Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Why/How does the Creedmoor out run the 260 & 6.5x55?

Photo finish horse race, losing by a nose is second place. Then there's third place...



DF

I reported a few years back about a mess up with my Swede. I was trying your 42 gr. RL-15 load with 100 NPT, when I mistakenly loaded 52 gr. My Ohaus scale jumped a notch. RL-15 is not a case filler and the overcharge went unnoticed.

When I fired that load, the chrono read 3,577 fps and the bolt froze. It took some effort to get it open, the primer was blown. No mallet, just my hand with some bumping. This was with Lapua brass. QL pressure estimate for that combo was 81,637 psi.

So, running this Swede, a strong FN, at 60K or even 62K psi, doesn't bother me in the least. It's been pressure tested...

Like they say on TV, "Don't try this at home"...

I am impressed with the quality of the bolt handle weld.

DF

Nice looking rifle df

Thanks, it’s a favorite.

Not many Swedes can shoot 100 gr NPT’s at 3,500 fps.

DF

Dang! You have a .257 Weatherby! And without that damned belted case....

Well the honest answer is that the Emperor really is naked.

The CM is an excellent shell.
Nearly as good as the 2 older shells it's trying to match.
(the 6.5 Swede and the 260 Remington)

The people trying to sell you products know the CM is new so it won't be made in weak actions. So running at high pressures is not problem for them.

All 3 shells have the same size head.
All 3 have the same size bores.
All 3 shells can be loaded to the same pressure if all are in modern actions.
All 3 shells can have the same twist.
All 3 shells use the same bullets.

If all 3 shells are put into the same action (say a Ruger 77 just as an example) and loaded to the same pressures the biggest (the Swede) is fastest, the middle shell (the 260) is in the middle and the CM is the slowest.

From the slowest to the fastest there is not enough difference to matter in the real world. There is no scenario on earth where XYZ ballistics are perfect, but 75 FPS less is just not enough.

So from a standpoint of use, there is no difference in any of them.

But loading the CM to a much higher pressure and telling people it's "better" is just a man saying the Emperor has beautiful clothing and that only "real experts" can see them. It's just a way of deceiving the public into buying the product and convincing them it's "better" when it is certainly not. The CM has only one advantage. It will take long bullets and still fit in a NATO length detachable magazine.
But in many (if not most) of the guns it's being offered in, those that do not use NATO mags, it's actually a small step backwards.
Nothing wrong with that.......but don't believe the lie that it's the most advanced and best set of ballistics ever made. The Swede has been doing the same thing just a slight bit better, for many dozens and scores of years. The 260 is much younger, but is still a bit better shell for most bolt actions.

So as I said............the Emperor really is naked.

Yep.

The field gets pretty level when you level it.

DF

that is a purty Swede!!

Steve,

Sorry, but those aren't the only factors in the popularity of the 6.5 Creedmoor. But like many people (especially rifle loonies who handload almost exclusively) you refuse to get it.

The 6.5 Creedmoor provides the same basic muzzle velocities as the .260 and HANDLOADED 6.5x55 ammo--but in "affordable" factory ammo, and very accurate "affordable" factory rifles.

Why in the hell would an average shooter (or even an above-average shooter) go to the trouble of buying or building some sort of 6.5x55, when throats lengths differ enormously? Handloading the 6.5x55 is a very variable pursuit, and factory ammo is also a crapshoot in both price and pressure. If you don't know this, then you haven't dealt with many 6.5x55's.

The .260 is more consistently throated, but that doesn't solve the handloading problems, even with many standard hunting bullets. In my present .260, a factory rifle known for fine accuracy, even Nosler AccuBonds (not Long Range Accubonds) and Hornady SST's can't be seated out long enough for consistent accuracy. Which is why I eventually felt compelled to modify the magazine to take 2.95" rounds.

The Creedmoor solves all those problems, with "affordable" factory rifles and ammo. If you don't get that, then you obviously don't have a grasp on the reality of modern rifle and ammo manufacturing.

But that isn't untypical of those who assume every hunter is a handloader, or even owns only custom rifles.

Mule deer is correct as he always is. The 6.5 Creedmoor is a great round for many reasons. I am a hand loader and a looney so.. Actually the case heads are not the same between all three. The 6.5X55 Swedish Mauser is .480 not .473. (SAMMI and most US loading manuals) If you buy US made brass then most likely it is .473 the European brass will be .480. Does it make a difference? I have used Norma, and Laupa in my 6.5X55's. In my 6.5X57 RWS because it is about they only one available. US loaded ammo is very weak due to the many older rifles still around Krag's and the 96 Swede (it is stronger than many might believe) I have seen some impressive velocities in a Sako in 6.5X55, and a CZ 550. The Steyr in 6.5X57 can top that. (more powder capacity) I don't load them that hot anymore because I see no need to. The whole short action thing is what sticks in my craw, the 6.5 bullets are very long for caliber, so to me it is a disadvantage to use a short action, unless one whats to stay at 130g and below.

I would think the Loony/Fire crowd and gun nuts in general are but a small part of the overall rifle market.

Hornady hit a home run with the Creedmoor. More power to them.

They listened. They performed. They were rewarded.

DF

And, as I have also pointed out before, Hornady designed the 6.5 Creedmoor as a target cartridge in 2007.

It is NOT recent "fad" among hunters due to "marketing." Instead, hunters discovered how well it worked, so demand kept increasing. The recent "publicity" is due to hunters wanting to know more about the 6.5 Creedmoor. Which is yet another thing those who think the 6.5 Creedmoor "appeared" a year or two ago don't understand.

Sometimes an action will function with the slightly larger Swede case head without alteration.

Jim Kobe fitted the 23" Shilen #2 barrel to the Mauser/Swede I referenced earlier. He had to slightly alter (open) the bolt face to accommodate the .480" Swede round. I use Lapua brass, which won't fit in an RCBS #3, .473" 30-06 shell holder. I use a #2 RCBS shell holder which is slightly larger. IIRC, the '06 Lee shell holder works with Swede Lapua brass. So, specs for the Swede can be all over the place. Nevertheless, I really like the round.

Push feed actions can be harder to adapt than CRF.

DF

My present "modern" 6.5x55 is a custom built on a commercial FN Mauser action built for .30-06-sized rounds. No modifications were needed on the bolt-face or magazine/feed rails. But that's not uncommon on older CRF actions.

Short version. The 260 and 6.5X55 CAN out perform the 6.5CM. But not with off the shelf ammo and rifles.

Got to admire someone who makes his own proof loads and can still tap a keyboard.

MD got it. It is the package and taking the crap shoot out of load development plus the niceties of more uniform pressure and an efficient use of a short action. Itching for a 22 Creed, probably be up next for a build. Then again there is the 6.5x55 SKAN maybe just re-mark one of my barrels.

The CM wasn't designed to outrun the Swede or the .260.

It was designed to match the .260 with bullets weighing 140+ grains but being magazine fed in a short action instead of a long.

That's it! Nothing more, nothing less.

ETA: If you really want to outrun the Swede, there's always the 6.5x284 and the .264 mags.

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.

Great post.