Just as the title says, do you think this cartridge is going to survive. I'm looking into a new rifle in some type of 6.5 and wondering if you think it'll be around or going by the way of most of the WSSM's
I'm for betting that it won't last long commercially. But could be wrong and then some, have been b4.
Dober
I agree it's in the mix and ballistically similar to the 260 and Swede so it may survive in the Loonie crowd or competition shooters but as for hunting no way.
You better be afraid of a ghost!!
"Woody you were baptized in prop wash"..crossfireoops
How can it fail? With all the gunwriters singing it's praises, and never seeing a bad article written about it, it's going to put all the other cartridges out of business. All the experts can't be wrong can they? LOL.
I don't drink or Smoke. I spend my money on gunpowder and gasoline.
If you buy a 6.5 Sweed you will have no need to ask the question.
Jim
BE STRONG IN THE LORD, AND IN HIS MIGHTY POWER. ~ Ephesians 6:10
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. --Winston Churchill
and to take millions of game animals, and win tens of thousands of competition matches. I know you just happened to forget these. Best to you,
Jim
BE STRONG IN THE LORD, AND IN HIS MIGHTY POWER. ~ Ephesians 6:10
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. --Winston Churchill
I think..more than likely, but it may fade into oblivion for a large part over the coming years. Just my guess over time what it will do. It could catch on, and ballistically has every reason to THRIVE vs. not survive as it's a fine round from its merit's.
Survive - more likely than THRIVE - is my guess, but I could be wrong. My guess is arms/ammo sales are flat lined.
When the 6.5x47 came out, alot of shooters adopted it, the Creed perhaps went after the same niche - competition shooters, w/hopes I suppose it would spill over for hunters.
Once Lapua intro'd their 260 brass for handloaders, it pretty much sealed the deal for many would be 47 AND Creed shooters, as the 260 is viewed to have a little more horsepower and now w/Lapua brass, accuracy on par for the needs of those TactiCool/Sniper/Steel shooters who for the most part are building custom rifles w/DBM mags that take longer COL/OAL rounds. That last part was the big selling point for the Creed.
Recently Sako has made a run of TRG-22 Sniper rifles in 260. The are out the box, ready to run for the guys who want that type of rifle.
The 260 has not thrived as well as it deserves either, but I think the pendulum has swung in it's favor in the USA for 6.5 shooters as I have seen more 47s for sale than 260. I see more 260 shooters than 47 or Creedmoor.
That said, ALL rounds have been proven highly accurate, and for all out competition the newer 47 and Creedmoor have equalled the 260 for accuracy, and some surpass it. Speed? All 3 are VERY close when looking at results of how shooters are using/loading them.
If you are looking for a factory rifle - find the rifle of your preference. If it's a Creedmoor, being a handloader helps, but I doubt factory ammo is discontinued anytime in the near future, and it's very accurate and to spec w/speeds. It's not my first choice due to being a 'Hornady exclusive' re: proper head stamped brass/ammo options, but it will do as good a job as you need if its in the rifle you want.
If I know Ruger, if sales are not increasing, many/all rifle options may be discontinued in time. DPMS and perhaps others however may have a small niche for the AR type rifles.
IF Lapua really wanted to kill the Creed, and dominate the mid-sized 6.5 USA market, they could mfg. MATCH grade ammo in their Lapua brass, using 123 and 139 gr Scenars at a competitive price. That last part is not what Lapua is known for doing.
That said Norma has an opportunity to do the same w/260 ammo as affordable MATCH/Tactical ammo market has room to grow. One thing is certain, many former 308 shooters have/are moving over to 6.5s.
I think it will. The fact that Ruger's Hawkeyes in it are selling pretty well and the fact that those cheap factory rifles are surprisingly accurate is going to be a factor. E
LOL - I do applaud Ruger for giving 6.5 shooters an option, but would have already bought a #1V by now had it been in the 260, but they never offered it, instead discontinuing all but the compact 77 in 260 IIRC.
Hornady upper management told me a few years ago, a short action '270 TC' was coming out pushing a 120gr as fast as a 130gr 270 Winchester load. Had that been correct, I would if it would have sold more rifles vs a Creedmoor? Perhaps he mispoke and meant the 6.5 Creed, but I am 100% certain, he said two seventy. Perhaps the idea was canned.
This thread is going exactly like a bunch of other threads. 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.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
I don't get the point of the original question. Other than a non reloading shooter, why would anyone really care about the popularity of a cartridge?
If you like the rifle/cartridge.. buy it and a few hundred rounds of brass, its not like their going to stop making 6.5mm bullets. In 15 years if you can't find new brass.. you can always rebarrel.
Heck I just bought a 338 RCM (that will be dead long before the creedmore).. I got 400 rounds of brass, when thats used up I will have certainly gotten my money out of the barrel.
The collection of taxes which are not absolutely required, which do not beyond reasonable doubt contribute to public welfare, is only a species of legalized larceny. Under this Republic the rewards of industry belong to those who earn them. Coolidge
One not-so-minor additional point: 6.5 Creedmoor cases are easily formed from .22-250 brass, and I suspect .22-250 brass will be around as long as centerfire rifles exist.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Barry - the 6BR IIRC, has won/wins from 300-600 meters. And taken many records to 1,000.
I am not sure the Creedmoor has done anything that other 6.5s have not done, inc. the 47 Lapua or the 55 Swede.
The 260 - Sherri Gallagher�s record-setting victory in the 2010 NRA High Power National Championship, Sherri was shooting a .260.
JB - good posts. As to niche rounds, often handloaders seek them for various reasons..that those rounds deliver. Brass can be sourced no doubt if pressed. That said, guys, think about the 41 magnum, the 350 Rem Mag and others with low sales volume...there is still brass being mfg...so it's not likely that the Creed will vanish, 'subside' perhaps if it does not prosper.
In the meantime, I bet Hornday could add incremental profit to ammo sales by mfg. 260 match and hunting ammo. Whether they choose to to make the financial investment for a return, or how that would affect their plans for the Creedmoor's future I do not know.
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.
It really simply boils down to:
Do you like it?
Then get it in a rifle or have one built.
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.
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.
Whether the cartridge survives, as in readily available factory loaded ammo, no one can know. As with everything new, the market will decide its long term fate. That said, change and innovation has been the hallmark of the firearms industry for centuries and I applaud companies like Hornady and Ruger for keeping that tradition alive and well.
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....
seems that some feel the need to convince themselves and others that their choices, and their stuff is the absolute best available, and that no other choice has merit, in any sense...
i've seen some who, if in the course of a debate began to doubt that their choice was the ultimate best, would jump ship, sell out and start over... sucks to be them, i guess...
LOL...ahhh what a simple life in the days when all one needed to do to change how much powder one burned, was to just add more...or less....of Black Powder down the muzzle! No worry about headstamps, brass, etc. etc.
No need to buy another rifle. No worry about what scope to mount, and what mounts to mount it in, or what stock to put your bbl/action in. Heck - some came with triggers that would put many of today's lawyer/litigation proof triggers to shame.
Man.....always chasing....what he does not have
Yep, keeping man on that Journey IS Capitalism in it's finest form.
Sure beats stagnation. Thank GOD I don't have to hunt with a 30-06/180 Corelokts and an El Paso K4!!!
It will survive just fine to those with the mindset of what it is... Yes,I have one and also own a .260,6.5X55,.264 and even a 6.5X57.Is it better then these rounds? some ways Yes.I've had bad luck the last two years with new guns,but determined to try the new Hawkeye,I'm happy! The gun shoots well,factory ammo is fanstastic and the handloads are very responsive. The Hawkeye is a departure of sorts for me,as I am a big fan of carbines,this has a 26"barrel,but not heavy and makes for a stable clear-cut rifle,which I have a chance to hunt this year.I see it no different than any "wildcat" out there without the PIA of making up stuff.Been there,done with it...If I wasn't willing to try something new,I would have stopped with the .270 45 years ago....rifle
Come on America, Athletes and actors are not heroes, only soldiers, airmen,marines and sailors get that respect�and let's add firemen and LEO's
When in my 20's I hunted for a while with an older guy who was convinced that everything he chose was perfect. In a way he was right, since his hunting arsenal consisted of a pre-'64 Model 70 in .30-06, a 12-gauge pumpgun and a tube-magazine bolt-action .22.
Eventually, however, I grew a little weary of hearing about his practically perfect life, and incredible suspicion of everything that varied from it. Like the smart-azz I was (and still can be on occasion), I said: "Gee, if everybody in the world thought just like you, it would get a little crowded in your house, wouldn't it?"
He didn't get it.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Barry - the 6BR IIRC, has won/wins from 300-600 meters. And taken many records to 1,000.
My point is that nobody goes to Walmart and buys 6BR ammo or 6BR rifles. In fact, I doubt that 90% of guys pulling triggers have ever even heard of it.
Does that matter?
No, that isn't the point of the cartridge.
Give the Creed time. At least Dennis DeMille is popping it's caps. If there are any records left for him to break, he will probably do it with the Creed.
Thank you everyone for your responses. Some very interesting views on the matter and I appreciate your expertise. This particular cartridge has been on my mind since I first heard about it and I wanted some real world advice.
For the most part these conversations drive me nuts. For instance, the .338 RCM was such an offense to the people who owned and shot .338-06's and .338 Win Mags. So what?! It wasn't intended for you! But for somebody who has always loved the concept of the .338 bullet diameter is was great to have another option to choose from when I gave up on my .338 Win Mag that I couldn't get to shoot and started looking for another .338 diameter cartridge. It IS a very relevant chambering for the person who wants to go a bit bigger in weight and diameter than anything they currently have.
The same goes for every new cartridge that comes along. If you have something similar, few people will chide you for not selling what you have to go get what is new. But when looking for something new, it is GREAT to have so much to choose from and are able to get EXACTLY what you feel you need or simply want.
For the most part these conversations drive me nuts. For instance, the .338 RCM was such an offense to the people who owned and shot .338-06's and .338 Win Mags. So what?! It wasn't intended for you! But for somebody who has always loved the concept of the .338 bullet diameter is was great to have another option to choose from when I gave up on my .338 Win Mag that I couldn't get to shoot and started looking for another .338 diameter cartridge. It IS a very relevant chambering for the person who wants to go a bit bigger in weight and diameter than anything they currently have.
The same goes for every new cartridge that comes along. If you have something similar, few people will chide you for not selling what you have to go get what is new. But when looking for something new, it is GREAT to have so much to choose from and are able to get EXACTLY what you feel you need or simply want.
......Drives me almost nuts too.
Usually when new rounds are intro`d, here come the critics. "Un-needed",,,,"won`t last",,,,"too many now in this caliber diameter",,,,"too many now in that caliber diameter",,,,"somebody`s pockets are gettin lined",,,,"why for"....."this sucks and that sucks"....and on and on we go.
It is almost as though that with any new addition, they feel that their long time favorite round in the same caliber is threatened in some fashion. Probably the best and most famous example of that, was the introduction of 375 Ruger. Other examples include the WSMs and RCMs.
If a very limited "some" on this forum had their way, the selection of perceived "needed" cartridges made available to the marketplace without a doubt, would be absolutely "slim pickings" boring.
I guess the other side of the coin, and one of which many folks grow weary, is the advertising of each new innovation as an "improvement" when in reality it is merely an alternative choice. What is true from one side is also true from the other.
Not a real member - just an ordinary guy who appreciates being able to hang around and say something once in awhile.
Happily Trapped In the Past (Thanks, Joe)
Not only a less than minimally educated person, but stupid and out of touch as well.
I guess the other side of the coin, and one of which many folks grow weary, is the advertising of each new innovation as an "improvement" when in reality it is merely an alternative choice. What is true from one side is also true from the other.
..........In some cases that probably was and is true. However, don`t forget about those new rifle formats for those new cartridges.
Hornady for example touted the new 338 RCM as equal in performance to 24" barreled 338 Wins when fired from the new 20" barreled M77 Hawkeyes.....Well "NOT" exactly.
But with that stated, the newer M77s chambered in the 338 RCM, offers a new and refreshing rifle format for those who wished for a shorter and somewhat handier rifle but nevertheless still very potent. Better ballistics no, but it was another rifle alternative.
When it came to the 375 Ruger, any perceived advertising hype from Hornady and Ruger where shorter barreled ballistics was concerned in duplicating longer tubed H&H performance, was in fact very true.
Just as with the 338 RCM, there came a new shorter rifle format alternative (Alaskan) for the 375 Ruger.
I like new stuff. Where did I ever go wrong? Has anybody chambered a 7mm Creedmoor?
BE STRONG IN THE LORD, AND IN HIS MIGHTY POWER. ~ Ephesians 6:10
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. --Winston Churchill
To really stir the chitt pot some more, here is what Hornady needs to commercially do imo. They may be already doing so, but I don`t know.
How about a 338 Ruger based on the "actual" 375 Ruger casing? How about a 300 Ruger based on the "actual" 375 Ruger casing?
Then they can produce those same 20" barreled M77 Hawkeyes that they now do for the 338 RCM, and produce new rifles chambered in those two above as well.
Then, from a 20" barrel the 338 Ruger will more than likely equal and exceed the velocities of the 24" 338 Wins, where the 20" barreled 338 RCMs fell behind.
Talk about pissing off the 300 and 338 establishments? Oh the crap would fly.
From the 375 Ruger casing, they already went to the 416 Ruger, so why not have some more fun and go with a 300 and 338 too?
Afterall, those two new additions "would certainly not" be needed!........LMAO!
To really stir the chitt pot some more, here is what Hornady needs to commercially do imo. They may be already doing so, but I don`t know.
How about a 338 Ruger based on the "actual" 375 Ruger casing? How about a 300 Ruger based on the "actual" 375 Ruger casing?
Afterall, those two new additions "would certainly not" be needed!........LMAO!
Let's see... The .338 Ruger based on the .375 Case... That would be: the .33 Newton
The .30/.375 Ruger would be the: (Drum Roll, please...) .30 Newton. Gee, just when you think you've found something new... You find out it's been thought of 95 years ago... I've read somewhere that Charles Newton was a bit ahead of his time...
While they're at it, could we please have a factory load for the .35 Newton... Then I wouldn't have to form brass... GH
"As you walk thru life, don't be surprised that there are fewer people that you encounter seeking truth than those seeking confirmation of what they already believe!"
To really stir the chitt pot some more, here is what Hornady needs to commercially do imo. They may be already doing so, but I don`t know.
How about a 338 Ruger based on the "actual" 375 Ruger casing? How about a 300 Ruger based on the "actual" 375 Ruger casing?
Afterall, those two new additions "would certainly not" be needed!........LMAO!
