Is there anything the 6.5 Crredmoor or 260 Rem.can do better than a 6.5X55 in a modern rifle like a Sako ?Is it just a loony thing.Scandanvians have been using the 6.5X55 for rifle matches forever.Huntz

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/8953007/1

Nice explanation by Mule Deer in this thread.

Don’t know how universally my comments here apply but can offer some experience on two rifles in these chamberings.

Montana 1999 in 6.5x55 – the 1999 has a 3.1” magazine but with the very long throat they give it that’s still too short to seat the longer bullets out to kiss lands and still fit in the magazine. Shorter bullets, specifically a Hornady 100 gr. A-Max, don’t even have their bases inside the case mouth if seated to an OAL which would touch lands. To its credit the rifle is still accurate with loads fitting the magazine but I have a nagging suspicion it can't meet its full potential hampered like that.

Tikka T3x .260 – This one is the classic .260 conundrum since it comes with a 2.8” magazine, you can load to 2.805 or 2.81” max. The relatively short Hornady 100 gr. A-Max is only .01 off the lands at a 2.8” OAL, even the Hornady 129 Spire Point is only .015” off the lands when seated to touch. But the 123 gr. A-Max is a full .090” off the lands at 2.8”. In mine the 100 and 129 grainers shoot just fine, half inch or better for 4 shots in fact (it is a Tikka, after all), but that 123 grain bullet needs another .08” room, it will shoot great but only if you load it too long to fit in the mag. I tried a long magazine to see if that would work – even in their "short action" i.e. short bolt stop the bolt comes back far enough to allow a 3.1” OAL and still pick up the rounds - but feeding becomes problematic with bullets tending to nose dive and shift around in the magazine too much.

As can be inferred here I've only worked with the three Hornady bullets so far, 100 A-Max, 129 SP and 123 A-Max. I would imagine heavier streamlined bullets and especially the really long VLD types would be even more affected.

I understand that the Tikka 6.5x55 uses their full long bolt throw and 3.4” (or 3.34?) magazine, so you should be able to seat the longer bullets out to hit the lands in that. In fact, knowing what I know now, the MRC 1999 would be the better match for the .260 and the full length Tikka a better match for the 6.5 Swede.

Sure do wish Ruger would see fit to chamber the 6.5 Creedmoor in their standard SA American, to include left handers. Or Tikka would chamber the Creedmoor in their short mag T3, that would be one super accurate and well matched combo.

In my world, nope.......

Fit in a short or medium action. Velocity is within 100 to 150+/- fps with the Swede taking the lead if you load to the same pressure in a long action.

I've got 5 6.5X55mm rifles (two Husquarna M-36 military, 2 Husqvarna M-36's converted by Kimber to sporting rifles and, 1 Danish M-52 target rifle with Lyman 48 sights [converted German M-98 with 28" Schultz and Larsen barrel and Lyman 48 sights). All are accurate and one of the M-36's is equipped with Elite aperture sights and is very accurate (1.5" groups) while the M-52 can do 1" if I do my part (with 75 year old eyes)! I wonder what younger eyes could do?

I also have a Remington Model Seven in 260 Remington (1-9" twist) that is not too accurate. I'm going to have it re-barreled with 1-8" rifling.

The 6.5 bore seems to be an ideal bore size for many applications.

Since 1997 I haven't had much trouble shooting good groups with bullets in the 95 thru 130 grain range in 1-9" ROT Remington 7 and 700 barrels chambered in 260 and 6.5-284. I have even had a little success shooting minute-of-deer groups with 140 grain Partitions from those same barrels in 260.

Not for me. I have a Swede in a modern action, CZ 550 American. It's my favorite rifle. Don't reload for all of my rifles but do for this one, 130 grain Berger Hunting VLD's.

I seem to be in the minority because it doesn't matter one whit to me whether a cartridge is long action or short action.

If I ever get a .308 based AR it will be a 6.5 Creedmoor, because you can't get a 6.5x55 AR and there seems to be much better factory ammo selection in 6.5 Creedmoor than .260 Remington.

You 'bout gotta reload for the 6.5x55 for full potential in a modern action.

That's the beauty of the 6.5 Creed. For non-reloaders, there's outstanding factory ammo on dealer's shelves at reasonable prices.

I have both, reload for both, like'em both. It boils down to the individual rifle, IMO. Performance is pretty close; they both kill stuff.

DF

Even if we load the 6.5x55 to its full potential, there is only a 3 to 5 grain difference in case capacity when compared to the 260, so how much more actual muzzle velocity can 3 to 5 grains of powder produce if all the other variables are equal? It seems to me that the 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5x47, 260, and 6.5x55 are more alike than different and that for medium game hunting purposes what one will do, the others will likely do equally well. Since I don't shoot competitively, I can speak to the question of which of the four would be better for competition shooting, but since the 6.5x47 and 6.5 Creedmoor were designed for competitive shooting, they might have a practical advantage over the 260 and 6.5x55 for the casual competitor due to the easy access of factory match loads.

These carts are too close to call IMO. For me personally the 260 wins simply due to component availability as a hand loader. The ballistics are very similar. The only thing the Creed has going is the ability to seat longer bullets, but with a custom tube, that's really a non issue.

They're close, differences are subtle.

But, what would Loonies be discussing, ruminating over, otherwise...

Nit picking, splitting hairs...?

Good stuff...!

DF

I've measured the practical difference in the .260, 6.5 Creedmoor and 6.5x55 using water, with the same 129-grain Hornady Interlock seated to the cannelure. This is more realistic than filling cases to the mouth, which makes longer-necked cartridges appear to hold more powder. The results were around 48 grains with the Creedmoor, 50 with the 260, and 52 with the 6.5x55.

Since potential muzzle velocity increases or decreases at 1/4 the rate of case capacity, when loaded to the same pressure, this means the 6.5x55 has about a 2% advantage over the 6.5 Creedmoor, around 50-60 fps with most loads. The .260 is obviously in between, so there obviously isn't any practical difference between any of the three ballistically.

If a 6.5 caliber projectile leaves the muzzle at 2700 fps, what cartridge did it come out of?

But, as Dirtfarmer said, we're loonies, what would we argue, cuss and discuss?

Critters wouldn't know the difference, hunters wouldn't either without looking at the headstamp...

DF

Well that right there is crazy talk -
.... if whitetails couldn't tell the difference, then why do I have essentially identical rifles shooting essentially identical load ;-)

Now, that's a $64, Loony question to which there may be no answer...

Or, to answer that one would be to hold the Key to the Loony disease process...

Not an easy nut to crack, for sure...

DF

So reading between the lines...

The 260 is way better.
(since I own two of em)

I like the design and performance of the 6.5 Creedmoor.

The 260 and 6.5 Swede should both be able to beat the Creedmoor in a footrace.

But to be practical, if the Creed was too light in the azz for a particular purpose, I wouldn't look for the 260 or the 'Swede as a significant upgrade in performance.

I don't have a .260 because I have a Creed and a Swede...

Too light in the azz..?

Time to move up to heavier ordinance.

But a mod speed 6.5 is pretty efficient at killing most stuff that won't bite you or stomp you to death...

Not that some haven't used it on such critters...

Not me...!

DF

I've had a Model 70 Swede for a few decades.

I've got a Lilja=barreled Model 700 action in 6.5 Creedmoor to pick up from JKob and drop in a Micky Hunter stock.

I've got a Stiller Predator action and a Rock barrel to attend to; I'm thinking 6.5-06.

Should probably think about getting a .260.... as soon as I get some greater hands-on experience with the .260 Grendel.

an update after my recent range session:

1. Neighbor’s Ruger 6.5 Creed with Hornady American Whitetail 129g Interlock factory load @ 2,820fps, subMOA

2. My 70 Classic 6.5x55 129g Interlock handload @ 2,827fps, subsub MOA (new to me, MCT3’s old Classic FW Edge by Redneck.)

While it could perhaps be argued that the local whitetails are unlikely to notice the 7fps average difference and differentiate between Creed & Swede (yes that rhymes), it is clear my Winchester is much better

And while I am pretty sure I can get another 100fps out of the swede load, it shoots so well now that I am not certain I will bother this year.


[i][/i]

The last new rifle I purchased was a walnut/blued Mauser M12 in 6.5x55. With it's classic styling, somehow the 6.5 Creedmore and .260 just wouldn't feel right. Plus it was only offered in the Swede.

I never ever thought I would fall in love again after meeting the .257 Roberts and 7x57, but the 6.5x55 Swede is fast becoming my all time favourite cartridge. I don't worry too much about match or long aerodynamic bullets. I pick a standard hunting bullet with H4350 and go hunting. Every bullet bar one will shoot three shots into an inch or less. The M12/Swede is my only rifle that will do that.

What load did you use with the 129g SP in the Swede?

Currently 129g Hornady Interlock SP, Lupua brass, 45.0g H4350, & BR2 primers.

Custom barrel 2,827 fps is faster than the 2,738 fps average same load with Winchester factory barrel

Thanks.

140 grn out of the sweed at 2920+ FPS

What length barrel?

Brad,

Yeah, I wanted to ask that myself. Have owned several 6.5x55's on modern actions and various barrel length, and haven't yet owned one that got 2900+ fps with 140's. In fact the 6.5-06 I had for a while, with a 26-inch barrel, only got around 2950 with 140's.

On another subject, here's a post I made on this subject in 2014. Robert White provided a link for the thread earlier in this thread, but I want to add some further comments at the end:

"I've owned multiple rifles in all three chamberings, and my take is this:

The 6.5x55 is capable of the same sort of accuracy as the other two, and can exceed their velocities slightly, since it has more powder room and normally comes in actions with plenty of room for seating bullets out. But the chambers and brass can vary considerably, and there aren't any full-power factory loads. Most American factory rifles (when available) only come with 1-9 twists.

Many .260's also come with 1-9 twists, but the chambers and brass are far more uniform (though brass quality can vary). Cases can also easily be made from various other .308-based rounds. But if you want to shoot very high ballistic-coefficient bullets the standard "short action" magazine is a little too short for optimum seating depth. If you onloy plan to use standard hunting bullets, it works fine. Factory loads tend to be limited these days.

The 6.5 Creedmoor solves the magazine length problem of the .260 by using a slightly shorter case with a wider, steeper shoulder. Brass quality is excellent, and the factory loads are very good, though sometimes hard to find. The 1-8 twist for ultra-long bullets is common, and every factory rifle I've shot in 6.5 Creedmoor has been VERY accurate with both factory ammo and handloads.

For the record, the only one I own a rifle for right now is the 6.5x55, but it's a custom rifle built on an FN Mauser 98 action with a 1-8 twits Lilja barrel, using a tight custom reamer. Most American factory ammo or brass won't fit in the chamber, but Lapua brass does. I've had it for a while, but if I hadn't would have kept the Ruger 77 Hawkeye in 6.5 Creedmoor I purchased the first year they came out, since it was just as accurate."

Since then I've acquired a .260, a Tikka T3 Lite from Whittaker Guns. It's nicely accurate, but mostly I like the lightness and balance in a factory rifle. However, as with many .260's I couldn't seat some bullets out to the lands, due to magazine length problems, and measuring the throat length indicates it's SAAMI standard. Not all of these bullets were super-high-BC types, since among them are several "conventional" plastic-tips. So I eventually modified the magazine and bolt-stop to allow rounds with an overall length of 2.92 inches, which allowed me to seat any bullets to the lands, even 140 Berger VLD's--and accuracy did improve with most loads.

Right now I also have two 6.5 Creedmoors, a Ruger American Predator and a Weatherby Vanguard Synthetic. Am still working on the Weatherby to get it to quit stringing shots vertically, though even with the stringing it still puts 5 shots in an inch. The RAR Predator is the most accurate of four 6.5 Creedmoors I've handloaded for. It's first 5-shot group at 100 yards, using 140 VLD's seated just shy of the lands and 41.5 grains of H4350, measured .33 inch--and that's as-is from the factory.

That said, one of the dirty little secrets of the 6.5 Creedmoor is that SOME bullets still won't seat quite out to the lands in the standard 2.84 inch short magazine. The above group's rounds had the bullets were seated to 2.88 inch overall length, which won't fit in the magazine. And yes, the throat is standard SAAMI length, as is the throat in the Vanguard, though the throats of the two rifles differ by .004 inch.

Of course, this problem can easily be solved by not using certain bullets. Some of the other Bergers will seated out to the lands at less than 2.84 OAL, as will the 139 Lapua Scenar. But the fact remains that the 6.5 Creedmoor's shorter case does not totally solve the problem of long-ogived bullets in short magazines--and with a little throat wear the problem becomes worse.

Still have my custom "classic" 6.5x55, built on a commercial FN Mauser 98 action with a medium-weight Lilja 1-8 twist barrel, and a stock made of New Zealand walnut. It was chambered with a minimum specs PT&G reamer with a short throat, so there's not problem seating ANY bullet out to the lands, with plenty of magazine room remaining. On the other hand, handloads in Lapua brass don't shoot quite as well as handloads in Hornady brass do in the Ruger American Predatot. In fact, I've never come up with one that shoots anywhere nearly as well as that first group out of the Predator--but the 6.5x55 is a lot prettier.

MD, what did you ask for regarding the reamer for your custom 6.5x55 98 chamber with the short throat, or maybe a better question is where/how does one ask for the same thing? Is such an animal readily available or would one need to provide detailed mechanical drawings to a reamer maker?

Reason for asking is that my MRC 1999 6.5x55 has a super long throat that leaves near Weatherby style freebore with normal 120-129 grain bullets and a somewhat heavy barrel profile, but otherwise is a fine rifle with a 3.1" magazine to boot. I've been quandering about what to do with it to keep it a 6.5 of some kind. That magazine begs to be used or I'd switch to a 6.5 CM or .260. Rebarreling it to a lighter contour Swede without shortening the throat would be an exercise in frustration but properly throated for the sleeker bullets in the 120-140 grain range would be great and the best of all worlds in that action, not to mention I already have good dies and plenty of 6.5 Swede brass.

I am not a hair splitter, when it comes what round is the best. I do not own a 6.5x55, nor the Creed. I do, however, own a Criterion-barreled .260 on a Remington short action. It is phenomenally accurate (for my eyes) with about anything that I put through it. I can load the bullets to 2.848, but cut it close on the magazine. I have backed that off to 2.840, to enhance field functionality.

I like the 129 Interlock and can push it to just over 3000 fps from my 24-inch barrel, with a max (as per Nosler data) load of Re 17, with 1/2 moa accuracy.

I have recently done a bit of testing with the 147 ELD-M and Re 26. I started with 48 grains, using a mag primer and the load shot very well with an average of 2922 fps. The es was not good and one shot was 2964 fps. There was a bit of ejector marking, so I stared to back down a bit.

47.5 grains using standard primers got me 2891 fps, with an es of under 12. Mag primers opened up the es a bit, and were actually a few fps slower! The primers were somewhat flat, but not bad, even though it was a fairly warm day.

I dropped back to 47 grains. With the mag primers, the pressure signs were non-existent. I only fired two shots over the chrono and they were 2826 and 2825, which was pleasing. The standard primers averaged 2819 fps, for three shots, but had a bit worse spread. Accuracy-as with all the loads-was good enough for me. This moderate load is a full 100 fps faster than a max load of Re19, which clocks 2724 in my rifle.

I am going to test some 140 Partitions next in the coming days.

As I stated, I am not really a hair splitter. I don't measure distance off the lands etc., and generally seat to just over what the book recommendation is, depending. I have seen nothing that the 55, nor the Creed will do any better or worse than the .260. The 55 has the long mag, which is a plus, but a .260 put in a long mag allows less powder crunch, too.

Between these three, it is nothing but personal choice, as to which you choose. Throating, twist, yada, yada, yada, are the choices to make, but as far as difference, I can see nothing that would be a game changer to me.

22.5 Tikka

My loads from 3 years ago.......6.5x55





I shot these yesterday out of a Ruger FTW Hunter 6.5 Creedmoor

Hornady 147 ELD-M .................OAL 2.850
Rem Small BR primers
Starline Palma brass
RL-26 47.0 ..................2,800 fps

46.5 grains of Norma MRP will get me the same speed.
46.0 grains of RL-23 will also give the same speed.

I'm on my 5th loading with these loads and primer pockets are still tight and no brass stretch.

Either load shoots bullets down the same hole. The FTW is a very accurate rifle and likes everything that I feed it.


I don't think there is hardly 30 fps difference between the 3 cartridges. I shot a 260 for decades.

I think the best design goes to the Creed.

Also convinced that the 1/8 twist is at its best with 147s.

Holy pressure Batman!

The Swede earned its chops long before those others were a gleam in some cartridge designers eye. Additionally, it is the most elegant cartridge ever developed. The fact that we have 6.5's other than the Swede is a testament to the need of the gun companies to churn up new business and to the gullibility of their customer base. All that said, maybe I should get one of those clunky looking 6.5's, just, you know, for the kids to fool around with or something.

I built a 6.5 X 55 on a VZ-24 a few years back and focus on using the 120 grain bullets. It's shoots almost like a .25-06 with the same weight bullet. I also converted a Win M-70 featherweight in .243 to .260 Rem and it too shot the 120 grain bullets in a similar manner.

For my VZ 24 the 6.5 X 55 is the better round as it's body taper is close to the original 8 MM Mauser round and the .260 has a very different body taper.....I can only assume better feeding in the Mauser.

Ballistics aside there was very little to argue about but fitting the action one uses might be the deciding factor.

From a 22" bbl, the Creedmoor and 260 basically run 140's around 2,650 - 2,700 fps +/-, while the 6.5x55 runs 140's 2,700 - 2,750 fps +/-.

Not much difference.

Nope..... primers edges just starting to smooth out, but no where near flattened, no hard bolt lift, no swelling, no other signs of pressure....new old stock 60's Lapua brass, Norma MRP, and moly coated `140gr AB and ABLR........

Sounds very scientific...

I think the 6.5x55 is the Looney thing.
Read above: the throat differences, action differences, twist differences, brass variations. Plenty to Looney and obsess over.

260 just poorly executed

Creedmoor is done proper. Not very looneyish though. Buy a rifle, buy factory ammunition and go shoot. That is why it is hitting it out of the park. Not everyone wants to be a Looney.

My Bergera HMR rifle is shooting sub moa 5 shot groups with handloaded Hornady 143gr ELD-X at 2715fps. I probably could have saved the trouble and tried the factory Hornady Precision Hunter ammo, but every gunshop I have visited in the last month had an empty spot on their shelf.

wonder what a 20 inch barreled Creedmoor would give up with 140's? I kind of like the new tikka t3 CTR with 20 inch barrel.

Tag

I can see that potentially working. With 48 grains of Re 26, I clocked some 140 Partitions at 2998 fps from my 24-inch .260. The load was showing some ejector marks, so I started to back off. At 47 grains, I am still at 2924 and accuracy is getting better. Trying 46.5 this morning to see if the group shrinks a bit. Re 26 smokes with heavy 6.5 bullets.

One thing that I notice about 26, is that some of my es is virtually zero.

The 6.5x55 should be able to safely get 2900 or so with a 140 out of a 22-23" barrel with RL-26, since the .270 Winchester easily gets 3000 from a 150 in the same barrel length

I ran some ballistic equations comparing the bore size and powder room of the two rounds. The 6.5x55 should get about 93% of the velocity of the velocity of the .270 with the same bullet weights, and the numbers indicated 2900 from a 140. Am all that surprised, since my custom 6.5x55, built on an FN Mauser action, gets 2825 with the 139 Lapua Scenar from it's 21-inch barrel, using a charge of Vihtavuori N560 two grains below the maximum listed in VV's data. N560 is very good powder, but probably not any better than RL-26.

This is from my last outing with my 22" barreled 6.5 Swede and 140's with RL26 measured with my Magnetospeed.





I believe if I mess with the seating depth a little it'll be pretty decent.

Mine is getting there with R26 with both 140's and 129 grain bullets. It consistently comes within 100 fps of the 270 with similar weight bullets. If you compare same BC to correct for the larger bore advantage it is even closer , like 120s in 6.5 vs 130s in .270.

VV560 seems very close in performance to R-26. When there is no load data for R26 I look at VV560 and MRP data to get a rough idea of charge weight and velocity to be expected with R26. R-26 may split the difference between MRP and MRP2 as those are similar to R22 & R25 all of which are very close in burn rate.