GunsAmerica: 1,000 YARDS FROM A $500 RIFLE–RUGER’S AMERICAN PREDATOR

[Pete123]

I don't know enough about long range shooting to say whether this is marketing hype or is accurate, though thought some folks here would find this interesting:

 

https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/1000-yards-500-rifle-rugers-american-predator/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20151228_BlogDigest_152&utm_campaign=/blog/1000-yards-500-rifle-rugers-american-predator/

 

Would be interested to hear what the long range guys have to say about this.

[peejman]

Pretty impressive, though I'm curious why no group sizes are included. A 9sqft target seems fairly large for a claimed sub-moa rifle.

[No_0ne]

9 sq ft. equates to a 36"x36" target.  At 1000 yds., using an out of the box rifle, with a scope designed for an AR, spending $960 for the total package, and presumably firing factory ammunition, consistent hits on that target sounds really impressive to me ...

[mikegideon]

9 sq ft. equates to a 36"x36" target.  At 1000 yds., using an out of the box rifle, with a scope designed for an AR, spending $960 for the total package, and presumably firing factory ammunition, consistent hits on that target sounds really impressive to me ...

 

In the Art of the Precision Rifle, they were hitting 18" targets at a mile with 308. 

 

With that said, 6.5 Creedmoor will do 1000 yards all day long. It's a great long range caliber. The Barrel is short and looks relatively stiff. So, I have no doubt that he was making hits at 1000 yards. Consistency is just a lot harder to acheive without a good stock, trigger, and optic. 

[rugerla1]

If I remember correctly the 6.5 will do anything a 308 will do just better.

Except be easy on your wallet :lol:
I guess if you're loading it yourself it may not be much different though?

[Pete123]

Pete, I remember you saying something about long range.
You thinking about this rifle?

 

Not yet, I need to get better at short range first  :-\

[nightrunner]

If I remember correctly the 6.5 will do anything a 308 will do just better.

Except hit the target harder...

Can't deny physics. .30cal hits harder than 6.5mm all day long.

Doesn't matter if it's just paper or steel though.

[MP5_Rizzo]

I'm not impressed enough that I'm going to rush out and buy a new one but I may pick one up second hand if the price was right. Without getting into a lot of math I will try to explain why. No_One mentioned the 6.5 Creedmoor as being beastly, I agree this cartridge is an exceptional long range choice and i think it contributes to some of the outcome of this test. The 6.5 Creedmoor can replicate and even beat 300 Win. Mag. trajectory with a much less recoil and it will retain more velocity and energy at 1000 yards as well. Long range shooting is about consistently shooting sub MOA and peejman mentioned that no group size was given but we do know they were able to consistently hit a 3ft. X 3ft. target. 1 MOA at 1000 yards is a little less than 10 1/2 inches. So with a little mental math we can say they were maintaining roughly a little over 3 MOA. In the big picture that's not bad for a $500 gun chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor with $400 plus in optics but not the be all to end all budget price rifle. Just my 2 cents and it's worth what you paid for it.

[mikegideon]

If I remember correctly the 6.5 will do anything a 308 will do just better.

 

The bullets fly a lot better.

[TMF]

I'm not impressed enough that I'm going to rush out and buy a new one but I may pick one up second hand if the price was right. Without getting into a lot of math I will try to explain why. No_One mentioned the 6.5 Creedmoor as being beastly, I agree this cartridge is an exceptional long range choice and i think it contributes to some of the outcome of this test. The 6.5 Creedmoor can replicate and even beat 300 Win. Mag. trajectory with a much less recoil and it will retain more velocity and energy at 1000 yards as well. Long range shooting is about consistently shooting sub MOA and peejman mentioned that no group size was given but we do know they were able to consistently hit a 3ft. X 3ft. target. 1 MOA at 1000 yards is a little less than 10 1/2 inches. So with a little mental math we can say they were maintaining roughly a little over 3 MOA. In the big picture that's not bad for a $500 gun chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor with $400 plus in optics but not the be all to end all budget price rifle. Just my 2 cents and it's worth what you paid for it.

There are too many factors going on at 1000m to determine accuracy of the rifle. I'd be more interested in how it groups at 100 or 200m.

