Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Mule Deer 6.5 PRC

John, I just got a 6.5 PRC and am getting geared up to reload for it. I read this really good article you wrote for Rifle Shooter. https://www.rifleshootermag.com/editorial/6.5-prc-load-data/361500 It gave me an idea of where I could start. When I ordered my reloading supplies from Midway they had Sierra #6 on sale, so I bought one. I was surprised to see comprehensive 6.5 PRC data in it. In reading the remarks for the 6.5 PRC, it sounds like your writing, and the description of the Sisk rifle with the Lilja barrel sounds like yours. Were the remarks and the load development your work?

First, the article actually appeared in Hodgdon's Annual Manual--which is published each year by the same company that publishes RifleShooter. (and several other magazines)

The remarks in the new Sierra manual are indeed mine, as are those on a couple other cartridges in the manual, but apparently they didn't attribute any of the writers' remarks. (I have not seen a copy yet. Generally companies that publish loading manuals with remarks from writers send a copy along after publication, but Sierra did not.)

The data in the Sierra manual is Sierra's, not mine--or Hodgdon's.
.

The style of writing felt like yours. I found it odd that there was no attribution. I don't love the loose leaf style of their manual, but it has to be the most comprehensive reloading manual on the market. Their case is listed as Nosler, but I didn't think Nosler was making brass for the 6.5 PRC.

That aside, I am going to use 130 grain bullets primarily. I have some 130 ABs, 129 ABLRs, and 130 Game Changers, Hornady Brass and Federal 210M primers. The rifle is a Christensen Arms Mesa with a 24" barrel. In your testing it looks like you went with "magnum" powders. I have never had a "magnum" capacity rifle, so I'll have to buy some new powder. I will say that Sierra listed RL17 as both the fastest and most accurate powder they tested with their 130 grain bullets. I do have some RL17 in the cabinet. Interestingly it is showing those velocities with a 50.8 grain charge where the "magnum" powders need charges in the upper 50's to get that velocity. I have been telling myself I am going to enter the 21st century and go with temp stable (like I need that for where I do most of my shooting) and anti copper fouling powders. I'll give up velocity to get accuracy if that matters.

Given that, what powder would you start with and what charges if you were in my shoes? If I pull the trigger on the starting loads and have acceptable accuracy, I am the kind of reloader that will stop right there. But here's where this casual reloader has been confounded in the past. If that accuracy is not where I want it to be, which variable should I change first? Charge, seating depth? How far should I get into the process before I bail out altogether on either the bullet, the powder or the primer (I remember you told me in the past that the primer can make a huge difference.)

Paul,

I went with the powders that Hodgdon's data listed as getting the highest velocities--which with rare exceptions is what I do when starting to handload for any article. While some handloaders claim they don't desire high velocity, I have found that's what probably 95% are indeed after.

In my rifle Retumbo provided the best accuracy and highest velocities with bullets in the 130-grain range of any listed in Hodgdon's data, but have also heard great things about Reloder 26 in the 6.5 PRC. Unfortunately, have not had time to try it.

As the article stated, I played with seating depth after shooting the Hodgdon loads at the OAL they listed. It turned out two bullets shot significantly better when seated a little deeper, the 127 Barnes LRX and 129 Nosler Long Range AccuBond. In fact the Nosler turned out to be the most accurate of all the bullets I tried in my rifle.

When starting to load for a new rifle I often start with an "affordable" but accurate bullet of the same approximate weight as the one I eventually want to use, to see which powders might work--without spending a lot of money. In your case I might buy a box of 129-grain Hornady Interlock Spire Points to start with, before switching to the more expensive bullets.

Nosler apparently does offer brass for the 6.5 PRC--or at least loaded ammo, as I've seen it for sale on the Internet. The Hornady brass, however, is very good, though I did have to eliminate some "donuts" at the neck/shoulder junction when neck-turning the cases.

Thanks John. I forgot to mention that I had some 129 Hornady bullets for just such purposes. Academy had them on closeout for about $10, so I grabbed a few boxes.

In the subject article you noted that the ABLR tends to shed more weight and penetrate less than the regular AB. Am I remembering correctly from reading a variety of your work that the AB performs on game similar to the Partition?

Good deal on the 129 SSTs!

The AccuBonds were specifically designed by Nosler to approximate the on-game performance of the Partition, and in my experience do just that. This includes the larger-caliber AB's retaining a higher percentage of weight, which is also what larger-caliber Partitions do as well (something not all hunters realize). While the weight-retention of ABs is very similar to the equivalent Partitions, there's a tendency for them to stop under the hide on the far side a little more often, since due to the bonding of the tapered jacket, the mushroom ends up wider than on Partitions.

The ABLRs are designed to expand at longer ranges, where velocity drops. If I recall correctly, Nosler lists their minimum expansion velocity as 1300 fps. As a result, at "conventional" ranges they tend to retain around half their weight, as opposed to 65-70% for most AccuBonds and Partitions, and 80-90% for the larger calibers.

Thanks John. I hope you and Eileen enjoy your holidays.

AccuBonds are why I shoot Barnes ttsx on elk and larger. My real world experience (no where near mule deer’s) but as he stated, they are designed from for 60-65% weight retention and often don’t exit. Big animals I want a bullet to stay together, tear chit up, break bone, and leave two holes for more blood. But hey what do I know. Some people drive fords, some chevys and both will still get you there. Happy Hunting

Thanks, Paul! Hope you have a great holiday season as well.

I would take a look at R16 as well. It is just slightly faster than R17 but has similar to almost identical applications. It is less dense than R17 but shouldn't be an issue with the PRC.

All of the mid Reloader powders should work R23 and R26 too. You will probably find the Hornaday is a pretty good hunting bullet not just for load work up. My Swede really likes them, deer not so much.

If you look at Sierra load data for the Creed, you'll see that it takes a slightly larger change of RL-16 to match RL-17 data.

To me, that would indicate that at least in that setting, they're pretty close, RL-16 maybe a tad slower burning than RL-17, contrary to their numerical order.

So it seems to be application specific.

https://sierrabullets.files.wordpress.com/2017/01/6-5-creedmoor-data-final-as.pdf

DF