Can you please tell me about the 6.5mm's for hunting. The positive & negatives of these calibers. Thanks.

I happen to think the 6.5s are excellent. I've hunted for years with the 6.5x55 and 6.5-06 and have taken quite a few deer with them. They're easy to load for and are very good rounds for accuracy. The sectional density of 6.5 bullets is excellent and there is a large bullet selection. They have great penetration and seem to have a way of unloading energy in an animal that is uncanny. Our more scientific brethren on here will have other ways of describing it, but the 6.5s have some kind of juju working. At moderate velocities they are stone killers. I think i've only recovered one bullet from all the deer i've shot. It penetrated the full length of a good sized deer and lodged in the back of the front shoulder. With bullet weights up to 160 grains, about the only thing I wouldn't choose a good 6.5 for is big bears. I have used 140s for hunting. A lot of members here have had equally good results with 129s, etc. I prefer an 8 twist barrel for stabilizing the larger bullets.

It represents one of the best trade-offs if you're thinking of longer ranges--you have a selection of high-BC bullets in the 140 grain range that can be driven fast, all with moderate recoil.

85 gr. to 160 gr. bullet selection with a HUGE selection of bullet styles and applications. What's NOT to like? I love my .260 Remingtons and plan on rebarreling a .30-06 to 6.5-06 AI in the future for a little more juice.

We have run 140 accubonds and 140 bergers on game so far with excellent results. Have a bunch of 160 Woodleighs loaded up and they shoot really well. May carry them on my cow elk hunt in December. Not going to do a lot that the 270 Winchester doesn't do, but neat caliber.

http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledge+Base/6.5x55.html has articles on several calibers, including a few 6.5mm as used for hunting. Discussions of factory ammunition and hand loads. Also, discussions of the origins of cartridges. The article in the link even has info on 6.5x54 MS and 6.5x52 Carcano, although these calibers do not have separate articles. 6.5 Creedmoor is not included, although it could be in the works. 6.5x47 also not covered.

Discusses available bullets and how they perform on game.

Hand loaders probably get the most from the various 6.5mm's. Creedmoor target ammunition seems as if it would give full performance, if the A-Max target bullet is acceptable for hunting.

I have hunted quite a bit with various 6.5's, including the 6.5x54 Mannlicher-Schoenauer, .260 Remington, 6.5x55, 6,.5x57R, 6.5-06 and .264 Winchester Magnum. They certainly kill big game neatly if the nut behind the bolt puts the bullet in the right place.

Don't work. Never have. Move along. Nothing to see here.

I have killed hundreds of deer with .264s. No complaints. reflex264

With proper loading techniques, they are nearly the equal of the .270 Win.

If you want to hunt, take your 270. If you want to talk about ballistics on the internet, get a 6.5.

If you already have a 6.5, go hunting.

If you are a shooter/rifle nut, do whatever you want.

It really is that simple.

Sycamore

Well I'm sorry but NO cartridge w/less powder capacity can equal one w/ a greater capacity.
That's from a performance measured in FPS & FPE & trajectory.

From a killing performance on medium game WE probably can't see any diff.

On larger game I 'think' most would agree that higher vel. & more energy will give better performance w/ equal bullet construction.

All one really needs.

My 6.5-284 likes 140's and for hunting hogs, whitetails and pronghorns, I use 140 SST's ahead of Vv N165 at 2,950 fps. This pre-64 M-70 wears a 26" Krieger and a Swaro Z5 with Outdoorsmans turret, effective out to 600 yds. The 140 SST is a great bullet with plenty of expansion without blowing up and good B.C.'s for extended range. IMHO, I think this is a near ideal combo for such an application.

DF

jwall, I guess they forgot to tell my Grandson that his 30BR was way undergunned for the white tail, axis, and hogs that he kills with one shot. I have 2 6.5X47 Lapuas and they leave nothing to be desired. I do have other calibers because I'm a gun junky.
Butch

hey butch - no argument here. Now you're not saying the 30BR can be loaded = to a 308 or 06 are you?

I didn't say the 6.5 or others would not perform, just not the same performance, esp. at long-ER ranges.

It's obvious the Creedmore, 260s, & 6.5X55 PERFORMS but in ballistic NUMBERS there is a difference.

That's all I'm saying. BTW, I'm looking for a 6.5X55 now.

I've become a big fan of the .264 Winchester Magnum, mine is very accurate, very flat shooting, easy to load for (though some others have said otherwise), light recoil. A 26" barrel helps it out.

I really like the 120 grain Nosler Ballistic Tip for antelope and deer. I use IMR 7828 primarily, though it shoots very well w/ H4831 too. I've been playing with the 130 grain Nosler Accubond; it likes to shoot also.

no argument here, but while case capacity means alot; dont forget about operating pressures....some smaller and more efficient cases can equal and surpass some larger cases when operating pressures are higher.

To the O.P.

The 6.5's are just plain cool...their high B.C's can allow a 140gr match 6.5 bullet to have a flatter trajectory @ 1000yds than a 300 Win Mag with a 190gr match bullet....I am originally a 6.5x55/6.5RemMag shooter who has recently become enamoured with the 6.5 Creedmoor's performance, and have never seen a deer lost or requiring more than one shot when shot placement was correct.
Besides; nothing comes closer to looking like a sidewinder missle than a Berger 140VLD seated atop any 6.5mm

johnny

flattop - still not arguing either.

If you will compare 6.5 & 270 bullets with similar S Ds (sectional densities) you'll find the B Cs (ballistic coefficients) are awfully close. A few gun writers pointed out the accurate way to compare cals/cart.s yrs. ago.

Then with the heavier 270 bullets you'll have similar trajectories and BETTER wind bucking, & have more fpe, because they're heavier.

I am NOT trying to put down the 6.5s at all. It is not an equal comparison to base the comparison on bullet weight alone. That would amount to 'ballistic gack'.

This very thing is what turned me off of the 260 Rem when it first came out. A gun writer did that very thing in a gun magazine. I remember the magazine but I don't remember the g w. (I don't think I want to know, now)

The 260 & 6.5s are FINE hunting cartridges. They're just not as strong as some.

jwall,

There was no offense taken, nor did I intepret your statement as putting down 6.5's....In fact while typing my post about the higher operating pressures I was actually thinking about the 30-30 Win vs the 30 Remington AR where it is possible to get 300fps more from the 30RemAR with its smaller capacity case than the 30-30 with its larger capacity albeit lower pressure case with the same 160gr bullet.

As far as the 270/6.5 comparisons....what it really all comes down to for me is the "different" factor. I've owned a few 270's in the past, and so have alot of my buddies. I like the 6.5 because its the "oddball" at the range. For my use, the differences are slight enough not to have to worry about them.

Good shootin'
johnny

flattop - yep, I am looking for a 6.5X55 Sweede myself and I

have multiple 270s and 30 cals. Go figure. I just want the K O O L
rifle.

One of these days Jerry, when I get FULL blown Loonyism, I am going to get myself a 6.5BR

... maybe w/a Grape McSwirly like 257s rifle posted under the custom forum.

Got close once, logic stepped in - 7BR brass stamped made, and no custom priced dies......and it did whatever it was asked....although as a 7BR rifle, repeater at that, my M7 always made me think, WHAT IF it were 'KOOLER' and was a SIX point FIVE BR! Lol.

Later, Arne Brennan and another fellow did a 6.5 Grendel, now LBC-AR, another did a 264 RLB on a 6.8 case and of course NOW we have the Lapua 6.5-47 Lapua, running right w the 260, 6.5 SE, abd Creedmoor.

SOoooo, Jerry, I think searching for that 'Road less traveled' I will build a REAL Loony rifle someday, a 6.5BR and it may well be in a platform that is also on a less traveled road.

A few wanting KOOL are running 223s w/Barnes, or fast twist and Swift SSIIs or Amax's....and Kill just fine, just like others who stay on the interstate running 30-06s, etc.

Comments below are to anyone..

ALL roads usually lead to the same destination, it's the Journey that one gets the most satisfaction.

When comparing rounds......it's not a matter of who wins in a ballistics race.

What DOES matter, does it do what YOU want and need it to do. Applies to guns, scopes, etc. Does it work for YOU? Tis the ?

For hunting, that usually means quick clean kills.

MOST rounds w/proper bullets steered right, 'Get R Done!' as JB says...more or less

I just desire to get the job done w/minimal fuss or pain to my ears and shoulders. A 270 really is a pleasant round, as a 7/08, yet a 260 or similar 6.5 has a little more 'Pleasant Factor' when firing.

Reducing recoil, blast, and extending barrel life and component dollars does not have to = reduced effectiveness afield.

I analyze, crunch numbers, and research too and learn alot by it all, yet in the end Ballistics and Gack never killed a thing.

One only needs to look at the 6.5 Grendel forum to see what their 'Undersized capacity 6.5s' are killing, and how far

im looking for less recoil in an elk rifle.i hear the 264 mag rocks,and am checking out the 257 wb.hows the recoil on the 264?

I have a pre-64 Model 70 in 264 with the 26" barrel and recoil is very mild with 140gr. bullets. Rifle is pretty heavy with a 3X12 Burris Signature. I'd say it's about on par with a 30-06 and 150 grainers.

my go to rifle is a Kimber Montana in 260......love the gun and is prolly the only one ill never sell.....with good bullets im not afraid to go after elk though i mainly use it for deer, speed goats and yotes......

6.5mm seems to be the point where real hunting rifles start for me. Bullet choice is excellent. Recoil is mild. It is my favourite and most used deer calibre - plenty of gun for all but the largest of deer. Combine a 6.5mm and a 8.5mm, and you have everything covered.

Years ago I used a 6.5x55 Swede on an Alpine Chamois hunt. Recoil is mild. Very accurate. In Scandinavia it is the prefered moose round. It compares very well with my .270. I would take it anywhere I would take my .270. In fact I am looking for a donor LH action now to do a build on a 6.5x55 Swede. I have also seen it used on boar hunts - it is very effective.

R270Man,

The 6.5s have never been as popular as the .270 Win and .30-'06 fro hunting in this country, but they are very effective rifle hunting cartridges. I killed my first deer with a 6.5X55, so I think I got warped early.

My favorite is a 6.5-'06 I built as a custom rifle about six coons' ages ago, which still kills them dead, only now I have been shooting 130 gr Berger VLD bullets from it instead of the 140 gr Hornady Spire Point bullets I started hunting with it.

The plusses are mostly ballistic advantages, while the negatives are mostly ease of use. If you compare to the .270 Win, it is pretty easy to go that route, but you have to really want to hunt with the 6.5s to get there from here. Maybe if JOC had written more about his experience with the .256 Newton we would be somewhere else, but it was not to be.

jim

I have experience with three 6.5's, 264WM, 6.5x06 and my current 6.5x55. I shot the 6.5x06 a lot, fried the barrel. I killed lots of stuff with it. In the end it's no better than the .270 it so often gets compared to. But so what. I might get another some day just because. I currently load for and shoot a 6.5x55 a good bit, as I age I am less and less willing to put up with recoil so I'm using this little Ruger a lot. It's the most accurate factory rifle I own. I've seen that with the 140gr bullets it trajectory it almost the same as the .06 with the 165gr bullets, but with much less recoil. I don't see a down side.

I have a custom Arisaka carbine in 6.5x50mm that I have
been meaning to sight in and take deer hunting but havent
done it yet.

The most successful hunter I know, a man with a number of 30+ inch mule deer, and many other trophies, uses a 264 Winchester for everything. Hard to argue with success.

Don't hear a ton of talk about 6.5s on the WSM - either based on the 270 or 7. Any particular reason?

I find this to be categorically not true.

The SD of the 6.5mm bullets are as follows: 120g-0.246, 130g-0.266, 140g-0.287. The .270 bullets: 130g-0.242, 140g-0.261, 150g-0.279. The BCs of Berger bullets in 6.5mm: 130g-0.552, 140g-0.612. In .270: 130g-0.452, 140g-0.487, 150g-0.531.

So lets pick bullets of similar SDs to compare. Since a 120g hunting bullet from Berger is not available in 6.5mm, lets compare the 130g bullet in 6.5mm to the 140g bullet in .270. SDs are 0.266 vs 0.261 respectively.

On the Nosler website, the 6.5-06 lists a max velocity of 3058 fps with 23" barrel and a 130g bullet. The .270 Winchester max velocity with 140g bullet of 2910 fps with 24" barrel.

So using the BC information of both bullets at those starting velocities here are the ballistics according to JBM with a 100 yard zero and a 10 mph 90 degree cross wind.
300 yards the 130g 6.5mm bullet drops 10"/3.2MOA, drifts 4.8"/1.5MOA with energy of 1894 ft/lbs. The 140g .270 bullets drops 11.8"/3.7MOA, drifts 6"/1.9MOA with 1740 ft/lbs. At 600 yards, the 6.5mm bullet drops 66.9"/10.6MOA and drifts 21.3"/3.4MOA with 1282 ft/lbs, the .270 bullet drops 79"/12.6MOA and drifts 26.8"/4.3MOA with 1098 ft/lbs.

So the 6.5 mm have a higher BCs than the .270 bullets at similar SDs. They will drop/drift less and have higher retained ft/lbs than the .270 bullets started at similar velocities due to the higher BCs.

The data above shows that ballistically the 6.5-06 is a better chambering than the .270 Winchester.

Not sure the differences are enough to matter to anyone, but the data seems to argue directly with your post.

I find this to be categorically not true.

The SD of the 6.5mm bullets are as follows: 120g-0.246, 130g-0.266, 140g-0.287. The .270 bullets: 130g-0.242, 140g-0.261, 150g-0.279. The BCs of Berger bullets in 6.5mm: 130g-0.552, 140g-0.612. In .270: 130g-0.452, 140g-0.487, 150g-0.531.

So lets pick bullets of similar SDs to compare. Since a hunting bullet from Berger is not available in 6.5mm, lets compare the 130g bullet in 6.5mm to the 140g bullet in .270. SDs are 0.266 vs 0.261 respectively.

On the Nosler website, the 6.5-06 lists a max velocity of 3058 fps with 23" barrel and a 130g bullet. The .270 Winchester max velocity with 140g bullet of 2910 fps with 24" barrel.

So using the BC information of both bullets at those starting velocities here are the ballistics according to JBM with a 100 yard zero and a 10 mph 90 degree cross wind.
300 yards the 130g 6.5mm bullet drops 10"/3.2MOA, drifts 4.8"/1.5MOA with energy of 1894 ft/lbs. The 140g .270 bullets drops 11.8"/3.7MOA, drifts 6"/1.9MOA with 1740 ft/lbs. At 600 yards, the 6.5mm bullet drops 66.9"/10.6MOA and drifts 21.3"/3.4MOA with 1282 ft/lbs, the .270 bullet drops 79"/12.6MOA and drifts 26.8"/4.3MOA with 1098 ft/lbs.

So the 6.5 mm have a higher BCs than the .270 bullets at similar SDs. They will drop/drift less and have higher retained ft/lbs than the .270 bullets started at similar velocities due to the higher BCs.

The data above shows that ballistically the 6.5-06 is a better chambering than the .270 Winchester.

Not sure the differences are enough to matter to anyone, but the data seems to argue directly with your post.[/quote

This a short response for now. (Upper Case for EMPHASIS only)

1. You think .005 diff is much between 130 6.5 & 140 270?

2. I notice you didn't print any diff in B C between the two.

3. There's always difference in loading manuals PER velocity.
I have been able to beat 2910 fps /140gr in 270 closer to
3000 fps w/appropriate powders & 24" bll.

4. With SIMILAR s d & bc - the heavier bullet will have SIMILAR
trajectory and have higher energy because of wt.

5. I know this thread is about 6.5s & hunting; My part focused
on 6.5X55, 6.5 Creed, & 260 Rem. YES the 6.5-06 is MUCH MORE
comparable to 270 in powder capacity and vel. et.al.

I just returned from hunting (saw nothing). I have to get ready for some company. Will respond more later.

Jerry

Do you consider the 6.5mm 140 Hunting vld to be "not a hunting bullet?"

It should have read, since a 120g hunting bullet from Berger is not available in 6.5mm.

The 6.5 caliber performs more like the 7mm than it does the 6mm. The response from game well hit, will be more uniform in the results than the 6mm and indistinguishable from the .270 or 7mm's.

I doubt there will be any negative comments from experienced users.

John

Use it with complete confidence....My lightweight GAP .260 put down five big game animals this past fall with one shot each, from 125 to 470 meters. From what I saw, it kills exactly like a .270, with less recoil and muzzle blast. I used the 130gr. Berger hunting VLD's at 3000fps.

Other than the 300 SAUM I now own, I'm trending toward lighter calibers and less recoil.

I have a bunch of years under my belt shooting and hunting with a 6.5-06 and I think it's one of the best 6.5's you could build.

I've killed deer down to chucks with it and a variety of bullets. Though I'd run the 120 NBT or 130 ABm pretty much full time if I build another one.

Which I will.

THANKS JOHN for you validation.

I think that sums is up accurately from 'some experienced source'.

Just something to consider with respect to the observation above that there is no significant difference between .264 and .277 bore. If the relationship where linear, sure, there isn't a big differnce. But the relationship is exponential, not linear. A simple way to think about things is the cross-sectional area increase in your bullet. And as this increases with the square of the radius, the increase in area in going up from .264 to .277 is actually nearly 10%. Not a whole heap of difference, but it is significant. I can say my brother and i have used a .270 and a 6.5x.284 (and the 6.5x.284 is essentially a ballistic twin to the 6.5-06) side by side, and would argue you can actually see a difference in the wound size.

I own,shoot,load for,hunt with a 6.5x54,55,57,6.5-06 and a 6.5 Creedmoor and then there is a .264 mag at the top.I buy the rifle for what it is,a package,I look for balance,working strenght and it's piece of history in the gun world.The above calibers are made up of Mannlicher,Brno,Ruger,Mauser and a pre 64 Winchester.I worry not about the caliber,they work and make the rifles even "neater".
My local deer are small by Northern/Western deer standards,but I would not buy a new rifle to go out west.So far,the bullets have landed in the kill zone.I am not beat up at the bench and enjoy some great bullets.I'm planning a Black Bear hunt with my 6.5 Mannlicher next year.If not,I've got about 40 other rifles and calibers to choose from....

Lots of pluses and really don't know of any minuses when hunting with the 6.5's.

Any thing larger than a mulie though that looks to be a humdinger?

Alan

SCENARSHOOTER et.al. - Just so there is no mistake about my opinion & position.

I am not only looking for a 6.5X55 but I've found one that looks promising. Details LATER.

I AIN'T a 6.5 opponent or hater.

Nothing better then a good 6.5x55. Jwall, If the one you're looking at doesn't work out for you let me know. I have a couple that I plan on selling soon.

Then is the 264 Win Mag superior to the 270 Win IF both use a 24" barrel?

Teal, I've done some light research on a 6.5 WSM, and I have read that it can be a bit of a barrel burner. Of course, these were guys using it for match rifles, so that probably comes into play. For a hunting rifle, I can't see that it would make that much difference. You aren't going to shoot long strings to heat up the throat. Heck, it's basically a .264 Win Mag, right?

Jerry, catch a fish yet?

6.5 - YEAH - I'm not sure which one is the SUCKA

Has to be him.

Description Bullet Dia. Weight (Grain) G1 BC G7 BC Recomm. Twist Part Number
130 gr Match Grade VLD Hunting .264 130 0.552 0.282 8 26503
130 gr Match Grade VLD Hunting .277 130 0.452 0.231 11 27501

I'll let you figure out with the above 130 grain bullets and book loads how a .270 Win compares to a .260 Rem out past 400 yards, particularly with respect to wind drift. Hint (1000 ft elevation): the velocity gap goes from 250 fps at the muzzle (3000 vs. 2750 fps MV for 22" barrel) to less than 100 fps difference at 400 yards, with the .260 holding more than an inch advantage in (less) wind drift at 400 yards. At 500 yards, the velocity gap is 50 fps (the 6.5 mm bullet gives up 200 fps less velocity over 500 yards), and the 6.5 mm has a 2" advantage in wind drift. Factor in the difference in recoil for most of us mere mortals, and you'll see where the advantage lies. Yes, that's all ballistic gack, but the .260 Rem does catch the .270 Win around 650 yards.

Plusses:

I like my 6.5x55s with 140gr bullets for deer hunting. It shoots plenty flat and penetrates very well. When I place one of these slugs on the shoulder of a deer standing broadside, the deer falls down at the shot and dies instantly. I don't load hot. My manuals say my bullets are trvelling about 2600 fps. Inexpensive bullets behave well at this velocity, so I practice and hunt with the same load. Recoil is lighter than any caliber on the '06 case or larger. I like it.

Minuses:

...I'm thinking...
OK, larger bullets make larger holes, and animals shot through the ribcage with larger calibers bleed more profusely and may die a bit quicker. This matters to people that aim behind the shoulders.

The .260rem is without doubt my favorite deer/elk cartridge.. I am seriously thinking about a 6.5-284.. 140NP's and 140AB's is all a guy would ever need.. IMHO

I'll give you credit for admitting, if not by direct statement but indirect,

that the 260 is BEHIND the 270 until 650 yds. (upper case for emphasis only)

Seriously, my only point was to point out that the 260 DOES NOT outperform the 270 everwhere in every way AS SOME PROPOSE. Actually I would have to LOAD DOWN my 270s to equal a 260 for MODERATE ranges. (Using comparable s d & b c)

Per mere mortals: 500 YARDS is a LONG WAY to shoot at game. I AM NOT criticing those who practice and USE EQUIPMENT capable of doing it.

I've had opportunities to shoot AT deer at 400 yds + in regrowth cutovers. However every deer was MOVING and I did NOT risk wounding and loosing the animal. I practice sufficiently and my gun/ammo is quite capable of 400-500 yd accuracy BUT an animal is not a TARGET. I'm not condescending to anyone.

