Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Help choosing new rifle caliber - 308 or 6.5creedmore

I have a tikka 308 im looking to sell as im just not fond of it. I handled one of the bergara b14 rifles the other day and plan to purchase one. Juet not sure if i wanna go 308 again or go with a 6.5 creedmore. Will the 6.5creed do pretty much all a 308 will do with less recoil? Or would the 308 be a more versatile choice? Used for primarily hunting

Personally, I'd go 308 although there is nothing wrong with the creedmoor except overhype.

If I was all set up to reload the 308, brass, bullets, dies etc. on hand, I'd probably lean that way, but if I was starting from scratch, it would be creed in a heartbeat.

Yes and yes.

One of the reasons people cite for .308 is availability of cheaper ammo. Thing is the cheap blasting stuff isn't very accurate, so that can defeat the purpose. If you want cheap, but usefully accurate, plinking ammo you have to load your own regardless of whether you have a 6.5 or .308.

The other thing is the cheaper, but good enough, hunting ammo can get hard to find. There have been times in the past several years when .308 150gr Cor Lokt ammo was nearly impossible to get. In that situation you're paying for premium ammo and it costs more either way. Sometimes the less popular rounds are easier to get when the more popular was bought up in a panic.

I'd go with the 6.5 this time to see if the cartridge will make for a rifle that suits you better. You have to try different ones until you find your preference. I've used a .260 and a .308, so I know what works best for me. If you haven't then you don't know and you're gonna have to try the 6.5 to find out.

What did you not like about the 308? If it was recoil,then you need to get the 6.5 Creedmoor. You can load a 308 down but there's no guarantee you will have as accurate of a load. In general you should be able to find an accurate load for the 6.5 with less recoil than the 308.

The 308 was fine. Just didnt care for the tikka. Im more of a 700 guy and after handling a B14 id much rather have it than the tikka. I took a few deer with the 308. No issues. Recoil wasnt bad but sure id like a little less

If only hunting deer sized game then I would go with a 6.5 creedmoore or the 260 rem. If going larger game than I would stick with the 308 win and get a good recoil pad/brake. I realize you can kill larger game with both but I tend to lean to the .308 bullet for bigger game.

I recently made the same decision, in favor of the .308, for reasons of versatility, component availability, larger diameter to augment expansion of the projectile. Recoil is not that much different, and a bit more weight in the .308 helps to reduce recoil(I went with a heavier barrel contour, which has other benefits as well).

Now that may be the silliest thing I've read all day.

Seriously, maybe NOT. Stock FIT for the individual can make a whale of a difference. The same rifle/cartridge shot by different people CAN have varied reactions.

Jerry

Everything else set aside, the .308 has been around since the 1950s and it's not going anywhere. You may want to ask yourself is the Creed here to stay or is it just the "big thing" until the next "big thing" gets here...just my $.02, your thinking may be different.

I guess some feel it is silly to calculate recoil energy, to consider the effects of different weights of components and of the rifle, stock fit, etc.

One could get into more variables like powder burning rate and gun weight affecting the recoil acceleration, the jet effect vs. powder charge and bore size (Mule Deer wrote an article on that effect some years ago).

Your use is "primarily hunting"??? What the heck does that mean? Are you hunting antelope or moose? Out west in wide open spaces or thick forest? The type of game hunted and the expected type of shots should always dictate your caliber selection.

It means purchasing a rifle more for the hunting aspect vs bench shooting. More specifically deer,antelope, possibly elk

If elk are included in possible usage, the .308 would be significantly better, imo.

I would agree. 6.5 would work fine for deer size animals and smaller. For anything 250 lb and up the 308 would make me more comfortable.

With elk in the equation, .308 all the way. I think the 6.5 would work on elk, but given a choice, 308.

How does a 308 kill elk better?

I think, both are great rounds. Should take animals the same.

IDK, not sure it makes a difference too much, but an elk shot in the exact same place with both calibers one is going to start out making a 35% larger hole right out of the gate and thus possible make a larger hole in the lungs to bleed it out faster?

Thats about the only reason one might argue that I suppose.

I think both are great options, but up here in Alaska I am partial to the .308 over the .260 I have. The 180s going 2700 fps or 140s doing 2800 likely isn't much difference other than a bit more mass with the .308.

If you plan to shoot a ways out there then the 6.5 is better, but I don't shoot much past 400 yards so the .308 does just fine for me even for grizzlies and brown bears I have seen shot with the .308.

Would a 140 grainer from a 6.5 do the same? Likely so, but I prefer the .308. I am sure you could argue that the the 6.5 is better in every aspect right?

because there are more $.02's, IMO's and more comfortables out there.

Looks like ima go with 308. Thanks for the info guys. I would like to add a 6.5x55 or 6.5creed in the future tho

I think the answer to this question is the 7mm-08.....

The .308 has some advantage in terminal ballistics over the 6.5 just like the 6.5 has an advantage over the .22-250.

Lol....chit

Stick with the 308. I find that you can find ammo for it anywhere which is important to me. Its popular, not that much recoil and basically is a "do anything" type round. If Elk is in your future then for sure the 308.

I have a 308 savage and i will say that the recoil is pretty mild. I also have a 7mm-08 in a different model and the recoil is NASTY.

i would say 7mm-08 would be a good choice too, but from my experience the recoil is almost the same with the 308 having a bit more in size for bigger game.

.308 it is. Like i said tho i would like a creedmoor or a swede maybe for my next rifle but for my needs right now i thinj the 308 is the ticket

Hard to go wrong with a 308 Winchester!

Killindeer: I have seen Moose killed with a 308 Winchester!
Personally, I have killed 3 types of Deer, Elk, Antelope, Mt. Goat and Black Bear with my 308 Winchester Rifles.
I have not shot, nor seen any game killed with the 6.5 Creedmore but tend to want to give the versatility and lethality advantage to the 308 Winchester.
Best of luck to you with whichever you choose.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

I'd rather talk rifles than cartridges any day, but in essence the .17 Rem and the 30-06 Springfield are more alike than they are different.

FWIW, I absolutely love the .308 cartridge, and have .308s in 2 different rifles.

But for a hunting cartridge I do believe that most guys are best served with a rifle chambered to a modern cartridge in .24, .25, or .26 caliber.

Aint' much a guy couldn't do with a sporter or light weight rifle made up in stainless/synth., and shooting a good 6.5 bullet.

My personal choice for decades was the .243 Winchester. Had a 25-06 built and it was a sweet shooting killing machine. Just this year i came home with a .260 Rem, and it's likely found it's forever home.

I do own a 243, a 700 i picked up not long ago. Havent taken game with it yet but used to shoot an old Browning lever action when i first started hunting and killed quite a few deer with it. I really like the caliber. I kept saying last year i was gonna get a 6.5x55 but never did. Handled the new Bergara rifles and must own one. I guess its likely gonna be 308 but gonna research the 6.5creed some more

Expanding bullets (save Berger VLD's) start expanding immediately upon contact and are generally fully expanded within the first two inches. With that- there is no difference due to being .308 versus .264.









No, not better in every aspect. They are so similar terminally with good bullets that it isn't worth talking about. No one looking at a dead animal would be able to tell whether it was shot with a 243, 6.5/260, 7/08, 308, 30/06, etc, using bullets optimized for each.



The reality is that if they all have similar terminal ballistics, and they do, why wouldn't someone choose the one with less recoil, less wind drift, and better factory ammo for lower cost?

I pretty much just hunt deer and hogs down here, and I can't say there's a bad pick between the .308win and the Creedmoor. If hunting locations where shot opportunities typically exceed 300yds, I reach for my 6.5x47L. It shoots pretty dang flat, is easy on the shoulder, drifts little in the wind, and is easy to hit with. It's enjoyable to shoot. If hunting where most shots are 300yds or less, I often carry a .308win. With most good cup/core bullets, I get a bit more on-game performance regarding knock-downs and good blood trails, as compared to my Lapua or my 260Rem. It is one of the most boringly reliable and effective medium-game calibers out there, often impressively so, but there is more recoil. And then there's the 7mm-08, which for me has yielded excellent results on game, with a little more recoil than the 6.5mm offerings.

I guess it would boil down to what I wanted the rifle for and the conditions in which I planned to employ it. If I planned to shoot it a lot, and shoot it long, I'd go 6.5mm.

So they both expand to the same size?? Huh I didn't know that...why not go with a 243 or 22-250 for even less recoil.

That's not how bullets work, but yes, their expanded diameter will be very similar.

There are three main points in terminal ballistics that matter to hunters-

1) Total Penetration depth (how deep the bullet actually penetrates)

2) Permanent crush cavity (what the bullet physically destroys by directly crushing the tissue)

3) Temporary stretch cavity (the tissue that is stretched outward radially from the bullet path)



In high velocity projectiles (above around 2200fps) the wound channel is significantly larger than the bullet. As such the difference in bullet diameter is nearly meaningless. As an example, using equally constructed bullets in both- if a 308win produces an average temporary stretch cavity of 8.30 inches wide, and a 6.5 produces a cavity 8.14 inches wide- you literally have a wound less an .16 of an inch wider..... Nearly unmeasurable in a lab, and completely meaningless in the field.



Terminal Ballistics isn't backyard "science" and gunstore myths anymore. What bullets do in tissue, why they do it, and how they kill is absolutely known and there is very, very little differnace between calibers everything else equal.








I would. That 22-250 can penetrate as deeply with the correct bullet as your 308 with 180 NPT's or have a much wider wound while still having enough penetration to reach the vitals of a 400lb animal.




Can you tell me what made these wounds?

This bullet penetrated approximately 20in, no exit. Point of the shoulder.






This one penetrated approximately 18-20in, no exit. Went through the shoulder blade, this is the wound behind the blade.






Another as above, 18-20in penetration, through shoulder blade. This is the blade itself.

Cool so I will sell everything but my 22-250 and rock on. Thanks man!! Just saved me loads of money!

Brother, there's little doubt that you know how to hunt, but you lack understanding of terminal ballistics. Presuming because you didn't say what gun killed what- that you can't.... which makes sense- because you can't. And no one else can either.

I know and I appreciate you narrowing down my gun safe! Gonna simplify an awful lot for me. I def spend more time studying maps and scouting than reading and studying ballistics no doubt so I will heed your advice and just go with a 22-250 for all my hunting. Should be fine I believe since all my hunting is 400 yards or less I believe. Thanks again for the help. Been enlightening.

I certainly have pics from blacktail deer shot with a 375 hh while hunting on kodiak that showed less internal damage than those pics above so you are 109% correct you can't tell any difference between what is shot with a 22-250 or a 375 hh so might as well save the $$$ and recoil and do it all with the lighter recoiling and cheaper to load rifle.

Formid,
You bring up some interesting points and have proof to back them up.

I cant disagree, one question though you refer to approximately 20" of penetration. Do you believe that's enough for larger critters like elk?

I read on a previous post you were considering a 243 for an elk hunt?
And you posted a pic of you? in Glacier close to a grizzly with a Glock 9mm.

We know 458win mag(Phil) stopped a charging grizzly with a 9mm.

With new bullet technology maybe we should rethink the old norms?

That being said, I shot a small whitetail at close range with a 22 Hornet, tight behind the shoulder in the lungs. The load was a 50gr Hornady at 2300fps, it ran off and I never found it, made me sick thinking about it.

Point being you can go too far with the marginally powered rounds.
I suspect Alaska Lanche would feel a little uneasy prowling around Alaska with a 22-250, I know I would.

As long as you the bullet starts in the vitals quartering away or towards, yes it's enough. I, of course would prefer more, however I want the widest wound channel possible while still penetrating deep enough.









