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

Ah. You are correct it is a poorly done synopsis of the whole test, with multiple inaccuracies.

Moses, if you’re asking me, I’m the wrong one, I only shoot handloads.
My 120 N B T s, are 3000, well 2987, FPS.

I agree 100s ‘should’ be popular among factory ammo shooters.


OTOH, 120gr in 6.5 (.264) is on the light side. Many prefer 140s or heavier.

I read through a little over 100 posts on this thread. I find it a little ridiculous that some rail against MD for his praise of the Creedmoor. Many of these jokers want to sing about their Swedes, but forget that most American shooters ignored and snubbed any and all 6.5 cartridges until he helped popularize the swede with his writings.

Everybody oughtta have a rifle... And a life beyond cartridge arguments...

JG,

Thanks for the ringing endorsement!

Can’t decide whether to accept that nomination or the presidency of the SWFA Fan Boy Club.....

Happy Trails

PS: I’m not dissing the capabilities of the cartridge. I’m just weary of all the giddiness and bullchit surrounding it on many forums. LOL!

I read about the first 3 pages and it’s craziness. In my relatively little experience, I’ve done the 30-06, the 308, and the 270, and I ain’t goin back. Well I mean I might...someday... But for what I want, what I need, just one bolt action medium-big game rifle, larger than a .223, that can double as an up to 700 yard target for fun gun, that won’t kick so much that I get tired of shooting it or have to concentrate too much to shoot it well, I think the mid powered.264’s is about the limit.
The Swede is way cool. The history. Just the way the ammo looks; the perfect middleweight; like a jumbo 222.
The 260 is fine too.
Then the Creedmoor. And I don’t care what the name is. It could’ve been the 264AR or 265 Hornady or the Six and a half Banana Split. It’s the complete package of dozens of rifle and ammo offerings with every base covered for wind bucking and carry and not too much recoil. It’s the easy button.

But still more than I have to have for nothing bigger than deer or hogs. So I start thinkin, for me, if I just wanted to buy one rifle, and one that was really easy to shoot, with all the same wind bucking and carry built in to the design of the factory rifles and ammo, the 6mm Crredmoor would probably be more ideal. But it’s not. At least not yet. Not many rifle offerings yet. Ammo has to be ordered online. There’s probably one place that I know of where I could walk in and buy it. And I’m torn between it and the 243 because the 243 is everywhere and in any rifle you could want.

I can see some of the detractors’ points. I don’t really need it. I don’t have to have it. And I’m not fretting over not running out and getting one today or tomorrow. But I wouldn’t deny the advantages of the 6.5 Creedmoor, and in a lot of the same ways the 6mm Creedmoor, if I was buying a new rifle. But I may just get a better 243 if I get anything because I don’t really have to have the latest and greatest😃.

Had a kid behind the gun counter tell me: “The Creed drifts 1/2 as much in the wind as the .260.... and it shoots flatter than that old outdated Swede.”

So.... I grabbed one of their reloading manuals off the shelf, showed him the data, and noted that both the .260 and the Swede shot the same bullets as the Creed.... faster than the Creed.

He stuck to his original assertion.... claiming the book was wrong.

The hype is real my friends..... very real.

The original post is a bit off to start with. The 6.5CM does not outrun either the .260 or the Swede. What the CM offers is a case that has a 30 degree shoulder in a case that is short enough to seat long bullets out without infringing on powder capacity. So you have a case short enough to feed fit in the mag with the bullet seated out where it ought to be. Combine those characteristics with the most accurate factory ammo I have ever seen and you have a winner.

A friend of mine fitted a .260 barrel on a long action and seats those long Berger bullets out where they should be and that cartridge feeds perfectly in the long action and he is getting veracity that the CM cannot reach.

I ceased all discussion with "the kid behind the gun counter" well before I was 30...

It might be enlightening for some to read the Sept. 2017 recounting of how the cartridge developed in the NRA American Rifleman. Demille and Emary, two veteran competitors and ballisticians, were at a 2005 Camp Perry shoot and began "brainstorming". They set down 7 parameters to meet for a potential new cartridge. What was easy to conclude - the .264 diameter, for its ballistic performance.
In deference to the .260, they were critical of its body taper, shallow shoulder and relatively short neck. All of which could induce some axis tilt to the bullet. But they also said it wasn't an inaccurate round as it won the 2010 NRA High Power championship. But the .260 Rem. wasn't designed for precision shooting and the future round, the 6.5 Creedmoor, was meant for that very sport.

Like so many of these debates, some like to flap their keyboard over minimal issues. If you like it, fine - if you don't, then use something else.

My Swede is better than all you all's sweeds and creed's....:


And it's longer too. Wink wink...

Damned nice PRM...

Dogshooter,

So the kid behind the counter is FOS. What does that prove, other than he's FOS--and like many older shooters (who have obviously influenced him) believes muzzle velocity is the one and only relevant virtue of any smokeless rifle cartridge.

Look at LeonHitchcox's post: It's the same sort of muzzle-velocity (changed to "veracity" by auto-spell-check) worship shown by 99% of 6.5 Creedmoor critics. THE CARTRIDGE IS NOT ABOUT MUZZLE VELOCITY, except to approximate the same velocities as the .260 and 6.5x55 in a case designed for one of the major realities of modern centerfire rifles--short-action magazines. If velocity was the ONLY criteria for 6.5mm cartridges even the 6.5x55 wouldn't exist, because we'd all be shooting 26 Noslers and 6.5-300 Weatherbys.

