The other problem with the 6.5 Creedmoor discussion is many shooters/hunters judge cartridge performance strictly on muzzle velocity, even a gain as little as 50 fps. Yet some of the same people consider, oh, the .264 Winchester Magnum "too much."

Like many of us, I've had my own encounters with the muzzle velocity race over the decades. One classic example was getting talked into chambering a custom rifle in .257 Roberts Ackley Improved rather than the standard .257, which is what I initially requested. I hunted with the .257 AI for several years, and never could tell any difference in field performance--whether trajectory, wind-drift or killing power--despite the AI's 75-100 fps "advantage" in muzzle velocity.

I should have known better, because before buying my first chronograph in 1979, I estimated the muzzle velocity of my handloads from loading manual data, both the velocity listed for loads and the trajectory tables in the back of the books. Of course, back then very few hunters knew how much effect atmospheric factors had on trajectory, or that bullet-company ballistic coefficients were only vague approximations.

My two primary big game rifles back then were a .243 Winchester and .270 Winchester. Using both loading data and range-testing, I came to the conclusion that the .243 got 3000 fps from the 105-grain Speer Hot-Cor, and the .270 got 3000 fps from the 150-grain Hornady Spire Point and Nosler Partition.

Well, gee, when I actually got my hands on that first chronograph, I discovered the .243's load averaged around 2800 fps, and the .270's 2850. The reason each shot flat enough to guess 3000 fps was, of course, that I lived in Montana, where the thinner air at higher elevations allowed bullets to shoot flatter.

After discovering the incredibly slow muzzle velocities of my handloads, I HAD to develop handloads that actually did get 3000 fps--though that involved using lighter bullets, which didn't shoot any flatter because their real-world BC's were slightly lower. And after hunting with them for a few years, I also never could see that magical extra "killing power" from another 150-200 fps.

Now, no doubt somebody here will claim they see a big difference in another 100 fps of muzzle velocity. If so, I applaud their sensitive perception. But in the real world I can think of several factors that outrank a 100-fps "advantage" in muzzle velocity, including:

1) Widely available, affordable and accurate factory rifles
2) Widely available, affordable and accurate factory ammunition
3) Widely available, affordable and accurate brass and bullets

No doubt these won't rank very high among the rifle loonies who constantly spend money on "building" rifles, or on handloading stuff from expensive brass to really special precision tools. But in the real world, far more hunters buy factory rifles and ammo, and even if they handload prefer buying brass for much less than a buck a case.

“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck