- Thread starter NLivingston
- Start date
I would argue that the 6GT would be the better option for a factory ammo PRS caliber, yes it has less options but a newer shooter is not going to be shooting a ton of matches and would have ample opportunity to stock up on the Hornady ammo prior to their matches. Once they make the leap to loading their own (they almost always do) it is an easier cartridge to load for. Most of all it is a much better cartridge for PRS.
So pretty much simping for any BR based 6mm churning up 2800-2850. K. Perhaps they should have recorded the video in fast forward mode. Would have saved me a step.
Nope, they are not wrong at all. Though 2800 is a bit fast for my taste. Lol
I would tend to agree with that while also taking barrel life into consideration.
My 6CM's while laserbeam like, only does so for about half of what a 6GT barrel will it for.
I'm a big fan of the 6GT, I think as the Hornady factory ammo becomes available, especially with that 109, its going to be hard to beat.
I totally get the argument for slower speeds. Running at the ragged edge has such a minimal return on investment in performance (wind/etc.), with a lot higher potential for issues (pressure issues with rain, debris, etc.).
The trend is to take things slower and slower in PRS. People are running BR equivalent cartridges in the ~2800's (per the linked video). Yet, still running very long barrels (average seems to be 26", with many running longer).
If we want to run a cartridge slowly (which there are many good reasons to do so), why the need for a ~26-28" barrel? Why not run say a 22" barrel?
I get that you would need more powder for the same velocity as say a 28", but is the difference really worth that extra 4-6" hanging off the barrel? That extra length is a suppressor. I don't buy any argument that says for balance/weight, as there is a plethora of weight kits available to address that.
Just a simple thought experiment.
The trend is to take things slower and slower in PRS. People are running BR equivalent cartridges in the ~2800's (per the linked video). Yet, still running very long barrels (average seems to be 26", with many running longer).
If we want to run a cartridge slowly (which there are many good reasons to do so), why the need for a ~26-28" barrel? Why not run say a 22" barrel?
I get that you would need more powder for the same velocity as say a 28", but is the difference really worth that extra 4-6" hanging off the barrel? That extra length is a suppressor. I don't buy any argument that says for balance/weight, as there is a plethora of weight kits available to address that.
Just a simple thought experiment.
There is balance to consider but also have to consider rotational inertia, this makes your rifle more resistant to wobble, it is why tight rope walkers use long poles to balance on tight rope and not short ones.
Never thought about that. Makes sense to some degree, though the argument is probably more academic than it is practical (IMO).
Especially if you are shooting suppressed and hanging a ~6-8+" suppressor on the end.
The suppressor will help bring back some of that rotational inertia lost, it is has less mass distributed across the length. so total length is the not the end all but mass at length will be the driver.
I agree, that the sectional density of a suppressor is much, much less than a rifle barrel, particularly the very heavy contours we use in PRS.
How much of a practical effect that is going to have while shooting on the clock off of a wobbly barricade is what I wonder.
I found jumping into 22 comps that my stock 16” 22 is much less stable and my wobble zone opens way up, i went to a 20” mtu and it was night and day!
In addition to balance.
Less powder for the same velocity, less heat put into the barrel in longer strings of fire, longer brass life for same velocity.
So basically efficiency.
I agree on efficiency, but again, how much is this conversation academic versus practical?
We are probably talking tenths of a grain of powder in cartridges that are already very efficient.
It's a lot easier to get a105/107/109/110 grain bullet going 2800 out of a 26-28 barrel with BR or BRA than a 22-24.
Also balance in directly effected by where you put the weight. For example, dropping a pound of weights into my TCS won't effect the balance as much as adding a suppressor or running a heavier/longer barrel.
Edit: That all being said. The above points should be way down the list of things you should consider tweaking for PRS. You'd be better off working on fundamentals
Also balance in directly effected by where you put the weight. For example, dropping a pound of weights into my TCS won't effect the balance as much as adding a suppressor or running a heavier/longer barrel.
Edit: That all being said. The above points should be way down the list of things you should consider tweaking for PRS. You'd be better off working on fundamentals
My wife's 24" BRA has no problem doing 2830 fps with FF loads (so essentially a BR). With fully FF cases, 2800 fps will be a breeze in her BRA. I imagine 22" wouldn't be that much different.
But I agree, there's a lot more low hanging fruit when it comes to scoring well in PRS than these nuances.
Anyways, don't mean to sidetrack the conversation. I just happen to find it an interesting observation. I may play with a ~22" BRA in the future for fun, surprised to not see others doing so.
I guess it depends.
In the end it all matters. But other things matter a lot more.
The entire idea of picking a 6mm creed vs BRA vs a BR is already in the weeds practically speaking.
Very true.
If you only need 2800fps - why get a Dasher, BRA, etc. over a straight BR?
Great question.
There isn't really a good answer other than improving the cases lessens their need to trim their length, more case capacity with the same powder charge is less stress on the brass/primer pockets, and some people say the angle of the shoulder on a dasher/bra lends itself to feed better from a mag but I have had a dasher and a BR and both fed great so idk if there's any merit to that.
