This is a SINCERE ?. I'm NOT trying to stir a pot of anything.

It's obvious on this forum & Ask The Gunwriters the 6.5s are recognized as SERIOUS elk medicine. I'm talking 260 Rem, 6.5X55 et.al. From a long time deer hunter, handloader, I have known about the 264 WM for years. I know when the 260 Rem was introduced but there are SEVERAL other 6.5s.

Yet in 40 yrs, this year, of deer hunting & 37 yrs reloading, I've never run into anyone carrying, hunting, shooting or loading ANY 6.5 except 1 264 WM. And now I have a 6.5 Swede, IT IS Y'ALLS FAULT.

Is it:
1. Lack of Publicity?
2. Entrenched competition, 270,308,06, 7Mag, etc,?
3. Lack of others experience/exposure with the cal.?
4. Rejection of a Euro caliber?
5. Our 30 cal military history?
6. Ammo availability difficulty?
7. Some or All of Above?
Maybe I am overlooking some things?

Since the 260/6.5X55 are reliable Elk,Moose medicine, they are more than entirely adequate for Deer.
So What's Up with the public's lack of use/acceptance?

Entrenched gayness of the 270 probably

Easily answered. Some people are ignorant, the rest are stupid! I have my third 6.5x55 right now and only one, the first, was a surplus military rifle. Second was a Parker-Hale I had rebarreled to it and present one in a Win Mod 70 Featherweight. Also have a 6.5x06 on a Rem 700 action.

Same reason tall skinny tires and compact trucks aren't all the rage.

Most guys have small peckers, and as a result, must shoot magnum rifles and drive around empty lifted full size trucks with 35" tires.... BWAHHHAAAHAAA!

Wow, this is early BUT ....

You guys are not doing anything to HELP the 6.5s popularity! !

Jerry

jwall,

Does it help that I was going to buy a .264 Win Mag a few years ago I purchased three boxes of brass containing 100 each?

Then I decided on a 7STW. I gave one of the boxes to a buddy who has a .264 and I turned the other 200 into my .224 MBOC.

What does MBOC stand for?

I honestly think it's mainly due to what the person was around growing up. Most hunters don't research everything like we do. I would say that they probably used a 308, 270, 30-06, 300 Win Mag or 338 Win Mag since they could hold a rifle because that's what their dad, grandpa or friend used.

The other is the magnum craze that hit us. I will agree that I thought I had to have a 50 BMG to cleanly kill an elk (not really, but you know what I'm saying). I think more and more are starting to realize that smaller, less powerful cartridges are capable of taking elk without all the blast.

I either have or had 3) 260's and a 264 Win Mag and loved them all.

IMHO

Yeah, it's obvious by reading numbers that any 6.5 is much superior to any other cartridge.

? 1. No it doesn't help.

? 2. 224 MBOC means your are WAY OVER BORE CAPACITY 22cal IN 06 cap.

Give me SOME credit; this is the FIRST time I've heard MBOC!

No. 3. It hasn't raised my curiosity since I don't need it.
Jerry

'Cause the ultimate 6.5 has already been invented--it's called the 270 Winchester..........



Casey

Now alpine... they don't need any help to get inflamed.

You are an In.stink.ta.gater

Jerry

Ask the same question in Sweden.

You'll feel better.

It's a looney thing, they don't sell them at WalMart and most have never heard of one. Those that have taken the time to look into one and have actually owned one know what the 6.5 can do.

my one and only elk a large cow was smoked with the swede using a 120 barnes ttsx at 275 or so yards. why? cause it was the most powerful rifle i own.

1 shot 1 kill worked perfect.

It isn't because everyone else is stupid or ignorant, or have small peckers....

I think it's because some folks (the vast minority) dote on numbers...the rest are more practical,and just go and kill animals.

For me it's 3 things that keep me from buying a 6.5mm:

1) the lack of ammo availibility in my area
2) The inability to have ammo shipped { they don't ship to NY }
3) the 2 6.5mm's i like {260 & 6.5x55 }are not availible in rifles i like.

I've done quite a bit of research on the 6.5mm and i've come to the conclusion that i would like to have one. I think it's an all around cartridge that's capable of harvesting a variaty of big game. It's also a easy load to shoot {light recoil}

I wish the gun manufactures would chamber this round in more rifles.Look at Remington,they developed the 260 but only offer it in one model {model 7}. Winchester Model 70 no 6.5mm currently offer.

Well, I don't see any icon or any print to indicate you're joking, so I'll respond as if you are serious.

I don't live in Sweden or Europe and therefore I don't care.

I live in USA and am curious about the lack of interest here.

NO SMILE, NO GRIN, NO JOKE.

Could it be because of the attitudes expressed here?

Jerry

Gravestone - Thanks, that's at least 1 kind of answer that address the ? seriously.

I just bought a Win M 70 6.5X55 from an individual. It's a 90s model but near 100% condition.

I suggest you can find a rifle PRE OWNED that you like.

Also the 6.5Swede is a RELOADING proposition. IMO>

Thanks
Jerry

Keep a close eye out. The 6.5's rem will gain popularity quick and actually are.

6.5X47 lapua
260 Rem
6.5 Creedmoor

These threes in just the last few years.

More than likely it was the bigger better syndrome. People are finally starting to see 70+ grs of propellant isn't needed to kill stuff.

Now if someone would buy my spotting scope for sale I'd turn that right around and put the deposit down on my next 6.5 grin.

I hope you're right. Even though I already have a Swede I would like to pick up a .260 Rem. It looks like it is losing popularity rather than gaining it. The 6.5 Creedmore, though, does seem to be gaining traction and might be the next one to make a good splash.



They used to offer it in the Rem 700 but dropped it. Not a good sign. Winchester is still adding new chamberings to their line; I'm hoping the .260 Rem is one of them soon.

I don't know,but it is popular with me.

Having taken game with nearly everything from .223 through .458 I have realized that a well placed bullet constructed to work at the speeds of the cartridge pushing it seem to work equally well. 6.5's are slick bullets with great bc and sd.....what's not to love.

about 15 years ago the local gun-shop had 6.5 Swedish military rifles on sale that were in great condition for under $125
several guys including myself bought one or more of those rifles and they got used quite a bit on white tail and mule deer,(they proved to be really nice deer rifles) several were sporterized , some had scopes,mounted, but the results for everyone I talked with opinion were that they were basically a great deer rifle, like a 257 roberts 270 win,or a 308, we had two guys in camp use them to kill elk,over the next few years, (hardly a large sample test) but both guys said the rifles basically acted like a 270 on elk, and while it got the job done neither hunter used the rifles on elk hunts again so obviously they were not overly impressed.

I live in Canada and see some 6.5's in the field, they are not uncommon here. Most are milsurp rifles, but some are new Tikka, Sako, and other modern European makes ( almost all 6.5x55's and a few .260's). I think Canadians use more 6.5's because we have no significant domestic firearm or ammunition manufacturing industry, and so do not have any incentive to "buy local" like shooters do in the USA.
USA manufacturers prefer to sell what they have in inventory, and have very little reason to chamber for a "foreign" calibre when any of several domestic cartridges from .25 to .28 caliber will do as well for hunting.

I wasn't kidding. They love the round in Sweden. After all....it's their round. I had a Swedish Mauser. It was ok, but nothing special.

You can always judge how popular a round is by the availability of ammo for it. Part of the problem is the low pressures that the factories have to load the ammo. The old Mousers couldn't take high pressures. So, you have to reload if you have a modern 6.5x55mm, and expect good performance. That limits the market even more.

When talking about all the different cartridges available. A friend of mine commonly says
"That's another solution to a problem that don't exist".

The 6.5x55 Swede is a fantastic cartridge. Do I own one? NO. Have I owned one? YES. Would I own another one? YES.

The 6.5x55 an under rated cartridge in this country by the unwashed masses. One of the reasons is until recently unless you were a hand loader the availability of ammunition for the Swede was non existent to spotty it all depended on where you were located. What ammo you could find for it was either the 180 grain MIL surplus or made by Norma.

I have been asked by others what would I recommend as a first gun for a first gun for a first time juvenile hunter and have recommended the 6.5x55 Swede as they could be picked up cheap and now that Remington and several others are loading for the 6.5x55 the price of ammo has come down. The 6.5 is an excellent starter gun and can and has taken anything we have on the North American Continent.

7. Some or All of Above?

Most of the above gets my vote. I don't think being a European caliber has much to do with it. The 7mm is also European.

I would say your entire list is applicable. There may even be a few points that have been missed. But I think that one of the biggest reasons is #5: We've never used a 6.5mm bullet in any significant manner for military purposes. If there had been a "6.5 US Gov't cartridge" that saw heavy use in some big wars you wouldn't be asking the question. Look at our most popular cartridges. Three of the top five best sellers are current or former widely used military calibers: 30-06, 223 Rem, 308 Win.

But next is probably #2, so many of the other popular calibers have been around a while and have become entrenched. The 270 Win, 30-30, 243 Win, 300 Win Mag, and 7mm Rem Mag to name some of them. Ammo is mass produced for the most popular cartridges and so ends up being less expensive and available in every nook and cranny, even in the remotest of places. Most non-loonies don't want to buy a firearm with hard to get ammo. Why would they, since most non-loonies also aren't reloaders?

I think that #1 and #3 go hand-in-hand. Most regular Joes have never heard of and thus never been exposed to a 6.5x55 or any other 6.5mm. A cartridge can't be popular if it is not widely available and never gets any press.

Lastly, The 6.5x55 (and related 6.5mm cartridges) are great, but they don't really do anything more than the typical common cartridges do in the eyes of regular Joes. As much as we want to convince ourselves (and them) otherwise.

As for me, I'll keep my 6.5x55 and hunt and shoot with it happily, regardless of any blank stares I get from people who ask me what cartridge I'm using.

Because they are a reloading deal only..Not everyone is a reloader...

Jayco

Really? You ought to call Midway and clue 'em in on that, I was just browsing their ammo. page and saw a total of 13 chamberings in 6.5 mm. that they carry ammo. for. Including the .260, the Swede, the .264 Winchester, 6.5-.284, 6.5 Remington, 6.5 Creedmore.......

Back off young man.

I was talking the availability of ammo when someone forgot the box.You can't buy that stuff around here when you realize you brought the wrong box or forgot..It happens...

The 6.5's have nothing on the popular cartridges everyone carries.Let me think for a minute.....

The .270 Winchester comes to mind..Everyone carries that just like the '06 and 30-30.

Jayco

Well, if that's what you meant, why didn't you say so?

Seems like a simple solution.......don't forget your ammo......

People always talk about "just in case you forget your ammo.," but never talk about "what if you remember the ammo. but forget your rifle."

Why is that?

What kind of rifle should you get, so just in case you forget it you can buy one just like it at the hardware store??

There are other reasons and the first that comes to mind is someone dropping there weapon with zero at home being not the case in Joe Blow Colorado.

You have to re-sight in and didn't bring enough ammo to do so and have enough to hunt with, and the local Joe Blow store only has the standard popular cartridges like the '06/270 and 30-30.

If a guy hunts enough,he knows what can and does happen even to the best of plans.

It only takes once to realize standard calibers is the way to go.

Jayco

'cept maybe the corner store has ammo that shoots like chit ( think shotgun pattern ) in your rifle. Then what...?

Right. So if a guy hunts enough, he learns that he oughtta bring more than 5 cartridges with him. If a guy really hunts a lot, he goes all out and gets a whole box of 20.

Of course if he handloads he's really screwed because who ever heard of a handloader being able to load up and bring a lot of rounds along?

You bought the wrong rifle(kidding)..Geez..You can't tell me the thousands of hunters out there that only use factory ammo,just wound game.

Weatherby Vanguards are sighted in with "Factory ammo" and you get the target.Factory ammo can't be all that bad with a guarantee to shoot less than 1.5 at 100 yards and the Sub Moa,less than .99 at 100,with factory ammo.

Mine was Winchester ammunition.

Jayco

Smoke..Your showing your colors...

Never had a boo-boo hunting..Never dropped a firearm or had a horse go down over it or just maybe a bumpy road going in or maybe your rifle isn't hitting point blank at 10,000 feet like it was at sea level?

How do we do this....

Standard calibers and standard folks versus oddball calibers and oddball folks....Or we could say loonies!!!!

Jayco

It is in the details. Some pay attention to them others don't.

Much to that.

It amuses me when talking elk calibers and the 243 is a elk killing machine..I am sure it is(I have seen it's pro's and con's in person) broadside but how many get that anymore?

Everything on the net is all about speed and 700 yard shots...That is not the case here in Idaho...

Speed don't kill,a well placed shot does..There isn't a 6.5 out there that kills better than the 7mm/270 Winchester with ammo every where.

Jayco

Someone's showing their colors......but it ain't me:

Kool....

I never have fell hunting, but I don't shoot odd ball calibers either!

Your point?

Jayco

My point is, if you've "never fell hunting," why do you worry so much about knocking your scope out of whack and not having enough ammo. to re-zero?

Well, since this is posted in the elk hunting forum I will state the obvious. Most elk hunters probably view the 6.5's as being on the small side. Elk are large, powerful animals, therefore most people opt for a large, powerful cartridge. I personally believe a Swede is enough gun for elk, but I have never shot one with one.

I'd say their is such a large population that 1) doesn't visit sites such as this and they are so entrenched in the 7mm-30cal-338 cal thought process 2) nor do the factory ammo makers support the 6.5's the way they do the larger caliber clan. I also think if more "mainstream" hunters realized that the plethora of premium bullets made the 6.5 more potent than of years/bullets past it would be much more popular due to lessened recoil.

Alan

That was the question not how holy they are,in some simple heads minds.

There are much better choices for elk hunting....

Jayco

1) Load your own
2) See answer for number 1
3) Have one built

Problem solved, thank me later

Yup, and your first answer was "they're for hand-loaders only."

Then it was "no, that's not it, it's because you can't buy ammo. just anywhere."

Then it was "no, that's not it, what if you knock your scope out of whack."

Now it's "there are much better choices for elk."

Have we come full circle yet?

Uh, actually....the .270 is the true 7mm....do the math...
I love my 6.5...but I carry a backup rifle and scopes for Murphy......

Jwall...

I doubt any gunwriter here posting will disagree that Jack Atkinson has more experience elk hunting than they do.It is said he has shot more elk on public ground that anyone else and by more than one other gun writer.

As Craig Boddington put it....

My favorite .33 is the .338 Winchester Magnum. I think it is well-accepted as the archetypical elk cartridge, and equally good for bear, moose and Africa�s largest plains game. Its ballistics are neither fast nor flashy, but it offers a rich selection of bullets, and it hits with authority. My old friend Jack Atcheson Jr. uses nothing but a battered .338 for almost all of his hunting, and as he puts it, �The .338 numbs them.� Amen.

The 6.5 ain't going to numb anything and neither is the 270 Win.There adequate in the right hands but far from the ideal elk cartridge in all circumstances.

Jayco

Exactly.........

Jayco

Id go hunt an Elk with a 6.5x55 swede any day as long as it was twisted 8:1 or thereabouts so I can shoot the 156-160 grain bullets as the ballistic coefficincy for the heavy 6.5s are awesome and the deer Ive shot with the norma 156 gr RN bullet will speak volumes in the realm of bullet penetration and as Im not a fan of magnamania Id choose a good ol 6.5mm bout anytime.

+1

The question was............

WHY AREN'T THE 6.5s MORE POPULAR ??

Not how great they are.

Jayco

jdm953 - You are SOOO LATE, don't botter knockin.

Jerry

WHY AREN'T THE 6.5s MORE POPULAR ??

Cuz.

Wow...just wow...

Because it is metric. 6.5mm???
I have 6.5x55 SE Sako 85 and I use it for deer. It works great. Less recoil, very accurate. Easy to reload. All components you can get from Lapua and Norma. Great selection of bullets.
Does kill any better?
I prefer it over 308 win and 270 win for deer and coyote. For elk I would take my 280 AI with 160 AB.
Vodek

.270 is easier to say than 6.5x55mm.

Numb? What does that mean in terms of killing elk?

Well with the .264 Win Mag being the Best Elk Cartridge in The World, the situation will slowly change, just have to give it a little time.

Amen brother!

Alan

There ya go....its a 6.5mm for the purists and its a magnum for the short pecker crowd.

Quite a few seem to have taken offense to the small pecker magnum thing, huh?

Logcutter, do you ever take your own advice?

A little quiz for the Elk experts here.Who wrote these quotes out of guns magazine.

1-Elk live in remote, hard-to-reach places. In other words, horseback to get there, horseback to hunt. Jostling around for six hours a day in a saddle scabbard, knocking against trees, brushing against rocks, banging into brush, demands a rugged rifle.

2-The third and last requisite of an elk rifle is the same criterion that makes heavyweights popular in boxing -- raw power. Elk require a hard hit to knock them down. Weighing in the 700 lb. class, elk are heavily boned and thickly muscled. Yes, you can shoot one in the ear with a .22 LR, but the idea is not to see how small a caliber you can get away with; the idea is to match the gun to the game to ensure positive, humane kills.

For an elk rifle, life begins at .30 caliber.

3-For most experts, "elk rifle" means .338 caliber. We concur most enthusiastically.

Who was that guy or guys as he said we?

Jayco

Umm well that's nice and all...

Experts..huh.. I'll bet there are quite a few here who would qualify. Funny thing is these writers were/are self proclaimed experts. Or they were appointed experts because until the computer age you had to have a way of letting people know you were afield. That was in print or word of mouth. The guys who were "in country" and getting it done didn't have the means or methods to get their word out. Many here have just as much if not more time afield that would more than likely say you don't need a .338

Wonder what these experts would have to say about "the swede" and all the Stag and Moose it has killed over the years???

I've 1000's of mountain pounding miles under saddle. Yes, I've slipped a stick in the scabbard time or 2. Those who are serious about poking an Elk with a rig will more than likely outfit themselves with optics/mounts than can take a bump or two.
More often than not your scabbard is under the stirrup which is under your leg so your leg is gonna take the brunt of the impact.

All this muse about your prophecy and the "standard" caliber and having to hunt high and hard for the monarch makes me wonder...

Where in the hell are you gonna get a quick "box of 20" of ole aught six or the .338 WM in the back country? After all if you're gonna ride in 6 hours ('bout 15-18 miles) you ain't getting back to the trail head that night.

I started pounding horse miles hunting in the back country in 1951 and I concur,but things can and do happen and we all have learned the do's and dont's probably the hard way.

As to your question on getting ammo 15 miles back in,it's like getting beer you didn't bring for the fire after the kill,the next camp just might have some and for the right price,bingo,it's beer time(example only)..

Meaning,your way/way more likely to find ammo way back in during back country Elk season with a standard caliber than an oddball and for a price,bingo,you have a few more rounds to get you by.

And back to the opps question...Why aren't the 6.5's more popular.I just mentioned a few with ammo availability being the biggest, in my mind as believe it or not,the majority of hunters do not reload.

Did I say that..The majority of hunters do not reload...

Jayco

Jayco - am I saying this ?

I think you have something there. Not that there are not other reasons to limit
the 6.5s popularity.

Afterall whether you are in back country or not, non reloaders have to have access
to ammo.
Jerry

My .02 ...

if you can ride over to the next camp to get you a box of boolits.. you ain't where you need to be.

Also, if you need to ride over to the next camp to get you a box of boolits.. you ain't where you need to be.

This hunting season my wife and I took a day off and loaded the dogs and headed to a back country resort and landing strip on the Salmon river via a fairly rough narrow and steep road.Go figure..Flat tire way back in..No problem right? Wrong...

I had forgot I changed rims going to a spoked mag rim that had lug nuts that were not standard for my pick-up.My star wrench didn't even have that size on it.So there we sat atleast 20 miles from the nearest place with only two rigs coming by with neither having the oddball size lug wrench.

The owners of the back country ranch came by and when they finally got back to there ranch,they used there satellite phone to call my son who left work and brought me the right tool.The wife/myself and my two dogs sat there for about 7 hours before we got it done finally, in the dark.

Just goes to show you what oddball things can do when things go south way back in.Had I had standard sized lug nuts,not a problem even if I forgot my lug wrench as the two others that passed by had standard wrenches that would have worked.

I had the 6.5 of lug nuts.

Jayco

My .02 is this: If you're stupid enough to pack into the backcountry and not bring a few extra rounds "just in case," then you deserve to go home empty-handed.

My other .02 is this: Most elk hunters don't use horses, so for most elk hunters, scabbards are not an issue.

I heard custom wheel guys had short pecker syndrome, too...

Not as bad as .338 magnum proponents though.....

Here's my opinion about those experts.

I've hunted for elk since the late 50's. I've never needed a horse to do it, and my success rate is way above average. Those guys probably hunt with outfitters, and a horse is the only way they can get their out of shape fat azz to the elk. The rest of us hike in.

A .270/30-06 is more than enough for elk. Magnums have more range, and don't always need a perfect shot. What does that say to you? For me it says they can't get close enough, or hit the kill zone. It's a crutch for not working hard enough on marksmanship and hunting skills.

Elk are killed every year with handguns and muzzleloaders at under 100yds. I'd be embarrassed if I needed a big magnum to do the same thing.

My .02.

Man, first we get reminded of what the question was, then we get all manner of dissertations on the .243, the .338, lug nuts.....

Wait a minute, I think I'm seeing a pattern here.......lug nuts, wing nuts.....

Wow... The guy advocating the use of a common, standard cartridge due in large part to it's availability everywhere doesn't even pack the right size lug wrench to change the tires on something he, assumedly, uses way more often than a rifle. It's not a wonder he's worried about not having is ammo with him...

Maybe,but we get into places others can't.



Jayco

I'd be embarrased if I had to buy chrome wheels, just to pick up chicks and feel younger.....

No lie, personally I'd put the need to be able to change a tire at the top of the list, and running out of ammo. near the bottom. How hard is it to bring a whole box of 20 rounds?

small pockets, maybe?

Geez...Can't anyone read the question at hand?..JWall asked WHY AREN'T THE 6.5s MORE POPULAR ?? and I gave my reasons it probably isn't...

