6.5 CM Hunting Bullet

blakeyboy said:
No

Hijack warranted. Bringing you to creek, the drinking part is up to you. And the hijack more for all other readers so they choose more wisely. 😉

This is important.😂

Ps; the thread title is 6.5cm ‘hunting bullet’.

There’s a difference in dead is dead if within sight and walk right up to it or 100 yards over the ridge and down it the thick stuff. Your freezer or god’s freezer, roll your dice.
Click to expand...
I have have not had to chase down anything shot with a mono or cup and core except for one high shot white tail, and that was not the bullet's fault, the shooter shot high is all. well over 50 years of killing stuff has taught me to make sure the bullet goes where it is supposed to and everything else is secondary.
Cat
 
Last edited:
iron cat said:
I have have not had to chase down anything shot with a mono or cup and core except for one high shot white tail, and that was not the bullet's fault, the shooter shot high is all. well over 50 years of killing stuff has taught me to make sue the bullet goes where it is supposed to and everything else is secondary.
Cat
Click to expand...
This is also true.

I can only offer the very noticeable difference in performance in this regard when I was finally able to get a certain rifle and cartridge that only offered this type of bullet and then started killing sh1t. Been around long enough to have been programmed to the tough delayed controlled expansion deep penetrating perfect mushroom stuff and shot a lot of stuff with accubonds and fusions from various and usually higher hp or velocity cartridges and no big thing to usually trail 60-100 yards. Then I start killing stuff with a pipsqueak cartridge but the much different bullet construction and it was a 180 degree flip and almost everything drt to 15 yards and have yet to see something make it more than 50. I had idea this would be result but I put it to test on game and 8 years later it has simply confirmed every year.

Will the tough stuff work, yup, always did for me. But it’s a very noticeable difference and confirms the headstamp does not matter, the grains of powder burned does not matter. The bullet matters most, next to placement of course and you can obviously place it, it’s what does the work. More work in right swim distance is what I prefer and only time we need to break out the ole trailing and tracking skills is when helping someone else who isn’t using the real good stuff. 😉

I still even recommend to newbies to make sure they try fusion on any new gun as much rather them have accuracy and fusion is accurate than not have accuracy but even still I have one backup rifle set up on that stuff and even gimmie deer at 75 yards pounded in lungs still makes it nearly that same distance. Then we kill 5 more critters with eldm and even less hp and all drt. Same story every year.

Not arguing dead is dead. Just that there is a difference and choose wisely. That’s all. Full perspective in this thread now achieved haha.

And there is a body of evidence across our hunting realms that support this, cannot be denied. It’s overwhelming. And like once finding god there is no going back lol. You cannot unsee what you have now seen. Not a chance if given a choice I’m not choosing on bullet over all other considerations. Regardless cartridge, regardless rifle. Literally going back to back multiple years of one to multiple years of another...you can’t unsee that. 😉

It’s almost laughable when one finds a bullet has shed half its weight and multiple pieces or jacket caught offside and people call it bullet failure. Like serious comedy. I’m disappointed if I find high weight retention and pretty mushrooms lol. Yet those same people walked right up to it after the shot because it did the best work you can do, failing to grasp the fact they walked right up to it.😉
 
Last edited:
blakeyboy said:
It’s almost laughable when one finds a bullet has shed half its weight and multiple pieces or jacket caught offside and people call it bullet failure. Like serious comedy. I’m disappointed if I find high weight retention and pretty mushrooms lol. Yet those same people walked right up to it after the shot because it did the best work you can do, failing to grasp the fact they walked right up to it
Click to expand...
depends where that splatter winds up as to whether it leaves a bad taste in the mouth or not
bullets that are expected to splatter are not failing if that is what they do,
 
Sure, let's liven it up a bit...

I doubt that the 6.5 Creed has enough powder capacity to make a PPU SP RN fly, but this would be my choice for deer, moose and elk. in my 6.5 x 55. Very potent load. In the creed, like most rifles, Sierra perform well, and for me out perform hornaday in everything I have tried them in. 140 gr SP Game Kings.
 
Meroh said:
Sure, let's liven it up a bit...

I doubt that the 6.5 Creed has enough powder capacity to make a PPU SP RN fly, but this would be my choice for deer, moose and elk. in my 6.5 x 55. Very potent load. In the creed, like most rifles, Sierra perform well, and for me out perform hornaday in everything I have tried them in. 140 gr SP Game Kings.
Click to expand...
The creedmoor has enough powder capacity to get good velocity with a bunch of different 160 grain bullets. I shoot 2 different woodleighs, and the Hornady round nose interlock in two different rifles.

I have no problem getting very good velocity in 18" and 22" barrels. Just have to use the right powders if you want the speed. Each rifle is different, but if you want speed with heavy bullets, you gotta burn some slower powders. RL-23, RL-26, H4831, Superformance, 6.5 Staball. Just an example of a few powders that work good in my rifles with heavy bullets.
 
Meroh said:
Sure, let's liven it up a bit...

I doubt that the 6.5 Creed has enough powder capacity to make a PPU SP RN fly, but this would be my choice for deer, moose and elk. in my 6.5 x 55. Very potent load. In the creed, like most rifles, Sierra perform well, and for me out perform hornaday in everything I have tried them in. 140 gr SP Game Kings.
Click to expand...
a 156 grain / 160 grain bullet is pretty much standard in the 6.5 Mannlicher Schoenauer carbine, which is a smaller case than the Creedmoor, and the the MS has killed tons of animals over the years. I doubt very much that is is magically better able to handle the big bullets better than a Creednoor as long as the barrel twist is correct.
Cat
 
Last edited:
U
Hand Skills said:
Shot placement is the #1 factor.

Without recovering the animal it's impossible to say...
Click to expand...
I have only ever recovered one animal with what I would call a bullet failure, but it was .284 , 145 grain Speer, not a 6.5 bullet. Entry was text book perfect.
We found that the bullet broke in half and the heavier piece traveled between the meat and hide, then exited and broke the buck's right rear hock.
We recovered the buck the next day after about a 4 hour stalk/ tracking job and finished the job.
 
iron cat said:
a 156 grain / 160 grain bullet is pretty much standard in the 6.5 Mannlicher Schoenauer carbine, which is a smaller case than the Creedmoor, and the the MS has killed tons of animals over the years. I doubt very much that is is magically better able to handle the big bullets better than a Creednoor as long as the barrel twist is correct.
Cat
Click to expand...
IronCat, what you're saying about the 6.5 Mannlicher is true, but you aren't telling the whole story.

WDM Bell used it to shoot Elephants at close range, with 160 grain bullets, at moderate velocities, but they were "SOLIDS."

Not the monolithic type solid copper bullets we see today but bullets with exposed lead core bases and very heavy jackets, without a soft or open point. We mostly call them Full Metal Jacket.

As mentioned, the secret to using small diameter bullets is to multiply their effect by increased weight, and therefore length. Keeping the overall length reasonable as well as maximizing weight, meant the bullets had round noses.

This enusured penetration, even through large bones, something larger diameter bullets may not be able to do, if they don't weigh enough to be solidly constructed.

This was the scenario close to a century ago. For the most part, bullets are so good today we can easily find lighter bullets that do the job well.
 
bearhunter said:
IronCat, what you're saying about the 6.5 Mannlicher is true, but you aren't telling the whole story.

WDM Bell used it to shoot Elephants at close range, with 160 grain bullets, at moderate velocities, but they were "SOLIDS."

Not the monolithic type solid copper bullets we see today but bullets with exposed lead core bases and very heavy jackets, without a soft or open point. We mostly call them Full Metal Jacket.

As mentioned, the secret to using small diameter bullets is to multiply their effect by increased weight, and therefore length. Keeping the overall length reasonable as well as maximizing weight, meant the bullets had round noses.

This enusured penetration, even through large bones, something larger diameter bullets may not be able to do, if they don't weigh enough to be solidly constructed.

This was the scenario close to a century ago. For the most part, bullets are so good today we can easily find lighter bullets that do the job well.
Click to expand...
Bell was also an incredible shot, and his ranges were close.
However , I have never shot an elephant , or anther Aftrican critter or even used the solids, only the 156 grain Alaskan, and the discontinued Seirra 160 grain SMP ( my favorite 160 grain bullet ).
That being said, my current 6.5x54 MS carbine shoots 140 grain bullets very well.
Cat
 
iron cat said:
Bell was also an incredible shot, and his ranges were close.
However , I have never shot an elephant , or anther Aftrican critter or even used the solids, only the 156 grain Alaskan, and the discontinued Seirra 160 grain SMP ( my favorite 160 grain bullet ).
That being said, my current 6.5x54 MS carbine shoots 140 grain bullets very well.
Cat
Click to expand...
As far as Bell being an incredible shot, it depends on which author you read. There were more than a few shots he missed the critical 4 inch spot, which would bring the elephant down quickly, according to some London Times reports.

Bell had to have some skill, considering how many elephants he killed. I can't, and won't say he wasn't, because of a London Times report, because no matter how skillful a shot a shooter is, something will go awry eventually.

Bell gets a lot of credit, for some things. I was never a fan of "Professional Ivory Hunters."

He was also very careful about what game animals he used the 6.5 Mannlicher on, especially if they could turn the tables on him in a heartbeat.

Your MS with its 1-7.5 inch twist should stabilise just about any 6.5 bullets, even the long range EXLD types.

