Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters 6.5 x 55 Swede vs. 30-06 - on the largest NA game

Experts, assuming similar S.D./B.C. bullets at similar speeds, and good/equal shot placement - what do you think of how these two would compare in killing on Bear, Moose, and Elk?

Since the 7x57 has such a following even here in the USA, by many 'in the know' experienced hunters, and the Swede so close, would you have any reservations using the 6.5x55 for the same job you might use an '06 ?

I have no doubt they both will kill, but will a Swede put the animal down in similar fashion, as quick as the Springfield?

Let's say comparing 140 to 180 Partitions, and perhaps RN 156-160s to 220s.

Despite wound channel size, I think the key would be straight line penetration thru vitals.

Should be fine on NW Louisiana bear, moose, and elk.



Seriously, it will be OK except in the extreme situations where more power is required to get the job done.

See the data in this post:
https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth..._SCANDINAVIAN_RIFLES_OPTICS_#Post1522364

Bruce

I personally would feel more comfortable with the 30-06.

In my world the swede stops at 400 pound critters....

Gimme the old .30-06 for the bigger stuff. I just might not get the classic broadside shot at the ribs I'd like to have.

65BR;
The interesting thing about moose is that they come in such a variety of sizes - much like deer I suppose.

So while a good moose in my part of the world would go 475lbs into the cooler, one in Klikitarik's or Yukoner's neighborhood could easily double that.

The lone moose I've killed went roughly 360lbs into the cooler and was taken to that place initially by 2 Hornady 220gr RN bullets out of a .308 Norma.

Neither exited on broadside hits in the heart/lung area and both bullets lost roughly half their weight while killing the moose.

Were the bullets a failure?

No, we ate moose meat so they weren't, but I wouldn't want to fight a bear with the bullets based upon the penetration I saw in that moose or the young whitetail buck I shot with that bullet as well.

In comparison, we've yet to find a 130gr. TSX in 4 deer shot with our daughter's 6.5x55 and from what I've seen with that bullet, I'd give it good odds at out-penetrating a .308" 220gr RN.

I'd chase local elk with our daughter's Swede without too much trepidation, but would likely want to limit myself to broadside shots. Then again, that's likely what I'd limit myself to with the .270 I carry with 130gr. GMX or the .308 Norma with 168gr TSX.

Anyway, there are a few random thoughts from one who lives where medium sized big game lives.

Regards,
Dwayne

30/06.
We have all read the studies from Europe about the 6.5 effectiveness.I'd still want the 06 as a personal matter.

If both cartridges were loaded with TSX's of the proper weight for caliber I would definitely side with the 30-06 for the largest game.

6.5X55 is a great cartridge. However, would you really feel completely secure with 160 grain bullet or 140 grain as is most commonly sold for the swede on Afognak Island in brush where you have 20 yards of visibility hunting Brown Bears.

Its not that its something that you couldn't do. It is more what would you do to feel comfortable. 200 grain Swift A-frames or 200 grain partitions aren't huge but they do give a greater measure of confidence when it comes to Brown Bears. Woodleigh has a 250 grain cup and core bullet that really might rock the house and even if it would only be chugging along at about 2250fps then I would be happier.

However, my 458 with 500 Grain Barnes tsx bullets would really make me feel better in the underbrush, alders and devil's club.

Sincerely,
Thomas

I've said it a hundred times, there is nothing that I would hunt with a 30-06 that I wouldn't hunt with a 6.5x55. If I'm intentionally going after the big stuff I'm bringing a bigger rifle all together. Now if I happened upon a grizzly with a tag in my pocket and I had a 6.5x55 in my hand I wouldn't hesitate for a second. Of course I would also try the same thing with a longbow, so I might be crazy!

25 years ago I worked for a Swedish company and visited the Sweden about one a month for meetings. At lunch (depending on whom I was eating with), the conversation would occasionally drift towards hunting. Some of the guys used the 6.5X55mm on large elk (moose to us) and felt no problems.

For any large and especially for dangerous game, I'd prefer the 30-06 with heavier bullets. The 6.5X55 will penetrate, but the smaller, lighter weight bullets (including the 160 gr.) seem a little light for me, if the animal charges or is annoyed (which a wounded moose or bear might become).

I love the 6.5x55 and use it as my deer rifle. Any thing deer sized down it gets the nod as my first choice. That would also include black bears. I also took it on my first cow elk hunt a few years back and wouldn't hesitate to use it for that purpose or on Moose if the opportunity presented itself. I must admit, that the .30-06 would be my first choice for elk & moose but I wouldn't feel severely undergunned with the 6.5x55, especially if it was running a premium bullet.

But if we are talking grizzly, no I wouldn't choose to use the 6.5x55 given the option of a .30-06. I've never hunted grizzlies, but I'd feel a bit of trepidation going into the brush with only a 6.5x55...

Penetration - probably the same
Wound channel volume - advantage goes to the '06
Shot placement - slight advantage to the Swede because of minimal recoil
Effectiveness on charging game - probably the same (this is just theory, since I haven't stopped a Brown bear with either). If it's a matter of stopping a charging 1200 lbs brown bear with either a 160gr or 200gr bullet, I don't think it'd matter much. They're both alike to throwing a pea at an enraged animal of that size. Shot placement and breaking bones or disrupting CNS is what's going to save you.

They'll both probably do an equal job on moose or elk, but I'd rather carry the '06 for animals of that size. I know it's merely an emotional/psychological thing, but it makes me feel a little more comfortable if I have to take a raking shot at a 1000lbs animal that is standing at the edge of the timber.

Give me the 30 06 hands down. Top bullet weight in 6.5 is 160, 220 is common in 06 and 250's were available at one time. I think there are still some out there. Bigger frontal area and 40%-60% more bullet weight plus more boiler room capacity make all the difference in the world in my book. These cartridges are not ballistic twins.

I have a swede, and carried it for elk, but didn't get a shot. So, I have no real world experience with it. I was going to carry it this year, but grabbed the 338 instead. The 338 gives the Bang----Flop, doubt the swede would do the same.

Problem with elk is, they are not deer -nor- are they moose. Elk do not just stop and die, elk keep going until they die. They have an amzing will to live. I have heard a moose will just stand there and let you keep shooting him...

There's some truth to that. I know of someone who put 7 shots from a .30-30 into a moose's head and neck. Just stood there and grunted every time it got hit.

Jordan, I'm going to question your statement about wound channel volume, not to be smart aZZ nor to say I know you're wrong but this is my experience: In the interest of "science" some years ago I fired 140gr 6.5 Hornady's and other caliber Hornady bullets including 180gr. Hornady's into wet newspaper to compare penetration and expansion and believe it or not it was hard if not impossible to see any difference between 140gr.(the smallest bullet tried)and the 180gr.30cal.(the largest) If I had not kept track of which bullet was fired into which stack of wet paper, I would have never known which was which until I found the bullet. BTW there was effort to keep impact velocity about the same for all bullets tested which was about 2500fps. Not that it would make any real difference, but the 140gr bullet was fired from a 6.5x06 not a 6.5 Swede. Again this does not mean you are wrong only that I question the statement. I also thought you might be interested.

Hmmm, interesting. I wonder what the results would look like if one measured the wound channel volume of ballistic gel using the same test. I also wonder what the results would look like if you shot 100 moose with each bullet.

I'm not saying that the .30-06 will always give a larger wound channel volume. It's certainly not an absolute, but my guess would be that the .308 would edge out the 6.5 bullet on average.

Could say it better.

I'm just playing devil's advocate, here. I just think it's funny how times change.

In the early to middle part of the 20th century, the 7x57 was considered one of the best ELEPHANT cartridges, and in 1935 Teddy Roosevelt stopped a charging RHINO a few feet from him with the most powerful handgun in the world... the .357 magnum!

So we lose a half a millimeter in diameter and 2 millimeters of powder capacity off the venerable 7x57, and its "critters under 400" only; and the .357 is marginal for deer!

No, I wouldn't go after bb's with my Swede! Just playing devil's advocate!

jordan, my guess is that the measurements would be a lot more precise. I'd like to see it done because I have more questions than answers. In the mean time if I get a chance at a moose I'll take my 30.06 not my 6.5x55, because I just can't at this point make myself believe what I've seen with wet paper tests.