For fans of the 6.5x55 Swedish

I

icedog

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
30   0   2
I am a fan of the 6.5x55, and while I doubt it's anywhere near the top of the list in sales in N.A., I know there are a good many other hunters and gun enthusiasts who think well of cartridge. So, I was a bit surprised to read what Edward Matunas wrote about the 6.5 back around 1979, and I quote... "It is useful on game up to 500 pounds and at ranges not exceeding 200 yds. Very few commercial guns have been chambered for this cartridge as it easily fits into the dead-cartridge category. Ammunition is now obsolete in this country."

So what happened to put the 6.5 back on the radar? I'm guessing the influx of surplus military rifles from Sweden, coupled with the development of loads other than the traditional 160 gr. bullet, had something to do with it. Were there any particular gun writers who championed the 6.5's cause on its way back to respectability?
 
icedog said:
Edward Matunas wrote about the 6.5 back around 1979, and I quote... "It is useful on game up to 500 pounds and at ranges not exceeding 200 yds.
Click to expand...

There may of been very little in way of guns and ammo for the 6.5x55 commerically (available to the writer) in 79 but he was dead wrong on its capabilities (as we know).

I wish writers would all do their homework instead of spewing uninformed opinions.....
 
Last edited:
There were some of us singing its praises even in the sixties. Then you had a choice between 139gr and 160 gr commercial loadings from Dominion and Norma. Norma was a match load if I recall correctly, but opened up well on game. The Dominion 160 was the mainstay of the 6.5 and was very accurate with amazing penetration. That has not changed much.

I bought a box of 140 gr Barnes but have not yet shot anything with them. I hunt the bush so the 160 gr is still my friend.

Randy
 
I picked up 10 boxes of ''century'' ammunition for $10 a box way back and never used anything else-and a lot of deer dropped dead.The 6.5x55 swede doesn't seem too picky what you feed it,hold it straight and it'll do the job
 
I can't remember ever being impressed with anything written by Matunas. I often found myself at odds with what he was saying.

This one seals the deal, although maybe he's learned a thing or two since the 70's...
 
Like I posted already in another thread, "My 1st centerfire rifle ever was a M38 Swede Mauser back in '89. Although it had a dark bbl it would put 3x 139gr 'Made in Yugoslavia' bullets under an inch @100yds always....I sold that rifle yrs later cause it was'nt a 30-06. The deer I shot with the '06 dropped the same as the 6.5 dropped them. I redeemed myself by finally buying a Tikka in that awesome unrecognized caliber in 2011. I don't recall reading very many articles about this caliber except for one in a 1986 or 88 G&A annual about a 13yr old kid who used one on a boar, I was hooked after that.
 
Last edited:
I've become a firm convert - low recoil, flat shooting, hard hitting. If the swiss had adopted it for their K31 it would probably be my go-to gun for just about everything :p
 
Winchester thought enough about it to chamber their M70 Featherweight in it. I am now the proud owner of one.

And Rem. liked it so much they put a disguise on it and called it the .260 rem.

DSCN5212-1.jpg


Maybe I'll shoot a spring black bear with it before I give it to my daughter for a graduation gift.
 
Ed Matunas did all of his game weights off of a calculation that he championed, and we all know how well calculations kill animals. He was actually right about the 6.5X55 being in fact dead at that time. There was a point where people where making 6.5X55 brass out of 30-06 brass, as there was no brass to be had.
I think that the 6.5X55 survived in spite of what the gun writers have said because it is a good cartridge, that's versitile, and does beyond what it's supposed to do. I wouldn't recommend it to a non-reloader, as the majority of factory loads leave something to be desired, but as a reloader cartridge it is (in my oppinion) the best of the 6.5's.
BTW, I'm saying all of this not as a 6.5X55 owner, but as someone that is able to recognize a well designed cartridge when he see's it.
Mike
 
I have a Remington 700 "Classic" in 6.5x55.
It has been shot & hunted a lot....mainly due to it's effectiveness and mild manners. This rifle recently acquired its 3rd barrel. Takes a lot of shooting to wash the throat out of one of these, but I wouldn't think of rebarrelling to a different chambering.
I just love the 6.5x55! Ed Matunas knew NOT of which he spoke back in 1970. Hopefully, his opinion has improved over time. Eagleye.
 
In South Africa we have been left out of the Swede 6.5, as we had so many Mausers of 7x57 and Lee Enfields and the .30 calibers (30-06 and it later almost twin .308W).

Excellent rifle. My first experience with a 6.5 was a friend's ancient-looking, hard-worked (Husqvarna, I think) in the 6.5 x 57 "Portuguese Mauser".

The long, thin bullet immediately struck me as unique. I shot a big kudu-bull with it from about 80 yds, semi side-on, into the front shoulder in order to reach the heart and lower lungs. The sectional density of that little bullet took it right trough that fairly tough animal - through the shoulder blade bottom, messed up the heart and went out just behind the opposite shoulder.

The 6.5 x 55 is marginally slower but still ample momentum concentrated in that thin projectile to take ANY African animal with a single shot. Hitting a strong skin / flesh / bone combination with a composite bullet of this extraordinary sectional density flying at about 2 400 ft/sec is ample for required penetration to a vital organ.
 
The 6.5mm curse ;)

There are 2 "problems" with 6.5x55:
  1. Large number of weak 100 year old rifles chambered for the cartridge
  2. 270 Winchester which is North America's 6.5x55 only more potent
There's a curse on all 6.5mm calibers in North America and 260 Remington might be the first great 6.5 caliber to survive the 6.5mm Curse which killed the excellent 6.5x55 Swedish, 264 Winchester Magnum and 6.5 Remington Magnum over here.

Alex
 
I would say 6.5 x 55 is holding its own.

The 6.5 X 55 mm Husky's that Tradeex were selling last summer
didn't last very long...and its not hard to find ammo for it.

I had a Swedish M96 and now I have a Husky 1640K both in 6.5 X 55 and I love shooting that calibre.
 
And it's still really present in the long range shooting fields... often as the VAIS or Ackley fashion, but it's still the same case...
 
AlexF said:
There are 2 "problems" with 6.5x55:
  1. Large number of weak 100 year old rifles chambered for the cartridge
  2. 270 Winchester which is North America's 6.5x55 only more potent
There's a curse on all 6.5mm calibers in North America and 260 Remington might be the first great 6.5 caliber to survive the 6.5mm Curse which killed the excellent 6.5x55 Swedish, 264 Winchester Magnum and 6.5 Remington Magnum over here.

Alex
Click to expand...

I dont' think the 6.5x55 swedish ever died it was just not as popular in North America for a quite a while....Its been a mainstream production item in Europe for a long time and I believe it to be relatively popular in Canada....I just wish more of the North American Manufacturers would chamber their rifles for it.

All those weak 100 year old actions are still shooting full powered Norma ammunition

I have a 270 and a 6.5x55 and they both have their own appeal but I know what you mean.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom