Have had a Swedish 1927, 6.5x55 since 1957. For game up to 300 yards it has always been accurate and never let me down. I've had many other cals, but always went back to the 6.5. Your vids are very interesting and thank you for your sharing.
nifty1940 I have buddy who loves to shoot at 400-600 yards .... shoots 2 rifles almost exclusively..... 6.5 swede and a .303 brit..... consistently drills good holes..... he still shoots open sights( his passion☺)
Excellent ctg and very accurate , i do not hunt every year with a fellow who owns three rifles all chambered in 6.5mmX55mm but do off and on.. With the high bullet BC the 6.5 never was welcomed with open arms in this country .. That is sad but true , i still meet hunters off and on who ask what i shoot and i say 6.5mmx55mm and after some thought he says, that's a military ctg isn't it? One of my favorite ctgs for 50 years is a custom bolt rifle in 7mmx57mm it has never failed to take a big game animal for me ..
I'm 53 and bought a 6.5 Creedmor this spring for these three reasons: 1) Low recoil. I hunted with a 30-06 for 35 years and just can't take the recoil anymore. Or rather, I don't want to take the recoil anymore. After sighting in my 6.5 I shot 2 more boxes at steel targets just for fun, and that's something I never did and never would do with the 30-06. The 6.5 is like a .22 in that regard, except that ammo costs 20x more! I shot last weekend with two friends and wrapped it up because their shoulders hurt. 2) I like the way the gun looks. 3) Marketing. It's a trendy caliber. Yep, I admit it, marketing worked on me and I'm too old to pretend it didn't. So what do reasons 2 and 3 have to do with hunting? Absolutely nothing, though you could rightly say they have quite a bit to do with the 10th commandment! Now the question I sit here and ask myself is, "would I have bought the 6.5 if I watched your video first?," and the answer is ... probably. Regarding the cost of ammo, sure, it's expensive but that is not a bother. I shot $100 last weekend and was ready to keep going, and that is a better bargain than shooting $10 of 30-06 and wanting to quit. Thank you for producing this excellent video!
I love your videos. Its so refreshing to listen to somebody that actually knows what hes talking about and is very objective and pragmatic about rifle cartridges.
I have three Swedish Mauser and love shooting the 6.5 Swede which in addition to being a fine military cartridge is an excellent hunting cartridge with appropriate bullets. You mentioned the 6.5 Arisaka. I used to have a Type 38 chambered in 6.5 Japanese and found to be very mild with respect to recoil.
I know the 6.5 Swedish👍👍 I've loaded 140 Partitions for friend who hunts Moose with it. He doesn't like wasting meat same as me and waits for the perfect headshot. That rifle is extremely accurate @182m with perfect overlapping hits using a leadsled👍👍
6.5 Grendel in AR platform, because it fits and it has .246 SD in 120 grain bullet. It's been great on deer and will put Hogs down with the Federal Fusion bullet. Easily reloaded and has small rifle primer ignition. Low recoil too. Really like this round.
At the time this video was made, I was similarly concerned about 6.5 Grendel. I'm really happy with the following it's received since then in the AR community. In terms of cartridges that an AR-15 can be chambered for, it really takes the cake at range.
This is a very rare time that GunBlue 490 has made a miscalculation. The 6.5 Creedmore has exploded in popularity since this video was recorded. They are now offered in Ruger Americans for $399 for example. Other Co's are offering them in inexpensive bolt rifles now that are more accurate than they have any right to be for their costs. The ballistic coefficient and sectional density of the 6.5 is exceptional. I think that cartridge will become entrenched. The reputation for accuracy is deserved and ammo prices have reached the lower point needed to truly become popular. It kind of hit that price vs. accuracy and usability point that the little .17 HMR hit in it's category 20 yrs ago. GunBlue 490 is a true sage for our times. The man is an absolute font of knowledge and good judgement. Kudos GunBlue.
M W yeah they are everywhere now. I would like an update from him from this same site/distrusted now. Almost every rifle on Cabelas site that has a .308 option has a 6.5CM option
It’s all marketing. . . and I wouldn’t consider the .17 HMR to be “popular”. I’m not opposed to the cartridge, it’s just that some of these new cartridges are designed to answer needs that frankly, no one was looking for. It really is marketing.
@Lewis Sparks The same could be said of any cartridge, lots of people don't take the time to learn the skills or to learn proper shot placement that is necessary. That's not the fault of the cartridge. I am a big fan of the swede also, that doesn't mean the cm doesn't have merits.
@Lewis Sparks I couldn't care any less what you or anyone else shoots. What you have said though is simply erroneous. For instance, Ruger has sold a pile of their American model in 6.5 Creedmoor, by and large, those are going to be hunters instead of target shooters. Whether you like or don't like something or whether something else is better or worse has nothing to do with those facts.
270 Win is and still in my favorite hunting round. 7mm-08 Rem is other round I prefer over 308. However 6.5mm and 260 caliber are great flat shooting rounds with accuracy. 30-06 and 25-06 are both great. I like 25-06 for dear hunting at longer range but overall I say take the 30-06. 300 Win Mag is more or less a too much for what I hunt will work but not needed.
6.5 Grendel is probably more popular now than when this video was made, it may be one of the ones that sticks around, especially since you can get cheap steel case plinking ammo for it.
That may be true in your area, but it's entirely a special order in my neck of the woods. By the way, I do NOT recommend cheap steel cases. They have a history of scouring chambers. Steel is used by governments of poor countries that cannot afford quality brass.
I’ve only owned one 6.5 and that’s a Grendel. I wanted something that was going to be effective on whitetail out to about 150yds with low recoil and muzzle blast. The Grendel has fit the bill very well with surprising accuracy. It would make an excellent round for getting youngsters involved in hunting.
What a fabulous video. from A. to Z. The alpha the omega the beginning the end. refreshing, refreshing video. Humbling yes, but totally refreshing. Makes one feel flushed but yet renewed.
Nice analysis of the 6.5 field, but since I have a 257 Roberts and a bunch of ammo for it, I am going to pick up a pretty little 6.5 creedmore, too. There is some joy in shooting well built cartridges.
I have used (3) .20 caliber rifles with great success. The .243, a .25-.06, and a .270. There is nothing the 6.5 could do for me that one of those rifles are already doing.
I like the 6.5 Grendel because it is a good intermediate cartridge between the 223/5.56 NATO and the 308/7.62 NATO, has a good BC, and fits the AR15 platform. I think it makes a decent varmint, hog, and even deer round. As long as the round is understood and used within its capabilities it makes for a versatile cartridge with good potential.
I concur that understanding and using cartridges within their limitations. But after decades of hunting game in areas where they might be lost I lean towards GunBlue’s philosophy of ample power for anchoring game. Smaller bullets just need more speed and relatively heavy construction to offer assurance of reliable kills. To me this starts with 243 with favorites being 6.5 Swede, 270 Win, 280 Ackley and even the 325 WSM(I won’t avoid the accusation of being an odd duck)
@@robertfree1908 The 6.5 Grendel with the correct bullet will do the job very well. Imo, if I had to pick one rifle, to do all, from target shooting, varmint, deer, hog, or shtf, I'd take the 6.5 Grendel in an AR15. Mine are Les Baer Custom's, 20" target crowned. I've always been a .270 150gr. Fed. Premium with a Nosler Partition. ( Eastern hunter ) but I've recently discovered Barnes TTSX in 6.5 Grendel that opened my eyes. I can also confess to being somewhat well vested in lineology. My first hunt was for rabbits in 1958.
@@boogerdog5247 I can’t reasonably argue with success. If the accuracy(and I haven’t seen an inaccurate 6.5 Grendel[or 6 ARC!] yet!) there along with enough bullet upset to ensure quick expansion then why not? Not that I’ve used either. But with friends and family building ARs so often I’ve seen what they can do. I myself just haven’t got that bug. I’ve just always like the classic stuff
@@robertfree1908 For deer, my go to since the 80's has always been the Remington 700 BDL in .270, using only Federal Premium with 150gr. Nosler Partition bullets. I'm in the same traditional camp. No AR ever made feels like the bolt action in hand.
@@boogerdog5247 so true. My fave is 270 but I’ve used mostly 140s some 130s but never a 150. Nothing against them. Just here in Texas haven’t felt a need for them. Stout 130 will kill our biggest hogs
Dear Sir, I want to take a moment to wish you a joyous holiday season and a Merry Christmas to you and your family. Thank you for continuing to share your knowledge of all things guns with your viewer community. Sectional density is tops on the list and that concept has connected the dots for a lot of hanging questions. I continue to review all of your videos to gleen further information for each and every one. When each new one is released, it is a Christmas present wrapped and delivered each and every time. Thank you for addressing metric numbers, they are still confusing and I believe President Reagan was right. May you and your family be safe and together, enjoy good health, and be looking forward to a prosperous New Year for 2017. God Bless. Cordially yours, Rick Mansberger PS. Merry Christmas to Benny
Judging by the variety of ammo that I found in a major sporting goods store I will have to favor the 7mm 08 over the 6.5 Creedmor and 260 Remington. They may have an edge at extended ranges but those ranges don't exist where I live.
The 260 Rem. and 7mm-08 share the same 308 case and thus, will never be rendered extinct; unlike the currently popular 6.5 creed may become, unless it can maintain its sales momentum indefinitely. I chose the 260 Rem. over the 7mm-08 for long range shooting and western Oregon clear cut deer/elk hunting due to its superior exterior ballistics and charge/bore ratio. Incidentally, reloading the 260 Remmy from necked down 308, 7mm-08, or necked up 243 is also thriftier than with the creedmore. I can easily get free brass from any range for my 260, try that with the creed, and you'll be there for hours sorting through thousands of 260 compatible cases.
@@johnnash5118 the 6.5 creedemore is now the second most chambered round in the country. its now more popular than the .260 and 7mm08 have ever been, combined.
6.5 Creedmoor is an amazing round! It's only 10 years or so old..but it's out performing 300 win Mags with better drag and BC's. After 700 yards the 6.5 (.264) has retained more energy than the 300 Win..incredibly efficient cartridges. Haha in Canada we seem to utilize both metric and Imperial..I always convert metric into Imperial in my head because as a kid I knew Imp. first. Thanks for this great bit of info!
Hmmmm...I'd be interested to find out how you came to the conclusion that a bullet fired from the 6.5 Creedmoor retains more enery than a bullet fired from the .300 Winchester Magnum at 700 yards. Surely you are not comparing bullets with similar BCs or SDs. Let me shine some light on this. Federal's Terminal Ascent 200gr bullet in the .300 Win Mag is conservatively rated at a MV of 2810 fps. We'll use this number. The Federal T/A 200 grain bullet has a BC of .608. At 700 yards, it retains a velocity of 1856 fps and is carrying 1530 ft-lbs of energy. Hornady's Precision Hunter 6.5 Creedmoor load with the 143 grain ELD-X bullet has a BC of .620 and is rated at a muzzle velocity of 2700 fps. At 700 yards, it retains a velocity of 1786 fps and is carrying 1013 ft-lbs of energy. In fact, at 1000 yards, the .300 Win Mag is still carrying over 340 ft-lbs more energy than the 6.5 Creedmoor. The 6.5 Creedmoor is a fantastic and efficient cartridge. It's an excellent target cartridge and a great close to medium range deer cartridge. Don't make the mistake of confusing its target range qualities with its capabilities as a hunting cartridge. It's not anywhere near the same league as the .300 Winchester Magnum. Hell, it's not even in the same sport.
Back when I was young and starting out as a big game hunter, I was given a book written by the late Jack O'Connor. The one piece of advice that he proffered up in that book, that has stuck in mind was shooting big game using a "high lung shot"! I've practiced that shot placement for 50+ years with rifle and handgun and have never lost a single big game animal and have never wasted an ounce of meat... I bring this up because, I have used many different calibers in rifles over the years, including 6.5 and have never observed a difference between ANY of them in killing big game using the high lung bullet placement. 99.9% of the great cartridge debate is pure B.S. brought about by personal bias and/or the misleading kinetic energy figures. My 25-06 doesn't kill a big white tail here in the mountains of Washington and faster or deader than my .300 Win. Mag. or 7mm. Rem. Mag. or 7mm08 for that matter! When my son was 8, he took his first deer with a .243 Win. and it went down with a high lung shot like it had been shot with a .300 magnum... I've used a .270, 30-06, .308, 6.5x55, .243, .444 Marlin, 45-70, 300 Weatherby Magnum, .300 Win. Mag., .375 H&H Mag., 7mm Rem. Mag., .44 Rem. Mag., .41 Rem. Mag., .357 Mag., .454 Casull and probably a few that I can't recall right now... The point being, they each killed large mule deer or white tails and black bear with equal effect using the high lung shot. Use common sense when choosing a hunting cartridge and don't ignore history and the old school words of wisdom that brought us to where we are now! There are no "magic" bullets and sub 1moa rifles don't kill big game at hunting ranges any deader than 1.5moa rifles do... The 6.5 hype is for marketing and sales only! A 6.5 will do what any .243 or .308 will do!
Sir ! Your final comment ( I understand) but possibly some don’t , it would have been better stated . A 6.5 will NOT DO ANYTHING that a 243 or 308 will NOT do !!
The 6.5 caliber is definitely good on paper. Actual hunting performance is negligible at best. 22long rifle has dropped many a deer. Saying that the 6.5 does offer a very good selection of bullets . It’s a great caliber, as are all . 270 is my personal preference. I know one fellow who built a 30/06- 6.5 mm wildcat on a k98 action with a costume 28” stepped section taking it from a Bull barrel to a sporting contour. Just after the end of forearm. It’s a very nice rifle. He carved the stock himself. And the trigger is < 3 lbs . Hair actually. He uses magnum powder and primers . It’s ultra accurate. Cuts a ragged hole at 100 yards. 20 shots. Whilst at the range one day a buzzard was spotted . NEW TARGET! Everyone gave up after a few minutes. The bird never moved . Range finders out and others like me watching in s scope . Watched as he blew it into feathers with one of his varmint loads, free handed at that. He knew his rifle that he built and knew his loads well enough to only shoot once. Sounds like a belted Mag when fired . 10lbs as well.
Mike Magnum Absolutely right. A high lung shot works even with a .22 lr from up close even on the biggest deer. Shoot it through the ribs leave it alone. It will go about 100 yds lie down and die.🇨🇦🤠
My advice if you want to learn about the 6.5 bullets is to get an old Swedish model 96 mauser and let the fun begin. I'd bet you'd fall in love with it.
This is one man’s opinion and if you’re willing to believe it you will be missing out on a great opportunity to enjoy a wonderful cartridge with low recoil and extreme accuracy.
I sight my 30-06 in at 325 yards and to make minimal adjustment out to 400 yards..... and little adjustment out to 500 .....I am very comfortable with that
Like to know how many manufacturers are making bolt guns chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor now as we are at year's end 2018. I just got one for Christmas myself this year, a Thompson Center Compass. Many more like the Compass in it's price range and also many more at higher price points as well now chambered in the 6.5. And I mean bolt guns, too. What a difference a couple of years has made as far as that cartridge's popularity is concerned, and the firearms now made available in that caliber. And at all price points from mild to wild as well. I personally think the cartridge came into it's own this past year and predict more growth for it in the year to come.
I have a rifle in 260 Rem and love it. Super accurate and mild recoil. Don't have to worry about brass either since it is a necked down 308 brass. BC is fantastic too. To me it is a winner. I use it for whitetails and hogs in SE USA.
My partner had a .300 WSM. I can enjoy shooting my swede all day but I wanted out of the shooting house when that thing bellowed. He eventually went to a 7mm-08.
I love me 96 Swede, I think a lot of the noise and light load data is the undeserved bashing of the Mauser 96 action. Remember all the uproar over the .308 Spanish Mausers that Samco used to import? I looked hard but could not find a single first hand problem. It was all "my friend's cousin" sort of stuff. I did run into some old load data for the 6.5x55 using Accurate 8700 [an out of production magnum powder}, and it basically called for stuffing the case full. That I would be a little leery of, but might give it a try with a 160 grain bullet. I think it would be dirty as heck though.
most data I have seen presents anemic loads. I have an older hodgson load bible that lists impressive velocity, but that data is related to a 29 inch barrel. the 23 1/2 inch husq/gustav barrel turns 45 gr imr 4350 into 2550 fps from the longer barrel list of 2850 with 140 gr. I tried hotter than listed loads, I could safely achieve 2650 avg. with no sign of excess. accuracy remained excellent. I get nervous hot loading, and the lower velocity is very pleasant, and effective out to 200 yd. you can push it further.( I get 2900 with 120 not exceeding max.) a very good deer/varmint load. I will try 129 loads yet, should safely be 2700 fps appx, the 130 gr in th 270 win is popular with some, so I figure it may just be a good recipe in 6.5 swede.
It is definitely worth checking the European loads, which tend to be much more inclined to extract the actual potential of the 6.5x55 SE. Enjoy that rifle!
PhilHewkin I agree. I have a 6.5x55, and also a Creedmoor. To me anyway, the only real reason for the Creedmoor is that it'll fit into an AR10 length magazine. It's a decent cartridge, but really doesn't do anything the Swede won't do with about 10,000 psi less chamber pressure according to my loading manuals.
I really enjoy your matter of fact videos and the fact that you have no agenda other than presenting the facts and suggesting suitable options for various situations. It also doesn't hurt that you have some experience and insight into certain cartridges that have long piqued my interest, ie. 7mm.08 and .257 Roberts. My first rifle was an 8X57 K98 Mauser and I found it a real brute to fire but it seemed to me the case itself has great potential with the right bullets in it.
Great video, im glad you talk about ethical hunting, bullet construction also, shot placement. Ive witnessed what a 264 WinMag can do to Alaskan Bull Moose with a well placed headshot @110+ paces. I loaded 140 Nosler Partition bullets to accuracy specs for my best friends Winchester M70.👍👍
I really enjoy reading everyone's commets. I agree that we are blessed with abundant calibre choices, which is a fun and woderful thing, but I tend to believe as Gunblue490 does. I love all those classic cartidges from long ago, the vast manority of which, perform just as well as their new siblings. If new cartridge development had stopped 40 or more years ago, we'd still have sufficient cartridges choices for every purpose (with the exception of the military, of course).
The magic of certainly calibers like the 6.5 comes down in large measure to the fact that we categorize bullets by weights. Rather than having certain caliber to length ratios for every caliber, whatever grain weight those came out to. If we then have two dissimilar calibers, that have bullets of the same weight, those bullets will have different drag factors. In addition we have certain calibers like the 6.5 where the historically preferred bullets are longer, and the barrels are set up to have more extension from the case, and more setback on the lands. The result is a platform that has much better long range performance and penetration. This is because in the case of the battle rifle period, the countries that fielded the 6.5 had to make up the lower weight projectile with rather extraordinary length in the bullet.
I gotta say i fell in love... I feel in love at first sight, with the Winchester model 70 super grade maple. I really like the .264 Win Mag. I also like the 7mm Rem Mag and 300 Win Mag.... I handload as well so I have some flexibility. I'm just torn on caliber. I'm leaning towards the 6.5mm because of ballistic coefficient and lower recoil, also the 26" barrel will help maximize my hand loads
Ash Merch I feel your pain, I love the maple stocked model 70 super grade as well. Winchester also has the featherweight with a maple stock. Would love to see them offered in 7mm 08 or 6.5 x 55.
What’s your game? Deer, mule deer, sheep only? 264 is right up your ally. Add in elk, and 7mag might be your best bet. Take out the long range hunting on sheep and keep the deer and elk and mule deer and 300 mag might be your ticket. Add in alaska bear/ moose and 300 mag or 338 mag will be your way to go. Personally id say, buy both. Buy the light and a heavy. Best of both worlds. A load out of 264 and 300 or 7mag and 338 is hard to beat or any combination there. All three are just fantastic hunting calibers. If you want to hunt white tail deer only, might want to consider a lighter cartridge like 308 30-06 270 280/280ai or 260 rem/ 6.5 creed or a straight up 6.5 x55. I thought winchester made at least one rifle in the old sweed
Hey Gunblue490! We need an update on this topic! The 6.5 Creedmoor has taken off here in British Columbia to some extent, for deer hunting. ... Lots of sporter rifles being sold anyway. And, re popularity, while this is no means a conclusive note, I just checked Midway USA... and the 6.5 Creedmoor has more different ammo options available for sale than any other medium game hunting caliber, until you get up into the 30 cals - see below: 243 Winchester - 69 25 06 Remington - 33 6.5 Creemoor - 83 260 Remington - 25 270 Winchester - 80 7mm 08 - 34 7mm Rem Mag 75 30 30 Winchester - 37 308 Winchester - 158 30 06 Winchester - 116 300wm - 100 Lots of factors of course. Love to hear your analysis! God's Love, Mountain River Valleys!
I have a Tikka T3 stainless in 6.5x55 which is my go to rifle for deer sized game. I have another Tikka in 300 WM that is my elk gun. Public land elk hunting is tough and its very hard to even see an elk on public land let alone get close. I like the 300WM for those 300+ yard shots on elk not only for trajectory but increaded terminal ballistics. A 300 WM at 200 yards is the same as a 308 at the muzzle. The 6.5s are great deer cartridges but are effective for elk for a recoil shy shooter. I think most people are overgunned for deer. You dont need a 308 or 30-06 for deer. A 30-06 is hard to beat as an all around rifle. I consider it a 400 yard elk rifle and it puts deer down hard. Ive never been a big 308 fan. It just doesnt do anything for me.
strat1080 You want a good blue trail on Elk. They are extremely tough. They don’t give up just because they have been shot. A round that goes through both shoulders and drops that Big Guy is only fair so .300 or .338 win.🇨🇦🤠
I find the 6.5 Creed to be immensely popular with the under 40 crowd. I’m a Gen Xer and I still go with the 30-30, 7mm-08, and 30-06 depending on what I’m hunting and the distance I might expect to encounter the game. I live in the northeast where 250 yards is a very long and very rare shot.
If I went back to the 1970s, I would get a factory shorter 96 Mauser in 6.5x55, a CZ-75 handgun, and a bespoke 20 ga SXS to do anything I wanted other than competition...that is probably a lie. I would still buy too much stuff. I mainly shoot steel informally at longer ranges. I still would not shoot any game at anywhere near long range as I am colorblind and cannot follow blood trails. I have a rangefinder and a ballistics program on my phone. Wind is the big deciding factor on longer range. I like the Creedmoor as the longer neck works well with longer projectiles over the .260. I think he is wrong about the Grendel due to its popularity with the AR platform.
I wonder how the numbers stack up now almost 4 years later. The Grendel is interesting almost 4 years later because it's brass can be made from 7.62x39 brass. It's easy to have a second upper for it. I don't understand this videos obsession with sporter vs. military grade rifles. Both styles put meat on the table just fine and I think AR numbers might skew the popularity of the odd smaller cartridges some since uppers and barrels won't be listed at distributers as a rifle. There's more to the 260 Rem and 6.5 cm than just case capacity. As I recall the 260 can't use long 6.5 or overly heavy 6.5 bullets without eating into that case capacity. The 6.5 Creedmoor can use long bullets thanks to its case design.
One of these Japanese rifles from 1 of my great uncles that he brought back to America from WW2 was handed down to me some years back. Think GunBlue490 is probably right, most of these Japanese rifles probably never been shot since WW2.
I had a cz in 6.5x55 swed sold to by a 270 win ,the swed is low recoil effective and efficient caliber I used 140 to 156 Grn a very long OAL its very popular here in the uk ,I may rebarrel my Remington BDL custom deluxe 243 win to a 260 R.E.M. After the new year just that little more punch than the 243 win thanks for the video I enjoyed it atvb Steve
Omg I had a 6.5 Remington. My father gave it to me. He never even shot it he just told me it was an experimental round. And I freaking sold it. I want to cry now
You should. Got any other guns your father gave you. We can experiment how they look in my safe. I'm just joking feller. But I'm always looking for deals 🙀🥃🗜
I love my 6.5x55, it has the light recoil of a 243 and the ballistic efficiency of a 7mm Rem Mag. I never used it on moose and feel that there are more ideal calibers for game of that size but I consider it a perfect rifle for deer class game. The new 6.5 Creedmoor is no doubt just as effective but truth be told my old 6.5x55 can match it's ballistics at 10,000 psi less pressure so I don't see the need to switch.
Several months ago, I rightly took your advice on picking a cartridge that would be available at Walmart, even though I do reload. The idea of traveling somewhere for a hunt and not easily finding ammunition was worrisome. Well, last month the 6.5 Creedmoor made it to the shelves of my local Walmart. It is my least favorite of the three rounds you discussed, but the availability of ammunition, and evermore popularity of the caliber in long range shooting seems very promising. I wonder how many more manufacturers are offering the 6.5 Creedmore since you published this video two years ago? Many thanks for your words of wisdom.
The Creedmoor has certainly surged in popularity since then, owing entirely to Hornady's savvy marketing and to the very slick name they gave it that has its roots deep in American shooting heritage. That's all there is to its difference between the equally capable 260 Remington, released over 20 years ago with a name that sounded like a castrated 270 Winchester with nobody paying attention in the least to its qualifications. Grendell and Creedmoor sound more exciting than (yawn) Remington. Even now, after the 6.5 bore size has taken off, and even with the slightly better (not much) velocity potential of the 260 Remington and its far more readily available 308 brass that can be reformed from 243, 7mm-08, and 308 with one pass through a sizing die, the 260 Remington seems destined to go the way of the 6mm Remington. Both superb, but colossal marketing flops. It's all in the advertising. Americans are only now discovering what the 6.5 Swede has been about for over a century, which has even more potential and versatility.
3 and a half years later, the future status of the 6.5cm remains a bit dubious, however one thing has happened that may distinguish it from other “flash-in-the-pan” chamberings-the US now has significant military contracts involving the 6.5cm. This is sure to have profound effects on the longevity, no? Your comments, sir?
Hi John, I appreciate your common sense with regards to buying odd or limited available cartridges. I also appreciate your fondness of the 257 Roberts. I wish you would do a special video on the 257 Roberts on how one would go about building a reasonably priced rifle. Maybe using a used model 70, Howa, or Ruger CRF Hawkeye. What barrel twist , suggested action - short or long? Necessary bolt face size etc. Availability of brass etc? Thank you so much, I know the 257 Roberts is functionally obsolete, but it is such an iconic American cartridge.
I was interested to hear from a friend a while ago who did some testing of various cartridges at long range. It turns out the 6.5x55 retains more energy at 1000 yards than the .300 Win Mag using the ammunition he tested. I was shocked by that, and rather impressed. I use a 6.5x55 for deer myself - it's my favourite calibre. It's a shame you guys over in the states don't like it so much. It has a lot to offer. Here in the UK it's quite popular.
