Into a different folder of QL... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 10:30:22 AM EDT
[#26]
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... This is what I did a couple years ago. I do notice that with custom dies/reamer it draws more interest? I think you are correct Ron. Ron, is it me or does the QL software offer a very limited amount of bullet choices, especially in 6.5mm caliber ? Maybe I'm not doing something right or have to go Into a different folder of QL... I see around 170 bullets. Dont know what your seeing/looking for. If your looking for a bullet not listed just take its lenght/weight & use another bullet with the same characteristics. just reduce load slightly to start. Either way the velocitys listed are only good for estimating what powder to try. I found some powders do better than QL sugests & others worst. I use QL just for powder start weights. I let field testing give me the hard #s. |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 11:11:53 AM EDT
[#27]
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... This is what I did a couple years ago. I do notice that with custom dies/reamer it draws more interest? I think you are correct Ron. Ron, is it me or does the QL software offer a very limited amount of bullet choices, especially in 6.5mm caliber ? Maybe I'm not doing something right or have to go Into a different folder of QL... I see around 170 bullets. Dont know what your seeing/looking for. If your looking for a bullet not listed just take its lenght/weight & use another bullet with the same characteristics. just reduce load slightly to start. Either way the velocitys listed are only good for estimating what powder to try. I found some powders do better than QL sugests & others worst. I use QL just for powder start weights. I let field testing give me the hard #s. Looks like your correct Ron, I had to refresh then load all bullets in that caliber...Thanks. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 11:41:01 AM EDT
[Last Edit: desertcj]
[#28]
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... The biggest problem you would have using a standard 6.5 TCU reamer is that it was not designed to fit in the AR, the TCU OAL is 2.6'', some are set up for 2.7'' and the PCC, and the AR, is set up for 2.26''. The TCU is set up to have the bullet sticking out of the case .34" to .44'' further than the AR mag will allow. so you have to shove the bullet deeper in the case to make it fit 2.26, but the long leed is still there. With long VLD bullets you could conceivably have over a half inch jump before the bullet gets to the lands, and the barrel would group like buckshot. Short chambering would not help the problem, a redesigned is necessary, and that is where the 6.5 PCC came from. No worries, I am not insulted in the least, it is actually a very good question, you are not the only one that has thought about that, we did, that is how this got started. Like Doc stated, the custom dies are only a few bucks more than TCU dies. Thanks, Paul I'm confused how running a 6.5 TCU reamer 2.26" into the barrel instead of the standard 2.6" or 2.7" wouldn't produce something similar? I agree that you may have to ream the throat deeper to allow the longer bullets to be seated out far enough. I did see that RonaldWilliams has done this before, is there any info? Do you have chamber/cartridge dimensions that you could share or are you trying to keep this proprietary? Anyways it's a cool project that looks to be developing nicely with some nice ballistics! |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 12:42:41 PM EDT
[#29]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... The biggest problem you would have using a standard 6.5 TCU reamer is that it was not designed to fit in the AR, the TCU OAL is 2.6'', some are set up for 2.7'' and the PCC, and the AR, is set up for 2.26''. The TCU is set up to have the bullet sticking out of the case .34" to .44'' further than the AR mag will allow. so you have to shove the bullet deeper in the case to make it fit 2.26, but the long leed is still there. With long VLD bullets you could conceivably have over a half inch jump before the bullet gets to the lands, and the barrel would group like buckshot. Short chambering would not help the problem, a redesigned is necessary, and that is where the 6.5 PCC came from. No worries, I am not insulted in the least, it is actually a very good question, you are not the only one that has thought about that, we did, that is how this got started. Like Doc stated, the custom dies are only a few bucks more than TCU dies. Thanks, Paul I'm confused how running a 6.5 TCU reamer 2.26" into the barrel instead of the standard 2.6" or 2.7" wouldn't produce something similar? I agree that you may have to ream the throat deeper to allow the longer bullets to be seated out far enough. I did see that RonaldWilliams has done this before, is there any info? Do you have chamber/cartridge dimensions that you could share or are you trying to keep this proprietary? Anyways it's a cool project that looks to be developing nicely with some nice ballistics! I believe Ron has used a shortend/modified version of the TCU case w/ a longer case neck...The problem is if use the std. TCU dies that are set-up for a 2.70" COAL and you short chamber it, you will likely get excessive bullet jump from the front of the chamber to the lands/groves of the rifling and thus you have a Inaccurate situation present. The case neck is longer the TCU as well, on the PCC its shorter. The 6.5mm PCC has .295" neck dia., a short throat, and a single approach angle very similar to the .264 LBC to squeeze out the most accuracy possible. The case body is actually slightly longer than the parent 223 case w/ the 6.5mm PCC round and thus gives-up no case capacity but actually gains some more capacity during the fireforming process. We do not plan to make the 6.5 PCC a proprietary round....We have not yet released the prints/drawings because we are not finished yet w/ the project, and feel it would be too premature before everything is complete. |
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 1:11:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1-Wolverine]
[#30]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
Originally Posted By 1-Wolverine:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I've been following this thread intently and decided to finally register so I could ask a few questions. What are the differences between the 6.5PCC and just using a 6.5 TCU reamer and short chambering a barrel to say 40mm cartridge length? I was thinking that would be fairly easy to do along with cutting off the bottom of some 6.5 TCU dies for case forming/loading. That would be using all "Off the shelf" parts that are fairly easy to get. I don't mean to step on your toes with the development of this cartridge, just wondering if this would be a legitimate way to go.... The biggest problem you would have using a standard 6.5 TCU reamer is that it was not designed to fit in the AR, the TCU OAL is 2.6'', some are set up for 2.7'' and the PCC, and the AR, is set up for 2.26''. The TCU is set up to have the bullet sticking out of the case .34" to .44'' further than the AR mag will allow. so you have to shove the bullet deeper in the case to make it fit 2.26, but the long leed is still there. With long VLD bullets you could conceivably have over a half inch jump before the bullet gets to the lands, and the barrel would group like buckshot. Short chambering would not help the problem, a redesigned is necessary, and that is where the 6.5 PCC came from. No worries, I am not insulted in the least, it is actually a very good question, you are not the only one that has thought about that, we did, that is how this got started. Like Doc stated, the custom dies are only a few bucks more than TCU dies. Thanks, Paul I'm confused how running a 6.5 TCU reamer 2.26" into the barrel instead of the standard 2.6" or 2.7" wouldn't produce something similar? I agree that you may have to ream the throat deeper to allow the longer bullets to be seated out far enough. I did see that RonaldWilliams has done this before, is there any info? Do you have chamber/cartridge dimensions that you could share or are you trying to keep this proprietary? Anyways it's a cool project that looks to be developing nicely with some nice ballistics! I am not the best at explaining things in type, my bad, I will try to make it simple. I wish I had a TCU drawing so I could give exact measurements. The problem is opposite of –––––––– "you may have to ream the throat deeper to allow the longer bullets to be seated out far enough"––––- the throat on a stock TCU reamer has that, its throat is too long, because it is set up for the bullet to be sticking out of the case further. It requires a shorter throat to work in a AR, you can not get a shorter throat without re-cutting the reamer, and if you are going to do that, you might as well order a new one that fits your needs. The distance from the case mouth to the rifling on a TCU is .34" to long, and you can not change that without re-cutting it. I have never spoke to Ronald, but my guess is he already had the reamer, or picked one up cheap, and probably had the tools, and knowledge to adjust the reamer to work for his needs. |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 1:32:11 PM EDT
[#31]
Well, Ron really knows his stuff...If you look at page one of this thread Ron has a pic of his modified TCU round next to a std. 223 round.
He has been building customs upper for quite a while now...He has his own shop and knows how to use it... I believe Ron shortend the dies and thus moving the case shoulder further back and as seen in the pic. vs the .223 round. The 6.5 PCC is the opposite, the shoulder is moved slightly forward, thus gaining case capacity... Maybe Ron can chime In and give a clearer explanation... |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 3:25:17 PM EDT
[#32]
I would be really interested in seeing some "short 6.5 TCU" load data/velocities to compare to what you guys are working on. I'm just thinking that I could order an off the shelf reamer, in stock dies and probably be shooting/testing in a couple weeks after shortening the dies and chambering a barrel. I will sit back now and continue to watch intently. Keep it up the good work
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 4:04:05 PM EDT
[#33]
I took 2.4oal(6.5TCU loaded oal) reduce to 2.25/26oal(max lenth AR mag) This .15 is removed from the 223/556 case. This gives me a 1.6 case. No need to do anything to the reamer. I just shortened the dies .15 but I did not push the shoulder back as far as the TCU. I run a .2 case neck length giving me a little more room for powder. I targeted the 100g Nosler BT because it is a good hunting bullet here given the game size but the Hornady 100g SP works great too. Final product is a round that with the bullets seated to 2.25/26 the base of those 2 bullets are right at the neck/shoulder junction for max case capacity & the throat is right were it should be. Both my 16" & 12.5" uppers will produce 1/2" groups with most of the holes touching.
I even have a fire forming load with the 80g sierra HP that will turn in 3/4" groups without issue. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 4:11:30 PM EDT
[#34]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I would be really interested in seeing some "short 6.5 TCU" load data/velocities to compare to what you guys are working on. I'm just thinking that I could order an off the shelf reamer, in stock dies and probably be shooting/testing in a couple weeks after shortening the dies and chambering a barrel. I will sit back now and continue to watch intently. Keep it up the good work This is why I did it. Reamer on sale, dies at midway. Brl arived & the next afternoon I was setting headspace. I love shelf wildcats 
Dont have much data with anything but the 100g bullets. I found as the bullet weight went up velocity realy drops. Plus the OAL starts to push alot of bullet into the case. 100g bullet, 2450fps avg with the 16' & 2350fps avg with the 12.5" I have some #s with the speer 120 HC but they realy did not impress me. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 4:32:34 PM EDT
[#35]
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I would be really interested in seeing some "short 6.5 TCU" load data/velocities to compare to what you guys are working on. I'm just thinking that I could order an off the shelf reamer, in stock dies and probably be shooting/testing in a couple weeks after shortening the dies and chambering a barrel. I will sit back now and continue to watch intently. Keep it up the good work This is why I did it. Reamer on sale, dies at midway. Brl arived & the next afternoon I was setting headspace. I love shelf wildcats
Dont have much data with anything but the 100g bullets. I found as the bullet weight went up velocity realy drops. Plus the OAL starts to push alot of bullet into the case. 100g bullet, 2450fps avg with the 16' & 2350fps avg with the 12.5" I have some #s with the speer 120 HC but they realy did not impress me. Excellent! What powder do you use? Not asking for specific charge weights of course..... |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/1/2011 7:33:17 PM EDT
[#36]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I would be really interested in seeing some "short 6.5 TCU" load data/velocities to compare to what you guys are working on. I'm just thinking that I could order an off the shelf reamer, in stock dies and probably be shooting/testing in a couple weeks after shortening the dies and chambering a barrel. I will sit back now and continue to watch intently. Keep it up the good work This is why I did it. Reamer on sale, dies at midway. Brl arived & the next afternoon I was setting headspace. I love shelf wildcats
Dont have much data with anything but the 100g bullets. I found as the bullet weight went up velocity realy drops. Plus the OAL starts to push alot of bullet into the case. 100g bullet, 2450fps avg with the 16' & 2350fps avg with the 12.5" I have some #s with the speer 120 HC but they realy did not impress me. Excellent! What powder do you use? Not asking for specific charge weights of course..... The faster powders usually work better for the " short TCU or MPC/Whisper" cases: AA1680, RL-7,H4198,H332 should work well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2011 10:47:24 AM EDT
[#37]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I would be really interested in seeing some "short 6.5 TCU" load data/velocities to compare to what you guys are working on. I'm just thinking that I could order an off the shelf reamer, in stock dies and probably be shooting/testing in a couple weeks after shortening the dies and chambering a barrel. I will sit back now and continue to watch intently. Keep it up the good work This is why I did it. Reamer on sale, dies at midway. Brl arived & the next afternoon I was setting headspace. I love shelf wildcats
Dont have much data with anything but the 100g bullets. I found as the bullet weight went up velocity realy drops. Plus the OAL starts to push alot of bullet into the case. 100g bullet, 2450fps avg with the 16' & 2350fps avg with the 12.5" I have some #s with the speer 120 HC but they realy did not impress me. Excellent! What powder do you use? Not asking for specific charge weights of course..... I use alot of RL10X, RL7, H322 & H335. Each upper has a preference & though H322 dosent clock as the fastest load(just over 2400fps) it does run just under 1/2" @ 100yds in my 16' rig. |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/2/2011 11:22:52 AM EDT
[#38]
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
Originally Posted By ronaldmwilliams:
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I would be really interested in seeing some "short 6.5 TCU" load data/velocities to compare to what you guys are working on. I'm just thinking that I could order an off the shelf reamer, in stock dies and probably be shooting/testing in a couple weeks after shortening the dies and chambering a barrel. I will sit back now and continue to watch intently. Keep it up the good work This is why I did it. Reamer on sale, dies at midway. Brl arived & the next afternoon I was setting headspace. I love shelf wildcats
Dont have much data with anything but the 100g bullets. I found as the bullet weight went up velocity realy drops. Plus the OAL starts to push alot of bullet into the case. 100g bullet, 2450fps avg with the 16' & 2350fps avg with the 12.5" I have some #s with the speer 120 HC but they realy did not impress me. Excellent! What powder do you use? Not asking for specific charge weights of course..... I use alot of RL10X, RL7, H322 & H335. Each upper has a preference & though H322 dosent clock as the fastest load(just over 2400fps) it does run just under 1/2" @ 100yds in my 16' rig. Thanks Ron for your follow-up and suggestions. |
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 4/3/2011 7:46:40 AM EDT
[#39]
Learned a lesson today.
A buddy of mine comes driving down the drive, while I am tilling up the garden, says grab a rifle, I got some new hog land to scout. I grab the PCC, put a sling on it, grab a mag, and then it hits me, I have shot up every round that I have loaded for it, DOH!!! I have plenty of guns that I could have taken, but dadgumit I want to get blood on the PCC. I have to make him wait while I load six, which is all the brass I had ready to prime. From now on, I will have some ready to go at all times, we did not get a shot, but the land was tore up with hog sign. I hope to get down there next week and get some blood on the Patriot. I did find one of the coolest arrowheads that I have seen. 
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/5/2011 7:27:50 PM EDT
[#40]
OK, here is how its looks like w/ the Ballistic Modeling w/ the Lapua 144gr. FMJBT in the 6.5mm PCC w/ the following barrel lengths, using AA2495 powder (9.9% Compr.) at just under max. pressure of 55,000 PSI.
22" Bbl. 6.5 PCC : Velocity: 2,285 fps. Energy: 1,669 ft/lbs. 18" Bbl. 6.5 PCC: Velocity: 2,208 fps. Energy: 1,558 ft/lbs. 16" Bbl. 6.5 PCC: Velocity: 2,162 fps. Energy: 1,492 ft/lbs. ETA: The Ballistic Computer Modeling shows Winchester 748 is slightly more efficient and gives slightly more velocity w/ no compression needed (100% Fill). and Paul was correct the numbers are from the muzzle (15 feet). 
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/5/2011 7:30:42 PM EDT
[#41]
Hello Fellas, I lot of you were asking about the Barnes 100gr. TTSX in the 6.5mm PCC...While Paul will be testing this bullet, he has yet to do so.
However, a lot of you guys already know that it has been a solid medium to large game bullet in other calibers...According to Barnes Engineers the the 6.5mm 100gr. Barnes TTSX will reliably expand down to 1,800 fps. and my still expand well down to 1,550fps. So I will give you guys all the available specs. of the Barnes 6.5mm 100gr. TTSX bullet, as well as the Ballistic Computer Modeling w/ various barrel lengths in 6.5mm PCC... Bullet Type/#: TTSX/26468 Bullet Length: 1.157" (Listed as 1.190", which is not correct) Bullet Weight : 100 grs. Bullet B/C: .360 Sec. Dens. : .205 Bullet Material: 100% Copper w/ Polymer Tip Rounds per Box: 50 Price per Box: Approx. $35 Ok, w/ the 22" 6.5 PCC Bbl. it looks like this: Velocity (FPS): 2,708 Energy (Ft.Lbs.): 1,630 All near Max. Pressure of 55,000 PSI. Using H322 Powder. 18" 6.5 PCC Bbl. : Vel: 2,610 fps. Energy: 1,515 ft./lbs. 16" 6.5 PCC Bbl. : Vel: 2,550 fps. Energy: 1,445 ft./lbs. The best news being that the actual field results are giving us better velocity that what the Ballistic Computer is giving us thus far w/ most loads... |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/5/2011 10:55:35 PM EDT
[#42]
For you guys that love the Lapua 123 grain Scenar, here are some of the Computer Ballistic Modeling stats for the 6.5mm PCC using W748 Powder at near Max.Pressure of 55,000 PSI, (4.5% Compr.):
22" SS P3 Match Bbl. : Velocity: 2,450 fps. Energy: 1,641 ft./lbs 18" SS P3 Match Bbl. : Velocity: 2,362 fps. Energy: 1,523 ft./lbs. 16" SS P3 Match Bbl. : Velocity: 2.308 fps. Energy: 1,455 ft./lbs. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2011 1:09:16 PM EDT
[#43]
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
The best news being that the actual field results are giving us better velocity that what the Ballistic Computer is giving us thus far w/ most loads... How much better are you getting in the real world? +5% or so? |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2011 1:11:58 PM EDT
[Last Edit: desertcj]
[#44]
I'll be anxiously awaiting test results for the 100grn Nosler Ballistic tip and the 107grn Sierra MK. I was looking at the 7.62x40 as well, hopefully the 6.5 will have better long range performance.
Wow, just ran a few simulations through some ballistics software, the 140 grain-ish bullets at 2200fps are pretty impressive out to 600yds or so IMO 
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2011 2:05:28 PM EDT
[#45]
Originally Posted By NickOfTime:
Originally Posted By Dr69er:
The best news being that the actual field results are giving us better velocity that what the Ballistic Computer is giving us thus far w/ most loads... How much better are you getting in the real world? +5% or so? Yes your correct, we are getting at least 5% over the Ballistic Modeling in velocity and the groups have been 1 MOA or better @ 100 yards w/ the loads that have been tried so far. |
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2011 2:15:20 PM EDT
[#46]
Originally Posted By desertcj:
I'll be anxiously awaiting test results for the 100grn Nosler Ballistic tip and the 107grn Sierra MK. I was looking at the 7.62x40 as well, hopefully the 6.5 will have better long range performance. Wow, just ran a few simulations through some ballistics software, the 140 grain-ish bullets at 2200fps are pretty impressive out to 600yds or so IMO Well let me do a quick rundown of the 6.5mm PCC w/ the 100 grain Nosler BT through the computer: Using W748 Powder at near Max Pressure...w/ a 22" Bbl. Velocity: 2,769 fps. Energy: 1,703 ft./lbs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/6/2011 6:42:05 PM EDT
[Last Edit: jasonusvi]
[#47]
What is the current status of barrels and dies? Tempted to get a barrel and dies in all the 223 brass based choices.
Ive got an LMT MRP and can swap barrels easily so the cost is just barrel + $150 conversion (no new upper, rail, assembly, etc needed). Thinking about selling off my two 6.8 barrels, bolts, mags, and brass in favor of this. Already have an MWS with 308 and 6.5 Creedmoor barrels so need 6.5 projectiles anyway (which by the way uses 308 mags and bolts). I have a 300BLK so that fills the efficient SBR role... thinking about this in a 16" or light weight 18". ETA: What gas lengths? I need carbine or mid given my rail length. Might even prefer mid gas for a switch block and suppress it. |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 4/6/2011 7:56:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Dr69er]
[#48]
Originally Posted By jasonusvi:
What is the current status of barrels and dies? Tempted to get a barrel and dies in all the 223 brass based choices. Ive got an LMT MRP and can swap barrels easily so the cost is just barrel + $150 conversion (no new upper, rail, assembly, etc needed). Thinking about selling off my two 6.8 barrels, bolts, mags, and brass in favor of this. Already have an MWS with 308 and 6.5 Creedmoor barrels so need 6.5 projectiles anyway (which by the way uses 308 mags and bolts). I have a 300BLK so that fills the efficient SBR role... thinking about this in a 16" or light weight 18". ETA: What gas lengths? I need carbine or mid given my rail length. Might even prefer mid gas for a switch block and suppress it. Barrels are ready to go (3-4 week turnaround), just waiting for the dies to be delivered by end of May (very limited suppy, I had to shell-out cash up-front for a dozen die sets)...Barrels can be had in 12" (SBR,Pistol Gas,Special Order), 16" Carbine or Mid Gas, 18" Mid or Rifle Gas, 20" and up Rifle Gas. Barrel & Die prices are very competitive as are Complete Uppers...Please email me for further details. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2011 10:27:43 AM EDT
[#49]
More pictures of rifles and groups?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/15/2011 11:26:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: jasonusvi]
[#50]
Dupe
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
