I have the itch for a 6.5 creedmoor........Ruger changed the barrel length from 26" to 24"..........JB and other's seem to think 26" might be the best"..."..any thoughts? Plan on setting one up to shoot 120-130 grain bullets for hunting out to 300-400 yards.......deer and speed goats for the most part........should I be hung up on that 2" difference?

I have JB's Creedmore Ruger and now, having shot it a bit,the 26" is perfect,in balance and horsepower...
It will be my "Clearcut" rifle this year for the little NC deer!

23" with .6" to .62" at the mzl and a stock that weighs no more than 28 oz.

Dober

I was ready to buy the Ruger and then they cut the 2" off the darn thing.......I for the life of me don't understand why they did that.........Greg R reviewed the Ruger In shooting times and praised the 26" barrel length as well... Ruger screwed this up in my book.

Seriously, I'd be that 99% of the people out there would count it a blessing to have it @ 24. The extra 56 fps or so one will lose by chopping 2" is of no big deal...for most

Dober

I don't think I ever said 26" was the perfect length for the 6.5 Creedmoor, but it sure didn't bother me. Also, 3100 fps with a 120 and 2850 with a 140 (both with fine accuracy) didn't offend me, either.

I'm not much into suggesting perfect barrel lengths, for two reasons: Over the years I've found other people have different ideas of "proper" balance (which generally but not always relates to their height), and I've yet to own a big game rifle with a barrel so short or so long that the buyllet bounced off game or exploded in mid-air.

JB, sorry if you misunderstood my question......I have looked at most of your articles and you don't say the 26" barrel is needed, but the gun you tested from Ruger did come with a 26" tube. I'm pretty sure I could get 3000 fps with the 120 grain bullets with a 24 inch tube.......which would do the job, it is however interesting to me Ruger at one point felt that 26" or longer was the magic number needed for this round. The two options I am looking hard at are a Cooper 54 with a 24" tube or the Hawkeye with a 24" tube...".I have also considered building a custom,but that starts adding up to a bunch more money really quick........in reality it probably will not make much difference. I am 6'3" tall and weigh 250 lbs so 26" barrels feel pretty good in my hands. So......new question....why did Ruger chop the two inches off?

I don't think that Ruger shortened the barrel to 24" I think that whoever did their web site listed all 77s with a 24" barrel when they redid it with the blue guns. I beliieve it is still a 26" barrel.

goodshot,

I suspect Ruger made the change because so many shooters are prejudiced against 26" barrels on a bolt rifle. There are as many myths about longer barrels being "unhandy" in brush as there are about 6x scopes being too much for woods deer.

I even know some custom gunsmiths who won't build sporter-weight rifles with 26" barrels, claiming they're too whippy to be accurate. This hasn't been my experience with several 26"-barreled sporters, both factory and custom, but there it is.

Why would anyone want a 26" barrel on a short action cartridge if they were using it for hunting? If you need a longer barrel to gain velocity, get a longer cartridge. The 6.5x284 and 264win mag are right at home with long barrels. The Creedmore and 260 do just fine with shorter tubes.

I personally see no need for any 308 length cartridge to wear anything longer than 22" and 18-20" is even better. If you want more weight out front, get a heavier contour barrel.

The set-up with the short action and a long barrel lenght and diamter is more a real joy to handle than you think. I often hunt with 20" carbines that are "nose" heavy.
While I bought this Creedmoor for my limited long range shooting,I would have no problem slipping thru my woods looking for deer and pigs.I think it's one of Ruger's best "balanced" rifles and I own about a dozen of 77's & 1'S.
I also have about 10 carbines that I have hunted with for years and never felt handicaped on a long shot.

The answer to the original question is 21 3/4".

That would be my preference as well.

I have always found it interesting that individuals will hunt in the brush with ease using a shotgun with a 26" barrel but the same ones feel a 26" barrel on a rifle is way too long to use in the same woodlot.

Guy's......I appreciate some of the answers given, not sure why there always has to be a couple of out spoken smart ----every time I ask a reasonable question. Enough about that.......I just hope the creedmoor stays around! In my humble opinion it appears to be a very well thought out design that offers a nice balance of power vs recoil etc. It seems to be getting a bunch of press.....hopefully more co. Will chamber for it.

