I am going to rebarrel a ruger precision in near future and it's currently chambered in 6 creed.It amazes me how well it shoots and I want a heavier longer tube when this one gets tired.Just wondering everybody's thoughts on the creed and 6 comp match.
- Thread starter Possumpete
- Start date
So close it doesn't really matter but you do have to fireform brass instead of just neck down. So that's extra work but what's the point of doing a little wildcatting if you aren't.
Ahh, but it does matter:
I have chambered a lot of barrels in 6mm Competition Match. I also make dies for it. So, I'm biased. Here goes:
If your end game is great performance with the lowest path of resistance, go with the Creedmoor. It'll do all it claims. The Competition Match begins to outshine other 6's when we start figuring end game costs, downtime with barrel changes, and pushing 107+ grain projectiles to the velocity limits set by plate match hosts.
2500 to 3000 round service life is very, very, very possible and realistic with the Competition Match. I've tracked this data for half a decade now. It's real.
Sterling accuracy. Out of the (pick a number) that we've chambered, none have ever come back with an accuracy complaint. Excellent brass life. If you know how to reload, you can expect 10+ cycles on your brass.
The rub. First, you have some work to do. Rather than regurgitate it here, I've written a detailed article on it:
https://www.longriflesinc.com/blogs/...petition-match
So, a little work is involved. I would avoid neck turning at all costs. I'd rather play in the street with a dull razor than neck turn brass.
X1000 if you're going to compete with this thing in a plate match.
Looking at this from the accounting perspective:
A Creed will typically run to around 1200 rounds with a heavy 6mm bullet and loaded with a powder like 4350. For sake of argument we will say you start with 1000 pieces of brass at $.90 each. We'll speculate that you get 10 reloads out of it before it tanks the primer pocket. Ignoring cost of bullets, powder, primers.
10,000 rounds total. (1000x10 reloads)
10,000 rounds / 1200 round service life on barrel ='s 9 barrels (8.3)
Barrel costs $330 (average blank)
Fitup: $325
Threaded muzzle: +$100
Add this up, were at $7695.00 for all the barrels, cycling that lot of brass 10 times, and all the machine work to fit it up. Works out to .77 cents each time you pull the trigger. (again, ignoring cost of bullets, powder, and primers)
Comp Match comparison:
Same 1000 pieces of brass at .90/ea
Same 10 reloads. . .
2700 round service life on barrel (average)
barrel cost, same
Machine work, same
Now we're at a total of $3820 or .38 cents per round. A reduction of 49% in costs.
What I'm factoring here isn't often discussed. The consumables like bullets, powder, and primers are relatively fixed. They are going to cost about the same regardless of what cartridge you use. The performance level of the cartridge however drives the expiration date on things like the barrel and brass life. Granted, there are a number of influencing factors in this. How aggressive you load, the cyclic rate on the gun when shooting, etc... Trying to anticipate that and quantify it into a cost really isn't all that practical in a PRS type format shooting event. It's just too dynamic.
With all that, the math does not lie. If you're expendable free time allows it, the Competition Match does have some advantages. If you just can't devote the effort to doing the grunt work in the reloading room, then the Creedmoor becomes very attractive as the ammo is easy to source.
Edit: One part of this I neglected to mention is you can enjoy some impressive results as you build your brass inventory. I'm running 105 Hybrids cause I have a shitload of em on the shelf. Using 47.7G of RL26 I'm at 3180fps on a 24" tube @2.885" COAL. My rifle runs a 5x group under .200" routinely. I don't often post group sizes as they equate to a dick measuring IMO. This gun has about 800 rounds (fireforming) on it. I swapped barrels when I made the change to RL26 so that I'd have an unbiased baseline when looking for barrel life limits. Thus far, no indicators that I made a bad choice. RL26 seems to be what it's reputed as: Unicorn fart dust mixed with Methamphetamine. That shit makes velocity like crazy in a little 6mm topped off with a heavy pill.
Other concerns/topics like how it feeds, extracts, etc is a non issue. On a properly setup rifle both run to the standard. The 6mm Comp Match is not an Ackley. AI cartridges have a more aggressive shoulder angle (40*) and they remove almost all of the body taper on the case walls. It's worth about a 8-12 percent increase in velocity over the parent cartridge. Its often at the expense of feeding and extraction. They can be little a holes at times to run fluently in both internal box and centerfeed magazines.
The Comp Match has a less aggressive shoulder and the body taper stays at the same rate as the original cartridge. This makes the feeding and extraction just as efficient as the parent case. The argument over shoulder angle, neck length, and how much better/worse is not something I can comment on. The research I've done on it does not seem very conclusive. Its another case of just keep looking till you find the answer you want...
Hope this helps.
C.
I have chambered a lot of barrels in 6mm Competition Match. I also make dies for it. So, I'm biased. Here goes:
If your end game is great performance with the lowest path of resistance, go with the Creedmoor. It'll do all it claims. The Competition Match begins to outshine other 6's when we start figuring end game costs, downtime with barrel changes, and pushing 107+ grain projectiles to the velocity limits set by plate match hosts.
2500 to 3000 round service life is very, very, very possible and realistic with the Competition Match. I've tracked this data for half a decade now. It's real.
Sterling accuracy. Out of the (pick a number) that we've chambered, none have ever come back with an accuracy complaint. Excellent brass life. If you know how to reload, you can expect 10+ cycles on your brass.
The rub. First, you have some work to do. Rather than regurgitate it here, I've written a detailed article on it:
https://www.longriflesinc.com/blogs/...petition-match
So, a little work is involved. I would avoid neck turning at all costs. I'd rather play in the street with a dull razor than neck turn brass.
X1000 if you're going to compete with this thing in a plate match.Looking at this from the accounting perspective:
A Creed will typically run to around 1200 rounds with a heavy 6mm bullet and loaded with a powder like 4350. For sake of argument we will say you start with 1000 pieces of brass at $.90 each. We'll speculate that you get 10 reloads out of it before it tanks the primer pocket. Ignoring cost of bullets, powder, primers.
10,000 rounds total. (1000x10 reloads)
10,000 rounds / 1200 round service life on barrel ='s 9 barrels (8.3)
Barrel costs $330 (average blank)
Fitup: $325
Threaded muzzle: +$100
Add this up, were at $7695.00 for all the barrels, cycling that lot of brass 10 times, and all the machine work to fit it up. Works out to .77 cents each time you pull the trigger. (again, ignoring cost of bullets, powder, and primers)
Comp Match comparison:
Same 1000 pieces of brass at .90/ea
Same 10 reloads. . .
2700 round service life on barrel (average)
barrel cost, same
Machine work, same
Now we're at a total of $3820 or .38 cents per round. A reduction of 49% in costs.
What I'm factoring here isn't often discussed. The consumables like bullets, powder, and primers are relatively fixed. They are going to cost about the same regardless of what cartridge you use. The performance level of the cartridge however drives the expiration date on things like the barrel and brass life. Granted, there are a number of influencing factors in this. How aggressive you load, the cyclic rate on the gun when shooting, etc... Trying to anticipate that and quantify it into a cost really isn't all that practical in a PRS type format shooting event. It's just too dynamic.
With all that, the math does not lie. If you're expendable free time allows it, the Competition Match does have some advantages. If you just can't devote the effort to doing the grunt work in the reloading room, then the Creedmoor becomes very attractive as the ammo is easy to source.
Edit: One part of this I neglected to mention is you can enjoy some impressive results as you build your brass inventory. I'm running 105 Hybrids cause I have a shitload of em on the shelf. Using 47.7G of RL26 I'm at 3180fps on a 24" tube @2.885" COAL. My rifle runs a 5x group under .200" routinely. I don't often post group sizes as they equate to a dick measuring IMO. This gun has about 800 rounds (fireforming) on it. I swapped barrels when I made the change to RL26 so that I'd have an unbiased baseline when looking for barrel life limits. Thus far, no indicators that I made a bad choice. RL26 seems to be what it's reputed as: Unicorn fart dust mixed with Methamphetamine. That shit makes velocity like crazy in a little 6mm topped off with a heavy pill.
