Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles Anybody looking to get into either the 6.5 Creedmoor or 6.5-284?

I have been shooting the 6.5-284 for awhile and haven't found that the additional velocity makes it a noticably better 6.5mm bore cartridge, within the limits of my ability, than the 260, 6.5x55, or 256 Newton. I have not yet owned a 6.5 Creedmoor.

I haven't hunted with the 243 WSSM, but like to shoot varmints and medium game with the 5 different Winchester/USRA 70s in 25 WSSM that I have on the rack. My primary pdog rifle is a Winchester/USRA 70 Super Shadow action with Ultimate Shadow bottom metal, a 1-14" Shilen barrel, and a McM Compact stock. Over 1K rounds down the tube and still hitting the mark.

Jeff

I currently have a 260 ackley, 6.5 creed and a 6.5x47. I think the 6.5 caliber is the easy to load for and not a bad chioice in the bunch. I have found that the 6.5 creed is the easiest to load for and may be the most accurate, but it may just be the rifle.

I can't for the life of me see why the 6.5 Creedmore is more popular than the .260. The factories are promoting the Creedmore and making better loads for it, but the .260 shoots the exact same bullets and it has more capacity. If you hand load it, it will out shoot the Creedmore. The 6.5/.284 is a pretty good cartridge alright. I have witnessed a coyote killed at 900 yds. with one in a Savage. But as far as the 6.5 mag goes, Remington is missing the boat by not loading it up as a long range cartridge in a 700 long action. If they would make good match cases and loads for it, it would outshoot the 6.5/284. It has more capacity. And if they would improve it with a 35* shoulder and a little straighter case then they'd really have something for long range. Just my thoughts and 2 cents worth.

I saw an article in the American Rifleman about the new "lightweight hunter" or some such name of a Savage that is rather cleverly designed as a light weight hunting rifle.
While at nearly $1000, it isn't a cheap Savage. But, if I were buying a Savage, that one has my attention.
If I wanted a 6.5, I'd do the Creedmoor round. Has the same capacity as the .260, but is better designed for use with the super high BC, 140 gr. bullets.
I wish Ruger made their heavy barreled 6.5 Creedmoors with their target trigger. Even w/o it, they are a heck of a deal from what I hear. E

Since I already have 34 CF rifles chambered for 6.5mm bore cartridges; 256 Newton (x2), 260 (x20), 6.5x55 (x8), and 6.5-284 (x4), I doubt that I'll buy either a 6.5x47 or 6.5 Creedmoor anytime soon.

I'm not a competitive target shooter, or a pretend sniper, so any advantage that the 6.5 Creedmoor might have over my existing herd of 22 260s is likely to be more theoretical than practical in nature.

Not a big fan of the Savage 110 series rifles if other viable options are available, but they have their place. I can't honestly think of any scenario where I'd ever pay $1K for any Savage 110 series rifle that has ever been made, particularly so for a lightweight rifle when CLRs can regularly be bought for much less $$.

Jeff

The light weight hunter can be bought for 715, which for a 5.75 lb rifle with some look that is guaranteed to shoot, I'd say it's a pretty good bargain.you will not have to replace the stock, replace the trigger, and bed the action in order to get it to shoot either......not saying that we have to do that, but I see a lot of guys on here who do that to get a rifle to shoot .5 to .75 when a savage will do that stock just about every time. Jmo, lenny

I don't believe for a second that when you buy a Savage 110 series rifle you get a rifle that will shoot .5 to .75 in its stock/out of the box configuration just about every time. Anybody on the internet can shoot 0.5 to 0.75 MOA groups, but it is much more difficult in real life.

Jeff

PS - I wouldn't pay $715 for a Savage 110 series rifle either.

There seems to be a lot of overlap in the 6.5s these days. The 6.5x55, 260, and Creed all seem to be too similar to each other.