My good friend in Rigging Idaho owns a 264 Win Mag and I have been there with him when he killed several Elk..Does it work..Hell yeah.. but does it work better than a 270 Winchester..Hell No...

That is another reason the 264 Win Mag never hit stardom besides being known as a "barrel Burner"..The 270 Win does anything the 6.5 can plus some for the average hunter.

Jayco

6.5 guys aren't 'average'. Kinda like the chrome wheel crowd....

Yeah, but you gotta admit, by the looks of that photo, no way you're gettin' way back in there on that road without custom wheels......

I wonder why chrome wheels aren't more popular? Probably because there ain't nothing a chrome wheel can do that a .270, er., I mean, a steel wheel can't do.....

That's pretty intelligent and on topic.

Jayco

I wonder why a guy that doesn't even hunt with a centerfire rifle even gets involved in a centerfire thread.

I'm not going to play high school games with you guys..If you have something to show and tell about 6.5's and Elk hunting..Chime in with your personal experiences with them on Elk and why you think there not as popular as others as JWall asked,not this childish bubble gum talk from grown men.

Jayco

Here you go...260 with handloads put together to perform as good or better than a .270.

How does it perform better?

And that answers the posters question about why the 6.5's are not more popular?

Go to Federal ammunition and find the 264 Win Mag,owe wait,it isn't listed,only the 260 Rem...One "Big" reason the 6.5's are not popular.

Jayco

130gr Berger VLD @ 3000 fps, .552 G1 BC.

Learn from an expert.....

Make a list....check it "thrice"!

Alan

270 Winchester Federal High Energy 140 grain Trophy Bonded 3100 fps.

Look on Hornady's sight...Absolutely "NO" 6.5's available.

Jayco

Still don't see how it's better compared to a max hand loaded .270?

Since I started reloading, the only factory ammo I purchase is rimfire...so 'ammo availability' is a dead issue for me...make it and bring it from home...

and while I hunt with the 260 and 6.5 x 55, my favorite 6.5 bore is a 6.5 x 57.... just neck up plentifully available 257 Roberts brass ( or 6mm Rem)....

but if you were relying on store bought ammo, try finding a box or two of that on the shelves at any small town store...

and as far as 'availability' in rifles that people want?
guess no one ever heard of a rebarrel...

heck I wanted a featherweight Model 70 in 6.5 x 55 for antelope hunting.. with a 24 or 26 inch barrel on it..

not going to find that on the shelf... but I picked up a used Featherweight cheap as it had a shot out 30/06 barrel on it ( the factory original)...$275.00 later, it had a 6.5 x 55 barrel on it, 26 inches in length...I had $550 in the rifle...

my life doesn't have to spin around what the marketing depts of gun companies decide to test the waters with this year..

.270 140gr Nosler AccuBond @ 3000 fps
500 meters, 2099fps, 1370 FP energy

.260 130 VLD @ 3000fps
500 meters, 2197fps, 1393 FP energy

Not real bad for a case burning only 45grs of powder out of a short action.

Now compare a .270 to a .264 Win Mag shooting 140gr VLD's at 3250fps.

Senar - a couple of ? ?

Can you get 3000fps from a 260 rem w/o 26-30" bll? SAFLEY

I haven't found that vel w/130 gr from a 6.5x55 more like 2800-2900

Do you believe the B C that Berger advertises?

Jerry

Once again your dodging the question on why the 6.5's are not so popular?There are offerings out there for the 264 just not from some major ammunition dealers.I have yet to see Nosler ammunition on the shelves around here.It's an order only proposition and not every hunter has the internet...Can't be can it?A hunter without the internet can't be successful or know chit can he...



Let's see....

Federal Cartridges 264 Winchester Mag ammuntion....NONE offered.
Federal Cartridges 270 Winchester ammunition..Several offerings

Hornady offerings for 264 Winchester Mag...NONE Offered
Hornady offerings for 270 Winchester...Several offerings.

Jayco

Who said I don't hunt with centerfire rifles??






Seriously??? Who was it that brought up chrome wheels in the first place? Was it Huntsman22, or someone else??

I get 3000fps with 130 VLD's with this .260 easily and could probably get a little more. It sports a 24" 1-9" Rock 5R barrel.

I've verified the BC of that bullet with actual field testing out to 1000 meters. Berger adjusted the BC's of their bullets not long ago and my testing with diameters from .243 through .338 show them to be very close if not a little low...

Well,gee..........I mean it's had since 1959....how much more time does it need?

One of the things I find interesting about these discussions is that the 270 Win is always used as a "baseline",the standard to beat...and both the 6.5 and 7mm advocates both go to additional lengths to do so.....very high BC bullets and/or longer barrels,faster twists and/or larger cases,etc, etc....touting all this stuff as evidence of superiority over a 270, which chugs along with lower BC's,standard twists dating back to 1925,etc.

In some instances these "gains" are substantial....but they mostly show up and can be demonstrated in the hands of the most skilled and talented LR shots.....and come at very great distances.Mere mortals will see little to no benefit.

And most of these "gains" have to do with the bullet in flight...I doubt anyone is going to see any dramatic difference in terminal effect.

What this tells me is that a good rifleman is on pretty safe ground with the 270. Is he "better" with a 6.5? Maybe, but purely dependent on his personal skill sets.

This likely has something to do with why all these 6.5's don't take the world by storm.

Scenar - okay.

Seriously, what powder do you use. Not asking charge wt.
Jerry

OK, here's your answer--becasue 6.5's haven't caught on in the US like they have in Europe, and guys like you wring their hands over the fact that they can't find ammo. at every corner gas station.

BTW, are you packing the right lug wrench now? Throw in a box of ammo. and you're all set.

I use Lapua brass, H4350 and Wolf Magnum primers. I just loaded the same brass(100 rounds)for the third time yesterday and the primer pockets are still nice and tight.

Scenar - thanks. I just got my Win 70 FTWT in 6.5x55 and it has 22" bll.

I'm looking for THE powder to use for 129 - 140 gr bullets. Now I would not expect to get 3000 from 2" shorter bll but I don't have to, 2999 would be close enough.

THANKS
Jerry

I like Mule Deers answer best...

Yeah, it's obvious by reading numbers that any 6.5 is much superior to any other cartridge.
_________________________
John

Jayco

Why not compare apples to apples. How does the .270 do with VLD's in different weights? Make sure to use max loads like you did with the .260

Not too many shoot at 500m. Lets see the energy at shorter ranges. You used the BC to gain advantage with the .260

Isn't that what BC is all about?

.277 Berger VLD's
130gr-.452
140gr-.487
150gr-.531

Inside 300 yards, there is no question about a .270 Win being sufficient for any reasonable use of that cartridge. Most people don't shoot past 300 yards at game. The vast majority of hunters don't know much about shooting in the wind either, and the .270 Win is better than a lot of other cartridges in the wind due to its velocity/BC combination.

However, wind is really the only variable once you have a targeting solution for the distance, vertical angle, and other atmospheric conditions (e.g., elevation/temperature/barometric pressure components) of the trajectory solution, which don't vary like wind does. With wind being the ultimate variable for shooting past 300 yards, using high BC bullets gives more margin for error in guessing the wind between you and the target (even with a wind gauge in your possession, you don't know exactly what the wind speed and direction is at other locations between you and your target). What the 6.5mm cartridges give you is good to excellent BCs for a given bullet weight and design, and that gives you longer "practical" range for a given wind speed and muzzle velocity, assuming one is serious about dispatching the game quickly and not just pulling the trigger and hoping.

Spot on post....

Yes, it is if you're a sniper. Why not use the .270 bullet with the highest BC if you're going to compare.

Bottom line is the .270 will kill everything I shoot at, if I do my part. The .260 won't do it any better, or even as good.

Lots of cartridges have more speed and power than the .270. So what? More speed...more meat damage. More power...more recoil.

The difference in diameter between the 264 Win Mag and 270 Winchester is .013 almost double what the difference is between the 7Mag and 270 Win at .007.

But all things being equal,diameter means nothing,does it?

Jayco

Well seems BobNH hit the nail on the head

Most everything TRIES to beat the 270.

I think ENTRENCHED competition is a BIG reason the 6.5s are not as popular.

If you want to open up the scope, take practically any cartridge with any bullet diameter, and you can do better from a BC and wind drift standpoint with a 6.5mm with the same muzzle velocity. Yes, you can talk about RUM and STW cartridges, but once you go there, you could have a 6.5mm version of those too. You would be very hard pressed to come up with an example better than the 6.5mm cartridge for a given bullet weight and recoil level. Lots of other cartridges get the job done, but if wind is a consideration, the 6.5mm cartridge of whatever size you want is going to be your best bet for giving you the most margin for error and practical distance given the wind conditions.

The majority of hunters can shoot good groups past 300yds at the range. With no pressure, a solid rest, and no wind. Put them in the field with adrenalin flowing, shaky rest, wind, and they should never take the shot, but they do.

When someone tells me they made/took a long shot past 300yds. I have one comment to them.............Don't feel bad. Next time you'll get closer.

If you're going to limit yourself to 300 yards, you don't need a .270 Win. A .250 Savage (and any number of other cartridges) would probably do just as well.

I'm not a sniper, I'm a hunter and I want every advantage I can get when it comes to killing big game animals. Bullet efficiency does matter.

To be fair, because you probably don't know. I play with long shots at the range for amusement. Our range goes to 500 yds.

However, i'm a still hunter who hunts in timber. My goal is to get as close as possible. Not see how far I can shoot. A good BC is not important to me for hunting.

I know too many hunters who think they do spot and stalk hunting. What they really do is spot and shoot. I can't see it, but that's me.

You should use a 30/30 then.

Your sure not going to here the horror stories of missing/wounding or lost game past 300 due to the unseen and unreadable winds across a canyon.

Only one shot 1 kill Berger VLD stories.

Jayco

You're absolutely right. I don't need a .270 for my elk hunting. I've used muzzleloaders, and a 30-30 in the past.

I always wanted a Remington 700. When one was offered to me in left hand. I couldn't pass it up. It was a .270. Not my first choice, but I knew I could make it work. I'll use a 150gr core-lokt for my elk. Plenty of bullet for my ranges.

I clean up coyotes for a rancher in exchange for permission to hunt his property in elk season. So, I do take long shots with the .270 too. Even then I can call them in to less than 150yds.

I have for the better part of 60 years. I want to try something different.

Mauser Hunter - We don't differ in hunting philosophy, but where I've hunted pronghorns and mule deer, there is no timber. The pronghorn I bagged a few years ago was somewhere around 25 to 30 yards away - I believe in getting as close as I can. The closest I could get for my mule deer last year was a little under 300 yards, so I had to take the shot where I got it, and I had prepared for that shot with sufficient practice to be sure I was going to nail the shot. BTW - That almost 300 yard shot was taken with a .243 Winchester with a 100 grain bullet that had a BC somewhere under 0.4 - not the optimal long-range deer combination, but I wanted to take a deer with a .243.

While I believe in getting as close as I can, if I can only close the distance to 350 or 400 yards, I want to be prepared to take the shot, and I want to reduce the uncertainty about the wind as much as possible. I don't know about you, but for a lengthy range session when I put a lot of lead downrange, I had rather shoot a .243 than a .30-06 (to just give an example of the two centerfire cartridges I've shot the most besides a .223). That means that if I am preparing for the possibility of shooting at 400 yards and I'm practicing a lot, I would rather shoot a .260 Rem than a .270 Win. Personal preference, but the personal preference is also backed up by technical data on performance, particularly with wind a consideration.

I agree with you about BC not mattering if you're hunting in the woods. If you're hunting in the woods, though, a 30-30 would probably be plenty of cartridge. It boils down to personal preference on a .270 Win (a good all-around cartridge) for your application.

Well according to the Mayan calendar it should happen right before the end of the world.



That�s just like him to use BC to gain advantage. Hardly seems fair.

Maybe you should limit yourself to archery or hand guns because limiting yourself seems to be your sport. Nothing wrong with challenging yourself.

People have varying methods of hunting that they find productive and/or fun. The 6.5s offer a measuable advantage to those who like to offer themselves more opportunity in the field rather than limit that opportunity. For most, the headstamp of a cartridge makes little difference, but for some it does.

Oddly enough, those that do gain an actual advantage from a proper headstamp, probbably need that advantage less than most others.

Nothing wrong with long shots if you're prepared for them. Like you seem to be, but I see too many who aren't.

As an example. I always hunt alone, but after I get my animal i'll go with friends to help out. They all like to spot a stalk, but there's never a stalk. I've been with these guys at the range, and I know how they shoot.
So, we spot an elk or muley 400yds away. I see then setting up for the shot. I say... we can get a lot closer than this. They never try, and 8 out of 10 times they fail at the shot. I always hope after so many failures they would listen to me, but it doesn't happen. It's very frustrating.

I'm a 6.5 slut to the max and hope it never becomes popular.

The 6.5's avoid boring people.

FWIW, I know how to get close.....But I use high BC arrows.....laffin'

There is a lot of truth in what you wrote. Using a Berger VLD with a high BC is going to reduce the likelihood of missing/wounding game past 300 yards due to the unseen and unreadable winds across the canyon when compared to using a bullet with a lower BC. That's one reason people use Berger VLDs - not to take irresponsible shots, but to be more responsible by reducing the uncertainty with wind drift.

Now that's funny......a little harsh, but funny!

The only thing that keeps me from hunting the archery season is the time of year. I hate to hunt in the heat. If it's not cold. It's not hunting season for me. It's why I don't use a muzzleloader anymore too. Sweat is too hard to cover up.

An added perk to cold weather is the meat is easier to keep fresh, and no flys.

I was impressed until you mentioned the high BC arrows.

Laffin'....those two were taken with ancient equipment(early 90's)compared to whats out there now. I still bowhunt, but haven't killed a critter with a bow in a few years. I just love being out there that time of year. Good scouting for rifle season.

That's true. I'm out scouting too. Ducking arrows.

Geez, I love all these "GUN EXPERTS" they proclaim that their latest whiz bang cartridge is the greatest thing since sliced bread and anything greater or less is totally inadiquate in the pursuit of their favorite game. When it comes to "GUN EXPERTS", "HUNTING EXPERTS", "TRUCK EXPERTS", or any other so called "EXPERT" I take their advice with a grain of salt as they think they know everything on any given subject.

I learned years ago that if you listen to one of these "EXPERTS" you can get yourself either killed or seriously injured and that if I ever became an "EXPERT" it was time to change my way of thinking.

Will a 6.5 round kill an Elk any better than a 270, 30/06, 300 Win Mag or any other round "NO" the Elk will be just as dead with 6.5 round as with any other round. Myself I hunt Elk with a 300 Weatherby or 30/06 is Weatherby a better round than the '06 no, is 6.5 any less of an Elk Round no, it's killed an awful lot of Elk, Moose and other game over the years.

It's just another grand old cartridge that has been around as long as the '06, 7x57 and 30/30 just to name a few. They all work they've been been around for over a hundred years and they will be around doing the job long after we are all gone.

What are you, some kind of EXPERT?.....grin!

Wow, I love 6.5's too, but to argue they are better than simular calibers with simular powder capacities is funny. The OP's question was answered over a dozen times. The 6.5's are not as popular, not due to on game performance, but due to poor advertising and lack of marketing hype. That also coupled with staunch competition from other calibers/cartriges with good marketing leaves us lonely 6.5 shooters with the pride of shooting a not so common cartridge that works just as well as the popular ones. Keep going though because you guys kill me!

Laffin... You are on a roll today.

That is a problem, but it has nothing to do with different calibers and the pros/cons thereof. I think you need new hunting buddies.

My New Years resolution is to have more fun.....I'm practicing two days early!

Nope, No Expert! Just know enough to be dangerous, but do know enough to know when someone is blowing smoke up someone's ass.......

Logcutter, stop it, you're killin' me!!


You don't need the internet for this one. Go get your Webster's off the shelf, and look up the word "irony."

Then see if you think it applies to a guy making an argument on an internet site, with information he got off other internet sites, taking a swipe at the internet.

'lil John

I doubt you know this guy named Wayne Van Zwoll but when he talks Elk bullets,he talks strong bullets not grenades.

And as he said....

Heavy bullets are not always necessary for elk; strong bullets are!

Does the Berger fall into the strong bullet category with A-Frames/Barnes and Noslers?

Jayco

Nothing more fun than poking 'lil John with a "Big Stick"..

Jayco

Logcutter, what was the question again? Was it about bullets, or calibers?

Speaking of blowing smoke..Howdy Pole.

Let's see,the question to you is,how many years have you hunted Elk with a center fire weapon?Which calibers have you used on Elk and how did the 6.5 compare to the .270 Winchester(if applicable)in person?

Just curious.

Jayco

I wouldn't call them hunting buddies. My hunt is always well over when I go with them. I usually hunt a different season in a different area.

Now that's funny coming from a guy who feels the need to quote the experts on this stuff, keep 'em coming.

Maybe a discourse on lug nuts is in order?

how many elk have you shot with 6.5's??

how many 6.5's in your safe, right now??

I can't see through all the smoke.....laffin' You should lighten up...it's all in jist isn't it? At the end of the day, you'll keep doing what you're doing and I'll keep doing what I'm doing.

Can't answer huh..I figured so....

I have been right there standing beside my friend with a 264 Win Mag as he took probably 7 Elk.We even switched rifles one year for laughs and what I can tell you first hand is, there is "NO" noticeable difference in effect between the two cartridges on Elk.

Now..Have you ever hunted Elk with a center fire weapon and if so,which calibers?

I have hunted Elk with the 25-35/30-30/300 Savage/30-40 Krag/270 Win/45-70 and 300 Mag(probably left out one or two).Owe,and the 454 Casull and 45-70 BFR but no Elk with either,just deer.

Now again...Have you hunted Elk with a center fire weapon to give the advice you give?????????????????????

Curious again...

Jayco

Chit smoke...I forgot the safe thing...I do not have room in my safe for anymore firearms,infact,I don't have room for all of them I own..Several have to ride in unprotected cabinets...I don't like that but I do have two man eaters protecting them and I feed them raw meat before I go to bed.

Atleast,I answer your questions if there on topic.

Jayco

Just my sick sense of humor comments not necessarily directed in your direction. It's just that you happened to be in the barrel when I posted. No offense was intended.

No words wiser spoke...Now post another picture of you and carry on.

Jayco

At least I have a few pictures.....

None taken....I know you're a good guy.

lil Loggcutter,

Well I have only been with Wayne on one elk kill. It was the furthest shot he ever tried on game. I wish I could remembers what caliber he used for that 600yd elk??

Owe,smarty pants..Like I have never posted one...Not worth the hassle but then again,I ain't as perty as you.Never owned a camera in my life..Mine are either cell phone shots or a member of my family taking the shots.

Chill dude...Take your own advice........

Jayco

touche'.......

I new that 'lil John..Just wanted to frazzle 'ya a bit and give 'ya another shot at fame at my expense......

Carry on E-3...

Jayco

Hey I retired as an E-4.

well yes, but don't sell yourself so short--

you're a world class hunter,

a near-world class shooter,

a top of the line trapper,

a mighty fine handloader,

and, i might add, that you could "outsnipe" those who claim to be the best--not because you shoot so well--of course you do that--but because i've seen you "transform" and then vanish away into the landscape--and i've seen it enough over the past near 40 years to know you can do it at will--or, on demand...

now, git outta towwnnn.................

Don't forget...

World Class Camera Man...His camera probably cost more than most of my scopes...Great clear pictures.

It's all in fun,right?

Jayco

My camera was less than $200....so you're right, it is worth way more than any of your scopes....having fun yet?....laffin'

Told you so..I have a Tasco Whitetail Hunter($29.95) on my .300 Win Mag and I can't break that damned thing even with 180's at 3100 fps.Wish it would so I could get a good one on it but that is one tough SOB...

We don't have to go into the Weaver K-4's do we?..I only have one scope that cost more than $200..A Leupold 2-6(?) illuminated but I do have a few Leupold's that cost less than your camera.

WOW..Pictures must be important to you to spend that many bucks on one.More power to you.......I can't afford or need one that bad.

Happy New Year young pup...

Jayco

Pictures are very important to me....does it show?.....grin!

Thanks for the "young" compliment. I'm in my mid 50's.

Well hell..You look younger in your pic's..I am in my mid 60's so I guess your still a young pup to me.

Sometimes I wish we/I would have taken more pictures for the grand kids but life is what it is.My Dad never owned a camera either..Guess he rubbed off on me more than I think.

Jayco

Scenarshooter and other 6.5mm fans,
Please explain one thing that's been puzzling me for a while. In the BC sweepstakes, 7mm bullets from many manufacturers have higher reported BC's than 6.5 bullets of comparable length (read s.d) - e.g., 120 vs. 140, 130 vs. 150, and 140 vs. 160.
So why not shoot a 7mm long distance instead?? Is it the recoil factor, or the slightly greater velocities (given the same case size) with the 6.5?

People don't age in pictures genius.

Cant agree more...I sure wish I would have taken more, and better, pictures when I first started hunting. I have some, but not near enough.

Probably over-do it now...but "film" is pretty cheap in the digital age.

I do..It does amaze me though how just a few post so many pictures of themselves..Makes me kinda wonder how many mirrors they have in there house...

Jayco

Some have done more things that require picture taking than others.

Some hunters could get by with one roll of film every 10 years.

Just sayin'...

Yeah right..Like the picture you posted of the Yellowpine guy and broken truck, then knocking the culture there........

Just sayin'..

Jayco

So you edited....

Some hunters couldn't hunt without struttin there stuff on the net.

Buzzard...

You know alot of old timers..Tell me they always carry a camera out hunting..No Way Jose or atleast in this neck of the woods.......

It's called bragging rights on the net from braggers...

Jayco

I took pictures when I looked good. I look like Quasimodo now.

Most of the old timers I know, wish like hell they would have packed a camera...

I wish they would have too.

What you see as "braggin'" I see as part of the hunting culture, history, tradition, memories, etc. etc. etc.

Myself included, but I still don't own one and see know reason to change at this stage of life..If I have an extra $200,it sure isn't going for a camera..I need a new chainsaw worse.....

Jayco

John - Now it's NOT fair to compare Apples to Apples.

Apples to ORANGES gives the RIGHT answers.

Weight to weight is the RIGHT comparison.

Jerry

Just My Opinion... To tho ORIGINAL QUESTION..

A reason for the lack of popularity for the 6.5X 55 is the same as for .358 Winchester and MANY other quite capable rounds.
" When they were first introduced to the shooting public, there
really wasn't a huge NEED for them. The manufactures and marketing people gave up spending money to promote them when
shooters didn't show a WILD interest in them. If a round doesn't
show a huge potential for sales and profit right off the bat, they are usually allowed to die."
So, the jest is, there wasn't ( or isn't ) enough need for that round to develope a lot of interest. Need, not Competition prevents some things from becoming popular.

Rabbitdog

My hunts are personal. The most important part for me is the hunt. Not the kill. How do you take a picture of the hunt? It's inside me to remember the rest of my life.

Just like my dad taught me in the 50's. He never saved antlers or took pictures, and I don't either.

I like reading about hunts from others, but I have no interest in talking about mine.

You mean this picture?



Definitely glad I had a camera that day. Its not often you see a rig that has its wiring grounded by an empty soup can, with a fuel pump from a motorhome hard wired direct to the battery and attached in front of the grill to keep it cool. Also impressive that the rig had NO clutch, wouldnt go into first gear at all. Of course the spark plug wires being held to the plugs with gray duct tape wasnt anything to sneeze at.

My buddy and I reworked the wiring in that thing as it was arcing all over the place. Wrapped the exposed wires in a greasy old glove so they wouldnt short one another.

Also wired the distibutor down so it wouldnt fly out every time the dude hit a bump.

That is some serious engineering...I dont care what you say.

Also pretty brave of anyone to even attempt driving that vehicle over 100 miles each way...

I was actually impressed.

I will concede that the "suspender" is a nice touch to the culture of Yellowpine.

John,

Actually, you might have to go up in SD with a 7mm to get an equivalent BC to what the 6.5mm bullets have. I think you nailed it with those two thoughts - more velocity and/or less recoil with the 6.5mm. Somebody may come through with additional thoughts, but you've basically answered the question yourself. Take the Berger VLD G1 BCs for example (good example because the BCs have been tested):
6.5mm 130 gr (SD = .266) BC = .552
.277" 140 gr (SD = .261) BC = .487
.277" 150 gr (SD = .279) BC = .531
7mm 150 gr (SD = .266) BC = .510
.308" 175 gr (SD = .264) BC = .498

6.5mm 140 gr (SD = .287) BC = .612
.277" 150 gr (SD = .279) BC = .531
7mm 168 gr (SD = .298) BC = .617
.308" 185 gr (SD = .279) BC = .549
.308" 190 gr (SD = .286) BC = .570

6.5mm 140 gr (SD = .287) BC = .612
7mm 180 gr (SD = .319) BC = .659
.308" 210 gr (SD = .316) BC = .631

For elk, some might see some advantage in going to a 7mm or .30-cal instead of a 6.5mm, but I don't remember reading about people having any problems with elk with 6.5mm cartridges if the bullet is placed correctly, and the Scandavians don't seem to have any trouble with bagging moose with the 6.5x55.

Hey Fellows......You Do Know We Have a Photography Forum

Don't You?
Jerry

Some people just need to get by..Not all are complimented by a retirement package at retirement.Try living off of Social Security without a stash somewhere.

Don't knock the seniors who can't make ends meet in today's environment.

Your picture is kinda funny and I am sure that guy is thankful.I was married in Yellowpine some 23 years ago and took our honey moon at packsaddle creek eating brookies morning noon and night.It was a nice place until Boise exploded..

Jayco

because here in the u.s.a the 30 cal is king. dad and granddad probably used something in 30 cal, so junior does as well. the vast majority of hunters don't reload, and ya can't just run into wmt for some 6.5 ammo the day before season starts. joe the hunter decides what is popular, and the 6.5 just simply doesn't have the following. not a criticism, just an observation. what's popular here at the fire has little bearing on what joe hunter is doing/thinking/wanting. as rodney king might say, "we be the monority".

Best answer yet.Definitely a thumbs up..

Jayco

BTW - For those who have never really looked at how the numbers are calculated, bullets with different diameters but the same SD and the same form factor (aerodynamic shape) will have the SAME BC. When somebody says "compare bullets with the same SD and same design," what they are really doing is saying to compare muzzle velocities because that's the only variable in the analysis. That's a one-dimensional analysis that doesn't really tell you anything.

To have a comparison that means anything, you have to set something else as constant, and what you set constant to compare cartridges could be recoil or bullet weight or something else because same SD + same bullet shape = same BC.

Yes. .284, and .308 calibers. I've only been shooting 6.5's for a little while so no elk hunting (yet) with them. But I wouldn't hesitate. Got a few 6.5 160-grain Woodleighs from a friend yesterday, I have no doubt they'd do the trick, as would 140 partitions, TSXs, or any number of bullets. I have three 6.5's in the safe and I've been wanting a .260 Remington for a while now. As Razorback said, 6.5's differentiate themselves on longer shots and my best right now for those is the 6.5-06 Ackley. So availability of ammo. is not something that keeps me up at night.

Next time I get my hands on a good, light short action I'm gonna go for the .260. Maybe get a match for my 7-08.

I like 7 mm's. too, for the same reason I like 6.5's--good combination of relatively light high BC bullets compared to other popular elk calibers like .30 and .338, and the ability to shoot 'em fast and flat without a lot of recoil andless drift.




PS, now I'm curious. Where do you see me giving anyone advice on what they should shoot elk with?

Many are shooting the "7's". I did for a while.

Economics played a part for me. Much cheaper to reload and shoot the 308, 260, 6.5X284 than the 7wizzum, 7 RM etc.

Except for the 6.5X284 the barrel life tends to be a bit more as well. Longer barrel life more rounds down range.. things tend to lean in your favor then.

I'm playin' with the 6.5-06 and hopefully soon orderin' a 260.

well placed bullets tend to give you "luck"

Just checking..

Are we supposed to be impressed with this picture?

I think he was saying that how he hunts elk...

In a pavement queen, without the lug wrench, on a road a soccer mom can drive in her mini van?

Got it...

Less of a chance in bumping the scope that way. But you do have quicker access to wally world to get ammo to re-zero.

I hear lots about "wind"...to listen on here,the slightest zephyr drifts bullets a long ways,and a 270 bullet seems to drift like a whisp of smoke.

I have bumped into the wind bugaboo myself, but not often.

To those experienced at shooting in wind,how often have you had to "allow" for it in making first shot hits on animals at 300-500 yards? And how far off have you held to make these hits?

Hi Bob, just a couple of hunts out west where i worried about wind.

300-500 yds will call for 6 to 18" adjustment for a 10 MPH wind 90 degrees to LOS, and multiply as winds dictate.

Gunner

dogcatcher - First let me say, I am NOT taking exception to your statement about this being posted on the Elk Hunting Forum. I would like to explain why I began it here.

It is here & Ask The Gunwriters that I have seen MOST of the discussion pertaining to the 6.5s. Good/Bad/Indifferent, the 6.5 Elk hunters are represented here and I was/am trying to pick their brains as to Why the 6.5s are not widely used/accepted.

And even here as is evident from the discussion not all elk hunters agree as to its use.

From a ballistical standpoint it seems that both sides (pro/con) have made up their minds. Some people don't want to be confused by facts. I have virtually quit trying to explain comparrisons.

NO my mind is NOT made up. I just bought a 6.5 Swede, but I know its capabilities. It's NOT a 22 lr nor a 50BMG. Even Ramblin Razorback said, "the 260 Rem catches the 270 at 650 yds."
Personally I like A 649 yd. advantage.

I turned 62 yrs old this month, so my time and opportunities to elk hunt are LIMITED. IF I do get to go elk hunting, either here in Ark. or some other State, I'd feel more comfortable & confident with my 300 WM & 180 partitions or accubonds.

Yes, I know that elk DON'T wear kevlar but like YOU said, "elk are big & powerful animals" and I want a LARGER caliber & bullet. I may not need it, but I'd feel more COMFORTABLE with one.
Jerry

Wind?......I live with it and hunt in it year around. It's a huge factor. I wouldn't get many coyotes killed if I had to reley on hunting on calm days only.

I hold for wind on every shot if it's going to push right or left. Even if it's only one or two inches of hold off, I compensate for it.

Bob, to answer your question about how far I've held off to make first shot hits, the one shot that sticks in my mind was a coyote I shot at a bit over 600 meters with my Surgeon .308 a few years back. My Airedale was working around out in front of me a few hundred meters, when a lone male coyote showed up on a hogback across the creek, between the dog and me. He wouldn't commit to coming into the dog and layed down watching the dog for about five minutes. I had plenty of time to calculate my hold off. He finally stood up and turned broadside, before departing. I held 2.5 mils left and fired. He straighted out, then disappeared over the ridge. I waited for him to come into view going up the other side. He had no way of getting out of the swale without me seeing him. He finally appeared, slowly walking up the other side and stopped right below the top. I could see a red speck right behind his right front shoulder. He fell over right there with a clean shot through both lungs. The bullet had drifted about 60 inches to the right. A little celebration dance was in order....not for the shot so much, but the fact that he'd been killing lambs steadily for about two weeks.

I think part of the deal is that most 6.5 bullets don't really offer significant improvement over standard jello and vanilla ice creamloads like the .270, 30-06, etc etc until you get past 500 yards. I own 2 6.5 rifles....a 6.5-06 AI and a 6.5 creedmoor. Within the NORMAL ranges I shoot they are not that different from a host of other cartridges. I personally don,t take many shoots over 300 yards, and if you take a poll nation wide I would guess most shoots are from 100-200 yards. Don't get me wrong, I love em, or I would not have two of them......in particular I like the 6.5 creedmoor, accurate , low recoil, flat shooting etc. maybe they will catch on but until you get the bigger manufactures to chamber and stick with them simple economics kicks in, they have not sold well. emington tried twice......6.5 mag & the .260....... Even Kimber gave up on the .260.......it comes downtown numbers fellas........many of us may like them, but the MAJORITY has rejected them, it's a shame, but it is reality.

Bob,

You know the �magic� .264 Win Mag drifts as we had to hold off quite a bit on that breezy afternoon.

To be honest it is most likely more of a thing of confidence in what you are shooting and feeling like you have the best solution to the problem.

To at least 600yds the idea of shooting a .270 Win is simply no excuse for a bad shot. Everything drifts in the wind.

The only elk I killed this year was at 175yds and any reasonable cartridge would have worked as well as the .264 Win Mag, but it sure worked.

I did spend a lot of time chasing a ghost in the most wide open country imaginable and carrying the .264 Win Mag simply meant that I had more �gun reach� than �shooter reach�.

I like having the shooter be the limiting factor in the equation and when I am packing that .264 (yes you know and have shot the one) I know the gun will never be �the problem�. That rifle setup simply out reaches anything I have ever seen.

Makes me try and be a better shooter.