I'm not knocking the 6.5 caliber by any means. My main hunting rifle is a Tikka T3Lite, chambered for the 6.5x55. It kills the animals I shoot at well, which means quickly.

I just happen to be a fan of heavy for caliber bullets, in just about any diameter I shoot. Old habits that work well don't change easily.
 
bearhunter said:
As far as Bell being an incredible shot, it depends on which author you read. There were more than a few shots he missed the critical 4 inch spot, which would bring the elephant down quickly, according to some London Times reports.

Bell had to have some skill, considering how many elephants he killed. I can't, and won't say he wasn't, because of a London Times report, because no matter how skillful a shot a shooter is, something will go awry eventually.

Bell gets a lot of credit, for some things. I was never a fan of "Professional Ivory Hunters."

He was also very careful about what game animals he used the 6.5 Mannlicher on, especially if they could turn the tables on him in a heartbeat.

Your MS with its 1-7.5 inch twist should stabilise just about any 6.5 bullets, even the long range EXLD types.

I'm not knocking the 6.5 caliber by any means. My main hunting rifle is a Tikka T3Lite, chambered for the 6.5x55. It kills the animals I shoot at well, which means quickly.

I just happen to be a fan of heavy for caliber bullets, in just about any diameter I shoot. Old habits that work well don't change easily.
Click to expand...
I agree, kill as many as Bell did and things will go sideways at times!
My little Mannlicher is the LAST thing i would use for a hunting rifle unless I knew where I was hunting , as it has a short 20 inch barrel, and a peep sight to boot! LOL
However, with a 140 to 160 grain bullet, in staking distances and intances out to abut 100 yards, it is right up there wit the best talking rifles made
Cat
 
iron cat said:
I agree, kill as many as Bell did and things will go sideways at times!
My little Mannlicher is the LAST thing i would use for a hunting rifle unless I knew where I was hunting , as it has a short 20 inch barrel, and a peep sight to boot! LOL
However, with a 140 to 160 grain bullet, in staking distances and intances out to abut 100 yards, it is right up there wit the best talking rifles made
Cat
Click to expand...
I hear you, the first rifle I hunted seriously with was a 6.5MS.

It was a lovely little thing, also with a 20 inch barrel, which had a full rib from receiver to muzzle, with "Safari" type multiple flip up tangential rear sights and a wide blade front site. The only ammo I could find for it back in the mid sixties was made by Dominion of Canada, now IVI.

160 grain, round nose bullets were the only offering, and the little MS shot them very well.

The four rear folding leaf sights were "regulated" exactly for the trajectory of the Dominion ammo, which was a blessing in disguise, because in those days, I had no idea about trajectories or regulating sights to the load.

The leaf sights were more than a bit optimistic IMHO, starting at 50 yds, which was a fixed sight, followed by a 150 yd, 250 yd, 300 yd and finally a very high 400 yd. It may have indicated meters, but out to two hundred fifty yards, it was very close.

I gave that rifle to my mentor at the time, to refinish and give to his son for his fifteenth birthday. I had moved on to what I thought was a superior round, the ubiquitous 30-06 Springfield.

I was a bit disappointed when the first couple of Deer I shot didn't just get knocked over from so much more "energy."

The much faster 150 grain, 30 cal factory rounds didn't drop a Deer any quicker than a plodding 160 grain, 6.5 cal factory round.

The Remington 721, wasn't any more accurate, heavier, and didn't fit quite as well. It also wore only factory standard iron sights.
 
remington jim said:
Well I’m a bit bored so let’s see if we can liven things up a BIT 🤪

So I like to use different bullets sometimes to see the Results . 🤷‍♂️

Just gonna try a new bullet in my 6.5 CM deer hunting rifle and I am trying to decide which out of these 2 bullets I might use . The Hornady 130 CX or the Barnes 127 LRX . Both shoot equally “ Well “ from my UL Rifle at 2800 fps plus .
Also there is a chance on a moose in the same area as well as a Black bear too .

I have experienced Kills with a LRX bullet in a different cartridge and it worked Excellent but never killed any thing with a CX yet 🤷‍♂️

So what you 6.5 CM Guys think 🤔 😀

Don’t give a HECK hearing about other bullets or weights ! 🥸 Thanks 😊
Click to expand...

Jim,

I've never shot any game far enough away to worry about the speeds at which they no longer open up. You probably might :p If so, I think I would go LRX as it is probably a little "softer"

CX bullets have worked well for me tho! Only 30 cal so far but 165 gr from a 30-06 and 110gr made for 300 BLK speed both open up very well in game.

Think I wouold go with whatever I found looked cooler :p

Certainly not having a hard time killing anything with monos here lol
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom