Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Rifles 6.5x55 for Moose? Really?

When I read about the 6.5x55 there is frequently this addendum, "THEY" say that "THEY" shoot moose with it.

Are there any "THEY's" out there?
Anyone actually had experience shooting Moose with it?

I hear about the thousands of Europeans who successfully use it but are there any forum users who have had first hand experience shooting moose with it?

What loads are used?

How effective is it? I know that this last question is subjective but I'd like to hear the answer anyway.

I'm currently building a 6.5x55 and I hunt Newfoundland Moose. I am not sure that I could be persuaded to try the 6.5 on them but I sure would like to hear of others who have.

Thanks,
Jim

Its a 6.5 what more needs to be said.....

Rug,

I have not used the 6,5 on moose myself. I have, however since 2003, danish hunters come hunt wildboar with me.

Many come with their 6,5x55, after all, it kills moose.

Long story short - the fame of the 6,5x55 comes from its inability to throw the heavy 10 gram (160 gr.) hard enough for the bullet to fail tensily.

Hit the soft stuff (tissue, ribs, heart, lungs) and your animal will be dead.

Hit hard stuff (bones, heavy muscle, shield on a boar) and you are in trouble.

I have followed up to many boars wounded with the 6,5x to condone its use with the regular bullets for boar. I would feel the same for moose.

Game changes dramatically with todays bullets, though.

Think 130 gr. TSX.

39.5 gr IMR 4350 under a hornady 160 round nose for 2450 ft/sec
Karl Gustav model 96 with 29 inch barrel Every moose and most every bear one shot kills. I shot six or eight bear a year for ten years, and half a dozen 800-1000lb moose wthout incident.

I changed to a larger bore for bear after a charge scared me. The bear died with a single shot to the head and it charged from 20 feet, died at my feet, but very scarry
Randy

By the way that new rifle was the start of my rifle loonyism. Do not fear shooting moose with the 6.5x55 and 160 gr bullets, they penetrate straight line and extremely deep. I have never used \barnes TSX in it, but they perform super well in other calibres.

Randy

I'd not think twice about it using a TSX, but I'm funny that way I guess (even though the 6.5 is not my favorite caliber after using it some).

I've taken several with a 270.....it's bullet placement. There have been thousands killed in Alaska with the 30-30

Most Scandinavian moose are smaller than Alaska/Yukon variety and a large percentage of the harvest is calves of 300 pounds or less.

Not too many years ago, Ross Seyfried wrote an article about hunting moose with a 6.5x54 Mannlicher, IIRC. Oryx bullet, which he had altered slightly with small cuts in the jacket at the nose to make it expand just a little faster.

One shot, one moose, and it only took a few steps.

Now that I think about it, I think it was a rifle he'd bought off of Ken Waters. Neat article. Close enough to the 6.5x55, I'm thinking.

- Tom

It was an Elk and a .256 Dutch Mannlicher, rimmed 6.5x54

Dang, you're right. It was an elk.

I [bleep] around and got too damned old before I could afford to go huntin where mooses are at. Hell, I'd use the 6.5 Swede..

Saying I'm right is a bit redundant, but thanks. I have one of those photographic memories, it's a curse.

Fixed it for you

I whacked an elk with the swede at a sedate 2350 fps or so with the 160 gr. Sierra. Would take it for moose in a heartbeat with any 156-160 or any of the 120 plus premiums.

I've said it here many times, but there is nothing I would hunt with a 30-06 that I wouldn't use the swede instead. Of course all the 6.5x55 rifles I've had have been scary accurate and I limited my shots to those I am very comfortabe making.

Anyone with inspirational tales of successful huge animal kills with the 155 gr Lapua Mega in the 6.5X55 Swed? Would like a preview of what I have to look forward to.

Figured that wouldn't need to be stated.....

You got something?

I use to live where beef was for sale and moose was for eating. Nobody ever said a 270 wasn't enough.A 6.5x555 with a 140Part. would be the same.

Not done it personally, but I will find out next time I go. Dressing up a Swede right now.

Favorite load for the Swede?

Using the Nosler 120 Ballistc tip in a modern rifle and the 130 TSX?

Being from the country in which the 6,5x55 is one of the most used calibers I might have a go at this? Ohh, I qualify by having shot exactly ONE moose with it. Why not more? Well, while I do think that it is perfectly capable of killing any living moose on this sphere we call Earth I do not think it is perfect for the job. I prefer cartridges with bigger, heavier bullets. This is simply because I do not always have a situation where I can pick my shot and then I want a bullet heavy enough to kill eventhough it might have to pass through the point of the shoulder (the knuckle) on a moose quartering towards me. A 6,5x55 with a 130 gr TSX might do just that but as it is not legal for moose here it's a moot point for me. I've seen more "bad shots" from 6,5's than most other calibers - to be honest many was because the bullet used wasn't up to the job. So for me the combination of the available, legal bullets with the rather small diameter and weight of the 6,5 makes it less desirable then fx a 9,3x62, 30-06, 8x57JS or what ever might float your boat. The 6,5 is used less and less here for our larger species. In the south the wild boar population is increasing and in the north the bear population is also increasing. A lot of hunters simply want a little more bullet than our "National Caliber" can handle.
Then again, if I ever get in a situation where I was forced the use the 6,5x55 I would keep hunting and not worry a bit! As long as the nut behind the butt use some common sense it will do what it is supposed to.

//K9_75

Monolithics banned in sweden? Please expound.

Good background info on your 'national caliber' for hunting. Thanks.

No,no,no - sorry Carl - I should have been clearer ! It's a weight issue! The 130 grain is 10 grains to light to be legal. Bad news is that even if it were 10 grains heavier it would still not be legal as its hard for a 140 grain bullet in the 6,5x55 to reach enough velocity to achieve the energy required at 100m. Then comes the stability issues with the loooong bullet too.
Cheers
K9_75

Thank you. I remember now. Is it not 9 grams/2700 J at 100 m or 10 grams at somewhat less for minimum?

2000j 1475 ft/lbs for +10 grams +154 grains and up ....

9 to 10 grams 139 grains to 154 grains 2700j 1992 ft/lbs

notice in some countries there is a mini for brown bear :
like 7 mm 170 grains 11 grams 3000j/100m 2212ft/lbs requiring at least a 7x64 or 280 rem. but that s another story.

Did it once, four times - the 6.5x55 on an Alaskan bull at around 150 yards. He got two Partitions and two A-Frames, 140s all. The shots were well spaced in time due to several other animals he was mingling with and "re-acquiring/verifying" the original target was needed. All shots were lethal; through the lungs, but all included the meaty part around the leg area on one side or both. No big bones were hit. The Noslers made it to the farside hide. The A-Frames stayed in the meat of the offside leg.



I was not much impressed and prefer the 30-06 or better for the big guys we generally kill. The bullets seemed to work well. If I were to use the same rifle again on moose, I'd undoubtedly use expanding solids of some type.

I don't know about moose, but I've shot 1 Kudu and 1 Eland with a 6.5x55 in 1987, using Norma 156 grain factory loads, and they both died promptly and on cue.

Jeff

I watched a buddy's 11 year old boy take a nice bull at 150 paces with a 7-08. Hit him in the neck right behind the head. Moose didn't know what him. DRT!

Many here use 223 or 30-30. If they feel the need for something bigger, they use an 06. Personally, I like my 9.3x62, 358 Win, or my 375 H&H during fall moose where bears are plentiful.

If a 6.5 Swede was all I had I wouldn't hesitate in a premium bullet. That being said, with other larger choices out there I would opt for something bigger - in complete agreement with Dr. Lou.

My Canadian outfitter told me you can kill a moose with a tennis shoe.

well sure, but use enough shoe.

From the little I`ve seen, moose are not hard to kill, they just don`t know they`re dead when you shoot them.
I saw a big bull hit 5Xs with 180grs from a 308 @ ~100/150 yd, all in the ribs, and walk -not run- about 75 yds from the point he was 1st hit while my buddy kept shooting. He finally sat there on his haunches like a big dog, bawling a time or 2, then finally rolled over. All the while my buddy was trying fumble another shell in the gun, and figure out what to do next.
I don`t think a 458 would have made any difference in how fast he dropped.
BTW these were factory Cor-Locts, none exited.

That's pretty standard, no matter what you shoot them with. The first shot would have had the same result. It takes a while for the lungs to fill up.

A buddy here in BC went from a .308 to a .338 WinMag, thinking that he would have quicker kills. He went back to the .308 when he saw that the results were exactly the same: shoot moose, moose walks off about 50 yards, moose lays down and dies.

Where you hit 'em matters. A 223 is a fine moose caliber....if you are able to head or neck shoot them with a 55 FMJ or better, and you have a rapid firing rifle along the lines of a AR-15. But there are much better choices.

For lung shots, getting bigger hole(s) out the back side helps to get the lungs deflated. It's the difference between drowning them and suffocating them. Drowning takes longer than collapsing the lungs. Bigger calibers and bullets tend to work better, though expanding solids also make the needed holes, if perhaps not as large.

Rug 3, I see your point. I'm not a moose hunter and the only one I have been in camp with was an Alberta whitetail camp. One of the guys had moose tags and he shot one twice with a .375 H&H and both TSX bullets were recovered.
That doesn't cause me to think a 6.5 Swede would be ideal, but hey if they can be killed with a bow and arrow or 30-30 they can probably be killed with a Swede.

The lightest cartridge I have used on moose was the 7x57 (with 160 North Forks) which worked fine, but a friend from Alberta has used the 6.5x55 on about 20 moose. He shoots them in the standard chest-spot, about 1/3 of the way up behind the shoulder, and they do the standard moose thing: stand around a little while and keel over. He has used a bunch of different bullets but I believe he mostly uses the 140 Nosler Partition, as it also works very well on Alberta deer (or about any other non-dangerous game on the planet).

Perhaps I need to repeat my single test (of four shots) at least one more time. I may still be having a hard time with getting aced by the guy with plain old Core-Lokts in his '06 which took the air out of the sails of that critter. Of course, his plain-jane bullet exited the back side and let out a lot of air right now. He, having never creased the stomach of a moose, was less afraid to place the shot a bit farther back hitting nothing but ribs and lungs.

Somewhere in my mans room is a magazine with an article about Moose hunting in Sweden. The jist of the article was a study done by the Swedeish Game Departmment, in which their officers went with hunters who shot Moose with different rifles and cartridges, and actually measured how far they went after the first shot and any follow up shots. IIRC this was done on at least 1000 Moose. They found 6.5x55's killed just as well and many times quicker than larger daimeter and more powerfull rounds. The exception was IIRC the 358 Norma (or some such round) and then it was only marginally better. It was a very interesting read, and the number of animals killed was a certainly adequate to prove or disprove a point.
I know that some of you guys saw that article, as it has been hashed out here before. Thee Moose I've seen out West, I could kill with a 22 pistol.

That study does not jibe with my experience, but then, as was pointed out earlier, many of the moose in that study were likely often younger, smaller animals than those we kill here in Alaska. There is no question that moose can easily be killed with the 6.5 Swede and smaller stuff. Of course, there is nothing that roams North America that cannot be killed with the same. However, heavier, thicker bullets give up nothing and, in general, work faster and more soundly, which is many times a good thing.

I willingly admit that the 223, 243, etc have been used very effectively to bring home the winter's meat, even when that involved these thousand pound-plus animals. However, based on a substantial collection of bullets I have taken from moose I've killed - including a number of expanding solids, I can say that moose are not a target to be trifled with in terms of how little one can get by with. No animal deserves less than a humane death.

Can a moose tell the difference between a 0.568 inch hole (2x 0.264) and a 0.678 inch hole (2x 0.338) through its lungs/heart?

Assuming similar construction with 2x expansion of the bullet with similar penetration. Lets compare 160g Woodleigh in 6.5x55 and a 300g Woodleighs in .338. SD for the 6.5 is 0.328, SD for .338 is 0.375.

its not a funtion of bullet width, its a function of area.

Hence the .264 bullet expanded to 2 times original diameter is (pi*{.264]**2) = 0.219 square inches

the .338 is 0.359 square inches, or 60+% larger

Moose......elk, bear, buff.....I'm sure either would work the same on any of them.

Actually, my 6.5x55 is one of my favorite hunting rifles, and it seems perfect for caribou. Admittedly, I have shot less than two dozen caribou with it, a lot less than I've killed with either the 6mm or the 7mm-08. But the difference between the latter two when used on caribou has been readily apparent to me in terms of which has been able to more quickly put them on the ground.

I do not have disdain for the 6.5X55 at all. However, if it were every bit as effective as the 30-06 then it would make no sense to use a 375 or 338 when the 30-06 was just as good; it would further make no sense to use the 30-06 because one could just as easily use a 6.5. That argument might work on deer or hogs, perhaps even elk. But when you get to animals that easily top 1000 pounds, I'll put my money - though I know they all work- on something bigger being better than the 223, 243, 6.5X55, 7mm-08, 30-30, etc.

Again I will ask, will a moose be able to tell the difference with a hole through his vitals of 0.219 inches squared versus 0.359 inches squared?

Klik, I somewhat agree, but where do we draw that line? What is big enough for deer/antelope? What is big enough for elk? What is big enough for moose? Why is bigger necessarily better?

Luke,

is not a study but reports from hunters compiled in some areas.

Norway has done the same for whole country but dont get any feedback from now (NINA is the name of the study).

If all you're doing is punching a hole straight through both lungs on a broadside shot, unimpeded by anything other than the ribs, then you'll probably not see a difference. But change the angle by ten degrees and all of a sudden we may be talking about including muscle around the legs. (See my original post in this thread. None of the four "premium" 140s out of my 6.5 exited.) The exit often makes quite a difference on a moose simply because the second and bigger hole often allows the lungs to collapse which means the animal dies more quickly.



This old and often posted picture includes bullets which I've recovered from moose I've killed. The bullets on either end, a Grand Slam and a Ballistic Tip, were both taken from the same animal. They both originated in the 340 Weatherby cartridge. The distance was the same. The Grand Slam was a shoulder shot (without hitting the big bones.) It made the animal take weight off one leg and stand in place while I poked three of those 200 BTs into the lungs. None exited so the animal stood there until it bled to death. I think that pretty much demonstrates what you are thinking. OTOH, that same rifle with better penetrating bullets would have easily punched three holes through the far side of the animal, most likely killing it more quickly. I have had very good success getting better results with the 30-06, and bigger cartridges, with nothing more than plain old Interlockeds, Gamekings, and, of course, the better bullets.

"Dead is dead" when you're staring at a computer screen. Dead may appear in several shades of grey, however, when you end up looking for your prize after he wandered into the donkey swamp or decided to wade into the river for one last "drink".

"Dead is dead" when you're staring at a computer screen. Dead may appear in several shades of grey, however, when you end up looking for your prize after he wandered into the donkey swamp or decided to wade into the river for one last "drink".

GREAT POINT!

I had a miserable moose recovery because the shooter shot said moose through the lungs and watched it walk off into a 3' deep half-frozen beaver pond to die. Without a chainsaw powered winch, the moose would have spoiled before we got it out, but it would have been much nicer if the shooter had kept shooting it and if it had died on dry land, even better if it had died within 20' feet of where we could have driven the pickup and hooked a chain onto it.

Jeff

I had a friend shoot a small Kentucky whitetail with a .30-06 with 180g Partitions at 45 yards. The doe jumped in the air, stopped, then ran and crossed a creek off of the hunting lease. We called the land owner across the creek and asked if we could recover the animal. He said yes, as long as he got to keep the meat.

We then crossed the creek, where the land owner met us with his tractor to recover the deer. That 180g Partition went through off side shoulder completely wrecking it. The small doe still made it 85-100 yards and crossed a creek without lungs and with a mangled shoulder.

Is the 180g Nosler Partition too light for whitetail does?

I think we all have these stories, but does that prove a point one way or the other?

Is a .338 Mag a minimal cartridge for Whitetail does?

No, but perhaps too heavy in certain light animal applications. In the case of a small deer, perhaps a rapid expanding cup and core would have been better.



Same deal. Many 338 bullets are going to act a bit tough when applied to smallish animals. A 270 or similar would probably have the more desirable effect at the expense of more damage - which will more likely prevent run-offs like you related.

Shooting through an animal the size of a deer is simple. It's actually quite a bit more difficult to catch a hunting bullet with an animal that size. OTOH, an animal the size of a moose is approximately the reverse situation. Consequently, it isn't difficult to shoot a deer-sized with more gun/cartridge/bullet than what is necessary and even useful in making a quick, humane kill. On an animal the size of a moose, shooting a shoulder fired gun that is equally as capable of the same things would certainly not be for the squeamish.




I would hope so, else we would still be using rocks, spears, or muskets. Study the anecdotes you witness and add other useful info as you can. I am aware that 30-something moose is not a statistically valid sampling of data. However, I don't think it's meaningless. I have no issue with anyone wishing to shoot a moose with a 6.5 Swedish chambered rifle. It will kill them just as sure as a 243 or 30-06 will with proper bullets. As with the 243 though, it isn't as ideal as something bigger like the 30-06, etc.

aka MKBenenson. Around 1895-1930, arctic explorers from Norway and Sweden were killing polar bear and walrus with 6.5x55 Krags and Mausers and, I believe, military full jacket ammunition. Around the same time in Africa the 6.5x53R and 6.5x54 Mannlicher were successfully used on a wide range of African big game. Penetration with the 156 and 160 grain bullets, and close shooting by experienced hunters, was the key both on the ice and in the jungle.

Lets see, passport ... check
Flights to Stockholm ... check
6.5x55 ... dang it still at Shaw's

DOH!!!

Good discussion, I tend to differ with you on a couple points, but I have enjoyed the discussion.

Thank you.

I am a 6.5x55 admirer, but I would leave my 6.5x55 Tikka home and grab my DOU45 sporter in original 7.92x57mm instead. 220 gr Sierra GK or 195 gr Hornady on a compressed charge of IMR 4350. No laser speed, but will have the job done.

Ruger 375, Sweden may not be the right country, it could be Finland or Norway. But I distinctly remember it as a government done, highly detailed, fully documented to the foot study on the subject of killing Moose. Someday I will dig it up.

to further the discussion.

is my remington 6.5x55 with 140 hornady interlocks @ 2700 fps a solid bull elk cartridge?

i've never hunted elk before and was planning on using it, but i'm not sure it's enough cartridge.

I found it! It was posted on this forum 7-05-07 post #1521544. Posted by Henrik, may also be #1522364. If any of you guys know how to bring this post back, I would appreciate it. I have it bookmarked but don't know how to transfer it.

Rockchucker, I will be using one of my Swede's this fall for cow Elk. I visited with an old timer in Wyoming a couple of years ago, who preferred his 6.5x55 for Elk, and had used it for years. I believe every cartridge has it's limits, just work within them.

Rockchucker, I will be using the same bullet you mentioned.

It's plenty of cartridge, but not my choice of bullet for elk. Something like the 6.6x55 begs for a premium bullet on elk.



Casey

I'll try this. http://www.24hourcampfire.comubbthreads...e/1#post1521544

Type in," sweedish cartridge statistics on moose," and it will come up. It does'nt come up if you use the prefix www.

I would want a larger calibre/cartridge for an elk than a 6.5x55. It's one thing when you're a local and if you don't get the shot you want, go home and go again next week. It's entirely different if you've traveled to hunt and your single opportunity is fleeting and at a poor angle. Then you have the delima of "do I shoot and hope for the best or do I pass up the shot(as you should) and have the rest of the year to wish I had taken more gun".

