CZ 6.5x55's and Heavy Bullets?

[n-300RN]

A question:

As per a call to CZ, they use a 1-in-9" twist in their rifles.  Most other 6.5x55's are rifled with a bit quicker twist in the 7.75-to-8" range.

Has anyone noticed any accuracy problems with the heavy bullets {156-to-160 grain} in CZ rifles?

Does anyone shoot the heavy bullets extensively?

I have a Ruger M77 in 6.5x55 with a quicker twist, but am interested in the CZ rifles as I like the set trigger on my 527 very much.

[falup]

what's your particular interest in the heavy bullets?
the 120's are used successfully on bear and under.
the 105's are good too.

[n-300RN]

Heavy bullets made the caliber its reputation.

I've used 140's on a couple elk and of course deer and they are superb.  But 156-160 grain bullets in this caliber are classic performers on heavier critters.

I would think the 1/9 twist would suffice for 140's but I'm not sure about the heavier bullets at 200 meters or more.

It doesn't appear that many people have much experience with the heavy bullets, or if so, they haven't responded to the post.

I'm interested in whether any yaw is noticeable on targets at 200 m or more.

[Fred Flinstone]

The original M-96 & M-38 Swedish rifles were mfgr. as to stabalize 140 gr. bullets, about ten or more years ago 160 grains went on the market(at the time the round was mostly & only used in the surplus Swedish service rifle.

These should be top performer for heavier critters to get down.

Regards,
Fred

[n-300RN]

Not sure what you mean here, as the 140 grain military bullet didn't exist at the time of introduction of the 94 and 96 Swedish Mausers.

The 156 grain bullet has been around for a long time.  

As for 140's, they have been excellent performers on the elk and deer I've used them on.

[hunter356]

I posted a reply before but I must have done something wrong because it didn't show.

I've used the heavy bullets from Hornady, Sierra and Norma.  They work fine and I haven't seen any sudden drop off in accuracy at 200 yards.  The 6.5x55 earned much of its reputation in the hunting fields with 140 grain bullets, which still do have a high sectional density.  As bullet technology has improved I just don't see that much practical need for the heavies anymore.  For whitetail sized game it is hard to beat the 120 grain Barnes X.  For bigger game or for all-around, anything that can be done with a 6.5x55 can be done superbly with the 140 grain Barnes X.  I think the 140 grain X out penetrates the conventional heavy weights.

But if you want to use 156 and 160 grain bullets, go for it!  I gave them a try and they shoot fine and kill game.

[n-300RN]

Hunter356, thanks for the reply.

The original question involved the use of the heavy bullets speicifically in the CZ 6.5x55 rifle with its 1/9" twist.  Is that the rifle you are shooting?

This isn't really about the effectiveness of the 140 versus the 156/160.  I fully agree with you based on my own experience on elk and deer that the 140 is fine, though I have used Remington Core-Lokt bullets and will continue to do so.  

As an aside, based on an extensive test I read, done in .30 caliber some years ago, strengths and weaknesses of various bullet construction were shown.  My excellent experience on deer, bear and elk with Remington Core-Lokt bullets at a variety of striking velocities so paralleled the test that I have made a conscious effort to stick with them.  Interestingly, the "X" type bullets performed exceedingly well as long as a narrow range of striking velocities was met.  It is interesting to me how popular so-called "Premium" game bullets have become over the recent years, and how much hunters are will to pay for them.  Poor Remington.  If they'd have designed their standard Core-Lokt 5 years ago they could charge 60 bucks per 50 instead of 12 bucks per hundred!  

I ain't complaining, though, I like having a bullet I can fire hundreds and hundreds of practicing on my range and still use the same bullet for hunting!    

I am really interested in the technical issue of sufficiency of the 1/9 twist in stabilizing the heavy bullets at extended ranges {200 plus yards}.  More or less academic I suppose.

I don't think there are too many shooters who have fired many 160 grain bullets from a CZ rifle for group at 200 yards or more, but I was hoping maybe there might be somebody who owned one of these fine rifles and had the same curiousity bug.

[betterluckytg]

Well, 300RN, I think I know where you're coming from, so I just checked out prices on 160 grain bullets from Lock, Stock and Barrel. Could only find two bullets in that weight, one from Hornady, a RN, and one from Sierra. They cost over $19 for the Hornady and over $17 for the Sierra. Far as I'm concerned, that's a bit steep. I too much prefer the bulk Remingtons at less than $11 a hundred by the thousand. But then, I suspect that we both would rather shoot than discuss the merits of premium bullets.

I've always been a Keith fan when it came to picking bullets toward the heavy end for the caliber for hunting, but am beginning to suspect that's no longer as pertinent as it was thirty or forty years ago because of improved bullet construction.

Out here on the plains, properly constructed lighter bullets are almost a necessity, due to trajectory considerations. In heavily wooded areas (and for bigger game), the 160 probably would be a better choice, and perhaps 200 yard accuracy wouldn't be a factor. But hey! You know all that, and I didn't answer your question.

So. No. I've not shot 160's in my 6.5x55 FS. Too pricey doncha know.

[falup]

looks like we're back to the old story of"only one way to find out for sure"
To be sure you'll have to invest in a couple of diff boxes
of bullets and see. The heavies,in 6.5, are hit and miss in the standard twist bbls as to wether they'll stabilize. You are correct about going to the 200yd. It's common for boattail bullets to actually stabilise/group better at 200yd
than 100yds. It's called settling in.it commonly doesn't occur till 150yds +.

[n-300RN]

I confess I like tight twists because the option is always there to shoot heavy bullets.  Since I do not know whether the CZ 1/9 twist will reliably stabilsize 160's I have shied away from it.  My Ruger has a 1/8 twist, closer to the original tiwst used by the Swedes.

So actually, I'd have to invest in a rifle too, to determine if the 160's would be adequately spun, not something I'd want to do if I could find out by posting on a forum.  Unfortunately, the 160's don't seem to be shot very much.

[hunter356]

300RN,

Although I own several CZ rifles, one of them is not a 6.5x55.  I've shot the 156/160 grain bullets in M96 and M38 Swedish rifles and a Winchester M70 Featherweight.  Ony way to determine for sure if they fly right out of a CZ is to shoot them, I guess!

I don't use Barnes bullets for training - too expensive.  But from my own experience, they are the most effective bullets I've used in the field.  For game the size of whitetails, of course, you don't need premium bullets at all.  I've been of the "heavier bullet is better" philosophy for quite a long time, and only in the last few years, specically because of my experience with the Barnes X, have I reluctantly decided that these lighter bullets can do the work that used to be reserved for the heavies.

Good shooting!