g n brezinski
Member
can any one tell me what this is and where I can find what the case looks like as copareted to a 6 ppc or the 6 br?
gary b
gary b
6 mm talldog
- Thread starter g n brezinski
- Start date
From a short distance mine looks exactly like a 6BR. When you look at them side by side you can see that the 6 Talldog is shorter. When you measure it, it's .100 shorter. Since it's a wildcat, reamers and cases vary somewhat I'm told. But this is close enough for rock & roll. I think I have 3 barrels. Two, I believe were chambered by Fred Hasecuster for a Stolle Teddy. I have a spacer that makes them fit a Panda. The 3rd was made to fit a Remington 600 action. I've only made brass and fired one of the Pandas. It shot well enough to win a small match or two and it had been fired when I got it, have no clue how maany rounds. I like the chambering, mostly because I like different stuff. But the brass is a bit of a pain to make.
Rick
Rick
JerrySharrett
Senile Member
Long time benchrest shooter Dr. Manny Garcia has the biggest selection of 6mm Taldog cartridges I know of. It is the BR case shortened to have the same case capacity as the 6PPC. I have one barrel, a Hart, chambered by George Kelbly and with Lapua brass it shoots very well. The early brass, Winchester 308 brass with the large primer pocket didn't seem to do as well.
IIRC, there was the Waldog and the Taldog. One was 0.125" shorter and one was0.100" shorter than the 1.5" BR. and there was the 1.55" long CBR. Freddie Hascuster shot the shortie quite a bit for a time.
IIRC, there was the Waldog and the Taldog. One was 0.125" shorter and one was0.100" shorter than the 1.5" BR. and there was the 1.55" long CBR. Freddie Hascuster shot the shortie quite a bit for a time.
T.Henderson
New member
6mmBR Talldogs
I have a couple of barrels from the estate of the Late Jerry Johnson from garden city, Kansas. The gun was his old panda I got back in 97 or 98 2 barrels both chambered for Remington Brass Tall Dogs by Gerald Forys of St. Louis,Mo. one was 110 short the other 125 short I had the Late Larry Kuse of K.C run a Lapua reamer in them and open the back end up, and made them both a 110 short. From what I understand Jerry shot those tall dogs and won with them often, and it was back when 6ppc brass was hard to obtain and very $ so maybe thats part of the reason for the tall dog, I think a true tall dog was .85 short, and remington brass was not good,most used 7 BR Brass and sorted a bunch of it to get a few. I had never shot either one of those barrels until last year when I came up with the Ideal that since 30 cal bullets were hard to get and I was running low I would fit one on my 6X Hunter gun and shoot it at 200 yds in score shoots. I put 28 gr. of AA 2015 and a 60ish grain berger collum pill just touching and ran around a 100yd score target 50 5x 3 wipe outs and thought not bad ! I think if Lapua 6 BR brass would have been around back then the tall dog might have been in more match reports. I guess the late Fred H. & Jerry J.. proved that they would. Dick wright shot a 200 short 22BR I think he called it a Brat. They look like fat ppc cases LOL !
I have a couple of barrels from the estate of the Late Jerry Johnson from garden city, Kansas. The gun was his old panda I got back in 97 or 98 2 barrels both chambered for Remington Brass Tall Dogs by Gerald Forys of St. Louis,Mo. one was 110 short the other 125 short I had the Late Larry Kuse of K.C run a Lapua reamer in them and open the back end up, and made them both a 110 short. From what I understand Jerry shot those tall dogs and won with them often, and it was back when 6ppc brass was hard to obtain and very $ so maybe thats part of the reason for the tall dog, I think a true tall dog was .85 short, and remington brass was not good,most used 7 BR Brass and sorted a bunch of it to get a few. I had never shot either one of those barrels until last year when I came up with the Ideal that since 30 cal bullets were hard to get and I was running low I would fit one on my 6X Hunter gun and shoot it at 200 yds in score shoots. I put 28 gr. of AA 2015 and a 60ish grain berger collum pill just touching and ran around a 100yd score target 50 5x 3 wipe outs and thought not bad ! I think if Lapua 6 BR brass would have been around back then the tall dog might have been in more match reports. I guess the late Fred H. & Jerry J.. proved that they would. Dick wright shot a 200 short 22BR I think he called it a Brat. They look like fat ppc cases LOL !
Last edited:
From Iceland
New member
Regarding the 6 Talldog
Gentelmen.
The original 6 Talldog was 0.80 short.
Mr. Stekl shot a .100 short case very vell.
I have used a .125 short case (Lapua).
Shoots every bit as well as 6PPC,same barrel.
All the best from
Reykjavik, Iceland
Magnus Sigurdsson
Gentelmen.
The original 6 Talldog was 0.80 short.
Mr. Stekl shot a .100 short case very vell.
I have used a .125 short case (Lapua).
Shoots every bit as well as 6PPC,same barrel.
All the best from
Reykjavik, Iceland
Magnus Sigurdsson
Lee Martin
Active member
From Iceland
New member
Lee Martin
Active member
I can't remember, but I'm pretty sure I have the original Precision Shooting article on the Talldog. Let me see if I can dig it up.
-Lee
www.singleactions.com
From Iceland
New member
Dusty Stevens
Hollow Point Dispenser
I sure do wish I could visit the land of fire and ice. Since I was a kid it was on my list of places to see.
From Iceland
New member
6 Talldog
Dear Mr. Stevens.
Thank you for the kind words regarding Iceland.
I hope someday you can make your dream com true.
Sir, you and yours are welcome !!
Sincerely yours,
Magnus Sigurdsson
Reykjavik
Iceland
Dear Mr. Stevens.
Thank you for the kind words regarding Iceland.
I hope someday you can make your dream com true.
Sir, you and yours are welcome !!
Sincerely yours,
Magnus Sigurdsson
Reykjavik
Iceland
Dusty Stevens
Hollow Point Dispenser
Now if i could only learn to speak the hardest language on earth and win the lottery
Dan Dowling
I think Mr. Dowling"s was the Waldog. I have a friend w/several Dowling builds, one is Waldog.
If I remember correctly,, he says the Waldog was Dowlings baby. All I can say for sure,, his shoots
great. He shot a couple of zeros @ Riverbend and a cow in the head @ home. Two hrs later,, cow
was up eating grass. This was accidental . His row of tires didn't stop the bullet.
I think Mr. Dowling"s was the Waldog. I have a friend w/several Dowling builds, one is Waldog.
If I remember correctly,, he says the Waldog was Dowlings baby. All I can say for sure,, his shoots
great. He shot a couple of zeros @ Riverbend and a cow in the head @ home. Two hrs later,, cow
was up eating grass. This was accidental . His row of tires didn't stop the bullet.
I once had Fred Hasecuster make me a Talldog barrel for a Panda...
.... and I talked with him at length about how it came about. He was one of the primary developers of this cartridge due to Sako discontinuing the .220 Russian brass (and before Lapua began manufacturing it).
Fred (gunsmithing) and Perry Morton (shooting) worked on the Talldog and started with a full length BR case (at that time it was Remington 7 BR) and kept shortening it until it shot like a 6PPC in the Sako .220 Russian brass. They tested it by basically shooting many groups at each length. Keep in mind that this meant not only shortening the case, but also shortening the dies and moving the barrel shoulder and cone back to match the case. Fred said he and Perry went though a lot of barrels and shot "tons" of groups. Also keep in mind that N133 wasn't out yet and the primary BR powders at that time were T-32, Norma 201, and 322 (mostly Scottish). Not coincidentally, the case capacity that seemed to work out the best was that same as the old Sako .220 Russian. That ended up being .085 short for the BR case. The Sako .220 body at the rim is about .440 while the BR case is about .470, thus the difference in case capacities.
I understand that Dan Dowling did something similar when he developed the .22 Waldog (after Dan's shooting buddy Waldo G.) on the Sako .220 Russian case, with the "optimum" case shortening ending up at .125 short. Later, when guys wanted to get a .22 to shoot with the sixes using the Lapua .220 Russian brass the "optimum" shortening seemed to be somewhere around .100 for that cartridge. (Again, not coincidentally, for the .22's to shoot well with the Remington BR case, it looked case capacity needed for the case to be shortened by .125, thus Dick Wright's .22 Brat on such BR case). My limited experience with the difference between the Sako .220 Russian and the later Lapua is that the Lapua could be loaded a lot hotter than the old Sako (which had head separation issues when shot hot because of the balloon head of the case down in front of the rim).
In regard to a 6 Talldog chambered back when the only source for BR brass was Remington, it should be noted that the newer Lapua BR brass is a bit wider in the backend than the Remington brass. Anyone with an older 6 Talldog chambered before the Lapua BR brass came available needs to open up the backend of the chamber about .003 or so to accommodate the brass in that area. (The shoulder will "adapt" to the chamber when it is fired.)
Now, I wasn't shooting back when this "craziness" was necessary to shoot at the top of the BR game, as I started at the tail-end of the Sako .220 Russian era. But, I have had 6 Talldog. .22 Waldog and .22 PPC -.100 barrels and I can tell you that they do shoot well when properly tuned. But, getting or making brass to fit those chambers is a real challenge. Shortening any accuracy cartridge to be concentric needs to have the necks inside neck-reamed before they are outside reamed to fit the chamber. I once had Lapua brass shortened for a .22 PPC - .100 and it cost over $3.00 per case; most of that was labor cost. The relative simplicity of prepping brass to shoot in a full-length 6PPC compared to the other "dogs" out there is a real positive; especially when the relative benefit of shooting any of the "dogs" other than the 6PPC doesn't seem to materialize. (Mike Ratigan may argue that, especially since Mike won the Super Shoot with a .22 PPC -.100. However, I'm pretty sure that Mike shoots a 6PPC today.)
And there is one other thing about the .22's in benchrest today. Getting really good (meaning top-flight) .22 benchrest bullets is a challenge as compared to really good sixes. There are some out there, but they are getting more rare to get ahold of. Most of the bullet-makers who make .22's also make/sell sixes (or keep the .22's for their own use). And they are just as constrained by the jacket manufacturers. The last great shooting that I've seen by someone shooting a .22 was Bill Forrester and Mike Ratigan. (George Kelbly and Greg Walley also did some fine shooting with variants of a .22.) And I know that Bill made his own .22 bullets and perhaps Mike either used Bill's or made his own. I think today all of those guys have switched to shooting a six because of the better availability of quality benchrest bullets in the six.
Anyway, it is great to read (or have lived through) the progression of the cartridges in competitive benchrest. But, what I've witnessed is that it was less of a development, and more of a distilling down to what works and what doesn't based on the constraints and availability or components. The 6PPC using Lapua brass is the competitive norm today. And it is because the others have fallen by the wayside in the crucible of hard competition.
And to those who may say that experimentation in benchrest is dead; I can only say that they haven't been paying attention. With many of the top competitors shooting compressed loads of N133 and how bullets have been continually changing ogive configuration (the "7-11" is the new rage), and with the very good concentricity of Lapua brass in the neck area, chamber dimensions and leade angles are the new area of experimentation with the 6PPC. Many of the top guys are using .265 to .268 necks, leade angles above the 1 1/2 degree leade angle (approaching 2 degrees) and a tad thinner at the backend of the chamber to control the brass expansion in that area with the higher pressure loads. Interesting stuff; and probably much of that thinking started with benchrest experimenters recognizing that they needed to shorten the case of certain types of brass some 30 years ago.
.... and I talked with him at length about how it came about. He was one of the primary developers of this cartridge due to Sako discontinuing the .220 Russian brass (and before Lapua began manufacturing it).
Fred (gunsmithing) and Perry Morton (shooting) worked on the Talldog and started with a full length BR case (at that time it was Remington 7 BR) and kept shortening it until it shot like a 6PPC in the Sako .220 Russian brass. They tested it by basically shooting many groups at each length. Keep in mind that this meant not only shortening the case, but also shortening the dies and moving the barrel shoulder and cone back to match the case. Fred said he and Perry went though a lot of barrels and shot "tons" of groups. Also keep in mind that N133 wasn't out yet and the primary BR powders at that time were T-32, Norma 201, and 322 (mostly Scottish). Not coincidentally, the case capacity that seemed to work out the best was that same as the old Sako .220 Russian. That ended up being .085 short for the BR case. The Sako .220 body at the rim is about .440 while the BR case is about .470, thus the difference in case capacities.
I understand that Dan Dowling did something similar when he developed the .22 Waldog (after Dan's shooting buddy Waldo G.) on the Sako .220 Russian case, with the "optimum" case shortening ending up at .125 short. Later, when guys wanted to get a .22 to shoot with the sixes using the Lapua .220 Russian brass the "optimum" shortening seemed to be somewhere around .100 for that cartridge. (Again, not coincidentally, for the .22's to shoot well with the Remington BR case, it looked case capacity needed for the case to be shortened by .125, thus Dick Wright's .22 Brat on such BR case). My limited experience with the difference between the Sako .220 Russian and the later Lapua is that the Lapua could be loaded a lot hotter than the old Sako (which had head separation issues when shot hot because of the balloon head of the case down in front of the rim).
In regard to a 6 Talldog chambered back when the only source for BR brass was Remington, it should be noted that the newer Lapua BR brass is a bit wider in the backend than the Remington brass. Anyone with an older 6 Talldog chambered before the Lapua BR brass came available needs to open up the backend of the chamber about .003 or so to accommodate the brass in that area. (The shoulder will "adapt" to the chamber when it is fired.)
Now, I wasn't shooting back when this "craziness" was necessary to shoot at the top of the BR game, as I started at the tail-end of the Sako .220 Russian era. But, I have had 6 Talldog. .22 Waldog and .22 PPC -.100 barrels and I can tell you that they do shoot well when properly tuned. But, getting or making brass to fit those chambers is a real challenge. Shortening any accuracy cartridge to be concentric needs to have the necks inside neck-reamed before they are outside reamed to fit the chamber. I once had Lapua brass shortened for a .22 PPC - .100 and it cost over $3.00 per case; most of that was labor cost. The relative simplicity of prepping brass to shoot in a full-length 6PPC compared to the other "dogs" out there is a real positive; especially when the relative benefit of shooting any of the "dogs" other than the 6PPC doesn't seem to materialize. (Mike Ratigan may argue that, especially since Mike won the Super Shoot with a .22 PPC -.100. However, I'm pretty sure that Mike shoots a 6PPC today.)
And there is one other thing about the .22's in benchrest today. Getting really good (meaning top-flight) .22 benchrest bullets is a challenge as compared to really good sixes. There are some out there, but they are getting more rare to get ahold of. Most of the bullet-makers who make .22's also make/sell sixes (or keep the .22's for their own use). And they are just as constrained by the jacket manufacturers. The last great shooting that I've seen by someone shooting a .22 was Bill Forrester and Mike Ratigan. (George Kelbly and Greg Walley also did some fine shooting with variants of a .22.) And I know that Bill made his own .22 bullets and perhaps Mike either used Bill's or made his own. I think today all of those guys have switched to shooting a six because of the better availability of quality benchrest bullets in the six.