Let's see... The .338 Ruger based on the .375 Case... That would be: the .33 Newton
The .30/.375 Ruger would be the: (Drum Roll, please...) .30 Newton. Gee, just when you think you've found something new... You find out it's been thought of 95 years ago... I've read somewhere that Charles Newton was a bit ahead of his time...
While their at it, could we please have a factory load for the .35 Newton... Then I wouldn't have to form brass... GH
...............I realize the 375 Ruger is based on the much older Newton case.
Nobody else had the fore-sight like Hornady and Ruger, to use the old Newton design, tweak it a little, and re-name it the 375 Ruger.
There`s nothing wrong with innovating something new based on a 95 year old case design and then re-naming it accordingly.
So what and more power to `em.
If added, the market place will either accept the 300 Ruger and a 338 Ruger if both so named, or they`ll reject one or both of them.
I wish somebody would commercialize my favorite 6.5...the 6.5-06. I would definitely buy one of those. I had one a number of years ago but it went to pay for bills during tough times.
I wish somebody would commercialize my favorite 6.5...the 6.5-06. I would definitely buy one of those. I had one a number of years ago but it went to pay for bills during tough times.
Oh, wait, ain't that the .256 Newton???
.....Yes it is, but oh wait, ain`t you forget`n a little something too??....:D
If Hornady does come out with a 300 and 338 Ruger based on the 375 Ruger case, the case diameter will be greater than that of the 6.5/06, which is based on the 30-06 case dimension.
375 Ruger casings have larger diameters. So while it is based on the Newton design, the case dimensions are different....
When in my 20's I hunted for a while with an older guy who was convinced that everything he chose was perfect. In a way he was right, since his hunting arsenal consisted of a pre-'64 Model 70 in .30-06, a 12-gauge pumpgun and a tube-magazine bolt-action .22.
Eventually, however, I grew a little weary of hearing about his practically perfect life, and incredible suspicion of everything that varied from it. Like the smart-azz I was (and still can be on occasion), I said: "Gee, if everybody in the world thought just like you, it would get a little crowded in your house, wouldn't it?"
He didn't get it.
If we all had just one standard cartridge rifle and bought a box of shells every couple of years, the whole industry would go under. I say this while I try to figure out how to get a bigger safe in here, because I've overfilled the one I've got.
Yep, i knew the .256 Newton didn't share the same case as the bigger Newt's. I was just trying to add another unneeded cartridge to the 6.5 crowd and realized it too had been done before.
Probably need to ask the question in 30-40 years. Cartridges sometimes take 20 or more years to gain popularity, i.e. the 270 Win. Frequently cartridges will almost disappear from the landscape only to be resurected to great popularity. The 41 Mag, 358 Win, 264 win, 350 Rem Mag and a few others from time to time. One never knows what John Q. Gun looney will buy.
Beware of thieves, scammers and dishonest members on the "Fire" classifieds. Ya there is a thief here too. Whatever!!
Didn't read the entire thread, but, the way the writers in the gun mags are singing it's praises, you'd think its the end all of cartridges. They'd have us believe that without it , we may as well not bother hunting. 'Course that's typical.
Didn't read the entire thread, but, the way the writers in the gun mags are singing it's praises, you'd think its the end all of cartridges. They'd have us believe that without it , we may as well not bother hunting. 'Course that's typical.
Oh ,horsechit.
Gunwriters are merely explaining it's virtues. It's called writing. It's funny that annoys you since nobody is putting a gun to your head to read them.
I have never seen a writer yet that claimed the 6.5 Creedmoor should replace anything.
Your gun writer "hate" is showing.
Grow up.
Last edited by jim62; 10/05/11.
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
Didn't read the entire thread, but, the way the writers in the gun mags are singing it's praises, you'd think its the end all of cartridges. They'd have us believe that without it , we may as well not bother hunting. 'Course that's typical.
There inlies the problem "not reading" all the thread. I have yet to see anything written that claims it to be the "second coming". The writers wrote THEIR take on the caliber,nothing more,nothing less. I own one and it was one of the ones written about,nothing special,'cept it does do what was written about. It was not a hand-picked special,but bought by the writer in a retail shop....
Come on America, Athletes and actors are not heroes, only soldiers, airmen,marines and sailors get that respect�and let's add firemen and LEO's
Didn't read the entire thread, but, the way the writers in the gun mags are singing it's praises, you'd think its the end all of cartridges. They'd have us believe that without it , we may as well not bother hunting. 'Course that's typical.
So, what's wrong with that? I built a 30-284, hunted with a Roberts AI, I even attempted to develop a short action magnum during the 80's and Jamison beat me too it so I bought and kilt a bull moose with a 300WSM. I could continue but the point is I like things a little different. I like to cut my own trail. I do run into a problem occasionly. Somebody has already walked on the same ground but I go there anyway. The 6.5 Creedmoor is proving to be a great gun filling a certain nitch. Gun writers who see it as a legitimate tool have it right. Will it survive? Dunno, but I'd like one.
Jim
BE STRONG IN THE LORD, AND IN HIS MIGHTY POWER. ~ Ephesians 6:10
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. --Winston Churchill
So would I. I've got a perfectly serviceable Rem MR in 7mm08 and there's a little voice in the back of my head that keeps saying. "Pull the tube and replace it with one in 6.5 Creed..."
I'm for betting that it won't last long commercially. But could be wrong and then some, have been b4.
Dober
My three favorite cartridges are the 220 Swift, the 30-06 and the 358 Winchester. Oh well, 1 out of 3 (successes) can't be bad. Heck, even a .333 batting average is considered good.
I'm curious why nobody has ever come out with a .270-308 (or .270 Creedmore, if there's a difference)? Why is everything 6.5mm or 7mm?
I can understand why the 6.5 Creedmore was 6.5. There were a lot of available match bullet choices in that caliber and the round was intended for High Power target shooting under NRA rules. But that shouldn't apply to hunting bullets where there are probably more good choices in.270.
I wonder how the .270 WSSM is selling.
Don't blame me. I voted for Trump.
Democrats would burn this country to the ground, if they could rule over the ashes.
I'm curious why nobody has ever come out with a .270-308 (or .270 Creedmore, if there's a difference)? Why is everything 6.5mm or 7mm?
Because it's a MATCH cartridge. It's the high BC/weight ratio of 6.5 cal match slugs. The Creedmoor was just a furtherance of the entire effectiency concept by designing the case around the .308 length mag box and match 140g 6.5 slugs.
Originally Posted by IndyCA35
I can understand why the 6.5 Creedmore was 6.5. There were a lot of available match bullet choices in that caliber and the round was intended for High Power target shooting under NRA rules. But that shouldn't apply to hunting bullets where there are probably more good choices in.270.
You just answered your own question. Hunting rounds are about power and velocity for longer point blank ranges- not about efficiency in shooting many shots during the course of a match with less recoil. Nothing is stopping anyone from making their own .270 Creedmoor Wildcat if they want to. Besides, the selection of 6.5 hunting slugs is just as good as that available for the .270 anyway.
Originally Posted by IndyCA35
I wonder how the .270 WSSM is selling.
I have no idea, since there IS NO SUCH THING. The .270 WSM however, is doing just fine.
Last edited by jim62; 10/05/11.
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
I'm curious why nobody has ever come out with a .270-308 (or .270 Creedmore, if there's a difference)? Why is everything 6.5mm or 7mm?
ask Mark Doberenski... he has talked about it IIRC... maybe call it the 6.8 DOBERmoor...
Originally Posted by IndyCA35
I can understand why the 6.5 Creedmore was 6.5. There were a lot of available match bullet choices in that caliber and the round was intended for High Power target shooting under NRA rules. But that shouldn't apply to hunting bullets where there are probably more good choices in.270.
i dunno about that... the .270 has made most of it's rep with the 130 bullet... there's a ton of .26s in the same weight range that'll do any and every thing that a .27 will...
at the end of the day, one cartridge does pretty much what the other will... there'll always be those who obsess over the most insignificant details, but even most of them i think, would prefer to simply use what they have more often...
i'm pretty fond of my small collection of hunting rifles and can find use for all of them... i do not, when hunting, worry about the rifle or the cartridge that i'm carrying... i pay attention to the wind, the sun, the game and how i'll use any opportunities given to me to take it...
Myself, I love just about anything in a 6.5 bore...unless it is a Mag case, which I see as overkill...
I seem to walk off the beaten path anyway...
I am just happy with the 260, but am glad that the other rounds are on the market..
for hunting, I find more and more that I just use load data from the Hodgdon # 26 Manual, for all the pistol silhouette data, for the 6.5 IHSHa ( or whatever all those letters are)...
A piece of 22.250 brass once got mixed in with my brass for the 260.. and ended up with a 107 grain Matchking in it...I thought it looked pretty cool and efficient...
I have more fun at the load bench and going to the range and testing it out... than arguing 100 to 200 fps difference on line..
I've found the difference between 100 to 200 fps is usually adjusted with a couple of clicks on the old elevation knob and suddenly is a non issue...
Those load data info for the 6.5 IHSMA ( whatever) for the pistol guys, more than works well in a 22 inch rifle...for distances of 250 to 300 yds...
In fact, I am now leaning to spend my time and attention thinking a nifty hunting rifle would be with an 18 inch tube, heavy magnum contour, with a shortened stock by an inch or 1.5 inches...or even a varmint contour barrel in the 17 to 18 inch range..
chambered in a 260, or whatever.. as I really don't care as much as I handload...
but truth be known, where I hunt locally... a good old 30/30 would still suffice...
older I get, practical utility becomes more important to me than anything else..
what has impressed me most in the last year in the shooting dept wasn't some magazine article, or a new caliber, rifle etc...
it was a guy I met at our local range this summer, when they had the pistol silhouette matches this summer...from So Cal..
he told me he settled on the 6mm and 6.5 bore world... and goes out and shoots between 8,000 to 10,000 rounds a year..
lucky dog! That impressed me the most, to be able to have the finances and opportunity...I should live so long..
"Minus the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the Country" Marion Barry, Mayor of Wash DC
“Owning guns is not a right. If it were a right, it would be in the Constitution.” ~Alexandria Ocasio Cortez
The .270/.308 aka .270 Redding has been around a long time. The 6.5 bore is where a lot of desirable characteristics in a shoulder fired cartridge converge. Anything close is close. I like the .260-don't have a Creedmore but I would like it too. Got a 6.5x42 AR-6.5s rule. PH
jim62, I don't hate any writers, fact is I enjoy the writing of most of them. Just stating an opinion. I like the 6.5. Have a swede, don't see the need for another. Don't really think the Credmore will do anything a Swede won't.
I also understand they are in business to sell magazines. Hell, I buy a bunch of em.
If you want one, but one. I don't care either way.
65BR-Well it is really a 42.5mm-just the 6.8 SPC necked down with 30* shoulder-no other changes. It is Mike Milli's design he calls the 6.5 DTI. Hope to check it out on the local whitetail herd soon. PH
Yeah, the 6,5 Creedmoor will do things the 6.5x55 won't. First, the cartridges fit in a 2.8" magazine. Second, they're short enough, with a long enough neck, to allow flexibility in seating long 140-grain match bullets.
Those are the two reasons it was developed, not to replace the 6.5x55. Apparently that's a difficult concept for many shooters to grasp.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
TBREW401, Those are the two reasons it was developed, not to replace the 6.5x55. Apparently that's a difficult concept for many shooters to grasp.
I agree! Some people just like a short action. Who cares how I feel about short actions vs. long actions. If someone likes the SA better that doesn't mean my LA isn't any good (or the other way around). Good for them that they can get what they want!
The problem is we speak dogmatically about our preferences.
If you want one, but one. I don't care either way.
You must care..
Otherwise why bother to post the anti- 6.5 Creedmoor rant in your first post here?
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
Nothing at all to do with writers. Just a comment on the coverage of a new cartridge. Not intended to denigrate anything or anyone. My apologies to anyone offended.
Will the 6.5 Creedmoor survive? Just look at how long this thread has survived.
Jim
BE STRONG IN THE LORD, AND IN HIS MIGHTY POWER. ~ Ephesians 6:10
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. --Winston Churchill
If you want one, but one. I don't care either way.
You must care..
Otherwise why bother to post the anti- 6.5 Creedmoor rant in your first post here?
I thought his post had more to do about writers, than the cartridge.
Yeah, in YOUR world it does. Your posts show that.
Last edited by jim62; 10/07/11.
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
John B. - No doubt, the 55 is here to stay, and the other mid sized 6.5's are made to capitalize on where the Swede left off bringing more awareness to the 6.5s in the USA w/thousands of imported Mausers, IMO. Being nigh ballistic twins of the 55mm, the other short action 6.5s are very capable.
I just dug up a recap of a hunter who went to Africa using a 'DOWNLOADED' 260 and 120 TSX:
"As a first-timer I must ask in advance for forgiveness for digging up this old thread but I couldn't help myself after chuckling myself right out of my chair and onto the floor, reading about the last 2 folks joking about the impression of the general public that deer are getting harder to kill now that they have learned to wear kevlar and such! It compelled me to pass along some fun data from a trip we made a couple of years back to South Africa... It involves two 6.5mm/.264 -bored rifles.
The first rifle was my eldest daughters .260 Remington mountain rifle. I had downloaded it to send a 120-grain Barnes TSX at a mere 2580 feet per second for mild recoil for her (age 14) and my youngest daughter (age 11 at the time) so they wouldn't find the recoil too sharp.
The second rifle (since according to the lore I was confident that the downloaded .260 Remington wouldn't be "enough rifle" for at least the larger species of those tough, threatening, thick-skinned African plains game) was a wildcat of my own design based on a shortened .300 WSM case and that pooped out the same 120-grained Barnes TSX at more than 3300 feet per second.
Well to make a long story short, Mr. Smarty Wildcatter (that was, ahem, me...) forgot to file the proper customs form for the 2nd (wildcat) rifle as I was hastily trying to find the magic recipe that would womp those big ol' African beasties down with authority, far too close to the time for our upcoming trip. As one might predict, that led to my "big" rifle staying safely back at the airport customs office an Johannesburg while we continued on afield for our 11-day safari with only the mild old 2580-fps .260 Remington. With the admitted exception of 1 impala that I repeatedly (lol) in haste shot underneath the head of because it was too close, the .260 amazed both us and our PH. Ahem, now that I've gotten that embarrassing impala incident out of the way, let's for the sake of this thread get on to the actual terminal data, which includes animals shot on that trip by both of my daughters and I. Again, I should point out that this rifle was launching a 120-grain bullet at nearly the same velocities of a 6.5 Grendel (only 60 fps more in fact...)
Impala #1: from about a hundred yards; 1 shot Impala #2: from about a eighty yards; 1 shot Impala #3: from about a hundred yards; 2 shots after the first shot was a bit too far back by 1 of my daughters. Second shot was a mercy shot (it was going nowhere) Blesbok #1: 75 yards; 1 shot Blesbok #2: about 200 yards; 2 shots after the first shot was a bit too far back. Second shot was a mercy shot (it too was going nowhere) Gemsbok (over 36 inches of horn): about 45 yards; 1 shot, instant kill Zebra #1: about 70 yards; 1 shot Zebra #2 (lead herd mare): about 80 yards: 1 shot Zebra #3: about 110 yards; 1 shot Black wildebeest (very tough shot at 340 yards with a gusting 20 to 25 mph crosswind, but we were pinned down after about 20 minutes of stalking by the herd sentinels): 1st shot piled it up within about 75 yards, but about 2 minutes later as we made our way two it the animal went from all 4 feet straight up in the air to rolling back slowly onto it's belly but couldn't get up. A second shot at 289 yards finished it for good this time. Note: the PH was amazed as he said he'd had a client about a week earlier hit a similar sized black wildebeest twice with a .375 H and H and they followed it for 10 1/2 hours... 2 outstanding Bushbucks: 1 took one shot at under 75 yards. The second took two shots - one at a full charge at us after we followed it into the brush after my daughter hit it slightly far back. I'll never forget that thing charging us with the guides' Jack Russel hanging about a foot off the ground, determinedly hanging onto it's rear trying to bring it to a halt. After the second shot at about 6 feet it slid to a stop of course. 1 very large Waterbuck: 50 yards; 1 shot
In any case in retrospect with that 120-grained TSX, downloaded to not far from the lowest velocity in the load books, we took animals from about a 70-pound Impala to probably 4 t0 6 hundred pound zebra, waterbuck and gemsbok, most with a single shot, at ranges from 6 feet to 340 yards. Would a larger round have taken them better? Considering the zebra, waterbuck and gemsbok ran from zero to a maximum of probably 55 yards, I doubt it.
Then again, maybe those African plains game haven't managed to get the proper customs paperwork to be issued their kevlar hides yet.
That story really doesn't surprise me all that much. My experience is that African game succumbs to good shot placement with an adequately penetating bullet just like American game of a similar size, despite all the BS about how tough those animals are.
I haven't used a 6.5 on African game but have used the 7x57 on plenty, including wildebeest and kudu, and it worked fine. The .270 does too!
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
It probably is--among a certain minority of hunters.
One advantage the Creedmoor has had from the beginning is very accurate factory rifles and ammunition. The list of good rounds that failed is a long one, and aside from timing a lot of the failures can be attributed to the rifle rather than the round, such as the .244 Remington in the 1-12 twist 722 and the 6.5 Remington in the Model 600.
Then there are cartridges that were pretty darn good and reasonably popular at first, such as the .264 Winchester, that couldn't compete with later rounds (7mm Remington Magnum). There are also rounds that weren't very popular at first, such as the .338 Winchester Magnum, that became far more popular later.
Then there's the .30-06!
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
I know the Creedmoor will survive in my house. I bought the Ruger target rifle first; liked it so much I bought a Hawkeye stainless and dropped it into a Factory laminate compact stock with a bedding job with plans to cut the barrel down to 18". This rifle shoots as well as the target rifle, so the barrel will remain at 26" for the foreseeable future.
MuleDeer.... Is it a simple one pass conversion from 22-250/250 Savage brass, or are you fire-forming?... While I have a large supply of Creedmoor brass on hand I would like to try this in my target rifle as it sees a lot of range time and it would be nice to have the option.
I used the Cream of Wheat fire-forming method. The "load" I ended up using was 18 grains Unique, topped by enough dry Cream of Wheat to fill a Winchester .22-250 case up to the base of the neck, with a cotton cleaning patch wadded up and stuffed into the neck to keep everything inside. The case formed perfectly to a 6.5 Creedmoor. It has since worked in other rifles as well.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
no, not for the "everyday hunter". it has a following with bench shooters, but that is a very small niche when compared to hunters (also known as the buying public). eventually the 6.5 will be relegated to handloaders, with very limited factory chamberings, much like the direction in which the 260 finds itself today. not a criticism, just an observation from what i read.
That story really doesn't surprise me all that much. My experience is that African game succumbs to good shot placement with an adequately penetating bullet just like American game of a similar size, despite all the BS about how tough those animals are.
Except for those Spring Hares?
"Live like you'll die tomorrow, but manage your grass like you'll live forever." -S. M. Stirling
considering the number of CMs sold in the last 3 years and factory ammo sitting on nearly every shelf I think the question was answered a good time ago. why did this round get so popular so quick? great factory ammo and great marketing. is the 260 a lesser round? nope! but big green fell on it's face out of the gate with it's factory ammo and crappy brass, Hornady didn't make that mistake.
Owned and shot most of popular guns and calibers over almost 60 yrs of hunting. Have only a 6.5 CM and a 308 now and either will take the deer, bear, elk or moose I decide to take. Both shoot my handloads to less than 1/2" and both help make a great day of hunting. Based on all I see they will both be around longer than I will and the 6.5 will only gain in rank as long as the guns and the ammo keep pace. Mac
I can't wait for all of the "New" and "Cool" to wear off the Creedmoors and to see them hit the used racks.
I don't see that happening soon, so don't hold your breath. They are probably behind only the .308, 30-06, and .223 in the number of current Factory loads available in such a wide variety.
Last edited by chlinstructor; 11/13/17.
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
I can't wait for all of the "New" and "Cool" to wear off the Creedmoors and to see them hit the used racks.
I don't see that happening soon, so don't hold your breath. They are probably behind only the .308, 30-06, and .223 in the number of current Factory loads available in such a wide variety.
In the next couple of years, after all the innerweb, tacticool super snipers find they can't instantly shoot 1000 yards, they'll sell them. I see these niche buyers aplenty and their comments and claims are simply amazing.
I can't wait for all of the "New" and "Cool" to wear off the Creedmoors and to see them hit the used racks.
Funny and sad all at the same time. "New" yeah sure, a cartridge that melds everything into a perfect package from the factory, what a fad!
I'm constantly amazed reading this forum. All the great knowledge is here,yet when something comes along that meets nearly every requirement, it's just a fad.. you dip sticks
I could see myself buying another Creed. One shooting 147s for longer range alpine shooting, and one shooting a more stout 140 for close range timber hunting.
I can't wait for all of the "New" and "Cool" to wear off the Creedmoors and to see them hit the used racks.
Funny and sad all at the same time. "New" yeah sure, a cartridge that melds everything into a perfect package from the factory, what a fad!
I'm constantly amazed reading this forum. All the great knowledge is here,yet when something comes along that meets nearly every requirement, it's just a fad.. you dip sticks
It's only happened with about every cartridge ever made, why do you think the 6.5 Creedmoor will be any different?
People buy new guns, figure out they need the next new toy to come down the pike, and sell the previous toy. Soon it will be the 6mm Creedmoor or 22 Creedmoor or whatever. The 6.5 Creedmoor might check a lot of boxes, but it's still a fad - some folks will keep their rifles because they are good guns. Others will follow the next trend and put their guns up for sale, to chase the next perfect cartridge. It's human nature.
I can't wait for all of the "New" and "Cool" to wear off the Creedmoors and to see them hit the used racks.
Ya know, THAT is an interesting point to bring up..
Some folks have been calling the 6.5 Creedmoor a fad.. Well its not much of a "fad" if the catridge and rifles chambered in it perform so well they don't get traded off. I sure haven't seen the used gun market floofed with them.
Folks seem to hang onto their 6.5 Creeds. Bodes well for it's future.
I can't wait for all of the "New" and "Cool" to wear off the Creedmoors and to see them hit the used racks.
Funny and sad all at the same time. "New" yeah sure, a cartridge that melds everything into a perfect package from the factory, what a fad!
I'm constantly amazed reading this forum. All the great knowledge is here,yet when something comes along that meets nearly every requirement, it's just a fad.. you dip sticks
It's only happened with about every cartridge ever made, why do you think the 6.5 Creedmoor will be any different?
People buy new guns, figure out they need the next new toy to come down the pike, and sell the previous toy. Soon it will be the 6mm Creedmoor or 22 Creedmoor or whatever. The 6.5 Creedmoor might check a lot of boxes, but it's still a fad - some folks will keep their rifles because they are good guns. Others will follow the next trend and put their guns up for sale, to chase the next perfect cartridge. It's human nature.
PG, I know you see a lot of cartridges and game killed a year. Honestly I'd think a guy like you would be a fan of the creedmoor, but I guess old wives tales die hard, even to those "in the know"... whatever man, load development is done at the factory level, and guns are set up at the get go for "custom performance ".
Haha, whatever man. I have a 6.5 Creedmoor and like the round.
Just because a round is good doesn't mean a bunch of the rifles it's chambered in won't be up for sale once the new wears off. It's what rifle loonies do.
Your point being "it's happened with every other cartridge introduced "
Well, no it [bleep] hasn't, not even close. Most every other cartridge is catered to Window lickers without the first clue.. the creedmoor is a mild cartridge that simply put, outperforms what the manufacturers claims.. i.e, a breath of fresh air in an arena full of BS.. some folks should really know better.
Regarding the OP, survival probably is not an issue. Even mediocre and unimpressive cartridges continue in use because someone owns and uses them - hard to remember when I last saw a modern hunting rifle melted down as scrap. A better question might focus upon whether or not the cartridge will stand the test of performance and market value over a long time span, and become a true classic among riflemen. Some cartridges developed as much as 100 years ago are still highly regarded and sought. Some more recent innovations seem to make the big splash and then become ripples. Issues of true quality have a way of sorting themselves out among knowledgeable folks. With faddists, not so much.
At first I was afraid, I was petrified Kept thinking that my 6.5 Creed would never survive Then I spent so many nights feeling sorry for my 6BR And I grew strong and I learned.......
At first I was afraid, I was petrified Kept thinking that my 6.5 Creed would never survive Then I spent so many nights feeling sorry for my 6BR And I grew strong and I learned.......
was the same prediction with the 204 ruger and 17 hmr. considering the number of manufacturers building rifles and selection of factory ammo it may be here to stay.The accuracy , effectiveness and low recoil make it a keeper for many of us.
"We are building a dictatorship of relativism which recoqnizes nothing as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of ones own self ego and desires."Cardinal Rathzinger
At first I was afraid, I was petrified Kept thinking that my 6.5 Creed would never survive Then I spent so many nights feeling sorry for my 6BR And I grew strong and I learned.......
to understand ballistics ya we all know on paper the creedmore 6.5 is a good new cartridge,but really just the good old 308 win. will hang close to the same ballistic but will a deer know the difference ? dead is dead this year for fun when I go to Montana I plan on using a 6.5x284 norma for deer which is ballisticly better yes better than the new Koolaid creedmore,and my son he`ll be using his 308 win. again. that old 308 win. last year my son killed a big 4x4 muley buck and this year a big 8 pt. whitetail in Minnesota .does my son worry about ballistics nope, son knows its the guy behind the gun more than the caliber always, so he will be carrying his trusty old 308 win in a BLR Browning to Montana next week and you can bet he will do just fine again with a 308 win. just the old grape flavor koolaid.
to understand ballistics ya we all know on paper the creedmore 6.5 is a good new cartridge,but really just the good old 308 win. will hang close to the same ballistic but will a deer know the difference ? dead is dead this year for fun when I go to Montana I plan on using a 6.5x284 norma for deer which is ballisticly better yes better than the new Koolaid creedmore,and my son he`ll be using his 308 win. again. that old 308 win. last year my son killed a big 4x4 muley buck and this year a big 8 pt. whitetail in Minnesota .does my son worry about ballistics nope, son knows its the guy behind the gun more than the caliber always, so he will be carrying his trusty old 308 win in a BLR Browning to Montana next week and you can bet he will do just fine again with a 308 win. just the old grape flavor koolaid.
Ballistically better? The .338 Lapua is ballistically better than them all, why not just cut to the chase and get one of those?
to understand ballistics ya we all know on paper the creedmore 6.5 is a good new cartridge,but really just the good old 308 win. will hang close to the same ballistic but will a deer know the difference ? dead is dead this year for fun when I go to Montana I plan on using a 6.5x284 norma for deer which is ballisticly better yes better than the new Koolaid creedmore,and my son he`ll be using his 308 win. again. that old 308 win. last year my son killed a big 4x4 muley buck and this year a big 8 pt. whitetail in Minnesota .does my son worry about ballistics nope, son knows its the guy behind the gun more than the caliber always, so he will be carrying his trusty old 308 win in a BLR Browning to Montana next week and you can bet he will do just fine again with a 308 win. just the old grape flavor koolaid.
Ballistically better? The .338 Lapua is ballistically better than them all, why not just cut to the chase and get one of those?
I got 338 lapua in a custom rifle with a big niteforce scope on it
Biggest problem I see with 6.5 CM is that everyone seems to be loading it with H4350 and now I can't find any to load my 30-06 with.
Trent, What about online? I know that Sportsman's is always pretty picked over, but I haven't tried any of the online guys lately. Have you?
I have. You'd thought Hillary has been elected considering the availability of H4350............
I actually found 2 pounds down and Smith and Edwards about a month ago. I was going to buy both but didn't want to be 'that guy' and just took one. That will keep me going for quite a while. Hopefully I'll find another jug before fall. I need to run to Boise here next week, Cliff's Gunsafes usually has some. (They charge like they are the only ones with any). Crazy how popular it has become.
A true sportsman counts his achievements in proportion to the effort involved and fairness of the sport. - S. Pope
to understand ballistics ya we all know on paper the creedmore 6.5 is a good new cartridge,but really just the good old 308 win. will hang close to the same ballistic but will a deer know the difference ? dead is dead this year for fun when I go to Montana I plan on using a 6.5x284 norma for deer which is ballisticly better yes better than the new Koolaid creedmore,and my son he`ll be using his 308 win. again. that old 308 win. last year my son killed a big 4x4 muley buck and this year a big 8 pt. whitetail in Minnesota .does my son worry about ballistics nope, son knows its the guy behind the gun more than the caliber always, so he will be carrying his trusty old 308 win in a BLR Browning to Montana next week and you can bet he will do just fine again with a 308 win. just the old grape flavor koolaid.
The Creedmoor was NOT designed for hunters who buy a rifle once in a decade and one box of ammo every other year. It WAS designed for target shooters who buy 6 rifles a year and buy their components in the thousand quantities. It is so popular with those guys because it does the same thing, the same way, pretty much every shot with boring regularity. That means it shoots multiple bullets into almost the same hole. It also is extremely pleasant to shoot because of the light recoil; it is less fatiguing for shooting many shots in a range session, into the same hole on the target.