I don't care what caliber anybody hunts anything with, but imo it's hard to outpenetrate a 6.5.

i figgered the hornady would be fine at that speed. i guess i could try nosler partitions

Do a bullet test. Shoot them both into a box filled with magazines, catalogs,etc, and see which bullet penetrates the best. I shot a Whitetail Buck that was quartered a little to me at the junction of the neck and left shoulder, the 14o gr Hornady exited in front of the right hind quarter. 8 pt at about 80 yards,I don't think you could get any better penetration than that. Interlocks are great game bullets.

Luke - I have a CZ550FS in the Swede. All the info I've read and researched over the years has indicated it being suitable for game the size of moose. Question I have are the "moose" in Sweden or Finnland any bigger, tougher or heavier then the species here in the U.S.? If the 6.5mm Swede is considered usable in those countries (assuming proper bullet selection and placement) why would we doubt it can be used here? Regards, Homesteader

here where I hunt 800-1200 lbs is average bull. The swede puts them down with authority with the 160 gr hornady. That is the only bullet I have used in the swede, but I expect a 140 gr tsx barnes would work as well.

Randy

I looked up Sweedish Moose the other day, and they are the same size as ours, but a little smaller than the Alaskan variety. Did anyone look up that Sweedish data on Moose kills yet, if so let me know what you think?

Homesteader, Do you get complete pass thru on a broadside shot with the 160 Hornady? I know it don't make any difference to a dead Moose, but I am just curious.

I am not Homesteader, but I have helped skin about 17 or so moose shot with various 156-160g bullets from 6.5 x 55's.

Exits have been pretty rare. I think I maybe one or two with this calibre...

Now exits with my .375 H & H with Barnes X bullets are a different story... One does not need this much power or penetration for moosies of course, but I just like using this particular rifle.

John

stillbeeman,

In my experience the entire theory that locals pass up less than ideal shots because they can go hunting again next week is pretty much BS.

This is because I live in Montana. I hear the same thing about Montana elk hunters, especially from non-resident hunters who usually arrive with much bigger rifles than the residents normally carry.

Here's the truth: The non-resident usually shows up for at least a week, and often 10 days, whether outfitted or not. If outfitted the non-resident is usually hunting in better country than the typical Forest Service public land accessible on foot to local hunters.

Most local hunters usually hunt on weekends, when everybody else is out too. Often they only hunt one day a weekend, because the other day is taken up with other obligations. If a resident hunted EVERY day of every weekend in the season, he would hunt 7 days, because opening day is a Sunday. (Or has been, anyway, for many years.) They take any halfway reasonable shot they can get, and almost never pass one up.

So the average local hunter isn't hunting any more days than the average non-resident, and usually in country with less elk. Yet somehow many residents manage to put an elk in the freezer every year with .270's, 7mm Remington Magnums and .30-06's (and yes, even 6.5x55's and 7mm-08's) while the non-residents rarely bring anything smaller than a .300 magnum, and often feel the need to buy a new .338.

Are these bigger rifles more effective? One of my favorite stories is about an outfitter I know who operates in the Bob Marshall Wilderness. He carries a .375 H&H as his back-up. I asked him is this was because of grizzlies, and he said no, it was to finish off the elk his clients gut-shoot with their brand-new .338's.

Mule deer,

not specific to residents of Montana in my opinion.

the number of times i ve seen huger calibers for the new kevlar protected caribou of northern quebec (new specy)...!!!!

ah that s maybe some polar bears are going in the camps lol ...!!!

I agree with MD. I am always puzzled by the notion of many hunters, that anything less than a 30-06 with 180's is a popgun. It's been hashed over ad-nauseum. Like Bell and others have said, a 1000 grains in the wrong place won't kill, but 50 grs in the right place will. My Dad always told me, "shoot them where they live".

Luke - I've not had the opportunity to try my Swede on anything approaching the size of a moose. However, I do know the Swede will penetrate (and pass thru) paper targets - LOL. Hopefully, it'll do the job on wild hogs and South Florida's newest hunting attraction PYTHONS! Regards, Homestead.

I think this notion is fed by hunters reading magazine articles and the writer is using a big caliber (not you) but some writers do this, Boddington comes to mind among a few.

Also, some outfitters recommend nothing less than blank____ caliber will kill their game. I have came across several canadian outfitter websites that actually say nothing less than .28 caliber is preferred for their whitetail hunts. Reading between the lines a hunter gets the impression not to show up with a 6.5 ot even a .270 Winchester to hunt deer. Some outfitters say a .270 is not suitable for elk hunting etc.

I don't expect all of the dead deer and elk that were killed with too small of calibers to be resurrected, but this is some of the ways non-resident hunters get the impression that they have to have BIG minimum calibers.

Mule Deer

I could not agree to your assessment of the local hunter more. My favourite story is one where I walked into an area for moose hunting early in the morning so I was four miles from the closest bush trail. As daylight was breakng I heard a four wheeler (ATV) coming down the game trail I had walked in on.

He stopped and was glassing a swamp/ beaver pond that I had been calling at. There was a nice little bull in the aders accross the pond that was watching us from cover. I asked him if he saw anything and scared him half to death. He said no, and enquired if I had seen any sign in the area. I told him no. He decided to drive back out and try another area. I suggested one twenty miles away.

He left, I waited a few minutes until it was full light, and I coaxed the bull out to within fifty feet of me on my side of the pond, where I shot him. On my way out to get an ATV to collect the moose, I walked past him and his truck stuck in a creek. I went out to my truck, drove it where he was and pulled him out, then went to recover the moose. Four hours later, almost at dark I came accross him again near the main road stuck again. I pulled around him, hooked a chain on his front hooks and pulled him to the main road.

He offerred to pay me, which I declined, but took the opportunity to educate him on not going into an area someone else was already hunting.

The rifle mas a model 38 Husqvarna 6.5x55 swede 160 gr hornady, one shot kill base of skull neck shot. There is a reason local hunters are often successful, they know the animal, the area and have done it before.

Randy

The northern European countries have been using this round for a long time, and take moose with them on a routine basis. Not to start another caliber war....but what about those among us that have gotten an elk with their .243 Win? My brother and I are 2 that I know of.....and I am sure there are more here on the boards. 6.5x55 is an all around great cartridge with low recoil and stopping power beyond its numbers.

Yep

My 16 year old niece filled her antlerless tag on a cow moose this year with one shot from her 6.5X55. Perfect shot placement, perfect bullet performance, cow took 2 steps and legs just came out from under her

We got two moose this year. I used my 358 Norma. Pretty good round. One of them I took with a friend and we both shot him through the lungs. He had a 308. Penetration was nearly identical with the bullets stopping in the opposite shoulder. The wound diameter of the 358 was much larger. The moose wandered the usual 30 yards and died.

However either shot would have killed the moose. I used 250 Speers in my 358 and they core separated. I think a partition would have exited. I am inclined to agree with Klikitarik that an off side hole would have helped. The 358 would have done that with better bullets. the 308 didn't on this big moose and bullet performance was perfect.

Moose are big and seem immune to shock. They seem to need to bleed out and that takes a while. I wouldn't be too worried about using a 6.5, as a minimum caliber for a smaller person.

I wouldn't use regular 160 grainers however. They seem overarted in my own testing, as they often core separate. 140 partitions are my go to bullet. I have a nice Rem 660 in 6.5 Rem Mag that my wife will use next year as her moose gun.

No worries.

Lester Roloff was right!
Do you have any experiences with folks taking Moose with the Barns 130?
Jim

Ya gotta dance with the girl ya brung, and if I was dancing for moose with a 6.5 Swede, I'd make sure she was wearing a pair of 140 TSX sandals. Had I chosen a girl with 160 Interlocks, I'd waltz her right through the engine room as well.

Jitterbug! I like your moves.
You sayin the 6.5 is no wall flower at the dance and a dandilion on the hunt?
Jim

She'll cut the rug, for sure.

Brother Kieth,

Thanks for your confidence builder.

Now, this is not the aftermath of Ai. I don't need rugs cut and I would rather not have someone digging around in my tent! The tent gets cleaned daily and filled up but it still accumulates things that find their way under the rug. Been there?

I just want to know if the 6.5x55 is a good mooser.

Rug3
yes with 160gr
Randy

Me either. And I agree with your comment about regular 160s:



This one came from a <300 lb cow caribou. They sure tear the 'jeebers out of lynx - I know.

I think a lot of responders forgot that the original question did not ask if the rifle was capable, rather if anyone had used it and how effective it was. I think if I use it again, it'll either be with the 160 Woodleigh, or maybe some old 140 XFBs. I knew firsthand - before Barnes Xs even existed- that the 223 worked alright on moose. I just happen to believe there are better combinations and would not recommend it to anyone. But I sure wouldn't hesitate to use a special rifle for moose hunting, especially the smaller eastern or Shiras moose, if that rifle happened to be chambered in the 6.5 Swede.

I always think when the Swedish Moose hunting study is trotted out that if the same study were done in North America the conclusion would be that the 30-30 is the best Moose rifle around.

Tejano
That study did not prove the 6.5 is the "best" moose rifle. It just showed that there is very little difference in the reaction of moose to various cartridges, shot placement being the same. Two very different conclusions.

Fred

Was actually thinking of the Swedish Bikini Team while writing that. Might have impaired my judgment.

On the other hand, I have hunted moose in a few places from Alaska down to Alberta, and all the moose I've taken were mature bulls. Have also seen a few other moose taken, including here in Montana. I would be happy to hunt moose with a 6.5x55--and maybe next time I will!

Tejano
The Swedish Bikini Team is certainly worth contemplating.

Fred

Mule Deer you should! Hell I'll even let you take my custom 6.5x55 if you don't have one curently in the stable!

Luke,

here is the post.
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth..._SCANDINAVIAN_RIFLES_OPTICS_#Post1522364

again this is not a study but datas received by hunters and compiled by hunters associations nothing statewide.

one study including where the animal was shot, which caliber, which bullet and weight, distance shot, etc ... was asked to hunters to feed a huge amount of infos (in Norway) but for now didnt see the publication if one day it appears i ll post the infos ..

enjoy

Remember, I didn't introduce the topic, so I'm not solely responsible for the hijacking.

Swedish Bikini Team:
http://www.uspsa2.org/sbt.htm

Biathlonman,

Thanks for the offer, but I have a custom 6.5x55 already: FN Mauser action, "California English" stock, Lilja barrel. It would do quite well.

The only problem is that the moose hunt with the most immediate potential (not much) is this year in Montana--IF I finally draw a tag after putting in for 30-something years.
If I draw, most of the moose in the unit are in a wildlife management area where centerfire rifles aren't legal! I can use a shotgun with bore-diameter slugs (no sabots), a muzzleloader with round ball (no sabots or Minie balls), or a handgun in a "traditional" chambering.

The only problem is that the moose hunt with the most immediate potential (not much) is this year in Montana--IF I finally draw a tag after putting in for 30-something years.
If I draw, most of the moose in the unit are in a wildlife management area where centerfire rifles aren't legal! I can use a shotgun with bore-diameter slugs (no sabots), a muzzleloader with round ball (no sabots or Minie balls), or a handgun in a "traditional" chambering.[/quote]

Why that is just UNCONSTITUTIONAL Geez.

If you draw, whatcha gonna use?


Travis

Seems like a legitimate application for Hubel458's "Shotgun From Hell.."

Travis,

Probably my Ruger Blackhawk Bisley .45 Colt with handloads using a 300-grain bullet. It has a 7-1/2" barrel and is easy to hit with at typical moose ranges down there in the willows and alders. In fact I have taken prairie dogs at close to 100 yards with it, so it shouldn't be too hard to hit a moose in the right place at closer ranges.

John G
In the future, if you choose to highjack threads with links to half naked women, wouldja PLEASE PM me, so I don't miss them!

Thanks in advance.

Fred

That would be cool. Best of luck in the draw this year.

Travis