No

Agreed.

One of the statistics that hasn't been mentioned is that an inch of typical sporter barrel length weighs about one ounce, give or take 1/4 ounce. If that makes a major difference in overall rifle weight or handling, then it should be seriously considered.

I am buying a Savage Weather Warrior with a 22"
I prefer 22" and under for rifles that I use in a box or ground blind. If I am in the open or mountain top shooting I like 26"

I know a couple people that still reference this thread, and I had some empirical data I thought might help others trying to figure this out. Essentially one of my closest friends has two Surgeon rifles chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor, and he has tried out a 26" barrel as well as a 22" barrel (both with the same contour and rifle setup). He has fired both guns 1,000+ rounds and shot over his Oehler 35P chronograph regularly. It is really a pretty great experiment, and I thought others might like to know what we found.

• 26" Barrel: 2860 fps - This is what he was getting after 1,200 rounds (no suppressor)
  
  
• 22" Barrel: 2805 fps - This is what he was getting after 800 rounds (no suppressor)
  
  
• 22" Barrel w/ Suppressor: 2833 fps - This is what the was getting after adding a 30P-1 suppressor made by Thunder Beast Arms.

Overall he only lost 55 fps after cutting off 4" of barrel, and after adding a suppressor it cut that to only 27 fps. That is only 2/10 of a mil (2 clicks) at 1,000 yards. He couldn't be more happy with that trade.

I wrote a blog post with more complete details. If anyone is interested, you can check it out here:

http://precisionrifleblog.com/2013/07/16/6-5-creedmoor-barrel-length-and-muzzle-velocity/

PRB,

Thanks for sharing that. That's some very interesting findings. A few follow-up questions:

How many shots were in the strings fired?
What bullet was used?

(Or are those questions answered in your link?)

Thanks.

I'm using 23 inches on a Savage 99 and the same length on a Sako L-579. Each has a different contour to achieve the balance and handling I like. YMMV.

"I have always found it interesting that individuals will hunt in the brush with ease using a shotgun with a 26" barrel but the same ones feel a 26" barrel on a rifle is way too long to use in the same woodlot."

Here is why. At least it used to be that 26" barrels for shotguns, was about the shortest barrel length you could get on a shotgun. And a break open double or single barreled shotgun, with 26" barrel(s), is approximately the same length as a short (22") barreled rifle.

It is my impression that model changes with different barrel weights are also at issue here.

Ruger first introduced the Creedmore in a 1B model with the 26" medium or standard weight barrel. These disappeared pretty fast and are scarce on the ground now.

Then they went to the 1V heavy varmint barrel at 24" in length. (The heavier barrel would optimize its use in long range competitions as it would not heat up as fast? Not many would carry this one in the field for deer etc.)

Is there a factory issue 1A in a light or sporter weight barrel at 22" for use as a hunter?

1B

There were some 1A's made. Pretty nice rifle but finding one now may be a bit difficult. I have not ran the chrono to find how much difference there really is between the 1B & 1A. Might be an interesting project.

No.
Either barrel length or even shorter will be very adequate for 400 yard deer sized game with correct bullet and shot placement.

I would rather go with a stout 20" barrel.

26", I have several 26" barrel rifles and I like the way they point. I have two 6.5 Creedmoors, a Ruger SS Hawkeye with a 26" tube and a Browning Long Range Hunter with a 26" barrel also, i haven't shot either. I have witnessed Flattop Johnny on this site shoot tiny 200 yard groups with 26" SS Hawkeye and his Ruger Target rifle. That is the reason I bought my 6.5's.

BALANCE has to be any real difference IMO.

The small case capacity does not need a long barrel. The chrono lists above bears that out.

As with other things Personal Preference is what counts.

With regard to original post: I say you do not need to fret about the 2" difference in barrel length. I think 400 yds is a long poke for hunting with that caliber but the extra 2" won't change it much. I would jump up to a larger cartridge so I was not feeling the need to push maximum loads. BUT if you are hot for the little 6.5 then by all means go for it and get what you want and have a ball.