As far as caliber goes, there aren't really any sponsors steering the choice of what people shoot. Guys will chase the new shiny, but that's human nature.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I disagree on the "What the pros use" reflecting sponsorships (it's something I disagree with a lot of people on, but whatever...), but otherwise I agree at how silly it is that people chase trends. I'm still shooting the same action, the same caliber, and just newer generations of the same optic and chassis as I was running when I built my first custom rifle for the PRS.
I knew I was going to get some disagreement, sometimes it's not a popular opinion (especially on FB).
For scopes, Bushnell is on there solely because they sponsor team GAP. Khales grew on that list as they sponsored more shooters. MPA, Proof barrels, Defiance, etc., etc. Great products, and I even use some of the ones listed, but even Ray Charles can see there is a correlation.
I absolutely do believe that those lists would look different if no shooters were sponsored. How much different would be pretty interesting and is pure speculation.
And I agree, sponsorships don't drive cartridge choices (at least not yet).
That’s why I still primarily shoot 260.Seems like it would make more sense to just stick with a caliber/speed you know well instead of starting over all the time.
Interesting, never looked at that number before. Makes sense. Out of curiosity, ran the numbers on H4895 and 6BRA... 35% efficient. 6mm GT and Varget, 32% efficient. Straight 6BR is around 32-33% as well.
What does a 6 Creed or 6x47 get for efficiency?
Roughly 29-30% respectively.
How are you determining efficiency? Does it it change with caliber? Say 6mm vs 6.5mm creed?
A lot factors in, like Sheldon mentioned, some huge cases shine too. There was talk of inherent accuracy of cases in a post, not coincidental that the high number cases rule the BR world for the most part.How are you determining efficiency? Does it it change with caliber? Say 6mm vs 6.5mm creed?
I really like efficient cartridges. One bad example of this is .224 Valkyrie. The ballistics look nice until you see that a similar size case can send a heavier 6mm bullet with a higher muzzle velocity burning the same amount of powder.
So if a 6x47 is 30% efficient and a Dasher is 33% efficient, roughly, then the question becomes... Is the 3% worth the tradeoff?
First, we all pick a case we want to shoot based off certain criteria. Say if YOU wanted to run a 105 hybrid at 3050fps, the 6X47 would be the logical choice, so why would the 3% be a concern. But say in your load development for a 6x47, would a 3% increase in efficiency in that case be beneficial to you?
More efficient, maybe by 3% but lower velocity and finicky feeding. I think so much of this is semantics. Guys are spending hundreds, maybe thousands of dollars to retool for a new caliber that is essentially no different.
I thought the trend was to reduce recoil, and still be competitive. I think a few have proven it works.
Mayhaps we should all pick a caliber we like and master it instead of trying to be a jack of all trades, and a master of none.
It's fun to try new or different cases. If you shot a 243 for 3 yrs and switched to a 6x47, would it take you out of the game?
Amen brother. I started shooting Border Wars matches last year with a Savage and an XTRII with a G2B reticle. The first match I got my ass handed to me. After that I practiced everything I saw in that match through dryfire and live fire. I committed myself to training hard. In the back of my mind I still thought I could never compete without all the whizbang new shit. Then the second match I almost got into the top twenty, and the third match I got into the top ten. After that I switched jobs and had no time to train. My scores steadily declined. It became apparent that the equipment has very little to do with it. If you have a rifle and load that shoots .5 moa and a scope that tracks and allows you to see the targets, the rest is about the skill of the shooter. Once I realized I could succeed with what I had, I stopped worrying about buying a custom gun and started worrying about buying more reloading components and barrels. I enjoy following all the new shiny as much as anyone else. If money ever becomes no object I will probably buy it. Until then, I understand that range time will add far more points to anyone's score than having a $10k set up. Now, before someone argues with me, I understand that if a guy was consistently placing top 5 that he may be able to buy a couple points with better equipment. What kills me is when I see people rack up credit card debt to buy top of the line shit to shoot matches. It's a hobby, and one where success isn't determined nearly as much by equipment as the majority of people think. The winners usually have nice equipment because they have been doing this for a long time. Over that time they have invested time and effort into being skilled while at the same time investing in better equipment because they know they enjoy this, and they are in it for the long haul. Take away their nice equipment and they will probably still figure out a way to win. Sorry for the rant. I just get sick of seeing threads about how equipment is going to help people win. Once you have stuff that works, equipment plays a minimal role.Or a couple people start winning matches with X (even though they were winning before it, too) and everyone has to have X because someone is winning matches with it. They should be training with what they already have and get better with it instead of chasing the new widget/caliber/bag/whatever of the week.
My wife picked up on this very quickly. Now, all the stuff she "needs" comes before the stuff I "need." I shouldn't have taught her so wellMarketing hype is just how you explain to your wife how you "need" all this stuff you want.
I agree with this one. For calibers like 6 Creedmoor you still see VERY few people running Hornady brass even though you have to resize and fireform Lapua brass to make 6 Creed brass from it. The tolerances and quality of the brass aren't comparable, and the only way I could see people running Hornady brass is if they make 6 Dasher brass that doesn't require fireforming. It'll be the only way people would shoot it since Lapua lasts so much longer.Too many purists rooted deep in Lapua brass, reamers, etc.. for Hornady to fuck this up.
I agree with this one. For calibers like 6 Creedmoor you still see VERY few people running Hornady brass even though you have to resize and fireform Lapua brass to make 6 Creed brass from it. The tolerances and quality of the brass aren't comparable, and the only way I could see people running Hornady brass is if they make 6 Dasher brass that doesn't require fireforming. It'll be the only way people would shoot it since Lapua lasts so much longer.
Cost is the same argument that led me to use Lapua brass even when running 6.5 Creedmoor. Hornady brass primer pockets were too loose to use after only 5-7 loads. Lapua brass would last 20+ loadings.I've got quite a few friends still running Hornady brass in 6 Creed, and I run the same for one simple reason - cost. I can easily get single-digit SDs and sub-25ES on my hand loads with Hornady brass. Given how much I lose at matches, I have a hard time justifying $1+ per piece.
Cost is the same argument that led me to use Lapua brass even when running 6.5 Creedmoor. Hornady brass primer pockets were too loose to use after only 5-7 loads. Lapua brass would last 20+ loadings.
My experience of losing brass at matches was not similar to yours. Over the course of two national matches and nearly a dozen club series matches I only ever lost fewer than 10 pieces of brass.
Cost is the same argument that led me to use Lapua brass even when running 6.5 Creedmoor. Hornady brass primer pockets were too loose to use after only 5-7 loads. Lapua brass would last 20+ loadings.
My experience of losing brass at matches was not similar to yours. Over the course of two national matches and nearly a dozen club series matches I only ever lost fewer than 10 pieces of brass.
Cost is the same argument that led me to use Lapua brass even when running 6.5 Creedmoor. Hornady brass primer pockets were too loose to use after only 5-7 loads. Lapua brass would last 20+ loadings.
My experience of losing brass at matches was not similar to yours. Over the course of two national matches and nearly a dozen club series matches I only ever lost fewer than 10 pieces of brass.
Honest question as I have no personal experience with the Dasher.
This is all hypothetical being the GT is not proven yet, but if the GT can match the Dasher Ballistically, Accurasy wise and addresses the feeding issues of the Dasher, what would the downfall to moving from a Dasher to the GT?
Would it just be the crap Hornady brass? I’m assuming that at some point as they did with the Creedmore, if the caliber takes off it’s only a matter of time before Lapua begins manufacturing brass for it, at which point you have now eliminated the brass prep as well.
Yes, there’s along of assumptions in that post lol, but lets just say for this posts sake that the above criteria is met.
Again, Not trying to start an argument, just wondering your thoughts on it.
The GT won’t be Hornady brass. It’s alpha which I’ve found as good as Lapua.
Oh nice. So with that being said, and if the above criteria is met, what would be the downfall to moving from the Dasher to the GT? From an outsiders perspective, if a new caliber can at least match my current calibers ballistics, and accuracy, feed more reliably, and eliminates the case prep, why would I not switch?
Again, the GT is not proven yet, so this is a hypothetical question.....
You would switch. However as You said this is all hypothetical until it can prove itself.
This is all hypothetical being the GT is not proven yet, but if the GT can match the Dasher Ballistically, Accuracy wise and addresses the feeding issues of the Dasher, what would the downfall to moving from a Dasher to the GT?
I believe the question is less "what would be the downfall", and more "what would be the upside"?
As I see it, downfall is going to be the initial lack of dies and brass as folks flock to the New Shiny, and the costs associated therein.
The only upside I see is no longer needing to form brass...though this could tip the scales for some users when it comes time to rebarrel due to time and/or cost savings.
Are the feeding issues of the Dasher being over blown? It seems some experience then and others don’t?
if the GT can match the Dasher Ballistically, Accurasy wise and addresses the feeding issues of the Dasher, what would the downfall to moving from a Dasher to the GT?
I would bet if you've been running Dasher for a while, you've probably got any feed issues figured out...
I run a Dasher on a 700SA, and Magpul Pmag 7.62ACs feed without issue. Hell, even 6BR fireform loads are 95% reliable...
Like you said, lots of assumptions in that question.
One of the big draws of the Dasher originally was that it was a time-tested caliber with benchrest level accuracy and world records to back that up. If if the accuracy of the 6GT matched it identically it would still need to develop that "reputation" of accuracy. More of a perception/marketing hurdle. But let's assume that's sorted out and the GT is the exact equal of the Dasher.
The feeding thing isn't really driving anyone. Most guys run the Dasher without issue. Might be nice to not have to buy a magazine spacer for the GT if you were just starting out. But if you already have the Dasher dialed in, there's no incentive to switch. Heck, I'd probably keep running the magazine spacer even with the 6GT if it fits in there.
You could probably rephrase to ask the same question about why guys don't shoot 6x47 instead of Dasher. The answer would be twofold, recoil and barrel life. The question is whether the GT splits that gap between 6x47 and Dasher in a desirable way.
As someone who is currently shooting Dasher I'd consider the GT after my Dasher brass and barrels are toast. My deciding factors are going to be whether it meets the accuracy, barrel life and brass life expectations, and if the brass is readily available (doubt Lapua is going to jump in). I'd also consider a couple more practical questions like whether my gunsmith already has the reamer and whether the OAL of the 6GT fits in my current mags so I can keep shooting my 6BRA with spacer kit and not need a whole second set of mags for the new caliber.
Assuming it matches the accuracy, velocity, and barrel life I'd go with a GT over a Dasher just because it eliminates the need to fireform. If someone comes out with Dasher brass, however, then I'd still go with Dasher just because of the large amount of load data floating around for the caliber and the proven history it has.Oh nice. So with that being said, and if the above criteria is met, what would be the downfall to moving from the Dasher to the GT? From an outsiders perspective, if a new caliber can at least match my current calibers ballistics, and accuracy, feed more reliably, and eliminates the case prep, why would I not switch?
Again, the GT is not proven yet, so this is a hypothetical question.....
Oh nice. So with that being said, and if the above criteria is met, what would be the downfall to moving from the Dasher to the GT? From an outsiders perspective, if a new caliber can at least match my current calibers ballistics, and accuracy, feed more reliably, and eliminates the case prep, why would I not switch?
Again, the GT is not proven yet, so this is a hypothetical question.....
Like you said, lots of assumptions in that question.
One of the big draws of the Dasher originally was that it was a time-tested caliber with benchrest level accuracy and world records to back that up. If if the accuracy of the 6GT matched it identically it would still need to develop that "reputation" of accuracy. More of a perception/marketing hurdle. But let's assume that's sorted out and the GT is the exact equal of the Dasher.
The feeding thing isn't really driving anyone. Most guys run the Dasher without issue. Might be nice to not have to buy a magazine spacer for the GT if you were just starting out. But if you already have the Dasher dialed in, there's no incentive to switch. Heck, I'd probably keep running the magazine spacer even with the 6GT if it fits in there.
You could probably rephrase to ask the same question about why guys don't shoot 6x47 instead of Dasher. The answer would be twofold, recoil and barrel life. The question is whether the GT splits that gap between 6x47 and Dasher in a desirable way.
As someone who is currently shooting Dasher I'd consider the GT after my Dasher brass and barrels are toast. My deciding factors are going to be whether it meets the accuracy, barrel life and brass life expectations, and if the brass is readily available (doubt Lapua is going to jump in). I'd also consider a couple more practical questions like whether my gunsmith already has the reamer and whether the OAL of the 6GT fits in my current mags so I can keep shooting my 6BRA with spacer kit and not need a whole second set of mags for the new caliber.
It makes sense that if someone’s running a Dasher successfully, has addressed the feeding issues, has all the brass, dies, etc and doesn’t mind the case prep than there would be no reason to switch over if the GT met the ballistics and accuracy of the Dasher.
Maybe it would be more of a option to someone who is looking to get into the 6mm game initially that the GT would be a better option.
Much like the 6.5x284 vs 6.5 PRC. It would make sense that someone who has been shooting the .284, has the ballistics, components etc dialed in, has no need for factory ammo or a short action, there would be no reason to switch over. Now it wouldn’t make much sense in my mind for someone who initially making the decision between the 2 to go the 6.5x.284 route when the PRC with factory ammo and in a short action is available.
IMO, I don’t suspect the Dasher (or any caliber for that matter) will ever be irrelevant to those using is as successfully as they currently are.
If the GT barrel life claims, of being longer than a Dasher, are true and it ends up in the 3,000+ round region I'd probably switch just to get faster velocities with an acceptable (to me) barrel life.
Maybe it would be more of a option to someone who is looking to get into the 6mm game initially that the GT would be a better option.
For short matches and little wind matches I use the BR for it’s minimal recoil and exceptional accuracy. However when shots are often past 600-700 and the wind kicks up I use the creedmoor. As much as I’d want a GT I’m not sure how much I’d use it as it would not have the qualities I’d want to see on a creedmoor or the BR. Perhaps it will eventually replace my BR IF it can prove to be as forgiving to load and is as accurate as my BR
Exactly. I believe George designed this cartridge for those that want the advantages of a 6 Dasher/BRA/BRX, etc but without all the "hassle".
Those already setup for the above cartridges won't really have reason to go to 6GT.
It removes some "barriers of entry" that may dissuade others from the 6BR family of cartridges. Some of the above cartridges are easy to fire form, and it's easy to get them to feed in rifles reliably. I think the "hassle" of these cartridges are over-exaggerated, as it was incredibly easy to get into 6BRA, but nonetheless, gives people more options. And more options are always a good thing.
No way in heck that's gonna happen. Barrel life is pretty predictable based on powder quantity and bore diameter. Bigger cases are going to have less barrel life and the 6GT is going to have less barrel life than the Dasher. You could probably make it close to a net wash if you ran the 6GT at Dasher speeds.
I think that's where it's going to shine. I'd recommend it to a new shooter over the Dasher simply for the reduced hassle factor of the brass.
Kinda funny, I'd see the 6GT in a similar way, but as the "larger" cartridge. Keep a 6BRA with 105's at around 2900 for most matches, 6GT with DTAC's at 2900 for when the wind is blowing a bit harder. Of course I could do that with a 6 Creed or 6x47 too, but would be nice to accomplish with less powder in a more efficient case.