It did sorta....as was mentioned the 6.5-284 is very close to the PRC in performance. It was also building a fan base with err...."regular"? consumers, being chambered in a few factory guns. When the CM was introduced it pretty well killed the average consumers intrest in the 6.5-284.
6.5 Creedmoor past present future
- Thread starter horsemen61
- Start date
- Status
Old Stumpy
Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
- Messages
- 1,451
Well, I'm sure that .30-30 Winchester outsells them all. Does that make it more of a winner than the Creedmoor or the PRC?
if thats true, and im not saying it isnt, i simply dont have any current figures to reference, then at least in terms of ammo sales yes, id say it is a "winner"
id be even more interested to see a comparison of the number of 6.5cm rifles purchased in the last 2 or 3 years, as compared to .30-30s.
i can say this tho, Christensen Arms lists the CM as being 52% of the chamberings sold in a 12 month period upto 4/10/2018
DDDWho
Member
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2016
- Messages
- 793
I’m 79 years old. I’ve spent a lifetime hunting and fishing and gathering equipment for those pursuits. I have rifles for every conceivable situation I think I need. I just don’t know where to fit another in. I’ll leave it to y’all to gather the new stuff
someguy2800
Member
Ammo sales are a poor indicator. 6.5 creedmoor has been the number one selling chambering for almost every rifle maker for several years.
someguy2800
Member
Again and for the last time I don’t consider besting the 6.5 creedmoor’s velocity by 200 FPS to be superior. I don’t need or want the extra velocity. I have found the ideal velocity that I like in a rifle chambering is to be able to push a heavy for caliber bullet to about 2700-2800 FPS. That gives me good ballistics for the ranges I shoot, with a good compromise of powder efficiency and recoil, and the bullets perform reliabiliably at that speed range. If I want more power I go up a caliber. I’ve no desire or need for 3000+ FPS velocities. You may think differently and that’s fine but I don’t want it and it’s not superior to me for what I want to use it for.
Old Stumpy
Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
- Messages
- 1,451
Thank you someguy2800 for an interesting discussion over the merits of the 6.5 PRC versus the 6.5 Creedmoor. While we may disagree on some points it has been educational. I prefer to think of this not an argument as much as a scholarly discussion between two old rabbis.
Shalom.
Shalom.
Old Stumpy
Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
- Messages
- 1,451
I wasn't referring to rifles when I said that .30-30's outsold them all, but ammo.
From what I can tell Christensen Arms specializes in bolt action rifles and specialized semi-auto rifles, and retails to a relatively niche market, so it isn't terribly surprising that 6.5 Creedmoor would be 52% of their sales. That hardly reflects the sales in North America overall.
A quick look at my local gun shop's inventory on-line revealed 52 / 6.5 Creedmoors in stock, 55 / .30-06 Springfields, and 92 / .308 Winchester rifles listed. They are a general sporting retailer that sells all types of rifles and handguns with no particular preference one way or the other.
So, while the Creedmoor is indeed a popular chambering, like the .30-06, the .308 seems the most popular.
As far as the .30-30 is concerned, I would guess that this is still a rifle that sells mainly out of department stores, with probably Marlins accounting for the vast majority of sales. How many sell compared to all the others, I don't know. These days .308 Winchester rifles probably outsell it by a wide margin.
However, when you consider the vast number of .30-30 rifles already out there, I would not be surprised if ammo sales each year are nearly the same as .308, and exceed the Creedmoor by quite a bit.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,328
I
See the “vital triangle” pictured above.
Gemsbok are tough and wildebeest are even tougher. This is an interesting subject. Guys like bell and Taylor and others who used the old .256 Mannlicher, reported glowingly about its penetration on even heavy game. They of course did not have the bullet technology that we have so they used heavy for caliber cup and core and solids for reliable penetration.
Now we have incredible bullets that penetrate just as well as the old heavy stuff but they do it at much less sectional density due to superior construction.
With that being said the number one issue that I see with African game and their reputation for toughness is lousy shot placement. If you shoot an African animal, except for big cats, behind the shoulder you’ve gut shot them PERIOD! African game has their diaphragm tucked up right behind the line of the shoulder. Their heart and lungs lie between the shoulder and do not extend behind the line of the shoulder.
Shooting a gemsbok or a wildebeest through the “vital triangle” with even a light caliber will kill them quickly. Shoot them a little far back and you’ve got a full blown rodeo on your hands. Where weight and construction really shine through is when you’ve got to get deep penetration through some trash, like big bones or paunch before reaching the vitals. That’s where a light caliber falls down.
BTW in colonial Africa speak cup and core was called a “patched” and a solid was called a “non patched” bullet. Some British makers measure bore diameter from the lans not the grooves. So a .256 was actually a .264 by our measurements. Just like a .404 is actually a .423 or a .419 or a .411 depending on who built your rifle.
See the “vital triangle” pictured above.
Gemsbok are tough and wildebeest are even tougher. This is an interesting subject. Guys like bell and Taylor and others who used the old .256 Mannlicher, reported glowingly about its penetration on even heavy game. They of course did not have the bullet technology that we have so they used heavy for caliber cup and core and solids for reliable penetration.
Now we have incredible bullets that penetrate just as well as the old heavy stuff but they do it at much less sectional density due to superior construction.
With that being said the number one issue that I see with African game and their reputation for toughness is lousy shot placement. If you shoot an African animal, except for big cats, behind the shoulder you’ve gut shot them PERIOD! African game has their diaphragm tucked up right behind the line of the shoulder. Their heart and lungs lie between the shoulder and do not extend behind the line of the shoulder.
Shooting a gemsbok or a wildebeest through the “vital triangle” with even a light caliber will kill them quickly. Shoot them a little far back and you’ve got a full blown rodeo on your hands. Where weight and construction really shine through is when you’ve got to get deep penetration through some trash, like big bones or paunch before reaching the vitals. That’s where a light caliber falls down.
BTW in colonial Africa speak cup and core was called a “patched” and a solid was called a “non patched” bullet. Some British makers measure bore diameter from the lans not the grooves. So a .256 was actually a .264 by our measurements. Just like a .404 is actually a .423 or a .419 or a .411 depending on who built your rifle.
Last edited:
H&Hhunter said:
My coworker said the same thing yesterday. He's been to Africa a number of times but it was a new experience for his wife and kids. His wife did exactly what you describe on a wildebeest with shot placement that would have been perfect for deer or elk but was a gut shot that day. The gemsbok all exhibited good shot placement with double lung hits and some bullets recovered under the hide on the far side. There was very little blood, even from the bullets that passed through. He mentioned that the PH was impressed with how the rifle/cartridge performed on most of the animals but they all agreed that it was less than ideal on the gemsbok. I think the conclusion was that gemsbok are very tough animals.
kimberkid
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2010
- Messages
- 1,654
Why does this thread remind me of the ...
9mm vs 40S&W vs 45ACP debate
or maybe the AR vs AK debate
or the 1911 vs High- Power
There is so much opinion and/or what people are comfortable with and/or what they shoot better with ...
Its a pointless debate.
...
9mm vs 40S&W vs 45ACP debate
or maybe the AR vs AK debate
or the 1911 vs High- Power
There is so much opinion and/or what people are comfortable with and/or what they shoot better with ...
Its a pointless debate.
...
horsemen61
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 6,755
Kimberkid this wasn’t meant to be a thread like that I just wanted to discuss the 6.5 Creedmoor not to bicker about what is better or not better
horsemen61
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 6,755
Update!
MOVING FORWARD with this thread let’s keep it about the 6.5 Creedmoor and not about what it ain’t
MOVING FORWARD with this thread let’s keep it about the 6.5 Creedmoor and not about what it ain’t
sage5907
Member
It's hard for people to discuss the good points of a cartridge like the 6.5 CM without saying things that don't make much sense. I get it that some people don't like the 270 Winchester but this statement is so shallow that it required a response.
Look at the data that Hornady puts out for their ELD bullets. The comparison is between the 270 winchester 145 grain ELD as compared to the 140 grain ELD for the CM. The 270 is about 200 fps faster at 200 yards and 100 fps faster at 500 yards. If you're going to compare cartridge speeds the same bullet design should be used for both cartridges. At 500 yards Hornady shows 2157 fps for the 270 and 2062 fps for the CM.
Last edited:
kimberkid
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2010
- Messages
- 1,654
I know ... but that's not what people turned it intokimberkid this wasn’t meant to be a thread like that I just wanted to discuss the 6.5 Creedmoor not to bicker about what is better or not better
. I've built an AR10 in 6.5 Creedmoor and a SiG SSG 3000 I bought a 6.5 Creedmoor barrel for because I have Osteoporosis (bone density -4.5) and I'm very happy with both, a Doc a Mayo Clinic who is also a "gun nut" warned me that unless I want to break a shoulder/collar bone to not shoot anything with more recoil than a 7.62x39 ... and the 6.5 Creedmoor is less!
Last edited:
horsemen61
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2011
- Messages
- 6,755
^^ I’m sorry to hear that KimberKid I’m glad the 6.5 Creedmoor has worked for you!
kimberkid
Member
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2010
- Messages
- 1,654
It's worked out wonderfully, and after a long unlucky medical streak I was very fortunate to have come across a doctor that is an avid collector and shooter as most have an aversion to firearm ownership, no matter the use.