I carried a 243 twice this year for elk and will again one more time. As for the 9mm, it's about hitting. As far as bullets- I think it's both. People went through "magnumitus" in the mid to late 1900's where only a 300 Weatherby was good enough for Texas deer. With that- bullets are VASTLY superior in almost all calibers and people have more opportunities to kill animals now. It's nothing to kill 20-30 deer a year now in some places which generally wasn't possible 30-40 years ago.

Once dudes really start putting animals on the ground with a bunch of different cartridges with correct bullet choices they tend to see that they are generally more alike than different.








There's no doubt. I wasn't, and am not advocating a 22-250 for general Alaska use. I am saying that if one doesn't notice a large (or any?) difference between a .375 and a 308 in deer, there's no way that there is a large difference between a 308 and 6.5.


You can definitely kill a WT with a Hornet, but it'd be best to pay attention to bullets and placement...... just like with every other one.






Amazing how people have no issue killing with a pointed stick in the lungs, but a bullet that creates for mare damage causes so much heartache......

True. One slices tissue causing hemorrhage ,the other crushes and destroys soft vital tissue with the same results.

I'd probably take the 6.5 Creed mostly because I hate the 308....

Talk about irrational!

Well said, Bob!!!!

I'd take it because I'm pretty sure I'd shoot it more.

Yes.......


I only like what I like.

And like Formid said there ain't much difference so it matters not what I use within reasonable parameters.


Pass the 270.

For my use I'd still choose a 270 over a 223 when it comes to shooting deer.

But whatever.

And of course no big diff between a 6.5 or .308.



The real question is, which one would be quieter with a suppressor?


I'm clueless, noticeable difference?

Bob y do u hate the 308??

I'm thinking if you treated every shot with a rifle with the same judiciousness that you treat a bow shot....there'd be a lot more meat in the freezer and a lot less debating about appropriate cartridges for big game hunting.....

Bob, what game have you taken with the 308 that you'd choose the Creed over it?

Or is this just one of those emotional gut-things that aren't based in anything else? I've got several of those...

The Creedmoor is an amazing cartridge. What other 6.5 cartridge can launch a 140 grain bullet at 2700ish FPS? Absolutely ground breaking!

My impressions were that 300 magnums generally caused more trauma and broke up heavy bone better and more reliably than smaller standard cased cartridges.

They also seemed to hit heavy game harder,especially at distance..

When I was using them all a lot and seeing them used I always thought the 300 magnums really belonged in the medium bore category.

I definitely think that velocity matters as I have seen more extensive trauma from bullets traveling fast than I have once they slowed down.

Meaning to say I have seen a lot more difference between(say) a 270 and a 300 magnum than i have between a 270 and a 280.

264 Win Mag, if you back it off some!

I personally don't think the Creedmoor's success is about ballistics.

In my opinion, it's about case design and factory ammo. It gave rifle guys something that worked within mag confines and high BC bullets (mostly). It turned anybody into a long range shooter that wanted to spend some money in a gun shop -- or so they thought.

Rifles manufacturers should take note of this. Any one of several manufacturers could gain a big share of the market overnight if they did it all right from the get-go. It wouldn't cost any more money to do so....

The Creedmoor also does it with minimal recoil and an affordable price. That doesn't hurt matters either.

Not saying a .308 wil get it done better than a 243, I have likely seen more moose shot with a 243 than most here and it most certainly can and does work. Especially with the little 80 grn TTSX. Heck this same buddy has taken grizz with it. And it most certainly works, but just because you can't see a post op difference in a 243 and a 30-06 kill doesn't mean the 243 is just as good of a choice for hunting larger critters does it? If everything is perfect sure but I have found grizzlies don't always give the perfect shot and sometimes you gotta break some bone in order to get your shot into the vitals and such.

oh, say:

260, 6.5 x 55, 6.5 x 57, 6.5/06....

Thats just the ones I've loaded for...

and then there is the magnum based cartridges....

I look at the Creedmoor as just reinventing the wheel, in comparison to the 260...

the market in the USA always seem to favor what's "new and improved" ( a marketing concept) over the "tried and proven" trends of yesteryear.

