pete dobinson
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- Courtenay BC.
The Creedmoor still out performs the 6.5x55 in a short action, thats what it was designed to for.
what does a 6.5 creedmore do that a 6.5 x 55 doesn't?
- Thread starter petew
- Start date
And this is one of the main advantages the Creedmoor offers all sorts of hunters and shooters. Good ammo, good handload components, good rifle selection, growing selections by the year
24" barrels, 60,000 PSI chamber pressure. Average of top 6 performing powders for each cartridge :
6.5 Creedmoor 143gr ELD-X @ 2765 fps (200y zero) ~ 2.8" OAL Short action
100y - 2624 fps / 2185 ft lbs / +1.6" high
300y - 2353 fps / 1757 ft lbs / -7.3" low
500y - 2099 fps / 1398 ft lbs / -41" low
6.5x55 143gr ELD-X @ 2875 fps (200y zero) ~ 3.13" OAL Long Action
100y - 2731 fps / 2367 ft lbs / +1." high
300y - 2454 fps / 1911 ft lbs / -6.6" low
500y - 2193 fps / 1527 ft lbs / -38" low
There ya go. I think the positives of the Creedmoor (rifles, ammo, modern load data) outweigh the 2 more clicks needed to get on target at 500 yards.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
It don't matter really, just personal preference.
- Location
- Southern Vancouver Island
I reckon it matters to folks that want a lighter rifle to tote around. Then again, I've had plenty of nice performing long action Swede/Mausers that were easy to carry and accurate enough to get the job done in both competition & hunting use. Fer me, what matters most is a rifle that fits well & shoots straight at the distances I use it. They be lots of good 6.5's out there, just figger out the one that works best fer ye.
Last edited:
Savage 10/11/12/16 are short action cartridge based.
Ruger American comes in both short and long actions. Tikka is the long action for all cartridges I believe.
That said, the majority of commercial short actions out there are still pretty long. Unless you get some high end custom action you are not really going to see the benefits of true short/stiff actions with any of the commercial offerings.
For sure...the single shot are pretty much a block of steel lol. I don't think it matters much how long those ones are.
I remember when the most expensive Savage you could buy was around $800-$900... they had 1 SS laminate version (12BVSS) I think it was, and 1 in a McMillan stock. Still kicking myself for not buying one back then.
Here is a good look at several custom actions with the 12 PTA in there as well. Some are absolute tanks.
http://www.6mmbr.com/actions.html
Last edited:
[FONT="] [/FONT]6.5mm Creedmoor is about to go popular, US[FONT="] Special Operations Command has revealed plans to replace a number of precision rifles across its components that use [/FONT]NATO-standard 7.62mm ammunition[FONT="] with new guns chambered for a smaller cartridge, the 6.5mm Creedmoor.[/FONT]
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...r-precision-rifles-and-an-assault-machine-gun
http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...r-precision-rifles-and-an-assault-machine-gun
Must be all that marketing.
Homesteader
CGN Regular
- Location
- In a Wallow West of Edmonton.
LMFAO Has to be one of the best lines ever. You clearly have a handle on this thread Weatherdog!!
Must be all that marketing.
SOCOM adopted the 300 Norma 2 years ago for long range snipes. How popular is that cartridge today?
http://www.wideopenspaces.com/ever-...-well-its-the-new-socom-sniper-cartridge/amp/
This deserves repeating.
"You, like many others, refuse to even try to get it.
I've posted something similar to this many times before:
1) The 6.5 Creedmoor was designed from the ground up as cartridge that would fit in standard short-action magazines with ANY bullet. Neither the .260 nor the 6.5x55 does. Whether you (or others) don't think short actions are the deal, MANY other shooters do.
2) The 6.5 Creedmoor case has features that result in finer accuracy, on average better than the .260 or (especially) the 6.5x55. One is a shorter powder column, the other a 30-degree shoulder. Both have been demonstrated, many times, over the past several decades to result in finer accuracy.