As I have pointed out many times before on these stupid threads, the powder capacities of the 6.5 CM, .260 and 6.5x55 are so similar (50 grains, give or take a couple) that the potential muzzle velocity in the same barrel length is within 50 fps of each other, which has zero meaning in the real world. If somebody wants to "build" a .260 on a long action yeah, it will get more velocity/veracity than the 6.5 Creedmoor ever "dreamed about," but it will be mostly due to handloading the .260 hotter, not any meaningful gain in powder room from seating bullets out a little longer. The same thing could be done with the 6.5 Creedmoor, and the same velocities would result, because the powder capacity is just about identical. That was one of the major points in designing the 6.5 Creedmoor: Constructing a .260 that would fit better in a short-action magazine.

I know all this not because of theory, but (as I have also pointed out many times before) I have owned a bunch of .260's and 6.5x55's, and right now own one of each, both very accurate rifles. The .260 is a Tikka T3 with a 1-8 twist 22" barrel, and the 6.5x55 a custom rifle with a Lilja 1-8 twist 21" barrel on an FN Mauser commercial action. Both will get just about the same muzzle as a 22" barreled 6.5 Creedmoor before showing definite pressure problems, even with new Wonder Powders. Yes, I could get more velocity out of either of them with 24-26" barrels, but so would a 6.5 Creedmoor. I know this from once owning a 26" barreled Creedmoor, my very first.

However, I had to lengthen the magazine on the .260 to get the finest accuracy, because the standard 2.85" magazine wouldn't even allow Nosler Ballistic Tips to be seated out to the lands and still fit in the magazine. I lengthened the magazine to 3" and now it shoots about as well as the average out-of-the-box 6.5 Creedmoor factory rifle.

The 6.5x55 is great cartridge, and I've rarely been without one or more for many years. (Actually, aside from the custom FN Mauser, which cost a hell of a lot more than the Tikka .260, I also have a Norwegian Krag.) I've taken a lot of big game with the 6.5x55 out to 400 yards, but it has one major fault in modern rifles: The throat dimensions are all over the place, one major reason factory 6.5x55 ammo varies considerably in both velocity and accuracy in different rifles. Which is exactly why it's primarily a rifle loony round: No matter the rifle, it has to be handloaded to match factory 6.5 Creedmoor ammo in either velocity or accuracy.

All of which is why the 6.5 Creedmoor has become by far the fastest-selling, mid-size 6.5mm round ever. It's being chambered in a lot of factory rifles not just in the U.S. but Europe, and a South African PH friend who owns a big sporting goods store in Kimberley reports that the majority of new rifles he sells these days are 6.5 Creedmoors.

Obviously this makes many shooters angry, given the evidence from this thread and others, but there's not a damn thing any of you can do about it--except not buy a 6.5 Creedmoor. Your ranting has not turned the tide,and neither has constantly pointing out how the .260 and 6.5x55 (especially your personal .260's or 6.5x55's) will do anything the Creedmoor will do. This is especially true of claiming another 50 or whatever fps from your personal anti-Creedmoor rifles.

The same is true of the super-loonies who split hairs over whether the 6.5x47 Lapua, or whatever, is slightly "better" than the 6.5 Creedmoor. That's equally irrelevant, because the 6.5x47 has always been a relatively expensive proposition, both in brass and rifles. The 6.5 Creedmoor is essentially a cheaper version, bringing the advantages to average folks.

But apparently you simply HAVE to keep ranting, just as many people rant about other stuff that won't be changed in the least by their rants. So what if you don't "need" a 6.5 Creedmoor? Nobody ever insisted you buy one. But tens of thousands of other shooters have, and are quite happy with them, because right out of the box they do basically the same things as the 6.5x55, .260 Remington and 6.5x47 Lapua. They got them by going to the nearest store and buying a rifle and and a few boxes of ammo, whether in any of the United States, Europe or Kimberley, South Africa.

Now that I've had my little rant, you can go back to attempting to convince 6.5 Creedmoor buyers they're incredibly stupid and gullible.

Good summary.

Isn't that sorta like trying to convince a dog to not bark at the moon, chase cars...?

Nice try...

DF

Those are great guns; that one has exceptional wood.

A keeper for sure...

DF

Good analogy, and I certainly agree. But once in a while, just like a car-chasing dog, I have to restate the obvious--or at least what's obvious to those who have actual experience with various moderate 6.5 rounds.

Don't think it will make any difference to the anti-Creedmoor club. However, they might enjoy getting together once a month and hammering some 6.5 Creedmoor brass flat. Adding a little physical slamming to their Internet rants might make them feel better.

At least you can pen or cage the dog...

DF

Damn John...... it was little anecdote.... simply meant to relay some of the mystical powers of the Creed being propagated around gun counters all over this great nation.

I don’t give a crap what people buy/shoot/promote..... I just thought the hype was hilarious.

Mule Deer,

You woke a lot of guys up to the advantages of 6.5 rifles and bullets with your articles about the swedes a while ago. Before that era a guy could have picked up a really decent swede for chicken feed. Now they're as easy to find as hens teeth.

Admit it... You wanna expand your swede collection and are trying to steer the herd towards something else!!!

Don't deny it... Read my signature line...

You trying to say those Scandinavians are harder headed than the Irish...

DF