6.5x55 out of the short barrel?

I've owned both a Krag and Swede carbines with 18" barrels and while they were quite functional the noise was, to me, unbearable. My 22" M70 Winchester Featherweight is just about perfect.
 
I had both an M96 (29.1" bbl) and M38 (24" bbl), and using the same batch of handloads through both rifles during the same shooting session gave me exactly 200 fps less velocity with the 24" bbl. That's quite a bit. I'd bet you'd lose another 200 fps to go down to 18", which would be way too much velocity loss for me.

I'd not go less than 24" based on my experience. Shorter will still kill game I guess, but how slow to you want to go??? With a full length barrel, and handloads, a 6.5x55 is hot on the heels of factory .270 ammunition; forget about it with short barrels.
 
Last edited:
Northman999 said:
I had both an M96 (29.1" bbl) and M38 (24" bbl), and using the same batch of handloads through both rifles during the same shooting session gave me exactly 200 fps less velocity with the 24" bbl. That's quite a bit. I'd bet you'd lose another 200 fps to go down to 18", which would be way too much velocity loss for me.

I'd not go less than 24" based on my experience. Shorter will still kill game I guess, but how slow to you want to go??? With a full length barrel, and handloads, a 6.5x55 is hot on the heels of factory .270 ammunition; forget about it with short barrels.
Click to expand...

You can't compare velocity from barrels of different guns... it will not give the real picture of what is going on.
 
Northman999 said:
I had both an M96 (29.1" bbl) and M38 (24" bbl), and using the same batch of handloads through both rifles during the same shooting session gave me exactly 200 fps less velocity with the 24" bbl. That's quite a bit. I'd bet you'd lose another 200 fps to go down to 18", which would be way too much velocity loss for me.

I'd not go less than 24" based on my experience. Shorter will still kill game I guess, but how slow to you want to go??? With a full length barrel, and handloads, a 6.5x55 is hot on the heels of factory .270 ammunition; forget about it with short barrels.
Click to expand...

I guess if what you really want is a .270, you should get a .270. If what you really want is a short barreled 6.5x55, you should get one of those.

I have never understood the common habit of trying to make one round into "almost as good as a whatever". They are all different. But they are all way more alike than they are different. Nothing I would hunt with a 6.5x55 would ever notice whether I used a 20" or a 24" barrel for the shot.
 
I'm not trying to make a .270 out of a 6.5x55.

It's just that, for me, a 6.5x55 that throws 140's at 2400 fps just "isn't right".

I got used to full length 6.5's throwing them around 2800, and so that's what I'm used to. If I had started with a rifle that did 2400 fps and gotten used to that, then I'd probably be saying "What the heck do you need 2800 fps for??? That's just silly..."
 
The focus is on the wrong thing in this discussion... performance (strictly speaking) should be set aside and the primary factors are the platform, the handling characteristics of the platform and an appreciation of the cartridge for characteristics other than pure velocity. For all of my bobs, I was thrilled with the results because I had already reconciled the loss of velocity.
 
129's are a nice load in the 6.5X55 and I can get 2650 with IMR4350 out of an 18.5" barrel... makes a nice little deer carbine.
 
Nestor said:
Interesting. I may start looking into lighter loads if I'll be going short.
Click to expand...

2650 is not a MAX load... if you just gotta, you can wring out a little more... I didn't see the point... it was a very accurate load... I'm shooting something similar in .260 (129's) & 7mm-08 (139's)... both are bobbed to 20"... and it is a nice length for this single shot platform.
 
Northman999 said:
I had both an M96 (29.1" bbl) and M38 (24" bbl), and using the same batch of handloads through both rifles during the same shooting session gave me exactly 200 fps less velocity with the 24" bbl. That's quite a bit. I'd bet you'd lose another 200 fps to go down to 18", which would be way too much velocity loss for me.
Click to expand...

200 ft/s velocity drop for 5 inches of barrel doesn't sound right but then some barrels are a little quicker than others as said. But however you slice it you won't be seeing 2400 ft/s in an 18 inch tube unless its underloaded. Without pushing it I shoot 140s at 2650 in my 20" tube 260rem.
 
I know I was around 2800 w 140s in 18 inch barrel . I was trying to see how far I could go and I think it was around 2900 I blew primers I didn't care if I destroyed the 300 dollar gun . But my point is , it's night and day between factory and hand loads .

To mr cannon

I figure one might as well use a cartridge to its potental and not handicap it. We have enough cartridges that are limited by design already .
 
Nestor said:
I'm planning to use exactly the same barrel. Well, I would certainly appreciate any feedback from you, once the rifle will be ready to rock!
Click to expand...

I'm not turning the outside of the barrel to a sporter contour or anything and the rest of the gun is made out of extra parts I had laying around that had cosmetic issues and weren't worth selling or making an expensive custom out of. My goal is a cheap back up rifle for the kids that functions and shoots well but doesn't look pretty. I can clean up my parts bins and have some fun building it at the same time.

I'll definitely post up the results here or in it's own thread once complete.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom