6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Calibres, cartridges, ballistics tables and ammunition information.

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by bladeracer » 29 Dec 2019, 11:42 pm

In Vic we can't use 6.5mm on red or sambar, has to be .277" minimum.
Practice Strict Gun Control - Precision Counts!
User avatar
bladeracer
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
 
Posts: 12655
Victoria

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by K2bonsai » 30 Dec 2019, 11:58 am

If I was in vic I would have gone 308 over 6.5 purely on the Sambar issue but as 99% of my hunting is NSW then I focused on the rifle that suited me and my region.
K2bonsai
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 27
New South Wales

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by Ramslamer » 31 Dec 2019, 3:37 pm

If you have convinced yourself that the 6.5 Creedmoor is the way to go then go with it. The Tikka might more than blow your $1000. budget but the Howa (second choice) is well under. Don't discount the Howa because it is a bit less expensive - I have seen some of them shout outstanding groups out of the box (The barrel was run in in the proper manner of course) Why not get two 6.5 Howas (possibly for the price of one Tikka) - one, a light walk around hunting rifle and a second one with a long heavy varmint barrel for target work. You can get them as barreled actions and then add whatever stock you want to make them look "cool"
Ramslamer
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 5
Queensland

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by mchughcb » 31 Dec 2019, 4:31 pm

My advice as you are just starting out. Buy the cheapest 308 you can get with the cheapest factory ammo you can afford. $400 howa or weatherby. At some point you might ditch it but you hopefully won't lose much money on it when you work out what you want to do. Barrel twists, barrel lengths, trigger pulls, length of pulls, FFP, or SFP scopes mil or moa, cheek risers, reading mirage etc is going to be too many things to worry about. Practice prone, kneeling, offhand, off a bench. If you can consistently hit the 10 ring of the 200 yard SSAA target in your first year then think that as an accomplishment.
User avatar
mchughcb
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1521
Victoria

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by sungazer » 01 Jan 2020, 5:04 pm

@mchughcb what is the size of the 200yrd SSAA target? or even just the 10 ring. They seem to have so many different size targets for the same or similar thing it seems that you just pick one. For example the 50yrd Rimfire target one has just two perhaps 100m targets on an A4 piece of paper but the real small bore 50 yrd target can fit 20 full targets on a A4 piece of paper.
sungazer
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1525
Other

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by SCJ429 » 01 Jan 2020, 5:29 pm

I think the 200 metre target is the C target, the 10 ring is approximately 3 inches with an inner circle of approximately 0.8 of an inch.

There is an H target, the one that features six individual targets, mostly used at 100 metres. This has the inner ring of one inch.
SCJ429
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3207
New South Wales

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by SCJ429 » 01 Jan 2020, 5:35 pm

A three inch group at 200 metres is 1.3 MOA.
SCJ429
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3207
New South Wales

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by in2anity » 01 Jan 2020, 6:23 pm

SCJ429 wrote:A three inch group at 200 metres is 1.3 MOA.

If that’s the target mchugh is referring to, planting all 10 shots inside the ten ring at 200m isn’t exactly easy, especially when there’s a bit of a crosswind and a time constraint. Lots of variables. I agree he’d be doing well to do that as a complete novice.
At what point does lack of maintenance become patina?
User avatar
in2anity
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3048
New South Wales

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by Am88 » 02 Jan 2020, 10:44 am

Maybe get some targets scaled down, so say a 500m target of 10 inches diameter would be 1" then see if you can keep your shots in the 1" circle, I believe I seen a member here do that for practice at a 50m range with trailboss loads in a .308 with cast bullets, bloody good idea if you ask me. that will tell you if your gunna be able to hit the target at 500m.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMuDsWOQ2SY

thats a .308, 294 meters, 325 yards. If the read out is in inches its .9. At 225 yards the three shot group is a .277 MOA. I may be a bit old school in my thought but there isn't much 'tacticool' when it comes to an M40A5, I think more people at the range would appreciated a rifle built like something like this and not bought with aluminium chassis and blah blah blah lol, but that's just me.
Am88
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 295
Queensland

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by SCJ429 » 02 Jan 2020, 2:15 pm

What do you like about the M40? Is it old school because it is a Remington 700? I would have thought it would be classed as Tacticool. Are rifles in chassis what are called Tacticool now?
SCJ429
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3207
New South Wales

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by Am88 » 02 Jan 2020, 3:02 pm

Personal preference really, it came from a different time and has developed over the years to what it is now, it's got a bit of history about it, same as the military Model 70 sniper rifles. When I say old school I don't mean from the 1800's just a term. I consider them tacticool. Just an opinion of mine. Just like the OP's other thread for the first rifle for him to buy with the comment about wanting a .308 to "feel the power". Just my opinion.
Am88
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 295
Queensland

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by SCJ429 » 02 Jan 2020, 5:15 pm

This rifle is all business and uses a classic action. It might appeal to you as well. The Sako TRG-22.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9BmkZkewQHc
SCJ429
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3207
New South Wales

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by bigrich » 02 Jan 2020, 6:14 pm

Am88 wrote:Personal preference really, it came from a different time and has developed over the years to what it is now, it's got a bit of history about it, same as the military Model 70 sniper rifles. When I say old school I don't mean from the 1800's just a term. I consider them tacticool. Just an opinion of mine. Just like the OP's other thread for the first rifle for him to buy with the comment about wanting a .308 to "feel the power". Just my opinion.


nuthin' wrong with the USMC spec m40's and m70's . i dig it :thumbsup:
User avatar
bigrich
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4483
Queensland

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by Am88 » 02 Jan 2020, 7:23 pm

SCJ429 wrote:This rifle is all business and uses a classic action. It might appeal to you as well. The Sako TRG-22.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9BmkZkewQHc


A little more. It could do without the 4 sided 12 inch picatinny rails for a forend however :lol:

I just like the history more so I think, and I just here so much about about how great these 'new' things are the best ever and can never be beaten and if you own you'll be the best ever, 90% of them couldn't even tell you why, it's just what the salesman has told them :thumbsup:
Am88
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 295
Queensland

Re: 6.5 Creedmoor definetely better than .308?

Post by SCJ429 » 02 Jan 2020, 7:45 pm

I have a Weatherby with the TRR stock, it is similar to the M40 stock. They are a great stock design and fun to use. I did not like the look of a Chassis but then I used a friends Tikka Tac A1 and an Anschutz Precise stock. They are awesome and I really enjoyed using them. I have to have one.... Or two.

Nothing wrong with the Remington 700, a much copied action design. I am not sure I can justify the cost of a M40A5.
SCJ429
Lieutenant Colonel
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Posts: 3207
New South Wales

Previous

Back to top
 
Return to Calibres, cartridges and ballistics