Retained energy is one of the factors involved with effectiveness, but it's not always the most important, especially on such game as elk and moose, which has traditionally been the game where the 300 Winchester Magnum shines. Having hunted such game, and having spoken at length with those who have experience with large, heavy game at extended ranges, the greater frontal area of larger bores is what makes the biggest difference in getting an animal down in a hurry. And, I could never endorse shooting game at 1,000 yards, regardless of the paper ballistics. The last New Mexico guide I sojourned with had very high regard for the 300 Winchester Magnum, and considered the 270 Winchester the minimum for opening a sufficiently wide killing wound that would bring a large elk down before lost. As for deer, or game up to twice its size, the 6.5 is certainly a perfect cartridge at any range, with almost any bullet weight. The reasons we use few 6.5x55 rifles in the US is simply because we have so many others, and manufacturers don't offer either the rifles or ammo here. The 6.5 Creedmoor is certainly gaining a following, which is ballistically identical to the Swede.
With all due respect sir, I will also add to your reply for your audience that the 55mm case length of the Swede, loaded with the higher sd/ bc bullets that is optimal for it, tends to be a bit too long for the 51mm optimized short action chamber. That 4mm additional case length of the Swede reduces the seating space of the optimal bullet, which forces the use of an accommodating (-4mm) but less than optimal bullet with significantly less sd/ bc., or the other choice of seating the optimal bullet 4mm deeper and into the powder capacity area of the case, thus reducing the charge capacity and negating any potential advantages of the Swede over the 260 Rem. or 6.5 Creed. Conversely, the Swede chambered in a long action slips it into the company of the optimally chambered 25-06 and 270, so what would be the point of selecting a Swede outside of a medium Mauser action? As superior a cartridge that it is, it's just not designed for American spec. actions, it's a Mauser.
Having grown up in South Africa, when I moved here in 1984 I had to learn what a '350' engine was. I had to hear the cubic centimeters to understand it. (5.7 liter) But pretty soon I was well assimilated into the country of my birth, and love the inch/mile designations. But my background has no problem with the 'psychology' of measurements at least. However, I am also a student of human nature and understand it. Again, thank you for your great videos. You say people email you questions? I have a couple here and there but see no email.
It's a terrific round ballistically, and was immediately popular when it was released. That popularity declined just as fast when shooters complained about short barrel life and its very cumbersome 26 inch barrels that delivered published velocity. High ammo cost and limited ammo availability was also an issue in remote hunting areas. When used with shorter barrels, it didn't do as well as Winchester's own 270 that has a larger bore and less recoil and muzzle blast. It's a simple matter of overbore; too much powder for its bore diameter to efficiently digest. The 264 suffered the fatal blow when Remington released the 7mm Remington Magnum that has greater bore diameter and higher efficiency. It has been fading for over 40 years, so I wouldn't put any money on its comeback.
I had a 6.5 x 55 sporterized Swedish Mauser with an old 6 power Weaver scope! It was accurate so long as I used 110 grain and up, bullets? Lighter bullets wandered. Never missed and never failed to kill my deer with one shot.
Awesome channel i really love the detail you go into and why you think or believe a certain way, I have one bit of constructive criticism. The audio is not that good in some of your videos. a bit of echo or something going on. Im not an audio expert but i think a new microphone will go a long way to adding to the quality of your channel and retaining subscribers. But i also know that good audio setups are expensive. looking forward to more videos from you. I really like your honesty about not having personal experience in shooting them but have done your research and know the history and use of the cartridges.
Leigh Cresswell My camera audio input requires a powered mic, and so far, I have not found one that works well. The echo is the besement room with no absorbing carpeting, etc. I am hoping to correct that issue, if I can find a suitable microphone without costing an arm and leg. Thanks for watching.
I have been thinking about the same thing. I can't see where the microphone is placed, but I would assume that with an automatic mic level on the camera, it would be beneficial just to try and get a wire extension in order to keep the microphone as close to you as possible.
Sten Møller Sten, my Canon camera is not very sophisticated at all. The mic is on-board. A jack is provided for the use of a separate mic, but it must be of the powered sort. I am currently endeavoring to remedy the problem, but have not had good results with the microphones that I have tried. It appears that a good mic will cost more than my camera! LOL I have a warm spot for Scandinavia, having visited friends in Moss, Norway on two occasions some years ago, travelling the countryside. Your comment about caliber selection gave rise to my next video, so stay tuned.
Hello again - I found myself a Sony microphone,(www.amazon.com/Sony-ECMMS907-Digital-Recording-Microphone/dp/B00001W0DT) that works very well for me with its standard jack. True, it's around $80, but I'm very happy with it. Ordinary AA battery, so it's simple and cheap to run. You can limit the angle to 90 degrees so echo from the walls would be no problem. How kind to mention the warm spot for Scandinavia. You will be welcome back, I'm sure. I haven't had the pleasure of visiting New Hampshire yet, but look forward to doing so one day. I suppose we tend to go to the typical tourist places first, and so we miss out on so many sweet spots. I'll most certainly stay tuned :-).
Not trying to over simplify things. Take sash cord like they used in sash weights in older windows. String old tee shirts on it close enough the bodies touch. A couple or so rows of those hanging on lag screw hooks will help tremendously with your audio echo. It's cheap, if someone can cut sleeves off and sew bodies together they don't have to be perfect, easy to hang and a small tote will easily hold them. A trip to your old tee stash, Goodwill and a hardware store. Total cost less than $15.00 not counting sewing. Can't afford not to try this solution out. Go in Peace
I'm interested too. I'm new to using different calibers A Winchester 30-30 was my 10th birthday present. Has served me well but finally reached a place I can afford more guns lol
It will be interesting to see just how the 6.8 the military has decided on is set up in configuration. Friend of mine just bought a 6.8 in AR platform for hog hunting, and he made several good harvests using a mounted thermal scope. I had been considering the 6..5 grendel in AR as the ballistics are very close, but now I think I will wait to see what the military comes out with....I would think whatever platform they use will make the availability of ammo and or other components plentiful
6.8mm is .277", which is the diameter of a 270 Winchester bullet, and a full caliber larger than 6.5, the .264" bullet. I owned a 6.8 SPC which was limited to 115 grain bullets in an AR length magazine. Such bullets have pretty poor sectional density of only .214. Traditional deer hunting bullets are typically .260 SD. Those bullets also have a pretty low ballistic coefficient of just .375, so they are not ballistically efficient at longer range. I'm skeptical that any decisions have been made by the military to choose a 270 bullet, which was rejected way back in the 60s because it was too heavy. The US looked at the 6.5 Grendel and the 6.8 SPC and rejected them over 10 years ago. Between reduced magazine capacity, weight, low ballistic effectiveness, and departure from the NATO standard of ammunition, I don't see that likelihood.
@@GunBlue490 I have wondered about what the military command is thinking, and from several of the articles I have read, they are choosing a 6.8 as the new rifle caliber and have three or more companies bidding for the contract. The companies are supposed to have a working prototype in the near future along with several hundred thousand rounds for testing. Criteria in one article was to defeat the body armor which is being used by other countries. A quick Google or other search engine check brings up many articles.....it may be media hype, but from what I have read they are going ahead. Your points about the sectional density etc sure seem logical, but like I said, I wonder just what the military command is thinking.....thanks
My friend's good friend who is a guide and ranch manager in New Mexico just killed a large black bear ( looked to be around 400 lbs) with one shot from 700 yards with the 6.5 Creedmore. I have the picture. The bear was a marauder in a cattle ranch.
I didn't mention it because it has been dying since its introduction of chronic illnesses since it came out in 1958. It's extremely hard on barrels. Being grossly overbore, it's one of the few calibers that even a casual shooter can burn out without trying. It's very noisy, as it burns vast amounts of powder in the monstrous case. Brass is very expensive and scarce, made in small quantities. Its advertised velocity was attained by Winchester in their Model 70 "Westerner" rifles with extremely unwieldy 26" barrels which are a contradiction for high plains and mountain carry, where such ranging qualities are needed. When Winchester shortened the barrel in response to customer complaints, it's reduced velocity was inferior to the .270 Winchester that struck harder with broader and heavier bullets, and with 7-10 grains less powder. The popularity in 6.5 cartridges has renewed interest in the .264 Winchester Magnum, but that interest will surely fade just as fast as it did in the 60's, and for the same reasons. In the 1950s magnum craze, Winchester built the round on a belted case rather than on the standard .30-06 case. The SAAMI approved 6.5-06 A-Square will easily match .264 Win. Mag. ballistics, with far cheaper brass, and with significantly less powder and barrel wear.
@@GunBlue490 the caliber in the model 70 Winchester can be dated back to the years of 1942 and 1944 checked by the serial number on the barrel model 70 Winchester Pre 64 and hasn't died out you can buy one today in a model 70 Winchester with in 10 miles of me I can show you 6 different 264 Winchester Mags ranging from bolt action pump and semi automatic
@@GunBlue490 I have a pre-64 model 70 featherweight in .264 win. mag that used to be my dad's. He took a lot of deer with it, but with the 22 inch barrel, it had a hell of a muzzle blast and a lot of noise, but didn't do as good velocity wise, and with powder efficiency as a 6.5-06 that we had chambered on a mauser 98 action. One of the things that I see that kind of bothers me is the bad shake that the Hornady book gives the 6.5x284 win. The barrel they used had a very short throat and as such the pressure spikes higher, and with the powder adjusted to keep it in spec's it will not perform on par with the 6.5-06. The Hornady book even points out the short throating and there for the slower speeds. I wish that they would have not done that, and used a longer throated reamer. Apparently though Lapua is aware of this, and their spec's for the 6.5x284 Lapua have generous "freebore" throat room. Weatherby is good for having a lot of freebore to allow the bullets to poke out of the powder room more. This is the case as I have measured it on the reamer that we used to chamber the x284wins Vs the throating on a Savage model 12 "F" class target gun. It will allow seating the 140 gr bullets out farther, allowing more powder room and also produces less of a pressure peak as the bullet moves and engraves on the rifleing. The Savage rifle is quite a nice target shooter, with a fast twist for heavy bullets, and a 29 inch barrel, (not a typo) it produces much closer to the hoped for .264 win mag velocity on less powder than the shorter barrels with short throats. Topped with an 8-32x Nightforce scope, it should do well in 1000 yard target matches. For hunting, I have several 98 mauser actions with sporter weight 26 inch barrels with 1:8 twist, but unfortunately my reamer was made for the short throat cut. I have a throating reamer that I got just recently that I hope to remedy this short throat business so I don't have to be so careful of bullet seating depth. Out here in the more open country of the Nebraska sand hills, the 6.5's seem to work very well. Even a model 7 Remington in .260 when it first came out worked nicely but I felt that it would be better if it had a little more speed, so moved on to these other calibers and have been happy with them. I have a sporterized 6.5x55, several of the 6.5x284's and the 6.5x06.. along with my fathers rifle, but no longer have the .260. I wish I would have kept it now.. would have made a great starter rifle for some young shooter.
Just got into grendel, I’ve never taken an animal over 100 yds east of the Mississippi so, it’ll do the trick reasonably well with little recoil. I hope the round stays out there but it’s probably going to force me to reload. I’m not TOO concerned about sourcing brass since you can form 7.62x39 brass and be set, maybe more work than one would care to do but with my ability to swap uppers, I only shoot a few dozen rounds a year for hunting.
Can anyone explain why 6.5 mm and 0.264 calibers are lumped together? 0.264 inches is 6.71 mm & 6.5 mm is 0.256 inches. I know it probably has to do with the sometimes odd naming conventions of the gun world.
It’s confusing but “6.5mm” bullets are actually 6.7mm in diameter, they same size as .264. So they are lumped together because they are in fact the same exact bullets (a 140 grain .264 nosler partition is a 140 grain 6.5mm nosler partition.) The odd variance in true sizes is annoying but common in the ammunition and reloading industry. It also goes the opposite, where a 7.62 Soviet bullet(.312 in) is not the same diameter as a 7.62 NATO bullet (.308 in)
WRONG. Nobody is making a rifle with a bore diameter of 2.5 inches plus. Dude....you need to study the metric system for 10 minutes before you make another stupid comment.
Are there any 3 cartridges that are so close to being the same ballistically as the 6.5x55, the 260 rem and the creedmoor? There maybe but how did the creedmoor become so popular when we already had the others? It appears that it is hear you stay.
My dad had a 264. I saw the cartridges back in the late 70s but he doesn’t remember what happened to the gun. Based on the bullets, I would like to have the rifle.
I grew up northwestern New Mexico, Fence Lake area has fantastic elk! A lot of people use 270win and swear by it for elk in New Mexico, a lot of people swear by no less than 7mag, or 300win mag in this same state! No one I know uses less than 150gr premium bullet in that 270 elk rifle, or less than 160gr in 7mag. So maybe a bit more wiggle room in bullet choice and power with 300win mag. I don't own a 6mm Rem, but I want a varmint rig in that cal at some point in the future! No great difference some would argue over the 243, but I love all the 7mauser related cartridges, just for historical interest. I may have to go with necking down 6.5 Swede to 6mm if that longer neck 6mmRem brass goes extinct!
My brother and I got new rifles at the same time. He chose a 243, I went with the six Rem. He is generally a slightly better shot than I am with any rifle, HOWEV ER, given the correct twist, the higher capacity 6mm case will outshoot the 243 both as to energy delivered, accuracy, slightly less recoil, and my rifle in my hands, is superior to his in all respects. You need to be a reloader, however. European brass is available or easily formed with the right dies. Mauser based rounds will live forever :) Seer
Hi. My name is David and I live in Australia. I am thinking about buying a 223 caliber rifle Couldn't find a review you have done on this caliber. Any information would be appreciated.Thank you.