These advantages are NOT theoretical. I have now owned three factory 6.5 Creedmoors, all relatively or really inexpensive, played around with another factory rifle, and also a semi-custom rifle. Also have several friends who own factory 6.5 Creedmoors we've range-tested together. The WORST accuracy I've seen from any of them, including factory ammo, is 5-shot (not 3-shot) one-inch groups at 100 yards.
The most accurate of all five I've owned, or tested personally, is a rifle costing around $400 retail. It's very first group at 100 yards, with a handload I'd found shot well in most Creedmoors, measured .33 inch. And that was five shots, not three. In the same rifle, most factory loads group three shots well under 3/4" at 100 yards.
3) I can just about bet which cartridge the local, long-range gunsmith uses. There are indeed recent 6.5 cartridges as good as the 6.5 Creedmoor, but none of them offer such an "affordable" package, whether in excellent, "affordable" brass, a variety of very accurate "affordable" factory loads, and a variety of accurate "affordable" factory rifles.
4) I own an accurate .260 and 6.5x55. In fact they're the most accurate rifles in either chambering I've ever owned, and I've owned several .260's and 6.5x55's.
The .260 is a Tikka T3, but to shoot its best I had to modify the magazine to accept 2.95" handloads, so bullets could be seated out to the lands. This wasn't just for "high-BC" bullets, but some common hunting bullets.
The 6.5x55 is a custom rifle on an FN Mauser commercial action, with a medium-contour Lilja 1-8 twist barrel. It was chambered with a custom match reamer with a shorter throat, by a gunsmith well-known for very accurate hunting rifles--who's built half a dozen other, very accurate rifles for me and my wife. Using Lapua brass and all the standard accuracy handloading techniques, it still isn't as consistently accurate as the $400 6.5 Creedmoor, and has never shot a 5-shot group anywhere near .33 inch.
Then there's the fact that throat lengths in 6.5x55's are "all over the place." Which is exactly what that accuracy gunsmith said before he barreled my rifle. Which is why factory 6.5x55 ammo, whether made in the U.S. or Europe, often doesn't shoot nearly as accurately as factory 6.5 Creedmoor ammo.
I am not selling either my .260 or 6.5x55, and will continue to hunt with both. But if I want or desire the finest accuracy, would use my $400 Creedmoor.
5) While super-accuracy doesn't matter in shooting big game out to, say, 300 or even 400 yards, I have known very few avid hunters who prefer LESS accuracy. And yes, despite the.270 or 7mm-08 (or whatever) being capable of more muzzle velocity with the same bullet weights, there is a noticeable difference in accuracy and wind drift at longer range with the 6.5 Creedmoor, and no noticeable different in "killing power."
After 8 years of testing (and hunting) with 6.5 Creedmoors, I am convinced it's "cartridge design" is superior. Hornady brass has been very consistent, both dimensionally and over the years, and like the wide variety of factory rifles now chambered for the CM is very "affordable." There are real reasons it's become a standard factory chambering, and almost every ammo manufacturer now produces 6.5 Creedmoor ammo--and not just in America but around the world.
Now I am going to copy and paste this into my computer's documents, so I can copy and paste it into all future repetitive Campfire posts questioning the validity of the 6.5 Creedmoor's popularity. It's not worth writing a new post for shooters who apparently aren't willing to attempt to understand the cartridge."
-John Barsness
"You, like many others, refuse to even try to get it.
I've posted something similar to this many times before:
1) The 6.5 Creedmoor was designed from the ground up as cartridge that would fit in standard short-action magazines with ANY bullet. Neither the .260 nor the 6.5x55 does. Whether you (or others) don't think short actions are the deal, MANY other shooters do.
2) The 6.5 Creedmoor case has features that result in finer accuracy, on average better than the .260 or (especially) the 6.5x55. One is a shorter powder column, the other a 30-degree shoulder. Both have been demonstrated, many times, over the past several decades to result in finer accuracy.
These advantages are NOT theoretical. I have now owned three factory 6.5 Creedmoors, all relatively or really inexpensive, played around with another factory rifle, and also a semi-custom rifle. Also have several friends who own factory 6.5 Creedmoors we've range-tested together. The WORST accuracy I've seen from any of them, including factory ammo, is 5-shot (not 3-shot) one-inch groups at 100 yards.
The most accurate of all five I've owned, or tested personally, is a rifle costing around $400 retail. It's very first group at 100 yards, with a handload I'd found shot well in most Creedmoors, measured .33 inch. And that was five shots, not three. In the same rifle, most factory loads group three shots well under 3/4" at 100 yards.
3) I can just about bet which cartridge the local, long-range gunsmith uses. There are indeed recent 6.5 cartridges as good as the 6.5 Creedmoor, but none of them offer such an "affordable" package, whether in excellent, "affordable" brass, a variety of very accurate "affordable" factory loads, and a variety of accurate "affordable" factory rifles.
4) I own an accurate .260 and 6.5x55. In fact they're the most accurate rifles in either chambering I've ever owned, and I've owned several .260's and 6.5x55's.
The .260 is a Tikka T3, but to shoot its best I had to modify the magazine to accept 2.95" handloads, so bullets could be seated out to the lands. This wasn't just for "high-BC" bullets, but some common hunting bullets.
The 6.5x55 is a custom rifle on an FN Mauser commercial action, with a medium-contour Lilja 1-8 twist barrel. It was chambered with a custom match reamer with a shorter throat, by a gunsmith well-known for very accurate hunting rifles--who's built half a dozen other, very accurate rifles for me and my wife. Using Lapua brass and all the standard accuracy handloading techniques, it still isn't as consistently accurate as the $400 6.5 Creedmoor, and has never shot a 5-shot group anywhere near .33 inch.
Then there's the fact that throat lengths in 6.5x55's are "all over the place." Which is exactly what that accuracy gunsmith said before he barreled my rifle. Which is why factory 6.5x55 ammo, whether made in the U.S. or Europe, often doesn't shoot nearly as accurately as factory 6.5 Creedmoor ammo.
I am not selling either my .260 or 6.5x55, and will continue to hunt with both. But if I want or desire the finest accuracy, would use my $400 Creedmoor.
5) While super-accuracy doesn't matter in shooting big game out to, say, 300 or even 400 yards, I have known very few avid hunters who prefer LESS accuracy. And yes, despite the.270 or 7mm-08 (or whatever) being capable of more muzzle velocity with the same bullet weights, there is a noticeable difference in accuracy and wind drift at longer range with the 6.5 Creedmoor, and no noticeable different in "killing power."
After 8 years of testing (and hunting) with 6.5 Creedmoors, I am convinced it's "cartridge design" is superior. Hornady brass has been very consistent, both dimensionally and over the years, and like the wide variety of factory rifles now chambered for the CM is very "affordable." There are real reasons it's become a standard factory chambering, and almost every ammo manufacturer now produces 6.5 Creedmoor ammo--and not just in America but around the world.
Now I am going to copy and paste this into my computer's documents, so I can copy and paste it into all future repetitive Campfire posts questioning the validity of the 6.5 Creedmoor's popularity. It's not worth writing a new post for shooters who apparently aren't willing to attempt to understand the cartridge."
-John Barsness
Exactly! Imagine if they had Hornady's marketing gurus and agency?
Norma? What's that? Your Great Aunt's brand? They'd rename it 7.62 Ultra Creedmoor and we'd be using it on everything from squirrels to sporting clays.
As a hunting cartridge, at hunting ranges, the 6.5 CM isn't as effective or versatile as the 308 win. Who cares about wind drift at long ranges where the bullet lacks energy to be an effective killer of big game. There is nothing special here. Except the owners desire to pretend they are.
Give me an example of where the 308 will be noticeably better in the field than the 6.5 CM.
