Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 6.5 Creedmoor Inherently Accurate?

I"m saying he uses what he uses because of it's proven accuracy and he kicks everyone's ass with it. He likes that. He doesn't use 7mags.

Again, would he get his assed kicked if he shot a 6 BR, Dasher or 6x47 Lapua, without the inherent accuracy of the 6XC?

Who knows?

I think we need an arm-wrassling wrassle-off. You're both right.

Edited to add: It's obvious to me that some cartridges inherently have the capacity to be shot more accurately than others.

Is the Creedmoor one of those? Beats me. I never thought inherent accuracy was the draw with the cartridge.

Ok just to pee on the parade. Is the 6.5x47 Lapua inherently mo accurate than the Creedmoor? If you pursues some target match results you might think this could be valid. But also there is a lot of follow the leader sort of copy catting in the bench rest arena.

Copy cat?

Of course. Competitors follow winning combos, follow the leader, follow leading trends in technology.

Look at the PPC phenomenon, before that, Mike Walker's .222 with the BR crowd.

Same thing now, just different rounds, different powders, different bullets, different applications including LR, etc.

This new technology is really great, better now than during the half century I've been reloading and shooting.

Some loony type hunters follow these trends. Old timers probably sticking more with what has worked for decades, less enthralled with newfangled fads, like smokeless powder...

DF

Just looked at the Pennsylvania light gun top ten roster. Several 6.5x47s, Dashers and 6XCs but nary a Creedmoor. Heavy gun fewer 6mms but still no Creedmoors. I was a little surprised there was not a one. I am sure either the 6 or 6.5 CM could be competitive but who knows why no one uses it. Bet some of the High Power and other AR platform events would show more Creedmoors.

Apparently, the cartridge does matter...

It do, it do. But not as much as us gun geeks think or perhaps I am wrong on this too.

I was in the Bergara custom shop in Georgia last year, doing a tour along with some other "industry" folks. Someone asked the primary gunsmith what factory ammunition they use to meet their accuracy standard and he gave a few examples for different cartridges. When asked about the 6.5 Creedmoor his answer was "they shoot anything".

I probably tested 10 rifles from various manufacturers last year chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor, I can't recall one of them not shooting really well. Yes, the factory ammo is very good thanks to great brass, bullets and generally low bullet run-out but there's also an inherent advantage to the cartridge design itself.

When/if I go to a 6.5 and its not x284 it will be 6.5x 47 Lapua....but YMMV.

A slightly funny note... David had the 6xc and the new bolt gun, tube 2000 IIRC, and he and I both had totally new rifles to us, going to the state matches in TX that year. Fairly sure David won the match, I never could shoot offhand well enough to have a fighting chance and could often drop a point or so at the rapids to boot.

but that day with a gun I'd never shot at 600, I managed to shoot the first 200 on the range up at Waco TX, and David dropped 4 points IIRC. His 6xc having been beaten by a 223 service rifle.

He was really cool about it too. And its the last time ( and was the first) I've ever been able to beat David in a match. LOL.

I read all about his non trust of 7 mags at long range and still had to built one... IIRC it was something about speed, if not over 280 type speed ok, but if 7 mag type or more... watch out..

The 7mag off the 300 wtby I had built, I'm still blaming the Douglas tube on, but its so far away from being accurate enough to shoot long deer with its not funny. Its barely trustable for 200 yard head shots.

And like others have said, most days David could beat me and everyone else with a 30-30. LOL

Jack O'Connor considered the 270 to be slightly more accurate on average than the 30-06.

Mainly because of the quality of rifles.

In that case, comparing those two rounds, probably true.

DF

rost495, I love the 7mm Rem Mags too. IIRC Tubb had something to say about pressure spike probability/possibility with that cartridge.

I shot a group - cloverleaf at 50 yds, under .2" - with a 30/30 TC Contender, 10" factory barrel, using Factory 150 Corelokts, and a 2x EER.

I guess I must agree.....well in my case it was a handgun

The Swede has a taper, and very accurate....... you can find this on google...

"This can be seen in the fact the 1999 British Long-Range Benchrest Championship was won by a Tikka Continental in 6.5x55. Group size was an almost unbelievable 10 rounds into 4.4 inches at 1,000 yards"

Many variables play into accuracy, but trends show, and the Creed tends to produce great accuracy....perhaps now with Lapua brass, the difference between it and the 47 is nil.......but I'd place my bet on a 47 if shooting for all out accuracy/precision in competition.

[/quote]



"This can be seen in the fact the 1999 British Long-Range Benchrest Championship was won by a Tikka Continental in 6.5x55. Group size was an almost unbelievable 10 rounds into 4.4 inches at 1,000 yards"


[/quote]

If he had only used the Creemoor he might have shot a 4.3" group.

There is more metal, on average, with a 270. (smaller hole)

Maybe it would be useful to kick around a few cartridges considered to be inherently INaccurate, if such exist (and where it can't be blamed on the firearm itself).

Yeah, I read about pressure spikes in the 7RM. From what I understand, the test barrels may have had rough throats.

My 7RM has a new Brux, no erosion. I don't mind running it at full throttle.

I think they said similar about the .243. The 6mm Rem runs faster and at 65K...

DF