Anyway, it is great to read (or have lived through) the progression of the cartridges in competitive benchrest. But, what I've witnessed is that it was less of a development, and more of a distilling down to what works and what doesn't based on the constraints and availability or components. The 6PPC using Lapua brass is the competitive norm today. And it is because the others have fallen by the wayside in the crucible of hard competition.
And to those who may say that experimentation in benchrest is dead; I can only say that they haven't been paying attention. With many of the top competitors shooting compressed loads of N133 and how bullets have been continually changing ogive configuration (the "7-11" is the new rage), and with the very good concentricity of Lapua brass in the neck area, chamber dimensions and leade angles are the new area of experimentation with the 6PPC. Many of the top guys are using .265 to .268 necks, leade angles above the 1 1/2 degree leade angle (approaching 2 degrees) and a tad thinner at the backend of the chamber to control the brass expansion in that area with the higher pressure loads. Interesting stuff; and probably much of that thinking started with benchrest experimenters recognizing that they needed to shorten the case of certain types of brass some 30 years ago.
Last edited:
geo.ulrich
Member
George, that adds well to the lore of these types of things ...
... and you have certainly lived through a lot of this first hand.
It shouldn't be surprising how so many of the earlier shooters/experimenters have worked all of the variables that can be worked to get the best accuracy. What impresses me is how much actual machine work it takes to try out the theories before even one shot is fired.
I had the honor (and one might say sad task) of going through the shop of one of our great Michigan shooter/experimenters Phil Sauer after he passed away a few years ago. Phil had great equipment and quite a shop to go with it.
One of the things that Phil experimented with in the 6PPC was a no-leade chamber that had the reamer run in an additional .027". And Phil shot 6mm bullets that were made on .750 jackets; and was a relatively high ogive - giving very little bearing surface. (Most of you may know that the typically 6PPC bullet is made on a jacket that is somewhere between .790 and .825 and shot in a 13 to 15 twist barrel - mostly somewhere around 14 is typical). The neck on his "6PPC-plus" basically had just enough length to hold the bullet in it and still be considered a "loaded round". Word was that these bullets approached 3,600 fps at the muzzle.
Phil was big on more velocity. When I was more of a neophyte than I am today, I once walked past him loading 133 into a PPC case and I remember seeing powder grains heaping over the top of the case mouth. I asked Phil if he had enough powder in there. His only comment was "I'd put more in there if I could".
Needless to say, don't try this at home and work up to these loads safely.
... and you have certainly lived through a lot of this first hand.
It shouldn't be surprising how so many of the earlier shooters/experimenters have worked all of the variables that can be worked to get the best accuracy. What impresses me is how much actual machine work it takes to try out the theories before even one shot is fired.
I had the honor (and one might say sad task) of going through the shop of one of our great Michigan shooter/experimenters Phil Sauer after he passed away a few years ago. Phil had great equipment and quite a shop to go with it.
One of the things that Phil experimented with in the 6PPC was a no-leade chamber that had the reamer run in an additional .027". And Phil shot 6mm bullets that were made on .750 jackets; and was a relatively high ogive - giving very little bearing surface. (Most of you may know that the typically 6PPC bullet is made on a jacket that is somewhere between .790 and .825 and shot in a 13 to 15 twist barrel - mostly somewhere around 14 is typical). The neck on his "6PPC-plus" basically had just enough length to hold the bullet in it and still be considered a "loaded round". Word was that these bullets approached 3,600 fps at the muzzle.
Phil was big on more velocity. When I was more of a neophyte than I am today, I once walked past him loading 133 into a PPC case and I remember seeing powder grains heaping over the top of the case mouth. I asked Phil if he had enough powder in there. His only comment was "I'd put more in there if I could".
Needless to say, don't try this at home and work up to these loads safely.
geo.ulrich
Member
Joe, Phil was definetly an experimenter forgot more than most of us will ever know and this was before all the great stuff we have at this time...He is missed