All that BS being said, if you can�t kill an elk with the .270 Win then perhaps �elk hunting school� might be a better use of funds than a new rifle in a �better� elk cartridge.

Jerry - That's not accurate. If you had presented the quote in context (see above), it would be clear that the "catching up" I mentioned only pertains to velocity and energy, and the .260 Rem has plenty of velocity and energy at all distances from zero to 650 yards and beyond.

In terms of wind drift, the .260 Rem never trails the .270 Win - the .270 Win never catches the .260 Rem on wind drift (i.e., the .260 Rem has less wind drift at every distance from zero to infinity), while the .260 Rem eventually catches the .270 Win on velocity and energy even after starting 250 fps slower.

The .270 Win is great, but it could be even better if it used 6.5mm bullets rather than .277" bullets.

John,

I think I remember that 264 shooting in the wind...



like just a little wind....



Ya, I think you know how to shoot that old 264..

most of the nay-say'ers don't show...

John, Gunner, Pat: Thanks for responses,and that is intersting,and impressive.I would have to live in very windy country and gain the experiences you guys have where you lived,to have the confidence to hold off that far.

Shooting John's 264 to 1200 yards I was astonished at how far "off" we were holding.I was pretty impressed with the 264 for that kind of work,and suspect that particular bullet (140 Berger at magnum velocities)would beat anything in 270 for those circumstances.

If I were going to build a 6.5,that's the one I would want....I even have dies and a large quantity of WW brass here.I am not unmidful of the advantages,having seen John's rifle do its' stuff..

John actually made the most realistic point yet. Even the original poster touched on the mindset of it all.

If you can't kill an Elk with a 6.5 (anything) maybe your money should be spent on other things rather than a new gun. Bigger cartridges don't make you kill any better. A bad shot won't get better because you have a magnum.

You still have to be able to shoot the rifle you have and shoot it well. Ala "know your rifle"

Why aren't the 6.5's popular? Maybe because all the media drivel and hoopla hasn't picked them yet.

There are probably several here but I only know one of them.(Hired Gun) He can shoot darn near anything he wants.. and probably does. But.. he posted picks of Elk being killed by "little Stuff". That in itself should be enough for most anyone here...end of story.

It is all very simple. But nothing good is ever easy.

Prepare, Plan, and Perform. You'll make you own success. Regardless of caliber.

One thing you have to do.. regardless of age or location. Get out there and shoot and well..just get out there. Yeah it's winter and it's rainy, cold ,snowy, windy... but it is the best time to learn. Or you can just sit here and discus and be the armchair hunter.

But hey this gives everyone something to ummm discuss.. yeah that's what this is a discussion...

What energy is left at 1200 yds for the .264?

With a 140 vld started at 3,200 fps, depending on the variables, roughly 775 ft-lbs.

How's that compare to a .270 with 150gr VLD?

Actually, I need to clarify, those numbers are at sea level. At 5,000 feet it's closer to 950 ft-lbs. And more, with altitude.




I have no idea. How fast do you shoot your .270 150 vlds? What's the BC? You can go on Berger's website and download their ballistics program for free, it'll give you the answers.

I don't, but the topic has switched to the 6.5 being better than the .270. I'd like to see how they compare with max loads in both.

You figured out the 6.5, so, I thought you could do the .270 too.

OK, I ran the numbers, I used 3200 fps for the .264 140 and 2900 fps for the 150 vld; G7 BCs are .313 and .272 respectively. I used 25 in. Hg for the barometric pressure.

1005 ft-lbs for the 264, 665 for the 150 .270 vld at 1200 yards.

Edited to add: If you run the .277 150 vld at 3000 fps, (Don't have Berger data but this is verrrry generous using Nosler's) you get 730 ft-lbs at 1200 yards. With that velocity you get 411 inches of drop and 89.5 inches of drift with a 10 mph cross-wind, vs. 325 inches of drop and 66.5 inches of drift with the .264.



I have my own chrono'ed velocities (in an accurate load) for the 140 grain .264 vld, just guessing on the .270.

I am NOT arguing, I have GROWN WEARY of stating the obvious. Here I QUOTE you twice and that's ALL I'm saying.

If I didn't like the 6.5X55 I WOULD NEVER have bought one. I have 243 & 6mm and I know their capabilities.

HAPPY NEW YEAR

I am leaving on my SUZUKI BANDIT and will return when it gets cold today.

Jerry

Well that sounds like fun, but does it really get cold in Arkansas??

I just ran them through on JBM...I'm a "meter reader", so....

.277 150gr VLD @ 3000 fps MV
1100 meters,1354fps, 611 ft. lbs.
90" drift @ 10mph

.264 140gr VLD @ 3200fps MV
1100 meters, 1677fps, 875 ft. lbs.
66" drift @ 10mph

.264 130gr VLD @ 3000fps MV
1100 meters, 1402fps, 567 ft. lbs.
85" drift @ 10mph

Of course, shooting big game at 1100 meters would be way over the top, but this is an example of what bullet efficiency is.

smokepole, our 30 degrees F and your 30 degrees F are 2 very different things.. . Throw in our humidity (93% today) and it changes dramatically. Of course you probably know that.

scenarshooter, check out the 7mm 168 gr VLD. I picked up some 150 gr VLD's from Calvin to play with for my 270. Just to see what'll happen.

That 7mm 168 VLD is a monster...so is the 180gr.

Guys, I'm not saying a .270 is out dated and useless, hell I've got a couple in the safe and have no intensions of getting rid of them. I've killed quite a few nice elk, mule deer, whitetail and antelope with my old Husqvarna .270. Dad bought that rifle brand new in 1966 for $125. That one will be passed down again...

Actually we are warmer than normal today. Monday our hi is supposed to be @40 F. NOW compared to Co, Wy, Mt, NO it doesn't get cold in Ark.

If I had my choice I WOULD BE living in CODY, WY. I love cold, snow, and CLOSE to Yellowstone. I'd love to help the wolf pop off the border of the Park.

Yes we can get cold here. Our coldest weather (contrary to weather people who have not grown up here) normally is Jan-Feb.

We have seen 0 to - 20 F in my lifetime, and I have shoe skated on creeks in Feb-March.

As to cold and riding motorcycles - figure in the WIND CHILL when riding 60-80 mpr (or faster).

I'm not at liberty to disclose where, but on the 'speedway' I have seen 140 mph, two diff. times. That DROPS the temp drastically.

My deer season ended Wed this week. I've been having WITHDRAWAL, not riding much since OCT. I have to go get my FIX.

HAPPY NEW YEAR

And I want to join BobNH saying THANKS for all the input pertinent to the subject. I don't enjoy hi-jacking.

Jerry

scenarshooter, I have never thought that personally. You and a few more on here I listen to very closely as a matter of fact. Really like it when you start posting pics! Several years ago while pouring over Federals site looking at the ballistics of different cartridges I found that the 260 Rem. caught the 270 W. on out there. I had to call my brother just to tell him. Nowadays I'm more into what our grandfathers and such hunted with. Cartridges like the 270 Winchester, 30/06, 7X57 Mauser, 35 Whelen and the 375 H&H are what really turn my screws. Oops forgot the 257 Roberts!

^^^ smart man ~!

Mashburn.....

Kick the tires and light the fires! Then listen for that thwack..boooom.

Indeed......!!

Scenarshooter, just out of curiousity, what did you use for barometric pressure?

Back to the original topic:

I think one significant other reason is the "one gun for all hunting" philosophy. When I started deer hunting with a rifle, I chose a .30-06 so I would have the one gun that I would need for all of the hunting I would ever do, including elk and a safari in Africa (if I hunted dangerous game I would have to have one additional specialized rifle, but that was it). For a lot of people, they probably do have just one gun for all medium and large game hunting, and if they have thoughts of ever going to Colorado to hunt elk and maybe even to Africa for a safari, they want the rifle they are buying for deer hunting to be adequate for their distant adventures. There has been a common perception that a person needs a .30-06 or 7mm Mag, or at a minimum a .270 Win or .308 Win, to kill an elk. Thus, the "one gun for all hunting" crowd, even if they may go elk hunting only once in their lives, if at all, are going to gravitate toward those four "elk" cartridges. Fact is, I can say in retrospect from my own experience, they would have more fun with shooting if they would choose a moderate powered 6.5mm or .25-caliber that is suitable for deer and that would also work for that one elk hunt, should they ever go. By the time you talk about the cost of a trip to Africa, one could certainly afford to buy a new .30-06 for around $400 (Weatherby Vanguard or Remington 700 no-frills model or a Savage or a Howa, to name a few available for around $400).

I think outdoors writers could do a better job of educating the average Joe hunter on this issue, but the outdoor writers are somewhat boxed in by the manufacturers not adequately addressing the deer market because their production (and by extension their promotion) is focused on the "one gun for everything" (with the traditional elk cartridges) and the "youth and women" rifle and cartridge (.243 Win). If the manufacturers would figure out that people would enjoy shooting more (and might, probably would, shoot more) if they had modest powered 6.5mm and .25-caliber deer rifles, the manufacturers would be promoting those calibers more. I can tell you, I have no problem burning through a couple boxes of .243 ammo in a range session and not even noticing, but given a choice, I'm usually not going to shoot more than a box per range session with a .30-06 or .270. I just don't enjoy shooting a .30-06 as much as I do a smaller cartridge, and I'm not going to burn as much ammo shooting a .30-06 as I would something in the 6mm to 6.5mm range. There is a chicken-and-egg issue with this in that the manufacturers are going to point to the current demand as justification for their current production decisions, and they would have to take a little bit of a risk to promote/push the 6.5mm and .25-cal deer cartridges when the traditional "elk" cartridges (.270, 7mm Mag, .308, and .30-06) are so firmly entrenched even among people who never hunt anything larger than deer.

-----------------------------------------------

To the other possible reasons:
1. The 6.5x55 was an old military cartridge. It never had an American manufacturer pushing it because it wasn't the creation of an American manufacturer. Also, I'm not aware of any American gunwriter touting the 6.5x55 like some of the other cartridges were touted (e.g., .270 by JOC). Remington dropped the ball on promoting the .260 Rem and totally mismanaged what could have been a wildly popular premier new cartridge for both beginners and experts. I wasn't around when the .264 Win Mag was introduced, but from what I've read it got plenty of promotion at introduction. The .264 Win Mag had other difficulties in gaining traction.

2. All four of the cartridges you listed - .270, .308, 30-06, and 7mm Mag - are either U.S. military cartridges, or a derivative in the case of the .308, (meaning instant acceptance in the sporting ranks) or were heavily promoted by gunwriters (and the manufacturers that developed the round).

3. This is probably the biggest reason for lack of 6.5mm popularity- people aren't familiar with any of the 6.5mm cartridges because they've never shot one and nobody they know has one or has ever shot one. Websites like this one with a bunch of rifle loonies who are looking for optimal performance have done more to promote the 6.5s than probably anything else.

4. The 6.5s lack of popularity doesn't have anything to do with the metric size or being "European" beyond what I wrote under (1) about the 6.5mm.

5. The .30 cals definitely crowd the marketplace. Millions more people hunt just deer than hunt all the larger animals combined (and I'm including black bears as a "larger" animal). There is no reason a .30-cal is needed for deer (and I'm stating this as someone who has used a .30-06 for years for deer). However, the .30-cals (especially .30-06, and .308) are all well-entrenched due to the military heritage of the U.S. .30-cals and people "know" them, know people who use them, and they are readily available.

6. Ammo availability is less of an issue in the internet age, but that is undoubtedly still a factor for some (probably not as significant anymore as the other reasons, though). However, the cheapest ammo found at Walmart and other outlets (Federal blue or red box) often is only stocked in the most common cartridges (.243, .270, .30-30, .30-06, .308, etc.), and some people are going to make their decisions based on a few dollars per box difference in cost. Can't blame them for looking to save money, and I buy that cheapest Federal ammo when it is accurate in guns I own (and it often is), but I think if the demand was higher for the 6.5mm cartridges like the 6.5x55 and .260 Rem that the cheapest ammo would be readily available for one or both cartridges over time. I'm sure in Scandanavia you can readily find 6.5x55 ammo everywhere ammo is sold in the cheapest ammo lines offered. The cheap ammo factor probably is really part of the entrenched competition factor.

If I had to rank the reasons, I would say from most important to least important:
3. Lack of others experience/exposure with the cal.
One gun for everything mentality
2. Entrenched competition, 270,308,06, 7Mag, etc. AND 5. Our 30 cal military history - combined (they are related)
1. Lack of Publicity (probably could be grouped with 3. above)
6. Ammo availability difficulty (which is related to 2. above)

with 4. Rejection of a Euro caliber? not really a factor (not rejection but instead a lack of exposure).

I keep checking back to see when the pix of NNC's will start showin' up.

FC

I wonder if we've missed the obvious on something.

It's rather hard to spend more than 3 months on the fire without seeing at least 2 threads about the lack of knowledge behind your average gun counter. The average person here probably hunts a little harder or is willing to learn a little more than the average guy hunting whatever game - across the board.

That said - the reason most cartridges not named 30/06, 270, etc isn't more popular is because the people with the most contact with the larger hunting populace aren't the most knowledgeable to begin with.

The 6.5 Creedmoor has been out for 5 years and received a TON of press, I've had counter folks tell me they've never heard of it when I've asked if they have one in stock. That's within the last 4 months.

If THEY don't know - how's the shooting public at large supposed to know? To the majority of hunters/shooters - that counter monkey is the expert to be trusted.

29.92, and 59*F

Interesting, I ran the numbers using Berger's program using 25 inches, and got almost identical drift but higher velocities.

Not aimed at Smoke...

I suppose if a guy regularly shoots 1100 yards/meters at Elk,then according to paper numbers, the 264 has an advantage over the 270, but what advantage does it have at common sense ranges that most Elk are taken?

Just how far do you have to take the 264 to make any noticeable difference..It sure is not at reasonable ranges...

1100 yards..Give me a break.

Jayco

I suppose you are just throwing me another softball but I'll take a swing.

1102 yards with a .264 Win Mag.

You got ripped off - all that I see is the head! Pay for an elk tag, guy should get some meat outta the deal...

Ok John, now you have really done it -- a post about a dead elk at 1102 yards.

Scarlett Johanssen and I can hardly wait to see the replies to this one!



John

YEAH !

? Think photo shopped?
Jerry

ps - I couldn't resist.

Now a SERIOUS compliment.

I've enjoyed seeing the 6.5 Creedmore 600 + yds elk hunt/shot very much.

Nice work, hats off to you!

Jerry

I just plugged in some 264 and 7 rem mag numbers at 11,000 elevation. Talk about insane with 140 vlds and 168 vlds. Wow.

Just answering the man's question.....

But as long as you asked, I ran the numbers at 500 yards (100 yd zero), and a barometric pressure of 25 in. Hg.

.264 WM 140 vld @ 3,200 fps = 2044 ft-lbs., 34.5 inches of drop and 9.6 inches drift in a 10 mph crosswind

.270 Win 150 vld @ 2,900 fps = 1631 ft-lbs, 45.3 inches of drop, and 13.2 inches drift in a 10 mph crosswind.


At 600:

.264=1860/55.2/14.2;

,270=1452/72.6/19.5

Well......sure! Like I been saying....you have to go to a magnum capacity hull to really beat a 270.

I was going to say that too. How does the .264 mag compare to the .270WSM, or the .270 Weatherby?

You know I have to say this.

Don't feel too bad. Next time you'll get closer.

And the elk won't be any MORE dead than it is from the distance he shot it from...

Well....not really. My 6.5-06 shoots 140 vlds at 3050, no problem.

6.5-06 140 vld @ 600 yards, 1665 ft-lbs, 62 inches of drop, 15.4 inches of drift in a 10 mph crosswind

.270 150 vld @ 600 yards, 1452 ft-lbs, 72.6 inches of drop, 19.5 inches of drift


My 6.5-06 is Improved, but a straight-up 6.5-06 will go 2950 with the same bullet and still beat the 150 vld in the .270, the differences being the BCs of .313 vs. .272, and the velocity--the 6.5 does it with a lighter, faster bullet.

NOW DOGGONNIT Smokepole, I JUST got my 6.5X55, I DON'T NEED you

flingin a cravin on me for a 6.5-06. Now Stop It.

Jerry

smokepole how much difference is there in this case? The vels seem about the same for each bullet.

The BC's seem low for both....is that in flight numbers something?

Bob, those are G7 BCs, the G1's are .612 and .531, respectively.

As far as the velocities seeming about the same (I'm assuming you mean between the straight-up 6.5-06/140 and the .270/150), like I said before, the 6.5-06 data are chronographed but I'm just guessing at the .270 velocities, based on Nosler data, which is lower for 150's.

Now, if some of you .270 guys would actually shoot these high BC bullets that'll keep up with the 6.5's, we'd have some real data to work with....

I'll be chronographing some in a day or two. 270 Win. and 150gr VLD's.

Well I'll help a bit..

My 6.5-06 runs 142's at 2995 with ease...

Happy New Year ANYWAY
Jerry

Make no mistake, I'm not dumping on the .270, mine is an M70 Supergrade and I won't sell it. I'll always have one, just because.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a brand new (circa 2000) M70 Supergrade .264 that needs some rounds through it, I'll leave you guys with these:

LOL smokepole that thing has been patched up with a bolt through the stock to hold it together...just send it to me I'll get rid of it for you!

Nahh, it's the "trigger governor" installed by attorneys to make sure it takes at least 12 pounds of pressure to pull the factory trigger......

I like that fancy bolt must be made out of the same stuff as wonder woman's jet....fancy.

Smoke, how in the heck are you ever gonna remove that trigger governor bolt? Them lawyers tricked ya with a special fastener design. Your slotted screwdriver is useless against such hi-tech devices.

And it is boringly accurate...

And the recoil is very tolerable...

rockchucker-
do you have any loading info to share about the 120 gr ttsx and Swede you mentioned? I just bought a box of the .264/120gr Barnes and some RL22.
-Westgoldrun

I shot a 2 1/2" 3-shot group with mine this morning.

At 500 meters.

A 26 page thread on 6.5mm's. They seem popular on this site.Do you think the rifle manufactures read these threads?

If they did they would build a 8lb rifle twisted at 8" in 6.5-06 with throat for a vld.

A 7lb rifle would even be BETTER.
Jerry

This is really a silly thread. Anyone who has every read about hunting Eurasian elk (what we call Moose) would know that the 6.5x55 carrying a 160 gr roundnose has killed many, many of the Eurasian elk.

We, as all people, are creatures of habit, so when the 30-06 became our military cartridge for decades, it is logical to see that the 100s of 1000s of Vets trained with it might have an affinity for it. The same was/is true Norway and Sweden with the 6.5x55.

In the past 30 years or so, gun experts (LOL), most of whom were/are on the take from gun and ammo companies have convinced many people that a 30-06 would not kill anything. We now have a large group of "hunters" who have no idea of how to "hunt" but believe that some huge magnum topped with an equally huge scope is the answer to their lack of "hunting" ability. This, in spite, of the fact that most could not hit a 12" pieplate at 300 yards if you took their lead sled and bench rest away.

A 6.5 caliber rifle with the proper bullets and ethical hunting will kill any lower 48 big game if the shooter is a real hunter and does his part.

Anyone who has missed the domination of F Class shooting by the 6.5x284, has been living in a cave.

The rifle on top is a 6.5x55. I wonder how many 100 head of game it has taken since it was built in 1935 by R.F. Sedgley in Philadelphia, PA on a 1903 Springfield national Match action ?

Then why did you waste your time?

Jerry

Actually, he's wasting our time..

It's just another screen name for Oldman1942/Bosslady etc. etc..

Why's he do that? To keep his post count low?

Of course, with the quality of his posts, a low count is a good thing....

No, it's not. It's actually a damn good question.

He keeps getting banned for doing stupid chit, usually in the classifieds. The he comes back under another name until Rick Bin bounces him again.

i use 49.5 grains of RL19 gets me 3/4" all day long. im happy with it

Thanks Smoke..

I thot those pics looked familiar. I've seen them under a different female handle.

I'll have to be more alert and I won't waste MY TIME.

Thanks
Jerry

Jerry, It is still a silly thread BUT in any case the question was answered with facts not invective.

In addition there is a bias against "metrics".

Why do you suppose the 6.5/308 is called the 260 Remington ? The 8mm/300WSM the 325 Winchester ? How did the 6.5 and 8mm Remington Magnums do ? Why are American guns chambered for the 35 Whelen when anyone with a ballistics table knows the 9.3x62 is superior ?

WE are not doing any silly stuff in the classified, in fact over a dozen scopes and rifles have been purchased here by our club members. It's called supporting your fellow members and site sponsors with dollars rather than yapping.

WE have a lot more pictures of fine guns and game taken with them. More than can be said for SOME loudmouths who are only here to troll.

Almost all our names are here, where were you ? Thanks, Roger

Yup that about sums it up...

Now old douche lady is back in with his "club" members..

How many times have you been banned larry?

Larry is in FL, dickhead, I am in WY. Come on down for a visit. Bring you little mexi-virgin with you as we're having a lot of 3 dog nights and she'll dump you in a heartbeat. Roger

Oh, you're not your wife this time? TFF...

You lie like a rug, and everyone here knows it, you jackass.

This schit is priceless. I love Larry and his alter egos

Larry how stupid are you ....I mean really?

Is that a rhetorical question?

You guys go easy on him, I hear he's in hormone therapy, and is having just tremendous mood swings.

Seems like a question of marketing. US firms have tended to market US chamberings most actively, and that marketing included getting rifles to gun writers for reviews, etc. Coverage in the gun and hunting press tends to stress the minor numerical advantages of one caliber or another, like the flatter trajectory of the 270 v. most 30-06 loadings, etc. etc. The .260 rifles don't stand out in terms of energy delivered down range, or even trajectory. 7mm-08 beats .260 or 6.5x55 on most stats, and the 270 even more so. The fact that most factory ammo for 6.5x55 is loaded to lower pressure limits contributes to numbers on charts that aren't impressive. None of this means much in the field, and as many have observed the high sectional density and accuracy of these rounds produce great results. It seems like .260 is gaining ground in popularity, but whether that continues will depend on manufacturers offering it. Interestingly both Sako and Tikka are offering more rifles in 260 now than in the old Swede, probably to get around the lower pressure factory ammo of the Mauser round.

PeaEye,

Actually, you've got it backwards.

The reason 6.5mm rifles aren't all that popular isn't that rifle manufacturers don't offer enough models, or that they don't get 6.5mm rifles to gun writers for testing. Winchester did a MAJOR publicity campaign with the .264 when they brought it out. Remington pushed their 6.5 and .350's in the 600 carbine pretty hard as well, sending a bunch to various gunwriters, and also tried pretty hard to sell the .260. Jim Carmichel was on board from the beginning there, even claiming to have developed the .260 himself.

The .264 actually did pretty well until the 7mm Remington Magnum came out, but the .260 appeared AFTER the 7mm-08 so never really had a chance, since the ballistics were so similar. (For some reason the average American hunter much prefers 7mm over 6.5mm.)

The 6.5 Remington Magnum never really had a chance because of the 600 carbine. Nobody really wanted lightweight hunting rifles in those days, and most gunwriters totally misunderstood the entire purpose of the 6.5 in a "carbine." It might have had a chance today, but I kinda doubt it.

The reason manufacturers don't offer many rifle models in 6.5mm is that 6.5mm rifles have never sold very well in the U.S.--except to a relatively small percentage of rifle loonies. These days 6.5mm rifles are slightly more popular due to the fascination with long-range shooting among (again) a very small percentage of hunters, due to the very high ballistic coefficients of their bullets. But the average hunter could care less about shooting beyond 300-400 yards. What he wants is a rifle chambered for a common round that will do the job, and the world had a bunch of those long before Winchester ever brought out the .264--including a cartridge called the .270 Winchester.

Consequently not many hunters will buy 6.5mm rifles, not matter how many small ballistic advantages they might have, and firearms companies are not in the business of making rifles people won't buy.

More kudos to companies like Ruger and Hornady who have the courage to not only introduce a new 6.5 but to support it as well.

John i actually don't remember Remington pushing the 260 hard at all.Currently they only offer it the model 7.You would think that being they developed the round it would be offered in more of their rifles. I remember the 6.5x55 swede as being a fairly popular.So if the 260 was marketed properly i would think it would be more popular.I for one like short actions which the 260 is chambered in.

Perhaps Remington thought Carmichel's blessing was plenty. After all, he was considered by many to be the top gun writer in America, and wrote a monthly column for one of the largest circulation magazines. But I also remember a number of other articles on the .260 when it appeared, and Remington initially offered more than one rifle, as well as a pretty wide variety of ammo--much more than today.

Big gun companies (the only ones that can afford to introduce new commericial cartridges) do pretty much the same thing as book publishing companies. When they introduce a new cartridge or book, they do a press release and send "review copies" to the right people in the business. If the public response is luke-warm, they tend to quit spending money on promotion pretty quickly, write that project off, and go on to the next deal.

The .260 never excited the American public, so Remington backed off. Yeah, they could have spent another bunch of money trying to convince Joe Deer Hunter that it was the greatest cartridge ever, but by 1997 the American market was saturated with good deer cartridges. Why would somebody buy one instead of a .243, .25-06 or 7mm-08?

I know, I know, the .260 has those magical 6.5mm ballistic advantages, and when handloaded can do anything the .243, .25-06 or 7mm-08 will do. So what? Rifle loonies want to buy exactly the right rifle for every job, not one rifle that fills several niches. Avergae hunters want to buy something that shoots cheap, available ammo and kills deer.

The .260 didn't excite either crowd, and still doesn't. The 6.5 nuts have gone on to other cartridges with even more minute advantages, and average guys kept buying .243's, .25-06's and 7mm-08's.

Don't get me wrong. I had a custom .260 for a while, and my wife owned a Model 7. It's a fine round, and have owned a hunted with a bunch of other 6.5's over the years, from the 6.5x54 Mannlicher to the .264. Right now I own four 6.5's, and have hunted with all of them. But not one is a .260. I pick as many nits as any rifle loony, but the .260 has never excited me--which is apparently the same reaction of most hunters.

One of the realities of capitalism is that you can't force people to buy rifles. If there'd been any sort of positive reaction to the .260 when it appeared Remington would have kept pushing it. But that just didn't happen, an apparently never will.

I remember Boddington writing a very favorable article on the 260 in Rifle Shooter... motivated me to want one... he and his wife used it on numerous African plains game with superb results... but I still don't have a .260. Local gun emporium had a used Stainless synthetic Model 7 for $425... I hesitated... and it sold. Oh well, my eyes remain open...

You make a good point John. Remingtons been known to muff a few cartridges in the past. One that comes to mind is the 7mm Express.But i do understand the way corporate thinks,if it doesn't make money in X amount of time......move on.

Yep, they're not in business to lose money.

In this context, you're largely right. However, in the broader sense, the primary objective of publicly-traded companies is to maximize shareholder value, which isn't as highly correlated to profitability as most would think. As for privately-held firms, it's a crapshoot as to the focal business driver at any moment in time.

The one I like the best is the 6.5-'06. I know if I ever want one it will be a custom only proposition. It won't do anything a 25-06, 270 or 280 won't do but it's still a good round.

I want to take this opportunity to say "THANKS" to the majority of you for your responses. A FEW didn't offer anything constructive but the MOST of you have.

Actually, there was a lot more discussion than I anticipated. I appreciate ALL of your help. Having recently gotten involved with the 6.5 Swede and it is my first 6.5 (264 cal) anything, I didn't have much of an idea about powders & bullets especially for the 6.5X55.

edited for spelling - watching the Cotton Bowl

THANK YOU VERY MUCH
Jerry

You're welcome Jerry.I'll bet you're gonna love the winchester in the 6.5 swede!!! Nice rifle.

LOL,

with the upswing in the choice of components i think the 6.5's are coming more into the light every year, for many years they were limited on bullets choices and factory loadings

i have really liked all my 6.5's and want to put together something else but what is the big question

Hi John {mule deer}
IF you see this take a look at it please.What do know about this gentleman?

http://www.chuckhawks.com/letter_to_remington.htm

All I know about him is what I've seen on his website.

I think that's all anyones knows about him.I wonder if he even hunts?

I've been enjoying your writings.....and learning a thing or two to boot!

Gun Writers are like Docters..Ask 10 of them a specific question and your likely to get, 10 different answers....Why...There experiences differ just like ours do!

The 338 Win Mag on Elk is a prime example,most think it is the ultimate and a few others think it is not needed.

There humans just like you and I and sometimes don't have the experience on certain animals others and the common Joe have.

Just my opinion!

Jayco

Yup and they're intitled to their opinion,take it for what it's worth.

Your right...Just like the rest of us..Opinions and experiences differ from you and I, to Boddington and Barsness...

Jayco

6.5's have me love struck...

Just ordered my second 6.5-06

I have enjoyed reading this thread since its begining. Well, most of it anyway. As to the original poster's question I think the post of Mule Deer above most closely hits the nail on the head.

I actually remember a couple people in Wisconsin who used the 6.5X55 deer hunting back in the 60s but I don't recall ever running into one person using one while hunting since I moved west about 30 years ago. By far the most popular calibers I have seen in the field are the 270 and the 30-06. I'd go one step further and say that the 06 with 180 grain bullets has been the one most popular round I have observed. For some reason 270 users appear to use more different size bullets than the 06 users I have come acrossed in the field.

For myself, having hunted elk with everything from the various sevens to the 375, I have pretty much settled on the 7X57 more because of the rifle than the caliber. It also has served me well for deer. However Finn Aagaards last sentence in an article he wrote many years ago says, "I'll tell you what; I like this little 6.5X55 mm, and believe that in it I may at last have found my ideal deer rifle." That's pretty high praise from a man with the real hunting experience that Finn had.

The biggest question that comes to me when I read a thread like this is, "Will the 25 caliber be the next darling of the type of people who are championing the 6.5 now, or will the 6.5 become the bottom of the scale? I mean no disrespect whatsoever when I say that. It's just that it seems accepted calibers keep getting smaller for hunting elk. Surely someone can manufacture a 25 caliber bullet that will shine in the 257 Weatherby or something with less powder space such as the 25-06. Will this be the case?

I think that the 25's are already there. Seem to be quite a few that are or have been using them for them with good results.

The funny part is people with no experience think having a gun that is capable of long range, a bullet that is better for long range, and actually practicing long range somehow means they cannot shoot and hunt close range.

Nothing like an inflated sense of self worth

Here is a piece about a friend of mine who knew how to get close and was willing to go through a lot to make it happen. Sadly he has passed on.




Hunter: Fred Mercer
Score: 419 4/8
Year: 1958
State: MT

Rough country has a tendency to produce big bulls and southwest Montana�s Ruby River country is about as rough as it gets. On a snowy October day in 1958 Fred Mercer woke at 0415 to find what every hunter dreams about�a skiff of fresh snow. He knew the day was going to be a good one; he just didn�t know exactly how good.

He cut the tracks of a small herd. Trailing smaller hoof prints was the massive track of respectable herd bull. Fred had shot his share of elk in the past, and he was looking for a wall-hanger this time. Having never even seen the bull, he deemed it worthy of an estimated 12-15 mile foot pursuit up and down canyons. As he wrote for Outdoor Life back in the January 1960 issue, �In hunting elk, as with all game, you have to look for them where they are and trophy bulls don�t hang out in back yards.�

As the sun sank in the horizon, Fred chose to try and intercept the herd as they moved into a headwaters saddle. Soaked in sweat, he scrambled up the final slope to peek over the ridge. And there was that bull, head down and feeding, not 50 yards away�broadside. Two solid neck shots (that�s how they did it back then) from his .270 Model 70 and it was over. Fred cleaned the elk in half an hour and rolled into camp a few hours after dark. At the time, it was the best elk ever killed in Montana and only second in the world to a Wyoming bull killed back in 1890.

It will shoot 6.5mm bullets better than any of the others...


Love my 6.5-06AI but it is (intentionally) too heavy for me to want to carry it much. I see a lightweight 6.5 in my future...

264WM still alive and well with plenty of getup and go, with the new metals barrels last longer than the older ones.

Just was scanning back thru this thread. Lots of talk about the 6.5-06, but couldn't find a mention of the 6.5x65 RWS. This is a factory cartridge a few of you might be very interested in.

6.5mm is my favourite calibre - my go to is a 6.5x.284, and i don't know that a better deer cartridge exists. Of course, the reason the 6.5mm haven't ever been so successful in your part of the world is because the .270 is just such a good, sensible cartridge.

Right on. I have read more than one place that if there hadn't been something called the 256 Newton around that Winchester would have probably used the 6.5 diameter rather than the .277 one. Just think, we might be shooting 263 Winchesters rather than 270s.

Idared - Thank You Very Much for the pic and story of Fred

Mercer. I enjoy it more than you know. Memories 'like' that

get MORE SPECIAL as we age.

Jerry

Jerry, you are most welcome. Fred was a super person. I do miss not seeing him anymore.

He is the reason I have 2 pre-64 Model 70s in 270. I just need to put a Weaver K4 scope on one of them in his memory.