OTOH - I have a verbal agreement to PURCHASE a 6.5X55 and the transaction is supposed to happen w/in a couple of weeks. (I'm not selling my 270s tho)

Too funny.
Let's see here, even with your figures, it takes 650 yds. for the 6.5 bullet to catch the .270 bullet. Right. We do our killing at 650 plus yards, not the usual ranges.
Second, you "cherry picked the bullets. The .270 can throw a 160 gr. bullet as fast as the .260 throws a 130 gr.
Then there is the little matter of pressure. This is where the "my little round is as good as your big round" sorts kinda sweep this issue under the table. I've seen lots of data that says the .270, at the same pressures pushes it's bullets significantly faster than the .260. When it first came out, Remington tried this argument. Until somebody pointed out their ammo didn't perform like they claimed.
Last of all, you are assuming those BC's are accurate, and hold steady throughout the velocity range. Of which neither is often the case. E

You can believe what you want, but the data bears out differently than your preconceived notions.

Yes, Redhead..there are advantages to 6.5s for some people.

I'm not arguing about this second point, it's just my thinking.

I don't know that larger holes cause death EVEN a bit quicker. I do KNOW that under normal circumstances, a larger hole ALLOWS more blood to flow or be pumped out.

Some on the fire don't agree but the bigger the hole/s, the more blood CAN get out.

That's only important in some hunting habitats. If you're hunting in or near thickets or REGROWTH cutovers it can be valuable.

Several times I've killed deer in regrowths and when you go to look for the animal, EVERYTHING looks different THERE than where you were. I'm speaking from personal experience as recently as Nov 12.2011. I had to go back to my position and re-pick out LANDMARKS just to find a dead buck lying on the ground and no blood trail was needed.

This has happend several times and when you have to blood trail an animal, the MORE BLOOD on the ground the better.

OTOH, I doubt seriously the difference between 264 & 270 would be noticeable. The bullet performance is probably MORE important IMO.

[quote=jwallthat the 260 is BEHIND the 270 until 650 yds. (upper case for emphasis only)

Seriously, my only point was to point out that the 260 DOES NOT outperform the 270 everwhere in every way AS SOME PROPOSE. Actually I would have to LOAD DOWN my 270s to equal a 260 for MODERATE ranges. (Using comparable s d & b c)

[/quote]

Behind in velocity, not in all aspects.

The .260 has an advantage in wind drift at any distance that wind would make a difference. You would need a .270 Weatherby with a couple hundred fps more muzzle velocity than the .270 Win to match the .260 on wind drift.

At moderate ranges, the real choice between a .270 and .260 ballistically is whether you want 15 or 20 yards more in max point blank range (e.g., 295 vs. 277 yards), or whether you want more margin of error with respect to variable winds. Beyond MPBR, you're going to have to compensate for trajectory anyway. The difference in recoil doesn't depend on what distance you shoot.

R R - There is not nearly enough diff in the 260 & 270 when you

use comparable S Ds & B Cs. Especially when the 270 starts out with so much more velocity. For whatever reason you & others are trying reverse or negate or deny the mathematical diff. The laws of physics are static.

Remember I'm not a 6.5 opponent, just realist.

Each to his own.

Happy Thanksgiving

Jerry

As shown by an earlier poster on this thread, as a general rule 6.5 mm bullets still have a BC advantage over .277" bullets with the same SDs. Besides, how is same SD more relevant than same weight when discussing bullets designed for the same purpose? As you go up in bullet weight for the .270, your velocity decreases (roughly 100 fps per 10 gr of bullet weight), and you lose to velocity about what you gain in BC ballistically.

Realism is that 6.5mm bullets drift less in the wind than comparable .277" bullets EVEN WHEN the .277" bullets ARE STARTED 200 to 300 fps FASTER. Science (aerodynamics) is on the side of the 6.5mm bullets, as shown by the BCs. Just think of all that wasted powder and extra recoil with the .270!!!

It truly is all ballistic gack, particularly at less than 300 yards. As I outlined in an earlier post, it boils down to preferences. If wind drift is more important to you, then the .260 is the way to go. If 15 or 20 more yards of MPBR is more important to you, then the .270 is the way to go. If you want less recoil, use the .260. If you want 10% more frontal area, use a .270. Out to 400 yards, there isn't a lot of advantage for one vs. the other in any respect except recoil.

Past 300 yards (past the distance where more MPBR would benefit you with a .270 Win), the advantages in wind drift start favoring the .260. But how many people shoot (or have any business shooting) past 300 yards? The .270 is a great general purpose round, but the .260 (and 6.5x55) really starts to outshine the .270 when people start looking at shooting 400 to 600 yards and beyond. Otherwise, why would competitive shooters favor the 6.5mm rounds over the .270 at long distances?

R R - I'm not mad, just tired so this is my last response.

1. You ask how is s d more relevant than weight.
That is the reason you & others don't understand the reality.

The s d is the ratio of dia/length and with the same nose shape, bullets with similar s ds are proportional.

When you compare 130 wt between 264 & 270, you're NOT comparing proportional bullets. (apples/oranges) A 130 264 is more aerodynamic than a 130 270 BUT is COMPARABLE to a 140 270.

2. AS any bullet's s d increases velocity decreases in the same cart. The 6.5 loses TOOO.

3. B Cs are only accurate indicators when used with bullets of similar S D. (comparable)

THUS using 264 120 gr IS comparable to 270 130 gr.

and 264 130 IS comparable to 270 140 gr.

I don't know your reloading background and I'm NOT being critical, but this lack of understanding is the reason you don't understand the REAL relationship between the 260 & 270.

We have writers here on the fire that can explain this better than I. And they do understand.

No hard feelings. I am buying a 6.5X55 and keeping my 270s.

Happy Thanksgiving

Jerry, go look at my new thread '260 Rifles done' in custom forum.

6.5 - 10/4 and gone.

I understand completely about sectional density, bullet shapes, aerodynamics, etc. I understand the reasoning behind why one might compare based on SD, but there's no reason to limit the analysis to just bullets with similar SD because there is no law that states we have to shoot bullets with a certain SD. Using a similar SD is one way to compare, but not the only way to compare. Even if you limit yourself to comparing based on SD, 6.5mm bullets have better BCs than comparable .277" bullets with the same SDs (see a thread that someone started this afternoon showing that, based on SD, .277" bullets have lower BCs than 6.5mm and 7mm bullets - there's no denying facts). See also the analysis below. One could use recoil as a basis for comparison, and that's as relevant as SD if recoil is your primary interest. There has even been talk on multiple occasions here at the Campfire that SD isn't relevant in comparing bullets any more given that modern bullets like the Barnes TSX (and other monometals) and the Berger VLD work so differently than the traditional cup-and-core bullets. That's kind of a different topic, but it is relevant to this discussion in that we're no longer bound to using a certain SD bullet for a certain application any more (i.e., bullets with the same SD are not necessarily equivalent any more). You're trying to normalize using SD with the assumption that normalizing with SD will make the BCs essentially equivalent, which you assume will prove your erroneous assertion that a larger case ALWAYS equals more velocity down range by limiting the variables to basically just case size and velocity, which are related. Even using the same SD and bullet design, we'll see below that the blanket assertion is false.

I gave an example of how a bullet from a .260 Rem would have the same velocity at 650 yards as a comparable bullet with the same mass from a .270 Win even though the .260 Rem bullet started 250 fps slower. I disproved your blanket statement with hard data, and you aren't willing to admit your blanket statement was erroneous, as many blanket statements are. You disagreed with the basis for the analysis (using bullets of the same design with the same mass). Here, let's do it your way with SD as equivalent as it can be, and we'll still see that your blanket statement was false.

Elevation = 1000 ft, 22" barrels, realistic loading manual velocities:
.260 Rem 130 gr Berger VLD (SD = 0.266, BC = .552), MV = 2750 fps
.270 Win 140 gr Berger VLD (SD = 0.261, BC = .487), MV - 2900 fps

Velocity @ 650 yds: .260 Rem = 1801 fps, .270 Win = 1804 fps
Wind drift @ 650 yds for 10 mph cross wind: .260 Rem = 29.7"; .270 Win = 32"

Using bullets of the same type with the same SD, the bullet from the .260 Rem has the same velocity as and less wind drift than the bullet from the .270 Win at 650 yards. Not everybody shoots that far, but some people do, and your blanket statement didn't make any qualifiers about only being valid to 300 or 400 yards.

BTW - it's all still ballistic gack, but facts are facts.

hope no one eles ever want's one just leave me all your .264 bullets and i will dispose of properly

R R - Yep, Apples are apples & Oranges are oranges. I like apples & y'all like oranges.

BOTH ARE FRUIT !