Other concerns/topics like how it feeds, extracts, etc is a non issue. On a properly setup rifle both run to the standard. The 6mm Comp Match is not an Ackley. AI cartridges have a more aggressive shoulder angle (40*) and they remove almost all of the body taper on the case walls. It's worth about a 8-12 percent increase in velocity over the parent cartridge. Its often at the expense of feeding and extraction. They can be little a holes at times to run fluently in both internal box and centerfeed magazines.
The Comp Match has a less aggressive shoulder and the body taper stays at the same rate as the original cartridge. This makes the feeding and extraction just as efficient as the parent case. The argument over shoulder angle, neck length, and how much better/worse is not something I can comment on. The research I've done on it does not seem very conclusive. Its another case of just keep looking till you find the answer you want...
Hope this helps.
C.
Last edited:
Does the comp match work in .30 cal AR style Pmags? I know the shoulder is too far forward to work in AW double stack mags- hits the guide ribs.
Not the end of the world, but you may be stuck running AICS pattern magazines in your RPR.
Not the end of the world, but you may be stuck running AICS pattern magazines in your RPR.
Buy the new ARC 10 rounders and all these problems become solved.
Ahh, but it does matter:
I have chambered a lot of barrels in 6mm Competition Match. I also make dies for it. So, I'm biased. Here goes:
If your end game is great performance with the lowest path of resistance, go with the Creedmoor. It'll do all it claims. The Competition Match begins to outshine other 6's when we start figuring end game costs, downtime with barrel changes, and pushing 107+ grain projectiles to the velocity limits set by plate match hosts.
2500 to 3000 round service life is very, very, very possible and realistic with the Competition Match. I've tracked this data for half a decade now. It's real.
Sterling accuracy. Out of the (pick a number) that we've chambered, none have ever come back with an accuracy complaint. Excellent brass life. If you know how to reload, you can expect 10+ cycles on your brass.
The rub. First, you have some work to do. Rather than regurgitate it here, I've written a detailed article on it:
https://www.longriflesinc.com/blogs/...petition-match
So, a little work is involved. I would avoid neck turning at all costs. I'd rather play in the street with a dull razor than neck turn brass.
Looking at this from the accounting perspective:
A Creed will typically run to around 1200 rounds with a heavy 6mm bullet and loaded with a powder like 4350. For sake of argument we will say you start with 1000 pieces of brass at $.90 each. We'll speculate that you get 10 reloads out of it before it tanks the primer pocket. Ignoring cost of bullets, powder, primers.
10,000 rounds total. (1000x10 reloads)
10,000 rounds / 1200 round service life on barrel ='s 9 barrels (8.3)
Barrel costs $330 (average blank)
Fitup: $325
Threaded muzzle: +$100
Add this up, were at $7695.00 for all the barrels, cycling that lot of brass 10 times, and all the machine work to fit it up. Works out to .77 cents each time you pull the trigger. (again, ignoring cost of bullets, powder, and primers)
Comp Match comparison:
Same 1000 pieces of brass at .90/ea
Same 10 reloads. . .
2700 round service life on barrel (average)
barrel cost, same
Machine work, same
Now we're at a total of $3820 or .38 cents per round. A reduction of 49% in costs.
What I'm factoring here isn't often discussed. The consumables like bullets, powder, and primers are relatively fixed. They are going to cost about the same regardless of what cartridge you use. The performance level of the cartridge however drives the expiration date on things like the barrel and brass life. Granted, there are a number of influencing factors in this. How aggressive you load, the cyclic rate on the gun when shooting, etc... Trying to anticipate that and quantify it into a cost really isn't all that practical in a PRS type format shooting event. It's just too dynamic.
With all that, the math does not lie. If you're expendable free time allows it, the Competition Match does have some advantages. If you just can't devote the effort to doing the grunt work in the reloading room, then the Creedmoor becomes very attractive as the ammo is easy to source.
Other concerns/topics like how it feeds, extracts, etc is a non issue. On a properly setup rifle both run to the standard. The 6mm Comp Match is not an Ackley. AI cartridges have a more aggressive shoulder angle (40*) and they remove almost all of the body taper on the case walls. It's worth about a 8-12 percent increase in velocity over the parent cartridge. Its often at the expense of feeding and extraction. They can be little a holes at times to run fluently in both internal box and centerfeed magazines.
The Comp Match has a less aggressive shoulder and the body taper stays at the same rate as the original cartridge. This makes the feeding and extraction just as efficient as the parent case. The argument over shoulder angle, neck length, and how much better/worse is not something I can comment on. The research I've done on it does not seem very conclusive. Its another case of just keep looking till you find the answer you want...
Hope this helps.
C.
Chad,yes I was reading your article the other night,very good information.I missed you yesterday and was going to call you back Monday morn.barrel life is what I was thinking while still maintaining performance.So ARC mags will work in the ruger.Right now I,m running R26 and the 105s in the creed but sounds like you will be cutting me one in the comp match.Thanks
Possempete,
I've been running a 6slr for 5 years or more now and if it came down to cartridge to use, it would either be the 6slr or 6 comp match. The others just don't add up. Either they don't get the velocities you want or they get the velocity, but you're biting barrels faster then they can make them.
you won't go wrong with the comp match.
Xdeano
I've been running a 6slr for 5 years or more now and if it came down to cartridge to use, it would either be the 6slr or 6 comp match. The others just don't add up. Either they don't get the velocities you want or they get the velocity, but you're biting barrels faster then they can make them.
you won't go wrong with the comp match.
Xdeano
xdeno, I thought about the 6slr,but the 6 comp sounds like a good fit.I like what I,m seeing with this 6 creed with velocity and accuracy but as I suspected I think barrel life is going to be short lived.Im at about 3190 with the Berger 105s with excellent accuracy with reloader 26 but if I can get another 1000 rounds of barrel life with the 6 comp and stay in the same ballpark it sounds like a winner.
I like the 6slr, but if I would do it all over again, it probably would be the 6 comp match and just h1000. Rl26 doesn't seem as temp stable in comparison to h1000. You won't be disappointed with the 6 comp match. Fireform on the go and keep moving.
xdeano
Can you or someone elaborate on this? Can the AW mags be modified to work with the 6 comp match?
There is a guide rib on the left and right walls of the magazine that is in the neck area of .308 cartridges (what the mags were originally designed to work with). It keeps the rounds from sliding forward too far, and stiffens the construction of the magazine. The 6 comp match shoulder is blown forward a little bit from where a .308 or .243 shoulder would be, and has a sharper angle. That shoulder position/geometry conflicts with those guide ribs and the rounds don't stack/fit in the magazine.
To make it work, you'd have to mill out the guide rib, leaving a big window on either side of the mag (unless you really want to get fancy and weld in straight patch panels or something).
I don't know, because I don't have any 6 comp match stuff anymore, but my guess is the same thing happens in Pmags (I'm talking about the LR-308 style Pmags that run in the RPR, not the AICS pattern Pmags). ARC mags are nice, and what I'm running right now, but there's no arguing with the price point. $20 vs. $75, obviously it would be nice for the $20 option to work.
As far as the OP's question, I'd keep it vanilla and go with the creedmoor. Too many things about the 6 comp match are "extra". Fireforming, long drop tubes or vibrating cases necessary to squeeze 50 grains of powder into the case, potentially needing to buy new magazines... It all added up to more frustration than I really wanted. Plug & go is nice. If/when I go back to a standard caliber from the SAUM kick I'm on, it will be a 6x47 or 6 creed.
In the lots of brass I checked, H2o cap in the Win 6 Comp brass was 56.1. The Hornady 6 Creed was 52.63. Gives you some idea.
I don't know.
Maybe I'm just getting old and slowing down, but why isn't the .243 Win, which is already supported in this platform by Ruger, good enough to come out and dance?
It just seems to me to be so much simpler. By the time one goes through all the gunsmithing, etc., wouldn't it simply be easier, quicker, and cheaper, to just buy another RPR chambered in .243?
If I were going to rebarrel an RPR to another chambering, knowing me, the .260 Rem comes first to mind. But the .243 Win is even easier.
Greg
Maybe I'm just getting old and slowing down, but why isn't the .243 Win, which is already supported in this platform by Ruger, good enough to come out and dance?
It just seems to me to be so much simpler. By the time one goes through all the gunsmithing, etc., wouldn't it simply be easier, quicker, and cheaper, to just buy another RPR chambered in .243?
If I were going to rebarrel an RPR to another chambering, knowing me, the .260 Rem comes first to mind. But the .243 Win is even easier.
Greg
Greg the 6 comp match and 6slr have a steeper shoulder 31,30 respectively and a longer neck allowing for better bullet seating as well as directing the fire to funnel into more of a column when it's coming out of the neck and into the throat which is suppose to give less wear on the throat. This is all theory. But it makes sense with the short life of the 243 over the 6comp or 6slr. It also has to do with the h1000 that is used in both over say h4350 that most use to get the velocity out of a 243.
Xdeano
Xdeano
How much H1000 do you need to shove into the SLR to get creedmoor speeds behind a 115DTAC ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm on barrel #3 of comp match, ran Accurate non binder 308 mags since inception and never modified a thing. Mausingfield action, I'd think direct feed would work even better.
What powder/amount & speeds were you getting with the 105's ?
Length of your barrel ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With win brass, h1000, f210m primers, 24" barrel bartlein 8 twist.
105 amax
47.0grn
2.790"
3122fps.
No pressure signs. And I'm about out of room with h1000. I could jump to h4831 and get even more velocity. I've played with rl26 a little bit But for the life of me I couldn't find data on it, I remember being just shy of 3300fps.
Xdeano
105 amax
47.0grn
2.790"
3122fps.
No pressure signs. And I'm about out of room with h1000. I could jump to h4831 and get even more velocity. I've played with rl26 a little bit But for the life of me I couldn't find data on it, I remember being just shy of 3300fps.
Xdeano
Thank you
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Greg,If I think I could get enough barrel life I have no problem with the original clambering or .243.But if I can actually double barrel life while maintaining performance it sounds like a win.But I am impressed with the 6 creed round in this factory ruger,If it gives me a solid 1800 rnds or better I wouldn't change.Cant argue itty bitty groups,sub moa out to 1040yds so far,3200 give or take with 105s,and so far up to 7 firings on the factory hornady brass,cheap hornady dies,And all out of this factory little ruger.Either way I think there both a pretty fine round.Thanks guys
Question for the proponents of the 6CM:
What does the 6CompMatch offer that the .243AI doesn't?
Seeing as how case capacity is increased in the .243AI, that just lends itself to running more slow burn powder, as less pressure, for the same performance. Are the differences in body taper/shoulder angle between them enough to make the 6CM more reliable when cycling from a DBM?
What does the 6CompMatch offer that the .243AI doesn't?
Seeing as how case capacity is increased in the .243AI, that just lends itself to running more slow burn powder, as less pressure, for the same performance. Are the differences in body taper/shoulder angle between them enough to make the 6CM more reliable when cycling from a DBM?
my 6 comp started dropping velocity around 1900 rounds...it was still accurate, but when you put it on a target in the middle of a match and expect your 115 dtac's to come out at 2975, and they start coming out at 2910...you miss, barrel = retired
ive never ran 243ai, but ive seen other guys run it...feeding was usually iffy and clunky...6cm feeds like 243, 260, 308, etc...
You have this totally backwards buddy. The 6mm Comp Match outruns a Creed by considerable amount. The Creed is the "fat kid" at the back of the pack in this race.
I would encourage you to go back a page and read what I posted initially. It's fully outlined.
Nutshell:
AI's suck ass if the gun gets the least bit funky with crud. Shallow body taper (almost none)
They can be a royal little punk to get to feed reliably. Again, shallow body taper and very aggressive shoulder angle.
Performance from my gun:
Retumbo (1st barrel):
52.2 grains
210 or 215 Federal primer (gun didn't care either way)
105 Hybrid
2.885 COAL
Norma Case
24" barrel, 1:8 ROT
3130fps.
RL26 (2nd barrel):
47.7 grains
210 Federal Primer
105 Hybrid
2.885 COAL
Norma Case
24" barrel, 1:8 ROT
3180fps.
I have clients running this in longer barrels for square range prone matches (Any/Iron, Any/Any) with 28"+ tubes and they've run them up to 3300 to low 3400 fps velocities.
Retumbo (1st barrel):
52.2 grains
210 or 215 Federal primer (gun didn't care either way)
105 Hybrid
2.885 COAL
Norma Case
24" barrel, 1:8 ROT
3130fps.
RL26 (2nd barrel):
47.7 grains
210 Federal Primer
105 Hybrid
2.885 COAL
Norma Case
24" barrel, 1:8 ROT
3180fps.
I have clients running this in longer barrels for square range prone matches (Any/Iron, Any/Any) with 28"+ tubes and they've run them up to 3300 to low 3400 fps velocities.
Thank you for your swift and helpful replies to my questions. I have been educated, always a good day.
I look at the reasoning and the expected costs coming from a respected builder, and I am still unswayed. Honestly, I would need to be shooting many times as much as a currently do for the argument against the .243 to be conclusive, for me. Others will have valid reasons to do the opposite as I.
But for me, this is all academic. I am a faithful convert to the .260 Rem.
Greg
I look at the reasoning and the expected costs coming from a respected builder, and I am still unswayed. Honestly, I would need to be shooting many times as much as a currently do for the argument against the .243 to be conclusive, for me. Others will have valid reasons to do the opposite as I.
But for me, this is all academic. I am a faithful convert to the .260 Rem.
Greg
I'm really with Chad on this one, but if you tone a comp match down to 3100fps or so, it will run way cooler than a slr, xc, or a creed if running a slower powder.
Morgan,
I don't know if I missed it or not, but were you using H1000 in this barrel, behind the Dtacs?
Have you moved away from the 6 Comp Match now, and if so, to what?
Last edited:
I'm looking for more insight and appreciate all the ideas from you guys. It just seems I hear about speeds but from 28" barrels or such. I currently have a 6 creed & 6SLR barrel. I've ran the creed for over 1000rds and speeds are still around 3013 with new 115's, with the older 115 I'm currently getting 2987.
With my 6SLR I was not able to get much more if any. But I only ran it for 150rds with powders such as RL22, RL25, H4350 & H1000
Never tried H4831sc....yet
I was running all this through a 24" Bartlein barrel, .237 bore, off the 1303 reamer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look at Chad's post #31 above. He shows two loads for 6 Comp Match in 24" barrels. Both going over 3100 fps.
Edit: but with 105s, not 115s. Just realized...
Edit: but with 105s, not 115s. Just realized...
Last edited:
yes, 105 hybrids or 115 dtacs w/ h1000...once the speed dropped, i tried cleaning and all that...only way i got it back was adding more powder
i switched to the 6slr a couple months ago...major reasons were i had about 1100 pcs new of 243 win brass and dont have to fireform, and i didnt have to worry about modifying my AW mags to feed...the local matches i shoot lose too much brass to keep up with fireformed stuff
if i was running standard AICS style mags and not losing so much brass in the field matches, i would have stuck with 6comp, it shot great
Thanks Chad, I did read your potential pitfalls for 243AI. Was wondering if others actually moved away from the 243AI due to feeding issues?
I have a .22-243AI, and built it with the assumption that feeding may not be butter smooth. As it turned out, that little ICBM feeds just dandy from an AICS mags/Surgeon DBM.
What are your thoughts on the 6Dasher, given its 'improved' 40° shoulder?
Seems like the Dasher is all the rage lately, and haven't read much of anyone ditching it for lack of reliable feeding, or getting "funky with crud"? And, unlike the 6Dasher, a 243AI wouldn't require mag spacers to function from AICS mags...
Reckon I'll just hafta build a .243AI to find out for myself. Been on the fence about it & did a 6x47L in the meantime. That x47L case feed so smoothly that I almost don't believe a round actually chambers & somtimes 'press check' to confirm. Will agree that my .22-243AI is not that slick...there's a more positive feel when a round chambers. But I really haven't experienced anything resembling the potential "AI" feeding issues I've read about.
Have read that a 6Dasher requires modified mag spacers, but that is more to address the OAL of the short Dasher case. Beyond that, it seems like the 40° shoulder doesn't cause any feeding issues for the Dasher fans?
Getting back to the logic of barrel economics. If the argument for running slower burn powder in a larger case holds true for the 6CompMatch, the 243AI should offer more of that same good thing...no?
id guess the dasher case is so short in a standard action its out of the feed lips before it really has a chance to bind up much...i wouldnt put much stock into anything about feeding a dasher...i know people who run them fine without spacers, others need spacers, some actions wont feed them at all unless the bullet is hung out long enough...way too many variables out there to base anything off that case...thats why everyone is making kits/tweaking feed lips/etc
I've got a comp match that Chad spun up for me and everything he says is true. I'm running a 26" barrel, 47gr of H1000 pushed a 110 SMK to 3150 at first. That load's down to about 3050 FPS after about 2,000 rounds, but I beat the tar out of this barrel early on during fireforming. I've got another couple tubes on the way and I won't be changing away from the comp match any time soon.
I looked at this a lot also recently. I was for sure a 243ai would be perfect for h1000 and mag length feeding. Talked to someone who said it never worked for him and it kinda pushed me off the idea. However, just looking at the numbers I still think it would work very nicely. I ended up just going back to the 6creed. It's nothing fancy, easy load work up, decent velocity and a short barrel life. I have just accepted barrels won't last long but the cartridge works for my needs and I don't need to caliber up in a different cartridge.
Love my 6 Creeds, but the comp match sounds interesting! Barrel life on the Creed does suck though, 1100-1200 is all I am seeing for a match rifle.
Something isn't adding up here...
How are you guys shooting the 6 comps using 5-6-7-8 grains more powder per than I am in the Creed to push 105s the same speeds I'm seeing from 115s?
43.0gr RL-16 under DTACs is at 3,125 from my 6 creed. Hornady brass is holding its pockets 5+/- firings on average, so I know the load is not super hot. I'm assuming pressure is much higher in the creed which contributes to lesser barrel life, but it would also seem that it's more efficient given these numbers? Just trying to understand the discrepancy in charge weights vs. velocity since performance wise, they are very similar.
This is my 3rd barrel, first two went 1200 and 1350, respectively.
EDIT: y'all are shooting much slower powders, I see now.
How are you guys shooting the 6 comps using 5-6-7-8 grains more powder per than I am in the Creed to push 105s the same speeds I'm seeing from 115s?
43.0gr RL-16 under DTACs is at 3,125 from my 6 creed. Hornady brass is holding its pockets 5+/- firings on average, so I know the load is not super hot. I'm assuming pressure is much higher in the creed which contributes to lesser barrel life, but it would also seem that it's more efficient given these numbers? Just trying to understand the discrepancy in charge weights vs. velocity since performance wise, they are very similar.
This is my 3rd barrel, first two went 1200 and 1350, respectively.
EDIT: y'all are shooting much slower powders, I see now.
Last edited:
What you are seeing is the use of a slower powder to achieve those speeds in order to get increased barrel life. As has been noted before, using faster powders, some BR guys have been able to get 3400 fps in the comp match. If competing, there is usually a speed limit of 3150-3200 anyway, so the goal is not more speed, but much more barrel life.
Burn rate vs. burn temp vs. internal volume.
I know of a few 6 comp match barrels that have burned out. One was toast at 1500 rounds (done, no throat for several inches), two more between 1500 and 1800 rounds, and one that went about 2500 rounds, but the last 200+ were chasing their tail trying to figure if it was shot out or not. I know of another guy that's at or over 3000 and has been struggling for some time to make things work how he wants (it's probably a dead horse).
There's no reason performance-- Aside from feeding from a magazine-- should be that much different from a 243ai, to include barrel life. Powder selection can play a part in that, which is why you see some 6.5 SAUM barrels, for example, that go well over what you'd expect from such an overbore magnum, but from what I've seen 6 comp match barrel life is not 2-3x more than that of anything comparable. You're always going to have a few guys that get 4000+ rounds out of them, or claim to anyway (never mind 200-500 rounds of your barrel life are spent making brass). Same thing with .260/6.5 creed, some dudes will dog them out past 5000 rounds, but most people see pretty significant performance drops well before then. So really it's all about where YOU draw the line, and the whole "barrel life" argument is always subjective.
P.S. I did a bunch of testing with the 6 comp match and several different powders and was never able to safely break 3200fps with a 105 in a 24" barrel (I did break 3200, but the webs were expanded and wouldn't fit in a shell holder). H4831, H4350, H1000, Retumbo, RL22. I've heard RL26 is the secret, but it was unobtanium at the time I was playing around.
I know of a few 6 comp match barrels that have burned out. One was toast at 1500 rounds (done, no throat for several inches), two more between 1500 and 1800 rounds, and one that went about 2500 rounds, but the last 200+ were chasing their tail trying to figure if it was shot out or not. I know of another guy that's at or over 3000 and has been struggling for some time to make things work how he wants (it's probably a dead horse).
There's no reason performance-- Aside from feeding from a magazine-- should be that much different from a 243ai, to include barrel life. Powder selection can play a part in that, which is why you see some 6.5 SAUM barrels, for example, that go well over what you'd expect from such an overbore magnum, but from what I've seen 6 comp match barrel life is not 2-3x more than that of anything comparable. You're always going to have a few guys that get 4000+ rounds out of them, or claim to anyway (never mind 200-500 rounds of your barrel life are spent making brass). Same thing with .260/6.5 creed, some dudes will dog them out past 5000 rounds, but most people see pretty significant performance drops well before then. So really it's all about where YOU draw the line, and the whole "barrel life" argument is always subjective.
P.S. I did a bunch of testing with the 6 comp match and several different powders and was never able to safely break 3200fps with a 105 in a 24" barrel (I did break 3200, but the webs were expanded and wouldn't fit in a shell holder). H4831, H4350, H1000, Retumbo, RL22. I've heard RL26 is the secret, but it was unobtanium at the time I was playing around.
Last edited:
Yeah I noticed the powder choices after the fact - that makes a lot more sense. We'll see how this new barrel does with the 115s going around 3125. If velocity or accuracy starts dropping off before 1500 rounds, I'm thinking a switch to the comp match is in order.
I have a 6comp match (kinda, long story) and am shooting 115 JLKs at 3113 fps. Use RL26 47.5 grains. Has sub 10 SDs. And shoots consistently tighter groups during development than my dads 6 Lapua so he says. My other load for 105 JLKs is 47.18 grains of RL26 going 3240 fps. And I have zero shift in POI at 600 yards. The thing shoots lights out with my rock creek 26 inch med Palma. And chambers perfectly after 2 prs events using MPA chassis TL3 and ARC mags. No mods. No nothing. My norma brass have over 5 firings and the primer pockets are tight like a tiger. Now... my dads 6 lapua has 12 firings in his brass and still just as tight as if they were new. He is using 42.5 gr. Of RL26 with 115s going 3035 fps. His 105s go 3157 fps and SDs of 5 consistently. He is as 1200 rounds on his 6 lapua and has also treated his barrel with the that Spartan liquid treatment. Will be interesting what barrel life holds in store. So far. The PRs events we've competed in. We've been able to get most all the brass back. So no crying. But if I lose some Comp match or 6 lapua brass. It hurts my heart. 6 SLR would hurt much less.
^^ That's what keeps drawing me back to the Creed. Even if I lost all of my Hornady brass at a match (never would), I wouldn't bat an eye.
The Lapua and/or fireforming of the comp match I think is what deters most guys from shooting them, but there is no arguing that there are some options that offer a little more longevity and efficiency than the 6 creed at this point.
I think simplicity is what draws me most to it... Neck down 6.5 brass, shoot 5-6x, throw it out, rinse and repeat. No fireforming, neck turning, etc. Size and shoot. To me, ease of use and maintenance on the end user is worth at least something.
The Lapua and/or fireforming of the comp match I think is what deters most guys from shooting them, but there is no arguing that there are some options that offer a little more longevity and efficiency than the 6 creed at this point.
I think simplicity is what draws me most to it... Neck down 6.5 brass, shoot 5-6x, throw it out, rinse and repeat. No fireforming, neck turning, etc. Size and shoot. To me, ease of use and maintenance on the end user is worth at least something.
Same here. The other frustration was stuffing the H1000 or Retumbo into the 6 comp match cases to get over the 3100-3150fps mark. I forget exactly what I was running; 49 or 50 grains and it would not fit in the case if I just dumped it. Had to pour in slowly and tap the cases as it fell and after I was done pouring to get it at least level with the mouth of the case so I could stuff a bullet in. Not worth 2 or 3 clicks...
Similar threads