Amen to this.

The reason I do not buy into this notion of seeking the lowest level of ballistic terminal effect when choosing a BG rifle.

Yes, you get my sarcasm! I have two 6.5x55s. I know the creed moor is fine round but so are the others you listed. It just baffles me when people act like the creed moor invented the 6.5 bullet.

The Answer is no it won't do "everything" a 308 will, but then again a 308 won't do everything a Creed will.

The 308 has more mass and frontal area which yields better terminal performance, but worse aerodynamics so it sheds energy faster than the longer heavier 6.5..

So the question becomes which cartridge looses what in an area you don't care about...

Availability (do you care)
- if you travel and forgot your ammo your screwed if you pick the Creed. You could go with a 260 vs the Creed and balance that out a bit. If you reload you already know the cost factor to the brass, and availability that both cartridges bring with them. Time and cost are bigger with the Creed.

Recoil (do you care)
- Not much difference here but the 308 does kick more than a Creed, if you are flinchy the creed will do you well here.

How far is your normal target engaged (how much drop- does it matter)
If you are a person who knows how to handle drop you are ok either way, but it's easier to shoot a flatter bullet, and better to pick one that doesn't shed energy at 350...If you hunt in areas where the normal shot distance is over 300 I'd go with the 6.5 and use bullets with a decent BC so they retain energy longer.

What type of shooter are you (risky shots, or not)
If you normally don't address targets over 350 than the 308 will give you a better margin of error for bad angle shots given it can keep going a bit more than a 6.5 .... HOWEVER this also depends on what type of bullets you use. If you shot only barnes or another alloy bullet this changes fairly quickly to be a level playing field. Either way if you aren't a precision shooter, or are flinchy, or .... where a marginal angle comes into play, well personal preference wise I go heavier so the 308 may be better. Again this is negated over 350 given the energy loss of the 308, or if you use lighter bullets in the 6.5 ... so other choices impact this one.


Other factors - that you won't choose that impact the results you may get..

Each rifle will "like" (shoot better) one weight.

308's tend to like 180's
6.5's tend to like 130's to 140's

Given these are short actions picking a long bullet can impact how much powder you can cram in... so if you are a speed freak do some research on the max velocity you can normally reach, the books lie about how each person is comfortable compressing a load, and I've seen folks disappointed with the top end... You don't want to be there.
300 WSM was like that - not sure on the Creed.

Energy is a theoretical number in a calculation....

Mass and frontal area, OTOH, do not change.

The reason we argue this nonsense endlessly is that the animals we hunt are easily killed with both so it's impossible to see much difference between anything (say) 6.5 to 7mm or 30 on standard cases.

With bonded bullets like an accubond say a .308 will toss a 180 accubond at 2700 fps with a BC .507.

The Creedmor tosses 140 accubonds with a BC of .509 at roughly 2700 fps as well.

Not sure I am seeing the Creedmor walking away from the .308. Out to 1000 yards they are basically identical for wind drift and drop which makes sense due to the bullets have nearly the same BC and going the same muzzle velocity. Only difference at 1000 yards of note is the 308 has roughly 650 fpe and the Creedmor has roughly 500 fpe.

So really only unless you use VLDs. Then the Creedmor does it start to make show a difference at longer range as you can shoot the 140 VLDs which have a .612 BC.

The Creedmor does seem to give you a 1/3 less recoil (23 ft/lbs for the .308 and 15 ft/lbs for the Creedmor with the loads above) in 6.5 pound rifles to get the same trajectory with quality hunting bullets. So unless I were to plan on running VLDs the .308 isn't giving up that much even long range to the Creedmor. Or atleast thats what I am telling myself to keep from having to buy one.

Like someone wise mentioned before they are more alike than they are different.

When you look at the success it's had in a field that crowded, it is amazing. And amazingly simple.

So true....at the end of the day either will work but whats the fun in that.

Aruging/learning on the internet is just entertainment we do when we can't be out actually killing animals

I think you need to re-look at the BCs of 140s. The Berger is .600 and you'd be hard-pressed to shoot a .600 bullet at similar velocities out of a .308.

