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.
What's the energy on target difference between a 140g 6.5 and a 175g 308 at 400,600,800 yards?
Not near where I can calculate it; honestly curious.
This kind of stuff is interesting!
I saw something very similar to this, both vertical and horizontal component with 6x47l, 6.5x47L and 6.5 Saum just yesterday. At 1122Y we were shooting at a 18" plate in windy conditions approx 8 -12 mph coming in at 1 -2 o'clock. Myself with the 6x47 and one friend with his 6.5x47 struggled to hit steel. We were continually adjusting from our last shot but wind had changed enough so that we barely missed a bunch of times.
Other friend gets up there and hits the same plate pretty well with his 6.5 Saum. That extra almost 400 fps with 140 hybrids makes more difference than i'd thought seeming x47 is no slouch. His 6.5 4S isn't quite as accurate at 100y as ours either and actually his RCBS summit press had some screws come loose which "screwed up" the shoulder bump so he was trying to shoot up the rest of his reloads to start fresh.
Over the years when I'd go out to a old long range spot out in the forest service, guys would be shooting their 308's with typical 168 FGMM. Shooting 6x47l I'd easily hit the same steel that they struggled to hit in the wind.
At our AZPRC match back then, which could be very hard on windy days, we'd see new guys with 308's who thought they were rifleman not even hit one steel 0/40. A few of those guys never showed up again. On another occasion I watched a famous and well respected rifle instructor have to dial on 5 mils for wind - 308/175gr, for our 1080Y steel and miss both shots by quite a bit, both sides of the steel. The same one I hit with 2.5 mils holdoff.
Yes I know about the flatlines and juggernauts, etc, but still.
Gonna have to try those flatline 122's going about 3500 fps in my 6.5 Saum on that 1122Y steel!!!
What's the energy on target difference between a 140g 6.5 and a 175g 308 at 400,600,800 yards?
Not near where I can calculate it; honestly curious.
This kind of stuff is interesting!
Yes I know about the flatlines and juggernauts, etc, but still.
.308, 175g SMK, 2650 MV400 - 1528 ft.lbs600 - 1104800 - 772
1000 - 522
.260 (6.5), 139g Scenar, 2760 MV400 - 1463 ft.lbs.
600 - 1131
800 - 859
1000 - 638
My 175 is going 2774 (faster than the listed 139g round) so I'm thinking that may put the 308 on top energy wise at least in this comparison. I'll look at JBM and see what it says because target energy matters as much to me as exterior ballistics. With this in mind, I'm starting to dabble with the 185g as well in 308.
Now here's a question as I don't know how the target energy on the target (terminal ballistics wise) is translated from the ft lbs of different projectiles. Fragmenting rounds like the M193 aside as well as assuming its the exact same bullet construction, how does this scenario work as far as listed ft lbs:
175g 308 hits at 1400ft lbs
140g 6.5/260 hits same target at 1400ft lbs
77g 5.56 hits same target at 1400 ft lbs
Since the 308 is 35g heavier and slightly larger than the 6.5 and both are larger and heavier than the 5.56 (the 308 being almost 100g heavier), does this transfer more energy onto the target or is 1400 ft lb the same thing, regardless of what it is? I'm not that up to date with my physics, but I'm guessing a heavier/larger projectile hitting a target with the same retained energy will transfer more to the target due to momentum?
Someone with some physics degrees chime in here.
I'm glad someone mentioned this. Definitely doing the .308 a disservice by using an antiquated pedestrian load for comparison purposes. There are new factory options with 185 Juggs, and all kinds of bullet options nowadays to close the gap. I am personally using a 180 flatline with a G1 of .712 at 2888 fps in my 26" .308 (magspeed capture below) and feel like its very competitive to the 6.5s. Yes it does come at a cost disadvantage though, and yes I am aware you can also use solids in the other calibers as well.
I decided to rebarrel in .308 again to take advantage of the long barrel life, and the fact that I could use Flatlines if I need the extra oomph at distance.
![]()
Well, I'm not a physicist, nor do I play one on TV. Hell, I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but since no one else has chimed in, I'll hazard a guess.
I believe that weight and momentum have already been baked into the ft/lbs unit of measure. The heavier bullet is traveling slower, but the lighter bullet is traveling faster. The momentum/terminal energy in this case equals out. I believe.
What I think will make a difference is sectional density. The .308 will dump it's energy more quickly, but the higher sectional density of the 6.5 will allow it to penetrate deeper even given equal ft/lbs terminal energy.
But they are both delivering the same ft/lbs of energy on the target (in your example).
I run old sierra 155 SMKs in my 308. When people ask me what bullet I run I tell them 155 Palma bullet and I get blank looks.
The article was more in the context of competition shooting, PRS Style stuff.
I recall seeing a snipers hide article saying that the 308 is obsolete or something of that nature compared to the 6.5 CM. I searched around an wasn't able to find it. Anybody know where it is?
Thanks!