I started the discussion a bit cautiously not knowing if he was a flaming liberal or what ... He seems like a pretty good guy! I wouldn't mind going shooting with him ... see him twice a year and he always remembers that I'm a shooter, collector & reloader ... but it's probably in his notes.
I started the discussion a bit cautiously not knowing if he was a flaming liberal or what ... He seems like a pretty good guy! I wouldn't mind going shooting with him ... see him twice a year and he always remembers that I'm a shooter, collector & reloader ... but it's probably in his notes.
Flatbush Harry
Member
BTW, despite my affection for the 6.5 Swede and .260 Rem, I have grown to like the 6.5 Creed a great deal. I recently swapped a Sako Bavarian in .300 WSM (I no longer hunt since I turned 72) for a Sako TRG-22 in 6.5 Creed. Sako makes great rifles! Indeed, I'll probably pick up a Bartlein 6.5 Creed barrel for my AI AT when I finish shooting out my .260 Rem barrel. I'm looking forward to a rigorous load development process for this fine caliber.
I don't know about the future, or I'd be rich. I've got a 30-06 that I don't shoot much after screwing up both shoulders. So I wanted something with less recoil, but more range than my .223/5.56 ARs. About that time, 6.5 CM is everywhere, and seems to duplicate 6.5x55 ballistics, which I know is relatively soft shooting compared to a 30-06 or 308. I now have an accurate, lightweight bolt action suitable for hunting or long range target work that won't aggravate old shoulder injuries. The ammo is easily available, and not overly expensive. I can get an AR-10 chambered in it if I so desire. Until someone comes up with a better do-all intermediate caliber I think it will be around.
Old Stumpy
Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2019
- Messages
- 1,451
Really, it's all been said, hasn't it?
Last edited:
Garandimal
member
It is disingenuous and pathetic.
6.5 CM 143 XLD-X:
Test Barrel (24")
Range - Velocity - Energy - Trajectory
Muzzle - 2700 - - - 2315 - - -1.5
100 yd - 2557 - - - 2076- - - 1.9
200 yd - 2419 - - - 1858- - - 0
300 yd - 2285 - - - 1658- - - -7.9
400 yd - 2156 - - - 1475- - -22.4
500 yd - 2030 - - - 1308- - -44.4
.270 Win 145 XLD-X:
Test Barrel (24")
Range - Velocity - Energy - Trajectory
Muzzle - 2970 - - - 2840 - - -1.5
100 yd - 2796 - - - 2516 - - - 1.5
200 yd - 2627 - - - 2222 - - - 0
300 yd - 2465 - - - 1955 - - - -6.5
400 yd - 2306 - - - 1714 - - -18.8
500 yd - 2157 - - - 1497 - - -37.6
They are not even in the same class.
GR
They are not in the same class of cartridges.
The creedmoor is a uses 45+/- grains of powder, from a 2.8" cartridge. The .270 uses 58+/- grains of powder from a 3.3" cartridge.
I have multiple powder load data that drives a 140 class bullet to 2800+ from a 22" barrel.
I also have data for h100v that drives a 145eldx to 3050 from a 24" barrel.
the balistics are close enough that I don't see any real advantage either way. I'd have no issue using either on any non dangerous game. I
up to the shooter to decide if the extra 200fps and 500lbs (at Max) of energy are something they actually need, or want. Same thing goes for the reduced recoil and sleeker bullets of the 6.5s
we used to compare the .270 to the 06 all the time, so honestly I feel that if we're comparing the CM to the .270 it's doin just fine.
Garandimal
member
It's comparable to the 6.5x55 or maybe even the 7mm-08.
It's "CreedMagic" to say that it outperforms the .270 in the field.
GR
wally
Member
I'd bet against this unless the US military (and perhaps NATO) decide to adopt it.
But it might become the most common center fire rifle target shooting and hunting rifles. Quality ammo for ~$1/round gives it a leg up on most everything else.
I shot one on the 4th of July and liked it a lot, but I'll stick to .308 until I can find a place to shoot significantly beyond 400 yards. My wife does fine with 5.56 out to 300 yards.
HardCase
Member
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2019
- Messages
- 10
I am finding Federal ammo with 140 grain match bullets in a plastic ammo can for $149 for 200 rounds. That's 75 cents each. Hard to find newly manufactured 308 with decent bullets for that. I see more variety of ammo for the 6.5C than for any other centerfire rifle round, except maybe 223/556 these days.
- Status
