If I did not handload, the Creedmoor would be My pick, as ammo as accurate as the Hornady 6.5 is priced at a much bigger premium in 260 Rem. Likewise, if someone dropped ALOT of Creed Brass in my lap....I might have a reason to load them
No doubt, if one likes a round, the investment in brass that will wear out a barrel and last MANY years, can be viable, and wise. Likewise, so can pre-ordering ammo if you shoot only factory, as one would not have to worry at a last minutes notice IF ammo is readily available.
It simply ASTOUNDS me that anyone with the handle "6.5 BR" would wax eloquent on pragmatic subjects as brass availability or cartridge longevity...
Last edited by jim62; 10/03/11.
To all gunmaker critics- "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.."- Teddy Roosevelt
If you buy a 6.5 Sweed you will have no need to ask the question.
Jim
I know Jim. I have (3) 6.5x55 swedes and a 260remington. I never could see the need for the 6.5 Worthless except to sell ammo and guns.
Does your tampon need to be changed, Francis?
You accuse gun writers of having an agenda, yet YOUR agenda here for the last several YEARS has been slamming the 6.5 Creedmoor without ever owning one.
You are simply pissed off that the 6.5 Creedmoor is stealing the last gasps of commercial breath from your beloved .260 "worthless".
A cartridge so "great" that Remington kicked it to the curb several years ago by dropping it from most of their rifle line..
The fact is, the 6.5 Creedmoor will do anything the .260 will do with less powder consumption and a better case design.
Can't expect a brainless twit like yourself to appreciate a round like the Creedmoor that was designed CORRECTLY for a .308 length action and 140g bullets. You obviously are not smart enough to do that.
Last edited by jim62; 10/03/11.
To all gunmaker critics- "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.."- Teddy Roosevelt
Purely looking at the Creed as to it's design and performance, it has few flies...but if it had the 308 based case to source brass, and the same options ie. Lapua brass and ammo options by other mfg. as the 260 does, then it would make those concerned w/the future viability of the round's supply of ammo/brass become moot and the OP would not be asking the question IMO.
While brass can't be sourced from .308 it CAN be sourced from the 22-250 and that's not going away. Plus - if a guy just can't live without superior brass - Lapua does make 22-250 brass...
It's always interesting to hear shooters with a very narrow range of interests complain about a new round that nobody is forcing them to buy.
As a 338Fed owner, how many times have I seen this happen.
It happens with just about every new introduction I can remember. It's almost as though they're afraid something new will succeed...
Exactly..
A rising tide lifts all boats.
The more cartridges viable in any caliber the better the overall bullet selection will continue to be.
Any round that helps expose shooters to the benefits of the high BC 6.5 slugs is a good thing.
To all gunmaker critics- "It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.."- Teddy Roosevelt
Jim - LOL. FYI, the 6.5BR was something I had plans for, but in lieu of built MANY 6BRs w/ready made brass and std. dies....though I did do one 7BR in a last minute flip/flop, it pleased also.
My username is not a statement that I run or ran one...yet
Yes, somehow w/Lapua brass/ammo in 6.5 Grendel and 6.5x47 Lapua bordering either side of it, it's getting harder for me to logically justify one.....during these economic times. The Grendel is not as user friendly to re-barrel an action w/oddball PPC head size...and the 47....well, if your doing one of them, you might consider the 260 as well for it's pros. I think the 6.5G is easiest to obtain in an AR Platform but would not rule out a TC or a Ruger #1 w/PPC extractor! Pro to an AR - you can buy what you want ready made in Grendel. If I build a #1....odds are it may well be in a 6.5BR, assuming I want to handload, no doubt it closes the gap giving another 200 fps or so over the Grendel.
Back to the Creed...Teal - as right as you are, in the end, my wildcatting days have grown shorter, and I really like to just load ammo w/quality brass that is properly headstamped. No forming, no guessing or confusion. K.I.S.S. works which is why 270, '06, 08, 243, and 30/30 shooters keep using their factory rifles/ammo. They 'get r done' in a pinch....with shot placement of course.
And yes Dober, a Corelokt Can be just as deadly as a Creedmoor....but I have not seen anyone pop an elk at 603 yds w/an '06/Corelokt but have seen them do it with a Creedmoor! LOL.
If you buy a 6.5 Sweed you will have no need to ask the question.
Jim
I know Jim. I have (3) 6.5x55 swedes and a 260remington. I never could see the need for the 6.5 Worthless except to sell ammo and guns.
DMSB, please see the following intelligent comments from Mule Deer:
"A bunch of people question the validity of ANY new cartridge, but ignore the fact that any smokeless round introduced after World War One is redundant.
All any new round introduced since then can do is fill a very small niche. Sometimes the niche is as small as offering something similar to a round a competing company sells. The .243 Win. and 6mm Rem. are perfect examples.
So what if the 6.5 Creedmoor's ballistic only match those of the 6.5x55 or .260? Hornady wasn't trying to develop a revolutionary new cartridge for whitetail hunters. Instead it developed a round for the target niche. Yeah, it will work just fine on deer, but that's not the point.
We could just as well have dismissed the .260 when it appeared because all it did was match what several of the original, redundant military 6.5mm rounds would so. But the .260 was also designed as a niche cartridge, one that fit in a short magazine--and also had consistent chamber and brass dimensions, unlike all those old military 6.5's, including the 6.5x55. Just try using ALL the different brands of 6.5x55 brass in a wide variety of rifles, and you'll understand part of the reason for .260.
It's always interesting to hear shooters with a very narrow range of interests complain about a new round that nobody is forcing them to buy."
One of the problems with commercial 6.5x55 rifles is that they ALL have to have chambers large enough to accommodate any commercial brass, which varies considerably in dimensions, especially toward the head. This is because the chamber dimensions for the 6.5x55 have varied considerably over the years, just like those of a great many early smokeless rounds, especially military cartridges.
This means that some commercial 6.5x55 rifles have generous enough chamber dimensions that accuracy isn't all it could be. The opposite side of the problem is that custom rifles can be tighter-chambered, but might not accept all brands of brass. A good example is my custom FN Mauser, barreled by Charlie Sisk.
Charlie warned me about 6.5x55 chamber specifications and brass being all over the place, but I was willing to seal with any problems. Charlie chambered the rifle with a custom Dave Kiff reamer, and it turned out that about 1/3 of Winchester and Federal cases refused to chamber, due to being too big in the rear end. This was solved by running them into my Redding 7x57 die, but an easier solution was eventually found: Lapua 6.5x55 brass works perfectly, and of course is top-quality. And of course the rifle shoots extremely well.
The .260 solves all those sorts of problems, just as 7mm-08 rifles don't show the wide range of chamber variations (especially the throat dimensions) of 7x57 rifles.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
If and when the day ever comes when you can`t find brass for a 6.5 Creedmoor or for any other cartridge, that is the signal for certain demise or doom for the round. That will trump any factory Creedmoor discontinuations.
Mule Deer - Thank you very much for your response. I guess that's a risk or challenge I'll have to take. I'm not ready to buy right now but unless something happens, I would like to get a Tikka T3 Lite SS in 6.5X55. I am aware they're not being imported right now, but maybe that'll change or I can find a good one used.
Of course a lot of this is really rifle-loony over-thinking. I must also point out that I once owned a Ruger 77 Mark II 6.5x55 that shot just about as well as my Lilja-barreled custom rifle! I wouldn't be surprised if a Tikka didn't shoot similarly.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
I just find it funny that the same people that dote and promote on the the latest cartridges all seem to have skin in the game. They are the same people that tell us we need magnums to kill 150pound deer, and bonded/monolithic bullets to kill Bambi. They also have the habit of promoting behaviors that are borderline unethical in the name of a product. If you don't use the cartridges they recommend, you'll get gored, stomped, or chewed into pieces once you track your critter into the bushes.
The 260 filled a legitimate need [6.5x55 ballistics in a short action]. The Creedmore, 30T/C, RCM, WSSM, WSM, and other similar cartridges were designed/produced to fill someone's bank account, not to put a better product in the shooters hands.
I don't drink or Smoke. I spend my money on gunpowder and gasoline.
There's another article on the 6.5 Creedmoor in the November issue of Guns & Ammo. In a photo line-up of the 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5 Grendel, .260 Rem, 6.5 Rem Mag, and .264 Win Mag it's easy to see what the author of that article is explaining when he says the Creedmoor case was designed from the ground up as a short-action cartridge with a modern shoulder angle as compared to the .260 Rem. The article includes data for 16 reloads with various bullets from 95 to 160 grains. Good data for anyone wanting to reload the 6.5CM.
I have that magazine too. I was underimpressed to say the least. My 18.5" Model 7 will nearly reach those velocities and match the accuracy with the 129 Hornady SP. 2650fps out of a stubby 18.5" barrel is more impressive than 2750 out of a 26" barrel.
I don't drink or Smoke. I spend my money on gunpowder and gasoline.
"Legitimate need?" Since when did we evaluate rifle cartridges for "legitimacy?" Frankly, if a cartridge wasn't designed by a national arsenal for military use it was designed by someone who "wanted to put money in their pockets."
Somehow I doubt Remington made Jim Carmichael's 6.5x308 a commercial cartridge out of the goodness of their big green heart
The 260 filled a legitimate need [6.5x55 ballistics in a short action]. The Creedmore, 30T/C, RCM, WSSM, WSM, and other similar cartridges were designed/produced to fill someone's bank account, not to put a better product in the shooters hands.
.............Welcome to capitalism, to free choice and variety.
The power of the RCMs, WSMs and similar rounds of more power than the 260, granted, isn`t really needed for deer. But some use their more powerful elk and big bear rifles as deer rifles too.
The makers of the 30TC cartridges, the WSM cartridges, the RCM cartridges and all the rifles that chamber them, also put money into the pockets of those who are employed by them?, and not just into someone`s bank account...
Exactly. I think it was Jeff Cooper who wrote that precious little innovation had occurred in the firearms industry during his lifetime. He also noted that most firearms would outlast their owners.
Thus, he contended the firearms industry relied on making firearms owners dissatisfied with their current holdings so that they'd get something new. In a sense, the industry tries to find new niches to explore and help shooters find a more ideal rifle, cartridge, etc.
Why is that such a bad thing? I don't understand why so many blast capitalism. It's certainly better than the alternative. Personally, I like filling my bank account by fulfilling a want or need of my clients.
I agree with Jeff Cooper. In short, I'm glad the firearms industry is trying to create new demand and innovate. If it didn't, the industry would dry-up in a hurry. That's not a good thing from my perspective.
In the end, a certain demographic doesn't understand "value" is a nebulous term. Some seem to think if something is not of merit or value to them, then it's not of merit or value to anyone. For them, it's a pocket-lining business selling to a foolish customer.
I just find it funny that the same people that dote and promote on the the latest cartridges all seem to have skin in the game. They are the same people that tell us we need magnums to kill 150pound deer, and bonded/monolithic bullets to kill Bambi. They also have the habit of promoting behaviors that are borderline unethical in the name of a product. If you don't use the cartridges they recommend, you'll get gored, stomped, or chewed into pieces once you track your critter into the bushes.
The 260 filled a legitimate need [6.5x55 ballistics in a short action]. The Creedmore, 30T/C, RCM, WSSM, WSM, and other similar cartridges were designed/produced to fill someone's bank account, not to put a better product in the shooters hands.
it's as simple as doing what you want... if you're buying a rifle, the manufacturer makes more money on an already in production model and chambering... putting a new item into production costs a fair bit of setup outlay for most things... your idea that all new rifles/chamberings are intended to line somebody's pocket is a bit out of kilter...
an idea is hard to kill... what has been done can be done again... there is little that is truly new, and nothing ever really goes away, at least not for ever...
as long as men carry rifles, someone will carry the 6.5 creedmore, and the .256 newton....
Well now you've gone and done it M D. The 6.5X55 has found a comfortable little nest in the back of my mind. I've almost decided that I want one. 