It was designed over ten years ago and just now has shown significant popularity in the marketplace. And look who has been the main promoter - Hornady - and what is their main business? Component sales! In the last few decades, they have become serious purveyors of quality ammo, but components - mostly bullets - were what brought them to this party.
It just so happens that the 6.5 Creedmoor also kills critters very efficiently. And the same attributes that make it easy to shoot one-hole groups just happen to be transferable to the hunt.
Two things made me realize the 6.5 CM had hit mainstream: The local W'mart has a fine selection of factory ammo for it and , in a phone conversation, my son asked if I've got one yet.
[quote=centershot]Biggest problem I see with 6.5 CM is that everyone seems to be loading it with H4350 and now I can't find any to load my 30-06 with.[/qu \
The joy of the '06, is that many powders work well. I like 4451 real well in mine with Hornady 150 ILs.
If it is up to me, the Creed is going nowhere. Since I have a .260 and Creed, my other guns are pretty much gathering dust. I am becoming a solid fan of the 6.5 bullets. I broke in my newly-built 6.5 last week with five deer in five shots. No fanfare, no blistering velocities, just purely good performance. They are selling like hot cakes around here, now that people are finding out how good that mild cartridge can be.
You did not "seen" anything, you "saw" it. A "creek" has water in it, a "crick" is what you get in your neck. Liberals with guns are nothing but hypocrites.
I've been a "gun guy" now for about 25 or 30 years. I've never seen a thing like the 6.5 Creedmore. It really is phenomenal. In my opinion the closest thing I have seen to the Creedmore for instant popularity , Well, maybe not instant was the Winchester short magnums. I don't have a 6.5 CM, mostly because I'm a big 6.5 Swede fan. However, I will get a CM soon.
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand." James Elroy Flecker
Another thing about the Creedmore "phenomena" that I think is really good are the spillover benefits- that is, the availability of more and better bullets and brass of the 6.5 bore- for any and all the 6.5s. Makes me give the 264 Winny some thought-even though I am a dyed in the wool 270 Roy user.
Last edited by 340boy; 11/22/17.
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand." James Elroy Flecker
Another thing about the Creedmore "phenomena" that I think is really good are the spillover benefits- that is, the availability of more and better bullets and brass of the 6.5 bore.[/quote [quote=340boy] Another thing about the Creedmore "phenomena" that I think is really good are the spillover benefits- that is, the availability of more and better bullets and brass of the 6.5 bore.
And great factory ammo that’s both accurate and reasonably priced, a great one two punch, a marketing home run.
I'm apparently somewhat older than you, which is why I did see something similar to the Creedmoor Craze. Back in 1962 Remington introduced their 7mm magnum, and it's "fad" kept going, and going, and going. As I recall, even into the mid-1970's it was outselling the .30-06, at least in new rifles and reloading dies. A friend who's a couple years younger than me worked in a local sawmill int he 70's, and joked that the company issued every worker a hard-hat and a 7mm Remington Magnum. It was that popular--and 45 years later remains a standard chambering in bolt-action rifles around the world.
The "flash in the pan" 6.5 Creedmoor is the only other centerfire cartridge I've seen that's kept selling better and better a decade after it's introduction.
“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.” John Steinbeck
Biggest problem I see with 6.5 CM is that everyone seems to be loading it with H4350 and now I can't find any to load my 30-06 with.
I bought a 6.5CM Howa from Whitakers, when they put them on sale for less than $300. Decided to use powder that I already had on hand before buying more. The first group I shot with it, W760 powder and 120 grain Sierra Mtachkings went under a half inch at a 100 yards. Since I'm a hunter, and not a long range competitor, I figured that would work just fine. Loaded up some 120 Nosler BT's for deer hunting, using the same load, and they shoot to the same POI. I realize 760 is not the "in" powder, but it works for me.
I'm apparently somewhat older than you, which is why I did see something similar to the Creedmoor Craze. Back in 1962 Remington introduced their 7mm magnum, and it's "fad" kept going, and going, and going. As I recall, even into the mid-1970's it was outselling the .30-06, at least in new rifles and reloading dies. A friend who's a couple years younger than me worked in a local sawmill int he 70's, and joked that the company issued every worker a hard-hat and a 7mm Remington Magnum. It was that popular--and 45 years later remains a standard chambering in bolt-action rifles around the world.
The "flash in the pan" 6.5 Creedmoor is the only other centerfire cartridge I've seen that's kept selling better and better a decade after it's introduction.
John,
I'm 50 this year. I started hunting and shooting back when I was a junior in high school, around 1985, I bought a tang safety Ruger in 300 win. I worked all summer at my dads chemical plant sweeping floors to save up for the rifle. I almost bought a seven mag instead. Good memories.
Tim
Last edited by 340boy; 11/22/17.
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand." James Elroy Flecker
I remember reading about the 7MM Magnum in one of the hook and bullet magazines while riding in the back seat of the car on a family vacation. I wish that I had the article so that I knew who the reviewer was. The tale involved emerging from the tent (or cabin) and seeing a moose across the water. Said moose made the acquaintance of the new round.
Not a real member - just an ordinary guy who appreciates being able to hang around and say something once in awhile.
Happily Trapped In the Past (Thanks, Joe)
Not only a less than minimally educated person, but stupid and out of touch as well.
Wait a minute.... You mean to tell me someone designed a cartridge that will sling a 140gr. Bullet at 2700 fps?! That's amazing! I loved the comment above that it shoots "one hole groups" with ease. The cartridge? not the platform it's fired from?
It appears the word "fad" must have a new meaning to some at least, like the meaning of the word "gay" changed over the years. To me a round that has been around 10 years or so and getting more popular every year and with sales of the factory ammo, components and the rifles being at such an insane level might lead one to conclude it must not be a fad. I would love to have a profitable "fad" like that !
Last edited by Nomosendero2; 11/26/17.
You will not make peace with the Blue Coats, you are free to go
Wait a minute.... You mean to tell me someone designed a cartridge that will sling a 140gr. Bullet at 2700 fps?! That's amazing! I loved the comment above that it shoots "one hole groups" with ease. The cartridge? not the platform it's fired from?
Yes.
The more things change the more they stay the same........
Casey
Not being married to any particular political party sure makes it a lot easier to look at the world more objectively... Having said that, MAGA.
I'm apparently somewhat older than you, which is why I did see something similar to the Creedmoor Craze. Back in 1962 Remington introduced their 7mm magnum, and it's "fad" kept going, and going, and going. As I recall, even into the mid-1970's it was outselling the .30-06, at least in new rifles and reloading dies. A friend who's a couple years younger than me worked in a local sawmill int he 70's, and joked that the company issued every worker a hard-hat and a 7mm Remington Magnum. It was that popular--and 45 years later remains a standard chambering in bolt-action rifles around the world.
The "flash in the pan" 6.5 Creedmoor is the only other centerfire cartridge I've seen that's kept selling better and better a decade after it's introduction.
I wasn’t born until 1961 so didn’t witness the 7mm RM craze firsthand. However, I remember in 1972 pouring over the Remington catalog with my brother all that summer. We both came to the conclusion, based on “the numbers,” the 7emem had to be the finest all-around hunting cartridge ever developed.
I still have never owned one
“Perfection is Achieved Not When There Is Nothing More to Add, But When There Is Nothing Left to Take Away” Antoine de Saint-Exupery
'We thank thee, oh Lord for thou doest provideth us with a low-recoiling, accurate cartridge. We beseech thee, oh Lord, to banish all .338 shooters to the abyss, and to all shooters of rifles with barrels longer than 22" to the 9th Circle of Hell.
Amen.
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand." James Elroy Flecker
I must say that after a few year hiatus from the sporting rifle world that I'm extremely impressed with the marketing behind the 6.5 Creedmoor. Nearly every one of the Average Joe deer hunters that work with me buzz about the cartridge incessantly. Just today I've been informed that it "produces a much larger wound channel" than my .270 Winchester's..... Whoever was tasked with selling rifles and ammunition in this cartridge has succeeded wonderfully.
I must say that after a few year hiatus from the sporting rifle world that I'm extremely impressed with the marketing behind the 6.5 Creedmoor. Nearly every one of the Average Joe deer hunters that work with me buzz about the cartridge incessantly. Just today I've been informed that it "produces a much larger wound channel" than my .270 Winchester's..... Whoever was tasked with selling rifles and ammunition in this cartridge has succeeded wonderfully.
For sure, the planning, development, roll out and sales campaign have been masterfully executed. Quality, reasonably priced factory ammo that really shoots is a big plus. Kudos to team Hornady.
They didn't do too bad with the .17 HMR, either. Dave Emary is a master ballistician and Steve Hornady is no slouch, himself.
Concerning the name, like the 7RM maybe it'll just be the 6.5CM. That way, no one will need to know how to spell Creedmoor. Terminal performance from moderate speed rounds probably benefited from developments in bullet technology over the last few decades. Great accuracy with a turret/range reticle is a great combo for LR shooting. Then there's the 6CM...
Marketing has nothing to do with it’s continued popularity. If it was marginal or underperformed with the serious shooting public, specifically gun writers, it would have been panned and lost popularity to another 6.5 the way the .264 did to the 7RM.
New cartridges aren’t propped up, especially when the internet is looking for a reason to diminish i.
Marketing has nothing to do with it’s continued popularity. If it was marginal or underperformed with the serious shooting public, specifically gun writers, it would have been panned and lost popularity to another 6.5 the way the .264 did to the 7RM.
New cartridges aren’t propped up, especially when the internet is looking for a reason to diminish i.
So true.
I think what many fail to realize is that none of these companies are big enough to have the capital necessary for “marketing” to have any type of an impact. These small companies are extremely lucky if their marketing budgets can deliver even 10 seconds of quality time with their message in front of consumers.
Hornady sure ain’t Ford or GM.
What could be a sadder way to end a life than to die having never hunted with great dogs, good friends and your family?
Cabelas had the Remington 140 gr Coreloct ammo on sale for $17 for the 6.5 CM
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
It’s so good you can just throw it, you don’t need no stinking gun!!!
"Allways speak the truth and you will never have to remember what you said before..." Sam Houston Texans, "We say Grace, We Say Mam, If You Don't Like it, We Don't Give a Damn!"
I just wanted to chime in here to say how worried I am that the 6.5 CM won't survive. I mean, if it actually had anything going for it like good ballistics, mild recoil, or accuracy, that would be one thing, but as it stands now, it's obviously just a passing fad. I can't sleep a wink!
Just wait for the 6.8 Creedmoor. You boys will have pools of slobber on the gunshop floor deep enough you’ll need your gum boots while you wait in line to trade in your old obsolete 6.5s.
Just imagine, 175 gr 6.8mm bullets with BCs of .700. Racks will be full of used 6.5 Creeds...
Just wait for the 6.8 Creedmoor. You boys will have pools of slobber on the gunshop floor deep enough you’ll need your gum boots while you wait in line to trade in your old obsolete 6.5s.
Just imagine, 175 gr 6.8mm bullets with BCs of .700. Racks will be full of used 6.5 Creeds...
you mean it'll kill deers and pigs more deader?
Dave
�The man who complains about the way the ball bounces is likely to be the one who dropped it.� Lou Holtz
The 6.8CM will be even more so. Unaffected by wind, inherently the most accurate cartridge conceivable, allowing for ethical 1000 yard shots on big game, some of which will fall dead before the bullet leaves the barrel from the powerful shock effects of pure terror. Be ready for the Rapture.
The 6.5 will Die a slow death.....I carried mine all Deer Season and did not see a shooter buck.....They must have found out !!!!! That I was packing a new Kimber in 6.5 and went Nocturnal ....When I used to carry a 270 they would practically pose for the shot....
Any one got a good deal on a 270 Gay ?
“When you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
The 6.5 will Die a slow death.....I carried mine all Deer Season and did not see a shooter buck.....They must have found out !!!!! That I was packing a new Kimber in 6.5 and went Nocturnal ....When I used to carry a 270 they would practically pose for the shot....
Any one got a good deal on a 270 Gay ?
Ooof, that is hard luck you betcha. I only shoot but one deer off the farm every year with the Creedmoor and they still are catching on. Get's harder all the time, I'll tell ya. So I had my buddy shoot one with the old Mosberg with the slugs dontcha know. Well be damned if the next day a fine eating doe weren't to step out from across the field and it was a call to the wife to say, get the bacon and onions we got vennie for the freezer.
It's not wrong to change rifles to trick em everysooften...but I'd not bring up that 270 around God fearing folks or other proper circles. Not everyone has spent time 'experimenting' in college like you did.
Liberalism; The impossible yet accepted notion that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.
I just don't see anything outstanding about the creedmoor. 1/8 twist and alot of media attention. Semd'em downrange with any other 6.5 and it equals or surpasses it. In the 70's I remember reading that the .284 was the optimum bullet diameter and now it is the .264, Ok , I will split the difference .284+.264 = .548 ÷ 2= .274...close enough to .277 for me. Merry Christmas.
I just don't see anything outstanding about the creedmoor. 1/8 twist and alot of media attention. Semd'em downrange with any other 6.5 and it equals or surpasses it. In the 70's I remember reading that the .284 was the optimum bullet diameter and now it is the .264, Ok , I will split the difference .284+.264 = .548 ÷ 2= .274...close enough to .277 for me. Merry Christmas.
It’s the 1:8” twist. The other factory 6.5s are slower and don’t handle the long, high-BC bullets as welll. The Creed recoils less, too.
What could be a sadder way to end a life than to die having never hunted with great dogs, good friends and your family?
Gunwriters have been claiming for decades that America won’t take to 6.5’s. I’m betting this one breaks the mold.
It’s been real hard for hunters to admit that recoil is not fun. The LR/tacticool community’s adoption of the round gives guys an excuse to quit the 300 mags.
And quite frankly, it has the SD to reliably take game larger than deer, something that cannot he said of 6mm and 25 cal rounds. In other words, guys shoot it well and it kills well.
My guess is it stays with force.
Originally Posted by shrapnel
I probably hit more elk with a pickup than you have with a rifle.
Originally Posted by JohnBurns
I have yet to see anyone claim Leupold has never had to fix an optic. I know I have sent a few back. 2 MK 6s, a VX-6, and 3 VX-111s.
Never underestimate the way that people will fall for a cool name. (Not to mention their indignant denial that they do so.)
What's even cooler is watching my 6.5 Tikka T3X, which cost me $560 at Whittaker's, print .25-.55 groups all day long with factory ammo, with mild recoil.
It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
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. 
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/sAPIC0Z.jpg)
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/qMjL6f8C/27-FD3-F35-D9-CF-4-FC0-AE24-D01508-F7-AF1-C.gif)