I think you need to re-read my whole post and not cherry pick that one liner

Well, I did go back and read your whole post. Bergers aren't the only 140 grain 6.5 bullet with a BC of 140 or better. Just the most obvious example.

The simple fact is, the 6.5 has multiple bullets with a BC of .600 or better that you can shoot at 2700-ish, and the .308 does not. Not even vlds get you there in the .308.

So your whole post is kind of pointless, especially the premise:

"Not sure I am seeing the Creedmor walking away from the .308. Out to 1000 yards they are basically identical for wind drift and drop..."

What combination will do that in a .308? Those seem more like 30-06 numbers to me, but I don't own, load or shoot a .308.

Thanks,

David

OK like I said unless you shoot VLDs the Creedmor doesn't really have any advantage which was the whole point of the point but the English language is escaping you this morning I see.

Notice I didn't say BERGER anywhere in my post anyways. I was referring to all low drag bullets as VLDs and just gave the Berger 140 BC as an example.

No a 30-06 tosses 180s at 2850 and 2900 fps.

We're talking 1000 yards, right?

Why wouldn't you use the best bullet available in both chamberings for 1000 yards if you're shooting at that distance?

Well I don't think would be a great choice for taking deer at 1000 yards. No doubt people will do it, but the energy just doesn't seem to be there at 650 fpe with the VLD at 1000 which is the same as the 180 accubond at 1000 too. But I'm sure let 'er rip with either anyways.

Two things. First, 2700 in a 24" .308 with a 180 is very optimistic. Nosler only gets slightly over 2600 with their data, and 2730 for the Creedmor and 140s. So you've got that.

And then wind drift. At 1000 yards, you have to hit the animal before "energy" even comes into play.

I'll take the .600 BC over the .509 for hitting at 1000.

Just going with what I am getting using Alliants MR-2000 and their load data jives with that 2700 fps is easily done...might as well use the best powder available right?

Yes wind drift is better with the 6.5 creed. I mean you do need an extra 1/2 MOA correction at 500 yards. Like I said they are more alike than they are different.

Its just that folks make the Creedmor to be this great long range game changer but when I run the numbers it just isn't the much more impressive and isn't even hitting as hard all the way out to 1K.

Besides...if you are talking about using the best bullets out there:
https://cuttingedgebullets.com/cgi-bin/commerce.cgi?preadd=action&key=MTH_308_180

Like I said both are great cartridges but all the Creed is really giving one is less recoil for similar trajectories and less energy (if that matters likely not).

1000 yards?


I was thinking normal ranges for shooting animals.

Seriously all those who have scored one shot kills at unwounded BG animals at 1000 yards please raise their hands?

Exactly. The difference between the two is even less the closer in you get from 1000

Right, and no doubt you could best the Nosler data for the Creed too, there are no new powders listed there either. But pressure tested load data is a good comparison of the potential of both cartridges.




I thought we were talking about 1000 yards, isn't that your original comparison? Big difference. But you knew that.

And that bullet you cited is a solid copper hollow point. I'm sure you've tried it in your .308 magazine with no COAL issues, and it's just as accurate as a vld, right? I've shot factory Creedmor 140s at long ranges and seen the results.

You're the one who made the 1000 yard comparison.

I know trying to give the Creedmor more of an advantage in ballistics as the closer in from 1000 the less of advantage (if any really) you'll end up with other than recoil.

Cause the difference at 500 yards is embarrassingly small.

I just ran the 165 gr AB in a 308 at 2850 fps,against a 130 AB for the 6.5 Creed at 2850.

I grabbed a quick eyeball average of velocities so the Creed may be a tad slow. But they were so much the same to 600 yards from a 200 yard zero,you couldn't shoot it.

I did not run any numbers for any of the High BC bullets but expect the Creed would rule there simply because a 308 does not have the case capacity to start a bullet with the BC of a 140-6.5 at the same velocity.

