6.5 calibers for big game hunting question

Glock4ever said:
I am pretty much in agreement of "sniping" animals but in the badlands/praries of S Alberta, it can be really challenging to get in close to skittish animals and some of the best shots can be on standing animals at 600m. I had to already let a black bear go last season because there was no way I could get in close on him, he bolted when I approached to within 500m..
Click to expand...

To be honest, if this is your normal hunting situation you should be looking at a .257 Weatherby (6.5mm projectile - 64.5 mm case length) and flat shooting out to the distances you want to hunt to.

If it won't knock an animal down at the range you want to shoot at - then you can be rest-assured that no 6.5x 55 will.
 
Last edited:
Kudu said:
To be honest, if this is your normal hunting situation you should be looking at a .257 Weatherby (6.5mm projectile - 64.5 mm case length) and flat shooting out to the distances you want to hunt to.

If it won't knock an animal down at the range you want to shoot at - then you can be rest-assured that no 6.5x 55 will.
Click to expand...

The 257 doesn't take 6.5 mm bullets.
 
Roy Weatherby shot a cape buffalo with a 257 WBY....but only once, probably just to say he could do it. I don't think he was even all that confident with that size of a beast lol.
Here though, I can't think of a better all around cartridge for north american game (no big bears though) for the wide open flats...shoots far and flat, recoil like a .270 Win.
 
Hitzy said:
Roy Weatherby shot a cape buffalo with a 257 WBY....but only once, probably just to say he could do it. I don't think he was even all that confident with that size of a beast lol.
Here though, I can't think of a better all around cartridge for north american game (no big bears though) for the wide open flats...shoots far and flat, recoil like a .270 Win.
Click to expand...

I've shot a 257 Wby for years and it's my favorite cartridge, but there are better ones for moose and elk. For me personally, moose and elk starts at 30-06.

For long range deer,antelope,wolf,sheep,goat,etc, the 257 Wby is as good as it gets.
 
My brothers moose this year was taken with his 6.5rem mag launching a 125gr partition - single round, bang flop. For the record, Moose are pussies.
 
Why are you guys calling it "sniping" an animal if it's past your comfort zone? Everyone has a different skill/practice/ability level. For some 250yards is long, others with plenty of practice think 500 is short. For me a 500 yard shot in calm winds is a gimme.

For the OP, the hunting I do sounds a lot like yours. Often times shots are presented at 5+ with no options for a stalk. For this, the 300wsm is great, was my favorite but have switched to a 7rem and interbonds. I will say if you want to be comfortable shooting out to 800y you must have a scope that tracks perfect and can be relied on. Then practice out to twice that distance, and don't turn down windy days for practice. In fact windy days are the best practice days. Long competions with live scoring targets will speed the leaning curve the fastest. Instant feedback for whatever reason really helps you pick up wind reading ability. And get a Kestral, taking wind readinds all the time will ensure it's on your mind in the heat of the moment.
 
Okay, I was not going to weigh in on this topic............however, for 600+ meter shooting on game the size of elk and moose the 6.5 is NOT adequate. You cannot foresee all the things that can happen even during the time of flight, an animal can turn, it can take a step, a gust of wind can move the bullet somewhat off course, etc. If you really want to kill game beyond 600 mtrs then use a cartridge designed for it in a caliber appropriate to the size of the animal being shot at. This starts at 7mm in my opinion and goes up from there, the 7 RUM and 300 RUM or 300 Wby are perfect choices for this type of hunting and shooting and arrive with enough authority to cleanly harvest animals in this size class. I think the 6.5s are fine up to sheep, goats, deer and caribou sized animals but when stepping up to the notoriously tough elk and the huge bulk and muscle and bone of moose I think there are way more appropriate cartridges for shooting at them beyond 600 mtrs. Even for use on sheep, goats and the like I would certainly lean way more towards the 264 WM, the 26 Nosler or Weatherby's new entry the 6.5-300 Wby for 600+ mtr hunting. I would not even consider the 6.5 Creed, 260 Rem or 6.5X55 for this type of hunting and shooting, I know they work on paper with the right scope and at defined distances with wind flags, but they are NOT 600 mtr hunting cartridges. Just because a bullet will reach out that far and put a satisfying hole in a piece of paper, does not necessarily mean it will do what needs to be done to cleanly harvest an animal at the greatly diminished velocity with which it will be striking flesh and bone. Besides why, when there are 10 better cartridges to do this with !!!!!
 
For hunting, a 130 gr bullet out of a 270 win is very versatile.
A large portion of the slippery 6.5 bullets I feel are not adequate for moose or elk anyways.
 
Kevan said:
I'm not a supporter of either the 264 Mag. or the 270 Win., but having had and used several samples of both I must say the 264 Win. Mag. is far and away more than the 270, much more..
Click to expand...
You could be right, I don't have experience with the 264 mag but both my manuals have the same bullet velocity's for 130 gr and 140 gr bullets. Tell me what velocity were you getting with your 264 win mag.
 
My 264 WM would drive 140 Parts at 3300 fps from a 24" barrel (probably still will, haven't shot it in many years, too many toys).................I have never loaded for a 270 and never will, but if it don't say Weatherby on the head stamp I doubt you will see those kind of velocities...........
 
pete dobinson said:
The 270 win is equal to a 264 win mag according to my manual.
Click to expand...

I own both in pre-64 M70's and reload for both. . I can tell you for certain the 264 WM is out front by all of 300 fps and considerably more if you work up the loads.. . The 264 WM, early on, gained a reputation of burning out barrels so loading manuals slowed down the speed. . To solve this problem Winchester went to a 26" stainless steel barrel capable of faster speeds with very little wear. . Problem was, the 264 WM had already gained the reputation as a barrel burner. . Mine has the stainless barrel and shows no signs of wear at all even though I've ran some pretty hot loads through it but never shoot a hot barrel, let it cool down.
 
Rod said:
I own both in pre-64 M70's and reload for both. . I can tell you for certain the 264 WM is out front by all of 300 fps and considerably more if you work up the loads.. . The 264 WM, early on, gained a reputation of burning out barrels so loading manuals slowed down the speed. . To solve this problem Winchester went to a 26" stainless steel barrel capable of faster speeds with very little wear. . Problem was, the 264 WM had already gained the reputation as a barrel burner. . Mine has the stainless barrel and shows no signs of wear at all even though I've ran some pretty hot loads through it but never shoot a hot barrel, let it cool down.
Click to expand...
Sounds like I was out to lunch on the 264 mag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom