6.5 Creedmoor

[Sam45]

Hey Guys, round the traps of late it seems that the 6.5 Creedmoor is the go to cal for long range.I certainly have NFI in regards to this round.

Now where does it sit in the tree of calibres ?

Is it a bigger cal than a .308?

Is it a viable hunting round?

Or is it a fancy overpriced round?

Thanks in advance. As I know there are a few here with some great knowledge

Ozzie Reviews just uploaded this :

https://youtu.be/vGSKWjzntDU

[albat]

Sam45 all your answers here mate https://www.huntinggearguy.com/general/ ... inchester/

[Sam45]

Sam45 all your answers here mate https://www.huntinggearguy.com/general/ ... inchester/

Thanks man

[Gamerancher]

6.5mm is .264, so smaller than .308.
"Is it a viable hunting round?" Short answer, yes. Bullet choice will determine how well it performs on your chosen game.
The case is shorter than .308Win with sharper shoulder and slightly less powder capacity.
Factory loaded rounds are at the moment premium target rounds and these come at a cost.
Buying components and reloading is a far cheaper option, bear in mind there are no "cheap" brass options. Quality brass comes at a higher cost.
There is an inherent accuracy in all 6.5 mm's which is attributable in part to the high B.C's of bullets available in the calibre, they stay true.
A mate and I recently built rifles in 6.5 Creedmoor for silhouette shooting, his is on a Howa action, mine on a Model 70 Winchester. They are both very accurate rifles and we have gotten similar sub 1/2" accuracy out of them using different loads. The round does appear to be quite flexible when it comes to reloading.
I certainly wouldn't hesitate in loading up some gamekings and hunting any of our common game animals.

[bladeracer]

Hey Guys, round the traps of late it seems that the 6.5 Creedmoor is the go to cal for long range.I certainly have NFI in regards to this round.

Now where does it sit in the tree of calibres ?

Is it a bigger cal than a .308?

Is it a viable hunting round?

Or is it a fancy overpriced round?

Thanks in advance. As I know there are a few here with some great knowledge

Ozzie Reviews just uploaded this :

https://youtu.be/vGSKWjzntDU

It's basically 6.5x55mm but fits a short action.
No - 6.5mm is 0.264".
Absolutely, but not legal for the larger deer species.
Perhaps - I'd expect a modern 6.5mm Creedmoor rifle to shoot better than an M38/96 milsurp, but it would depend on what you want to use it for.

[Dogger]

Hi ive been having a look at 6.5 Creedmoor lately, in the shape of all the new tactical chassis that are popping up now from the US of A. Standard rifles in very expensive bodies, sounds like my ex. The Tikka, Howa and Savage are shooters. I feel the Creedmoor is an Americanized 6.5x55 Swede, im aware it was designed by US shooter David Tubbs. But it's a swede, American s take ideas from others like the Springfield 03 it's a copy of Spanish 7x57 mauser captured during the Spanish American war. Sorry i prattle, the 6.5 Creedmoor has low recoil and high BC. On the down side there are no dies as yet in Australia, case's expensive and our ammo prices belong to a third world country. Buyer beware

[Sako308]

Ballistically the 6.5CM is identical to .260, and has taken off a lot more in the US because manufacturers have been producing quality match ammunition for it, while 260Rem has been more a reloaders cartridge with few match loadings available off the shelf. This is also starting to change.

Here in Australia its actually reversed, .260 is wildly popular because of the ability to easily resize 308 and 243 to 260, as components and loaded ammunition for 6.5CM was expensive. This is slowly changing with the increased popularity, ammo is getting cheaper, components are getting cheaper and more proliferate due to an increased number of manufacturers getting involved.

Like the 260, Its a great cartridge with exceptional performance, but most of the hype is simply driven buy the US market. 260rem has been around Australia and killing things well for a few decades now.

Frank over at Snipershide did this video comparing the two and explains a good deal.

https://youtu.be/B8Qf1mIEY7E

[sungazer]

It is well liked in the target guns F open for the long range a flatter trajectory and used for 1000yrds. However IMHO it does lose its energy rather fast the recommended 1000ft/lb for killing things ethically is lost at about 400m. Therefore the hunting side of it again IMHO is not as versatile as the 308.
I have 243 and before I bought it I thought yeah great gun not as much recoil lighter and flatter so not so much to worry about when out in the field.
All that is true however it makes as much noise if not more than the 308. I would have liked a long range flat less recoil and quite. I guess you cant have everything.

[Cooper]

I have been seeing a fair factory ammo for 6.5 Creedmoor in gun shops lately. Dies and Hornady cases seem to be readily available. Lapua is also making brass now but it runs small rifle primer and small flash hole. Also seems to be a fair selection of 6.5mm projectiles available.

[bladeracer]

It is well liked in the target guns F open for the long range a flatter trajectory and used for 1000yrds. However IMHO it does lose its energy rather fast the recommended 1000ft/lb for killing things ethically is lost at about 400m. Therefore the hunting side of it again IMHO is not as versatile as the 308.
I have 243 and before I bought it I thought yeah great gun not as much recoil lighter and flatter so not so much to worry about when out in the field.
All that is true however it makes as much noise if not more than the 308. I would have liked a long range flat less recoil and quite. I guess you cant have everything.

Have you tried 7mm-08?

[sungazer]

No I haven't tried the 7mm.

The reason the brass is made with the small primer is that it is believed that this produces a better or more consistent cartridge hence more accurate. A lot of the 308 target F Class competitors also use the Lapua 308 Palma brass this also uses the small primer. The small primer pocket means there is more brass at the bottom of the cartridge this makes them stronger and last longer reloading wise.

[Sako308]

Small primer 'Palma' style or standard large primer only becomes relevant if you will be running your loads to chase maximum velocity, as the small primer cases were developed to handle higher pressures. Ballistically they perform the same, although some anecdotal evidence from the 6.5x47 lapua development shows that switching from LR to SR primers gave a more constant ignition.

The 7mm-08 is another understated cartridge with a good selection of high BC pills.

[duncan61]

I wrote to a barrel maker over East recently about re chambering my .243 to a suitable long range target rifle and their recommendation was 260 Rem or 6.5 Creedmoor.I did lead with the suggestion of 7/08 but it was dismissed as a long range target round.I wonder is there any foundation in this theory.Could .5 mill make that big a difference???

[duncan61]

150 GR. SIE HPBT AR2209 .284" 2.800" 42.0 2549 40600 cup 45.4 2724 51500 cup 7mm/08
142 GR. SIE HPBT AR2209 .264" 2.780" 38.8 2573 52300 psi 41.5 2694 59800 psi 6.5 CR
142 GR. SIE HPBT AR2208 .264" 2.350" 27.9 2250 40900 cup 29.7 2396 49600 cup 6.5 BR
142 GR. SIE HPBT AR2209 .264" 2.780" 41.5 2590 50100 psi 44.5 2735 58000 psi 260 Rem
I am not seeing a big difference can some one enlighten me why one is so much better than another it looks like personal choice and how much you are willing to spend

[bladeracer]

I wrote to a barrel maker over East recently about re chambering my .243 to a suitable long range target rifle and their recommendation was 260 Rem or 6.5 Creedmoor.I did lead with the suggestion of 7/08 but it was dismissed as a long range target round.I wonder is there any foundation in this theory.Could .5 mill make that big a difference???

Rechambering a 6mm tube to take 6.5mm bullets?
Do you mean rebarreling?

I would go 7mm-08 out of those three for long-range target shooting. Long range shooting is all about beating the wind.

[bladeracer]

150 GR. SIE HPBT AR2209 .284" 2.800" 42.0 2549 40600 cup 45.4 2724 51500 cup 7mm/08
142 GR. SIE HPBT AR2209 .264" 2.780" 38.8 2573 52300 psi 41.5 2694 59800 psi 6.5 CR
142 GR. SIE HPBT AR2208 .264" 2.350" 27.9 2250 40900 cup 29.7 2396 49600 cup 6.5 BR
142 GR. SIE HPBT AR2209 .264" 2.780" 41.5 2590 50100 psi 44.5 2735 58000 psi 260 Rem
I am not seeing a big difference can some one enlighten me why one is so much better than another it looks like personal choice and how much you are willing to spend

For enlightenment look at the BC, trajectory and wind drift of the bullets.
.626 for the 6.5mm, .429 for the 7mm, but the 150 doesn't take advantage of the 7mm. Try the 168gn HPBT at .488.
You will need a tight barrel twist to use the 142gn 6.5mm - 8" minimum (Ruger American is 8"). You'd more likely be using the 130gn HPBT with BC of .355.
Ruger American 7mm-08 is 9" twist which limits me to around the 168-175gn range.

[sungazer]

I would say that personal choice is the largest factor in choosing a caliber. The next or maybe the first should be intended use for instance if target shooting the caliber and even bullet weight and manufacturer can be a determining factor. If you try to make the gun multi use which can be done you have to make some sacrifices or put up with some inconveniences limitations ect.
It is interesting however that on a lot of occasions that there is very little differences in scores across say F open where you can use any caliber and bullet weight and even compare this to say F/TR or F Standard where there are restrictions. This sort of goes back to say your personal preference is Ok but you may need to be a better shot, say at reading wind and so many other factors.

[sungazer]

Personal choice goes to a lot of parts of the gun as well that can have large influences. For instance Stocks have a look at the diversity out there and even in the competitions there is a large range from old style wooden stock to Aluminum Chassis, Tube guns, cast Aluminum I have seen them all line up on the same mound. then there are the scopes. I see a few posts back the Bladeracer said he would not recommend a FFP scope. He is not wrong that is his personal preference. For me I like the Second Focal plane on my target rifles there is no need to know what the distance is, there is no need to work out how far you missed the centre bull by. This information is all given to you so you can set and adjust the scope from that. However on my hunting rifles I like the First Focal Plane and a Mil retical with markings as you can adjust the zoom as much and as quickly as you like and you can still immediately see the size of the object and can use hold off for range or adjust the scope. The Mil retical for us metric users makes visualizing scale so easy.

[Gamerancher]

With regards comparisons between 6.5, 7mm and .308cal, as can be seen in the information below, for the given 2500f/s velocity the 6.5 shoots both flatter with less wind drift and better retained energy at long range than both the 7mm and .308 calibre bullets.
This is why the various 6.5mm's are very popular in long range shooting.
Yes, it is a slightly lighter bullet and yes, you can get higher velocities out of each, but this is only a "for instance" example. Trying to compare apples and apples.

6.5 Creedmoor

Ballistic Coefficient 0.626 Velocity (ft/s) 2500 Weight (grains) 142
Maximum Range (yds) 600 Interval (yds) 100 Drag Function G1
Sight Height (inches) 1.5 Shooting Angle (degrees) 0 Zero Range (yds) 200
Wind Speed (mph) 10 Wind Angle (degrees) 90 Altitude (ft) 1000
Pressure (hg) 29.53 Temperature (F) 75 Humidity (%) 0.78

Ballistics Results - 6.5 Creedmoor
RANGE (YARDS) VELOCITY (FPS) ENERGY (FT.-LB.) TRAJECTORY (IN) WIND DRIFT (IN)
Muzzle 2500 1971 -1.5
100 2373 1775 2.2 0.6
200 2250 1596 0 2.3
300 2130 1430 -9.2 5.3
400 2014 1279 -26.1 9.7
500 1902 1140 -51.6 15.6
600 1794 1014 -86.7 23.1

7-08 Rem

Ballistic Coefficient 0.429 Velocity (ft/s) 2500 Weight (grains) 150
Maximum Range (yds) 600 Interval (yds) 100 Drag Function G1
Sight Height (inches) 1.5 Shooting Angle (degrees) 0 Zero Range (yds) 200
Wind Speed (mph) 10 Wind Angle (degrees) 90 Altitude (ft) 1000
Pressure (hg) 29.53 Temperature (F) 75 Humidity (%) 0.78

Ballistics Results - 7-08
RANGE (YARDS) VELOCITY (FPS) ENERGY (FT.-LB.) TRAJECTORY (IN) WIND DRIFT (IN)
Muzzle 2500 2082 -1.5 0
100 2316 1786 2.5 0.9
200 2139 1524 0 3.5
300 1971 1294 -10.1 8.1
400 1811 1092 -29.4 14.9
500 1660 918 -58.9 24.2
600 1521 770 -101.3 36.4

.308 Win
Ballistic Coefficient 0.390 Velocity (ft/s) 2500 Weight (grains) 150
Maximum Range (yds) 600 Interval (yds) 100 Drag Function G1
Sight Height (inches) 1.5 Shooting Angle (degrees) 0 Zero Range (yds) 200
Wind Speed (mph) 10 Wind Angle (degrees) 90 Altitude (ft) 1000
Pressure (hg) 29.53 Temperature (F) 75 Humidity (%) 0.78

Ballistics Results - .308 Win
RANGE (YARDS) VELOCITY (FPS) ENERGY (FT.-LB.) TRAJECTORY (IN) WIND DRIFT (IN)
Muzzle 2500 2082 -1.5
100 2298 1758 2.6 1
200 2105 1476 0 3.8
300 1922 1230 -10.4 9
400 1749 1019 -30.3 16.7
500 1589 841 -61.6 27.2
600 1442 693 -106.7 41

[Gwion]

How does that work out with a Berger 140 VLD out of the 7-08 with a BC of .510?

At a guess, the gap would close somewhat.

[bladeracer]

With regards comparisons between 6.5, 7mm and .308cal, as can be seen in the information below, for the given 2500f/s velocity the 6.5 shoots both flatter with less wind drift and better retained energy at long range than both the 7mm and .308 calibre bullets.
This is why the various 6.5mm's are very popular in long range shooting.
Yes, it is a slightly lighter bullet and yes, you can get higher velocities out of each, but this is only a "for instance" example. Trying to compare apples and apples.

6.5 Creedmoor

Ballistic Coefficient 0.626 Velocity (ft/s) 2500 Weight (grains) 142
Maximum Range (yds) 600 Interval (yds) 100 Drag Function G1
Sight Height (inches) 1.5 Shooting Angle (degrees) 0 Zero Range (yds) 200
Wind Speed (mph) 10 Wind Angle (degrees) 90 Altitude (ft) 1000
Pressure (hg) 29.53 Temperature (F) 75 Humidity (%) 0.78

Ballistics Results - 6.5 Creedmoor
RANGE (YARDS) VELOCITY (FPS) ENERGY (FT.-LB.) TRAJECTORY (IN) WIND DRIFT (IN)
Muzzle 2500 1971 -1.5
100 2373 1775 2.2 0.6
200 2250 1596 0 2.3
300 2130 1430 -9.2 5.3
400 2014 1279 -26.1 9.7
500 1902 1140 -51.6 15.6
600 1794 1014 -86.7 23.1

7-08 Rem

Ballistic Coefficient 0.429 Velocity (ft/s) 2500 Weight (grains) 150
Maximum Range (yds) 600 Interval (yds) 100 Drag Function G1
Sight Height (inches) 1.5 Shooting Angle (degrees) 0 Zero Range (yds) 200
Wind Speed (mph) 10 Wind Angle (degrees) 90 Altitude (ft) 1000
Pressure (hg) 29.53 Temperature (F) 75 Humidity (%) 0.78

Ballistics Results - 7-08
RANGE (YARDS) VELOCITY (FPS) ENERGY (FT.-LB.) TRAJECTORY (IN) WIND DRIFT (IN)
Muzzle 2500 2082 -1.5 0
100 2316 1786 2.5 0.9
200 2139 1524 0 3.5
300 1971 1294 -10.1 8.1
400 1811 1092 -29.4 14.9
500 1660 918 -58.9 24.2
600 1521 770 -101.3 36.4

.308 Win
Ballistic Coefficient 0.390 Velocity (ft/s) 2500 Weight (grains) 150
Maximum Range (yds) 600 Interval (yds) 100 Drag Function G1
Sight Height (inches) 1.5 Shooting Angle (degrees) 0 Zero Range (yds) 200
Wind Speed (mph) 10 Wind Angle (degrees) 90 Altitude (ft) 1000
Pressure (hg) 29.53 Temperature (F) 75 Humidity (%) 0.78

Ballistics Results - .308 Win
RANGE (YARDS) VELOCITY (FPS) ENERGY (FT.-LB.) TRAJECTORY (IN) WIND DRIFT (IN)
Muzzle 2500 2082 -1.5
100 2298 1758 2.6 1
200 2105 1476 0 3.8
300 1922 1230 -10.4 9
400 1749 1019 -30.3 16.7
500 1589 841 -61.6 27.2
600 1442 693 -106.7 41

I don't think you are comparing apple to apples though with this example. To be able to use the 142gn 6.5mm bullet will likely require a custom barrel.
Try running the same numbers with the 130gn .335BC 6.5mm bullet that you'd be shooting in most off-the-shelf rifles.
Or if you want to know the absolute best case try the 7mm 180gn ELD-M .796BC.

[Gamerancher]

Reply to Gwion,
Yes, it does. The 6.5 still has the edge though. I have both and my results have been in line with the data. I used to have a 6.5mm/.257 Ackley. That thing would send Sierra 155gr match kings down range @ 3000f/s, shot flat and straight, would put 1 & 1/2 " 5 shot groups @ 500m. Bit hard on throats though.

140gr 7mm .510BC.
Muzzle 2500 1943 -1.5 0
100 2344 1709 2.4 0.7
200 2195 1497 0 2.9
300 2050 1307 -9.7 6.7
400 1912 1136 -27.6 12.2
500 1779 984 -55.1 19.7
600 1654 850 -93.6 29.4

[sungazer]

Like wise if you were using the Berger 155 gr (VLD Match target, Match Fullbore Target, Match Hybrid Target) or the Sierra 155 gr HPBT Palma Match King, 2155, 2156.
Perhaps a better comparison would be to use the maximum weight projectile and powder combination as listed in ADI and then to a comparison as that would be the Calibers best potential.

Sending a Sierra 155 Match King at 2940 or above is the standard practice and load for most competitors as it keeps the projectile above supersonic at the 1000 yds so you don't get the issues with the trans sonic zone. Its not that big of a load when you use a 30 inch barrel aging pretty standard for target rifles.

[bladeracer]

Reply to Gwion,
Yes, it does. The 6.5 still has the edge though. I have both and my results have been in line with the data. I used to have a 6.5mm/.257 Ackley. That thing would send Sierra 155gr match kings down range @ 3000f/s, shot flat and straight, would put 1 & 1/2 " 5 shot groups @ 500m. Bit hard on throats though.

140gr 7mm .510BC.
Muzzle 2500 1943 -1.5 0
100 2344 1709 2.4 0.7
200 2195 1497 0 2.9
300 2050 1307 -9.7 6.7
400 1912 1136 -27.6 12.2
500 1779 984 -55.1 19.7
600 1654 850 -93.6 29.4

Where do you get 6.5mm 155gn Sierra Matchkings?
And what twist do they require?

[bladeracer]

However on my hunting rifles I like the First Focal Plane...

You don't find the FFP reticle becomes obstructive at longer ranges though?

[Gamerancher]

Reply to Bladeracer, et al,
So maybe one apple was a"granny-smith" Still , was implying similar weights at same MV's.
Yes, as I said, you can change the ingredients for the various calibres and the results will be different.( please refer to the 1st line of my original post)
As for the 180gr 7mm ELD-M, you 'aint running that bullet in an "off the shelf" 7-08 rifle either.
You need a 1 in 8" twist rate to run the 142gr 6.5mm. Pretty sure any factory rifle chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor will have 1 in 8".
I built mine with a 1 in 7.5" twist rate, just because.
Also can't find the bullet you are refering to,"130gr, .335BC". Just had a quick look and found numerous 6.5's from 108gr and up and all had BC's above .450.
Even a Hornady interlock, a spire point, flat based hunting bullet has a BC of .445.

Sierra don't make the 6.5mm 155gr MK's anymore, pity, they were a great bullet.

[bladeracer]

Reply to Bladeracer, et al,
So maybe one apple was a"granny-smith" Still , was implying similar weights at same MV's.
Yes, as I said, you can change the ingredients for the various calibres and the results will be different.( please refer to the 1st line of my original post)
As for the 180gr 7mm ELD-M, you 'aint running that bullet in an "off the shelf" 7-08 rifle either.
You need a 1 in 8" twist rate to run the 142gr 6.5mm. Pretty sure any factory rifle chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor will have 1 in 8".
I built mine with a 1 in 7.5" twist rate, just because.
Also can't find the bullet you are refering to,"130gr, .335BC". Just had a quick look and found numerous 6.5's from 108gr and up and all had BC's above .450.
Even a Hornady interlock, a spire point, flat based hunting bullet has a BC of .445.

Sierra don't make the 6.5mm 155gr MK's anymore, pity, they were a great bullet.

Similar weights at similar MV would be fine if you're comparing bullets in the same caliber. Not in different calibers. A larger caliber requires a heavier bullet to offer similar ballistics. If that caliber also allows higher velocity then clearly that is an advantage also.

[Gwion]

Reply to Bladeracer, et al,
So maybe one apple was a"granny-smith" Still , was implying similar weights at same MV's.
Yes, as I said, you can change the ingredients for the various calibres and the results will be different.( please refer to the 1st line of my original post)
As for the 180gr 7mm ELD-M, you 'aint running that bullet in an "off the shelf" 7-08 rifle either.
You need a 1 in 8" twist rate to run the 142gr 6.5mm. Pretty sure any factory rifle chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor will have 1 in 8".
I built mine with a 1 in 7.5" twist rate, just because.
Also can't find the bullet you are refering to,"130gr, .335BC". Just had a quick look and found numerous 6.5's from 108gr and up and all had BC's above .450.
Even a Hornady interlock, a spire point, flat based hunting bullet has a BC of .445.

Sierra don't make the 6.5mm 155gr MK's anymore, pity, they were a great bullet.

Similar weights at similar MV would be fine if you're comparing bullets in the same caliber. Not in different calibers. A larger caliber requires a heavier bullet to offer similar ballistics. If that caliber also allows higher velocity then clearly that is an advantage also.

The whole point of the argument is that the 6.5 has very good ballistics when talking weight for weight.

[Gamerancher]

Go back and check Duncan61's question, that was what I was replying to.

Yes mate, you can get better results with heavy for calibre VLD bullets no matter what, BUT, that comes with the trade off of increased recoil as you go up in calibre. I'm sure a 7" artillery round will outperform a 7mm with regards downrange energy and wind drift but I'd hate to hold onto one.

That's the main reason why I built my Creedmoor. After 3 lots of shoulder surgery I was looking for something that I could still shoot 500m Silhouette with.
The 6.5 Creedmoor has the accuracy I want, the down-range energy required to knock down rams with a much reduced "felt" recoil compared to my 7-08's.
As for ammo and component availability, I had no worries getting a set of dies and the 200 cases,( Hornady ) that I wanted. I also had 2000 projectiles sitting on the shelf so had that side covered. I have a Sako 75 in 6.5 X 55 which is nice to shoot and extremely accurate but I still wanted to go down, in recoil, from there.
It's all good, great discussion is supposed to be the point of the forum isn't it?

[Gwion]

Maybe a better comparison would be to find a bullet of similar BC for each cartridge and see how much powder it takes to push it it, say 2650fps.

For instance, i shoot the 162Amax (stated BC= 0.625, stated SD= 0.287) at approximately 2650fps (from memory, maybe a touch slower: will double check data) from a 24" barrel, using 43.3gn of BM8208:


Calculated Table
Rng / Drop/ Wind / Velocity /Energy
(yd)/ (MOA) / (MOA)/ (FPS)/ (Ft/lb)
0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 2655.0 /2535.2
100 / -0.0 / 0.5 /2507.7 /2261.7
200 / -1.9 / 1.1/ 2365.0/ 2011.7
300 / -4.5 / 1.7 /2227.2/ 1784.0
400 / -7.5 / 2.4/ 2094.3/ 1577.4
500 / -10.8/ 3.1/ 1965.9 /1390.0
600 / -14.5/ 3.8/ 1841.7 /1219.9
700 / -18.5/ 4.6/ 1721.2/ 1065.5
800 / -22.9/ 5.5/ 1604.2/ 925.6
900 / -27.7/ 6.4/ 1490.8/ 799.3
1000 / -33.1/ 7.3/ 1381.1/ 686.0