That was my only point, and it was on the 1000 yard comparison.

FWIW, at the distances I'd shoot big game, I don't really care what other people shoot or their rationales. For anything bigger than deer I'd go with the .308, especially compared to a .243.

Exactly me either. I am merely saying aside from recoil the creedmor doesn't a major advantage over the simple 308 at ranges you would shoot deer at even using Low drag .6 BC bullets. But I guess that's lost on you as my posts don't make any sense to you and you can't see that. Or more likely I explained what I was trying say extremely poorly.

You're a bit touchy I'm this subject eh? None of it is lost on me, and the only aspect of your posts I commented on was your 1000 yard comparison.

Once again you introduced that, nnt me.

PS, I'm signing off to get in some exercise, which is more important than any of this stuff for my kind of hunting.

My 308 does 2600fps with a 208gr amax with a B.C. of .648

My 260 does 2700fps with a 140gr VLD with a B.C. of .614

Run the numbers to 1000yds and the 308 wins in wind drift by 6"
The 308 loses in drop, by 10"
The 308 wins in energy by 330 ft lbs
The 308 loses in recoil

You can play with the ballistic numbers all day long and make your pet cartridge look better or worse.

Kinda silly to argue over but this is the campfire and good sport to us.

This!

I have yet to lay eyes on a Bergara rifle. If it suits you, make this choice in confidence that you will do well with it. In whatever cartridge you choose.

A 180gr solid and a 180gr frangible has the exact same "energy", yet are completely different in flesh.

"Energy" is not a wounding mechanism, never was and never will be. It is an idea that was dreamed up in a time when they didn't know how to measure "killing ability".

That time is long over. How bullets kill and why is COMPLETELY known. It is simple- placement of wound, depth of wound and width of wound. That's it. Full stop.

If the bullet in question has enough retained velocity when it impacts the target to expand/upset/fragment/whatever, then it will kill just fine.





As for the difference between external ballistics with the 308 and 6.5..... It is possible to get very close. We compete with a 308 load that is within pressure limits yet launches a 185gr Berger at 2,800fps from a 26in barrel MR2000. It does over 2,700fps from a 22in barrel.

Yet UNEQUIVOCALLY in the field we get less hits in the same guns than we do with 243's/6.5Creed/260Rem/etc. Why is that? I mean ballistically they are so close you can't really hold the difference in the field, right? Wrong. And it's one word- SHOOTABILITY. It absolutely can not be over stated. Especially in lighter weight hunting guns the differences in hit rates (group size in the field) from varying positions, on varying targets under stress is measurable. It is for every single person. Given the same platform and mechanical precision, there is no one that can shoot a gun with 25ft-lbs recoil as well as they can a gun with 15ft-lbs of recoil. That is a mechanical fact proven through thousands of shooters.

There is so much more to killing animals at medium-long range than just external ballistics. Recoil, muzzle lift, mental focus, follow through, muzzle blast, etc all contribute to pushing one to NOT do what is required to hit things. They less stable the position, the more wind, the more physically and mentally stressed one is, and the shorter time span one has- the more the differences show themselves.


If both bullets cause enough tissue damage, both drop and drift the same, both have the same mechanical precision, and both arrive with sufficient velocity to cause bullet upset- the one with less recoil and less muzzle rise, will ALWAYS result in more hitting and killing. It is only with drastic changes in terminal ballistics that you see an increase with going bigger.

An example would be a 300 magnum using a 178gr AMAX started above 3,000fps. There is a massive, measurable difference in wound channels between that a 168gr AMAX in a 308win going 2,700fps. Yet even then- the actual "killing ability" (that is how many shot fired for how many animals dying) almost always favors the lesssor recoiling platform. Some people can shoot well enough to do very, very well with the 300's, but the vast majority will have better success with a 6mm/6.5mm even though they have less "power".

Great explanation!

Im going to the range now to shoot the Mashburn and the 6.5 Creed....

I never considered a .308 to be hard recoiling. I mean it's always on the list as a good option for youth and women for good reason. The .308 is suddenly not "shootable"?

Is it always the case that a lesser recoiling rifle yields better shots if the same rifles are both capable of the same accuracy and the only factor left is human? So a person will see better accuracy with a .22 lr or 17 hmr than a creedmor? Only asking cause I never felt hamstrung by the recoil of a .308. I guess subconsciously I am? Interesting thoughts for sure.

What you get with cartridges like the 6.5 creed(6.5x55,.260 rem. 6.5x47 etc.) over others like the .308 is the best of "the most with the least". The most BC., SD., mass and velocity with the least amount of recoil, blast, wind drift..., to effectively kill most big game animals in N. America( and Charles Shelton might have argued "All" NA big game animals).

If you are going to parse numbers, the less recoil of the creed wins out. And less recoil makes for better hits... and hits count.. and better hits count betterer.

It's not just recoil, but yes given everything else being the same a gun producing 5ft-lbs recoil will be shot better than a gun producing 15ft-lbs recoil. NOT JUST from pure recoil. One of the biggest things is to get people to learn is how to set themselves up and shoot the gun to catch their own trace and impacts AND then them learning to do it aggressively for every shot. Just as you should "fight" to get the most stable position possible, you should "fight" to catch your own trace, splash, and impacts on every shot fired.

There is stacking effect with doing so. Yes, watching the hit through the scope is good for follow through with helps greatly with proper form before the round has left the muzzle, but it does WAY more than that. When you make a call- elevation, wind, lead, or positionally AND you watch the results of the call in real time - your brain links the two consciously and subconsciously. You immediately learn from that one shot more than you would from multiple shots where you don't catch trace/impacts.

It is absolutely possible to spot your own shots with a 7lb 308 and 180gr bullets- I spot around 80% of the rounds fired from a 300WM past around 200 yards with a decent position, but it is significantly easier to do so, with far more consistent results with a 7lb 6mm or 6.5mm with close to the same case capacity as the 308.

Let's say that for example, peak shooting performance will be with a 223 and 75gr AMAX in a 10lb rifle- that's the baseline. Everything we do more than that will decrease our shooting performance. Less rifle weight= lower hit rates. More recoil- lower hit rate. More muzzle flip- lower hit rate. Etc, etc. Now when you add other variables such as range, wind, size of animal, etc it can and will change that. I may NEED (or want) the terminal ballistics difference with a 308 and 180gr TSX at 300 yards, BUT I will not shoot it as well. I may need (or want) the decreased wind drift of the 6.5Creed with147gr ELD's at 600 yards, but I won't shoot it as well- HOWEVER, I may get a higher hit rate due to less wind errors.


All of that is to say there is a sweet spot. The sweet spot for mid range shooting is somewhere between a 223 with 77's and a 308 with 185's and it meets around the 6mm and 6.5mm chamberings. They provide excellent external ballistics, very good terminal ballistics, are relatively easy to shoot, and tend to get shot A LOT. Those 4 things combined account for a lot more in the killing equation than any difference in "power".

If one were to take the wound channel of a 6.5Creed with good bullets and imagine that being put into the chest of an elk... There isn' a human alive that would say- "that ain't going to work". Yes, you have to hit the chest.... You also have to hit the chest with a 308amd a gut shot elk with one is a guy shot elk with the other.


With bullets, most hunters do not seem to realize that good companies design and produce bullets for OPTIMUM performance against whatever target they want. It is the reason (along with knowledge) that 223 and 9mm have went from "marginal" to being the absolute #1 choice of those how can choose, for killing bipeds. Animals are no different. It is not a big thing to design a .224 bullet to penetrate deep enough to get through an elks shoulder and reach the vitals- though to do so means a narrower wound channel. That's what you get when going bigger and/or heavier- a wider wound channel for the same penetration depth (or deeper penetration for the same width).

Well, if we're talking comparison of the cartridges and not what your particular rifle will do, this points up one advantage of the creed, really the reason it was developed.

Because I'm sure that's not a standard factory magazine that works well with a 208.