David Neve True. Watch my 222 Remington review. I love the 223 Remington, and carried an M16 in Vietnam. I've owned a few, mostly AR types and now, my Mini-14. There are countless good ones, but they make me yawn with boredom, to be honest. Great as they are, to me, they just don't ring any bells, because accuracy is simply great (yawn), but nothing like its Daddy, the 222 Remington, which is entirely another world of shooting, that shows what spectacular means. The ballistic advantage of the 223 is about 45 yards, theoretically, but the 222 adds that yardage and more with its accuracy. My Tikka T3 walnut shot average groups of sub half- MOA before I bedded it, and now it's half that. See also my bedding video, featuring that gun, where I show the pre-bedding groups. But if the 223 is your gun, you can't go wrong. They are very nice (yawn).
GunBlue490 Thanks for your expert opinion.I watch most of videos on iTube which you produce. I will think seriously about the 222. I value your expertise.
Remington 760 pump in 223 is a very accurate rifle. I have watched 200lbd + whitetail drop in tracks with 223 . Shot placement is key . I try for a high neck shot with a small center fire. Break the neck . DOWN! Bread basket shots will usually take a 60ish yard death run. Still dead.
In my mind the 6.5 bore size is a great compromise in recoil , ballistic performance , and killing power. Lesser bore size and bullet weight are less lethal. Greater bore size and bullet weight gives more recoil. To obtain greater ballistic performance also requires greater bore size and bullet weight. The 6.5 should make for the best long range varmint and medium size game caliber. The 6.5 Creedmore is a compromise of a compromise. The right case capacity for barrel life , recoil , ballistic performance and accuracy. Great target cartridge but not the best for anything else but that is what a compromise dose. The old 30-06 will out perform it on heaver game. The 223 is a better all round varmint cartridge. The 6mm PPC is more accurate. The 338 Lapua will out perform it at long range. Other than that, the 6.5 Creedmore works fine.
The Grendel only exists because of the AR15 platform. It's pretty pointless in a bolt rifle. I would say the biggest market for it is not complete rifles, but barrels and BCG's for people building their own rifles.
I'm calling BS on the 6.8 SPC. Folks into ARs knew the 6.8 was .277. It was not confusing, and was identified in gun rags and online articles. 6.8 SPC had other issues, similar to how 6.5 Grendel had issues early with being proprietary.
I'm sure they are. Not that they do anything better than anything else for 98 percent of the buying public, but folks like something new. It's another cartridge, a wee bit bigger and harder recoiling than the 243 that may offend smaller shooters and a wee bit smaller than the standard 7mms. I'd like to do a poll on those who buy it and ask them what its advantages are for them.
@@GunBlue490 I couldn't agree more. As a reloader into long range shooting, 243 with the 107 SMK has been my go to. But now with high quality factory ammo in 6CM, I shoot that then reload the brass. The round is a little more magazine friendly for the high BC bullets too. Really it doesn't matter to me, but I like having more options.
@@GunBlue490 I was torn between 270 and 260 for a long range bolt gun. I decided on the 260 for, mainly, three reasons: I prefer short action, I can neck down 308 brass for extreme affordability, and I could not find a rifle with a 270 barrel with a proper twist rate for heavy, high b.c. bullets. I was also going to build an ar10 in 260 but went with the 6.5 creedmoor because I have more room with that shoulder angle to seat the bullet further out as the throat erodes and still fit in the magazine. I can still make 6.5cm brass out of the 308 but with 3 or 4 steps(pain in the @$$) but only have to do it once. I need a color system to keep the brass/loaded cartridges separated... I love your work and thank you for your wealth of experience, GunBlue490!
I purchased a savage axis ( $250 ) chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor to see what the hype was all about . I’m happy to say that it’s almost identical to the .243 in my opinion after shooting both side by side . It’s sufficient for white tail without a doubt and a great caliber for women and younger adults that are recoil sensitive . It’s also very economical to shoot ... I picked up a 60 round box at Walmart in 6.5 Creedmoor for $40 . If you have a .243 no need to get a 6.5 Creedmoor ....
Just bought a box of Hornady 129 SST for my .264 winchester magnum. Only powder I have is IMR 4831. (Not Hodgdons 4831). Does anyone reload with this powder? Load suggestions? Thanks
I love your videos and always learning something new, recently I got interested in 257 Roberts and since there are no rifles available in this caliber would you think that 6.5mmx55 swede would be a close to it cartridge still having 85gr varmint bullets available as well as 100,110,120gr and more or what caliber/cartridge would be an all around close match to 257 qualities?
The closest would be the two that essentially displaced it; the old 25-06, and the 243 Winchester. The former uses the same bullets, with an approximate 10 percent increase in power, while the 243, though smaller bore and perhaps less capable on larger game, has been found quite good for the same category of shooting. The 6.5 Swede is an excellent round, and capable of even larger game up to moose, on which it is used in Europe, but it does ramp up the recoil a bit. However, I would prefer its more subdued velocity over the hyper velocity of the 25-06, which is really a long range specialist that is quite destructive at woodland ranges, even with its heaviest 120 grain bullet. The judicious handloader can replicate 257 Roberts loads with the 25-06, and though it is not as efficient, is a very nice rifle. I believe Kimber offers the 257 Roberts as a standard chambering, and I know they are dynamite shooters, made on the Model 70 design, free floated and epoxy bedded. I frequently see my Shot Show Special Model 70 on Gunbroker, and can personally attest to it. See my recent shooting video with it this summer.
SixFiveFiftyFive Actually, there is no 6.5-06 commercial equivalent in this country, though some wildcats such as the 6.5-06 A square and 256 Newton were exactly that.
Discussions comparing cartridges in a vacuum is an exercise in futility. There is absolutely no such thing as a better cartridge in such a vacuum. If my purpose is the shooting of a mule deer at 390 yards, and if I am capable of weilding the cartridge, then the 270 Winchester is superior than the 7mm-08. But if my wife is sensitive to recoil, the ballistic performance of the former is a moot point, if she can't hit confidently with it, and the latter becomes her superior round. The 7mm-08 is an exceptionally efficient round, but if one desires greater frontal area, 308 is greater than 284, which is greater than 277, which is greater than 264, and 243, and so on. Whether one sails downrange with better efficiency is an academic matter of no concern to the person requiring superior bullet diameter and heavier mass. The inaccuracies that you cite relating to bullet diameters and their given names are fascinating factoids, but have no relevance to the historical peformance of ammunition on game. The fact that the 270 rates high on the sales charts goes to the simple fact that it works very well for the reasons that it was promoted. The reason the ballistically superior 280 ranks low is because the 270 works, and it had a better press agent in Jack O'Connor. I've shot many head of game at incredibly long range with the 270. No amount of ballistic figures could convince me that the ballistically superior 280, with higher recoil, would be superior for my needs. I love my 7mm-08, and it's more efficient than the parent 308 in relative terms, but it certainly isn't "better". No matter how I carve the numbers, a 180 grain bullet outweighs a 165, and has more frontal area and mass, while having the same sectional density. A deer won't know the difference, but no act of ballistic juggling will convince the moose that they are the same. I occasionally hunt deer with the woefully inferior 32 Winchester Special, compared to the 7mm-08, but when I take the deer, he fell to an antique within its range that was just as worthwhile a thrill as downing a deer at 350 yards. We have a great variety of wonderful cartridges to select from, and I enjoy that selection. I don't find it worthwhile to pit one against the other, as they each have entirely suitable places in the game. Please don't reduce the fascinating choices to king of the hill.
GunBlue490 Thank you. I'll reflect on this. I'm still green in the relative spectrum of life and field experience. I have to accumulate more pratical experience before I can speak like you. It takes a substantial budget and/or time to do this with cartridges, especially in the field, which is why many folks obscese over paper. There aren't any real shortcuts except via knowlegeable and experienced mentors. Your videos are truly educating. Thanks again.
Moneyshot It's an extremely overbore, super magnum cartridge, as are all the new Nosler rounds. That mean LOTS of powder scooting down the barrel. Lots of powder means lots of erosion, in comparison to standard, or even magnum rounds, which places significant and uncontrolled wear on the life span of a barrel. The 264 Winchester Magnum is considerably smaller, and was notorious for wearing out barrels, so you can factor that as an indicator. How much is the difference? Consider, the 264 Win with a 120 grain bullet, clocking a super fast 3300 feet per second, is doing so with 64 grains of powder, which is not much more than a 30-06. The Nosler version, with the same bullet, is upping the ante by another 400 feet per second, but with 94 grains of their recommended US869 powder. Read that again. Ninety four grains. Logically, the Nosler, by all possible reasoning, will be extraordinarily hard on barrels. If you like target shooting, you may find that a barrel is toasted and no longer grouping before you reach the end of your first few hundred rounds. Being an overbore round, it has a very fussy diet of very limited extra slow burning powders to select from in order to achieve its performance and or accuracy. As with all such performance, it comes with other price tags, too. First of all, cost. Nosler is currently the sole provider of cases, to my knowledge, and they make wonderful brass, but it is not cheap, by any means, and larger means more. From one pound of powder containing 7,000 grains, you won't get more than 74 loads with their recommended US869, if you can even find that powder, which is not selling like hot cakes at your local dealers. Recoil is magnificent at 29 foot pounds of free recoil in a rather heavy 8.5 pound rifle, and goes up from there; way up, into the 30s. A typical 30-06 generates a mere 19 or so, in comparison, which is the top of the comfort zone for the vast majority of recreational shooters. It's not a prone rifle for a hunting weight sporter. Nosler recommends 120 grain bullets for deer. That's utterly ridiculous, unless every deer is taken far beyond 300 yards, because such velocities are nothing short of explosive dynamite on game inside that distance. I know that everyone on the internet shoots their deer offhand at 800 yards, but actual deer are shot between 30 to 75 yards away, and most mules and antelope are taken inside of 250. A 350 yard shot on game is a rarity, and the hunter who can actually shoot reliably beyond 250 yards is even rarer. Reliably, from actual field positions, without shooting aids. Seeing a beautiful 200 pound mule buck reduced to inedible pulverized garbage at 150 yards with a heavy bullet smashing into him at 22-250 velocities is not my idea of good performance. Reducing the velocity by increasing bullet weight makes no sense. Deer need no such sectional density, and the hunter needs no such recoil, and the 140 grain load simply brings it down to 270 Winchester velocity of 3200 feet per second, which the old 270 does with a slick 130 grain load. With over 30 grains less powder. In a lighter gun, with half the recoil. With easily obtained components. Hmmmmm. If I want to go after big game such as elk, I want more bullet diameter, not sectional density. And I can get that in spades with far less exotic cartridges that work at velocities that don't turn meat into blood pudding. The 270 is the reason the 264 Winchester Magnum never got off the starting block. Well, you asked me what I think of it. I can't think of one reason for it.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply! I already have a 30 06 and I love it. Was considering getting a spectacular ballistics performer for a second rifle but everything you say makes a lot of sense.
Average joe that loves guns so much the more I pay for one the more I’ll use it…love my $4k+ Daniel defense 16” .308…I load for it every single day and fire it 4 outta 7days a wk…live alone and all I do…while upper fell through porch banisters vortex viper n all 5’ to the ground barley lost zero…I’ve got it dressed out as far as possible and put a whole 10rd mag in the head box@530yrds…thanks ol Buddie
Now there are two other players on the market that people are for some reason going crazy about....one of them being the 26 nosler and the other more resent is the 6.5-300 wby.....not very practical cartridges but definatelly speed demons....another cartridge so a lesser degree is the 6.5-284 norma which is a standard in Long tange shooting stages
JP811931 You won't be expecting me to do a review one highly priced, big ticket rifles and their proprietary rounds that are aimed at exclusive pockets. All these are barrel burners have the same life expectancy as the 264 Winchester Magnum. I'm not a fan of the ultra long range hunting concept in the least, and frankly wish that companies with such prestigious names as Nosler and Weatherby would get off that nonsense, which leads to too much waste of precious game by fool shooters. Such cartridges have no logical place in the hunting camp, being far too destructive on edible tissue at sane ranges, while enticing irresponsible shots. Hunting of game should never be reduced to pot shots.
Dosent 6.5 Creedmoor use a trimmed down .243 case and isn't the .243 cartridge based on the .308 cartridge or case? Ive seen guys use a .243 case that has been trimmed and then ran through a 6.5 die.
No. The 260 is a necked down 308. The Creedmoor has a steeper shoulder angle and has very slightly less powder capacity than the 260 Rem. The 243 is also a necked down 308.
As Gunblue490 graciously explained, the case capacity of the 6.5x55 is higher than the CM. One can therefore achieve higher speeds with the the 6.5x55 at the same pressure levels. The CM is a pure Hornady re-branding of the Swede but it is neither more accurate nor faster. Get a Tikka in 6.5x55, handload and you are guaranteed supreme accuracy, efficiency and speed.
1911geek Yes, the 6.8 shoots a true 277 diameter bullet, just like the 270 Winchester, but that's their only relationship. I have owned a 6.8 and it's a fun rifle to shoot. The 6.8 is a terrific round for the handy rifles it is chambered for, and I can recommend it for larger varmints or even deer, provided a heavily constructed 120 grain bullet is used within sensible ranges.