[MP5_Rizzo]

There are too many factors going on at 1000m to determine accuracy of the rifle. I'd be more interested in how it groups at 100 or 200m.[/quote]

I agree since this is really just a sporting rifle.

[peejman]

I'm not impressed enough that I'm going to rush out and buy a new one but I may pick one up second hand if the price was right. Without getting into a lot of math I will try to explain why. No_One mentioned the 6.5 Creedmoor as being beastly, I agree this cartridge is an exceptional long range choice and i think it contributes to some of the outcome of this test. The 6.5 Creedmoor can replicate and even beat 300 Win. Mag. trajectory with a much less recoil and it will retain more velocity and energy at 1000 yards as well. Long range shooting is about consistently shooting sub MOA and peejman mentioned that no group size was given but we do know they were able to consistently hit a 3ft. X 3ft. target. 1 MOA at 1000 yards is a little less than 10 1/2 inches. So with a little mental math we can say they were maintaining roughly a little over 3 MOA. In the big picture that's not bad for a $500 gun chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor with $400 plus in optics but not the be all to end all budget price rifle. Just my 2 cents and it's worth what you paid for it.

 

 

That's basically what I meant.  He mentioned sub-MOA during initial shooting... so that should mean roughly 10" groups at 1000 yds.  That tells me that a good shooter (one who could consistently make sub-MOA groups at 100 yds) should find hitting a target 3.5x bigger than his group size relatively easy.  1000 yds is a long way and I don't mean to discount the difficulty, but it doesn't get any easier than a good rifle on flat range with no wind.

[TMF]

I can shoot sub MOA groups with a sub MOA rifle and the correct ammo at 100m. That is a true test of the capabilities. A sub MOA rifle at 1000m though, I have roughly a 40% chance of getting a first round hit (based on history). This is due to varying winds over the course of a kilometer. There is absolutely no way to accurately account for it, which is why a spotter utilizes trace. I've been on a 1000m range, where the instructors popped smoke grenades every 200m. The wind was different at each distance, sometimes going the opposite direction as wind at different distances. The best one can do is make a call based on the mirage and guesstimate based on experience. But he'll never get it correct the first time; at least not often. The only way to judge the performance of a rifle at that distance is if you have a kilometer long vacuum.

[atlas3025]

Crickets......
LoL

.308
Hornady 168 A-MAX .308 muzzle of 2780fps energy 2884 at 1000 yards velocity 1234 energy 568 drop 409 and deflection 99.9 BC of .475

6.5 Creedmore
Hornady 120 A-MAX 6.5 muzzle 3020fps energy 2430 at 1000 yards velocity 1335 energy 475 drop 344 deflection 91.2 BC of .465

 

I don't have a dog in the fight, because I shoot 6.5 Creedmoor, 308, and 300 Win Mag, but I don't trust those numbers.  The Ballistic Calculators I use show the 6.5 Cr 120 Grain Hornady load in a 26 inch barrel carrying ~540 Foot LBS at 1000 yards.  190 Grain Fed 300 WM is about 1000 foot pounds, and 308 in 175 SMK is about 575 foot pounds.  I have validated the trajectories and POI vs the programs with real results, so I think they are right on.  I have not validated a 168 grain load in 308, but it can't be hitting twice as hard as the 175 load.  

 

I like the Creedmoor alot.  If you are target shooting, it's tough to beat.  But I don't think you can argue it is superior to 308 in terms of "power" at 1000 yards.  It is certainly not the match of the 300 Win Mag (I know you didn't say that, someone else did) at that range, or really any other.  

 

For target though, IMO the only real knock on 6.5 vs a 308 is barrel life..which probably doesn't matter to most of us here.  

 

I think TMF is right.  I would only argue that in my experience, 300 yards seems to be a better test than 100...though wind comes much more into play at 300.  There is some ballistic funkiness that occurs at short ranges sometimes that get worked out around 300 yards.  I have a Sendero in 300 Win Mag that shoots 1 inch groups at 100, which is kind of shitty...but it shoots 2 inch groups at 300, which is much better.  I have known other shooters that have experienced the same thing.  It doesn't make sense to me...but it seems to happen. I was ready to throw my Sendero in the trash until I started shooting at 600 yards.

[atlas3025]

You guys are crazy....
This guys a believer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6APMqMkikk

 

Lol, you said the 6.5 had more energy...Spomer doesn't say that!  There may be a point out past 1500 yards where the 6.5 catches up to 300WM, but even at 1500 yards, the 300 WM is ahead of it. The 6.5 catches the 308 though around 1100.  

[221 Fireball]

I've killed a lot of deer in my 60 years of life. From .221 to .300 WBY, they all worked well if the shot placement was right. My current deer battery is a 7mm/08 and a 6.5x55. I've shot some big deer in the past 6-7 years with these two rifles and I'm sure the deer couldn't tell the difference, all piled up pretty hard in the results. 

 

I have found I actually enjoy shooting these lighter recoiling rifles all year round, which in turn, helps my shooting ability come hunting season. I sold my ultra-lite .300 Weatherby many years ago and do not miss it!

 

But not to totally hijack Pete's thread ... the Ruger does look interesting for sure. But Pete, if you're going to dabble in long range shooting, get a caliber that's recoil tolerable to YOU, and don't worry about what everyone else is shooting. Take baby steps in distance as well.

 

Long distance is in the eye of the beholder, and his/her ability as well. Whether 100 yards or 300 or 600, etc., can all feel good when you consistently punch that bullseye.

[No_0ne]

I'm not impressed enough that I'm going to rush out and buy a new one but I may pick one up second hand if the price was right. Without getting into a lot of math I will try to explain why. No_One mentioned the 6.5 Creedmoor as being beastly, I agree this cartridge is an exceptional long range choice and i think it contributes to some of the outcome of this test. The 6.5 Creedmoor can replicate and even beat 300 Win. Mag. trajectory with a much less recoil and it will retain more velocity and energy at 1000 yards as well. Long range shooting is about consistently shooting sub MOA and peejman mentioned that no group size was given but we do know they were able to consistently hit a 3ft. X 3ft. target. 1 MOA at 1000 yards is a little less than 10 1/2 inches. So with a little mental math we can say they were maintaining roughly a little over 3 MOA. In the big picture that's not bad for a $500 gun chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor with $400 plus in optics but not the be all to end all budget price rifle. Just my 2 cents and it's worth what you paid for it.

 

Wasn't me that said that, I've never shot anything in 6.5 ...

 

Crickets......
LoL

.308
Hornady 168 A-MAX .308 muzzle of 2780fps energy 2884 at 1000 yards velocity 1234 energy 568 drop 409 and deflection 99.9 BC of .475

6.5 Creedmore
Hornady 120 A-MAX 6.5 muzzle 3020fps energy 2430 at 1000 yards velocity 1335 energy 475 drop 344 deflection 91.2 BC of .465

 

If I'm reading your numbers right, the energy of that particular .308 round is greater than the energy of the 6.5 round at 1000 yards, maybe that wasn't the best example you could have used ...

[Pete123]

Interestingly, I posted the article because I mis-read it to say that he was consistently hitting three inch plates at 1000 yards - not three foot plates.

 

221 Fireball,  thanks for the recoil advice.  I shoot for enjoyment and don't enjoy heavy recoil, not to mention its tendency to cause flinching.  

 

When I move to my next accuracy rifle I'll take a hard look at the 6.5 Creedmoor unless something better comes along by then.

[Rebels010]

I have this rifle and in limited time with it, have been impressed. Only have about 12-15 rounds through it but once sighted in I shot 3 sub moa (.75) at 100 yards. Very small small sample size for but for the cost of the rifle I'm very pleased. Plan to shoot it more but for the money and with a threaded barrel it's hard to beat.

[orientalexpress]

. 260 Remington is also a great long ranger. Shoots the same projectile and the 6.5 Creedmore.
And, They say the barrel life on the 260 is a bit longer.

 

I have a Ruger American Predator in 260rem.  I'm currently working on loads for it with the .264 143gr Hornady ELDX bullets.  So far with factory ammo is about a 1 MOA gun.  I'm anticipating after some tweaking it will easily be a sub moa. 

[DavidCBaker]

 

 

For target though, IMO the only real knock on 6.5 vs a 308 is barrel life.  

 

 

 

 

Could you enlighten me on that point? Is it an issue of fps from the 6.5 round that wears a barrel more?