It takes more work to 'swallow' oranges!

Jerry

I found the high sectional density and BC of the 140-grain Nosler Partition very handy last Sunday when shooting a whitetail buck at 30 yards with my custom 6.5x55.

Of course I had to click in some elevation, but even at that extended range the bullet exited. Otherwise the buck obviously wouldn't have died. Just love the magic ballistics of those .264" bullets!

Nice to see your not 'ashamed' of shooting game at rock throwing distances

EVERY deer I killed UNDER 50 yds was more exciting/satisfying, then those at extended distances.

Nice knowing a round has good reach if/when you need it, but often it is moot. That said, for game, I will choose the better sd/bc, assuming proper 'hunting' bullet construction.

Magic is as magic does.....and most 'tricks' can be pulled off by a good magician

So JB, give yourself a little credit! Using a 140 PT in 6.5x55 for a shot like yours, was a wise one, deadly yet not turning 'hamburgerizing' your venison upon impact! But you knew that!

Hope you had a great Thanksgiving all.

The given muzzle velocity of 3000 fps for a 130 grain 270 seems rather mild. However, the bottomline appears to be, don't waste your money on a .277 VLD!

JB..during this hunt,did you turn the engine off first,then shoot or after you nailed it and got out to fetch it...
30 yards..LOL,are you preparing for a TV spot?

30 is much more respectable than 730, 830 or 930 IMHO, says something about the hunter, skills as a hunter and as a sportsman

I recommend to those interesting in a good read, "A Sporting Chance" by Daniel Mannix, he exemplifies my point.

Interesting reading from both the "technical gack" perspective, and from the point of view of those who use the 6.5. As a fan of the 6.5x55, I don't have one, but have planned on several occasions to build one. But I can't seem to shake the idea that my 257 Roberts, with only .007 smaller bullet, will do anything I want done on deer out to any distance I can confidently shoot them. Now if I can get another 257 Bob, with a 1-8 twist and find some 130-135 grain bullets, maybe I can give the 6.5x55 a real run, with even less recoil!

Beside, if JB can use the 257 for deer at 400+ yards, I should be able to use it on Missouri whitetails at 100-200 yards(provided I put the bullet where it needs to be). But then again, maybe I will take the 1942 M-38 Swedish Mauser out next time and see if it really makes a difference. Still seems that where the bullet hits is more important than what bullet hits, assuming proper bullets to begin with.

MOST conventional hunting bullets will reach and take out vitals on deer w/ no problem at sane ranges.

No deer can survive a good 24 cal bullet or larger IMHO when placed well, (again 'hunting/game' bullets, not varmint bullets).

Even 22 cal w/good bullets do deer in fine at your 200 yds and under mark.

Shoot well, and everything else usually takes care of itself IME.

6.5 mm is my minimum for big game in British Columbia. I have a target rifle coming sometime,savage LRP, and it is chambered in 260 Rem. With a 130 AB, any BC animal is in trouble with a well placed shot, plus I'm hoping to be competitive on the 1000 yd range.

If any of us could have lived with an original Remington 600/660 in 6.5 Remington Magnum from the inception of our hunting career to the end of it, oh the stories we could tell.

A 130 had killed a plethora of game for Jack O'connor and his fans, as well as the 130 AB will IME from a 264-08

A 6.5 RM is a good one, short carbine perhaps not allowing it's full potential, none the less, it was/is a formidable hunting round/package. Not much a well loaded RM cannot do for NA game.

+1

I shot this cull buck earlier this fall with a 6.5mm Rem Mag and a 130 gr AB at 3050 fps. The buck dropped in his tracks with a high shoulder shot.

JD338

Nice rifle and buck. 3-10 M1s?

They have been doing the job for about 100 years, look at the Scandinavian countries. Moose on down. I have two, 6.5X55 and 6.5X57 90g to 165g pick the critter and with a good shot meat in the freezer.

I had the same experience on a good size GA. white tail back in '98. Only it was a 129 grain Hornady loping along at 2750 fps from a sporterized swede. He didnt go anywhere. I liked that rifle and cant remember why I got rid of it. Any who got a CZ in 6.5 Swede now.

I used to travel to Sweden on business and meet with auto test engineers at the company's proving grounds. They generally used 6.5@55 Swedes (some used the 8X57mm Mauser) on 500 Kg. (1,100 pound) moose and never reported any problems. If it works there, it�ll work here.

If I recall correctly, they used 160 gr. NORMA bullets.

Don't hear too much about the 270 or 7mm WSM either.