6.5 Creedmoor or 30-06?

[jmr40]

I recently bought a new rifle---had considered the 6.5 but came home with a .308----more oooommmppphhh and way cheaper ammo.

Way cheaper?

6.5 CM ammo
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/4...oor-129-grain-interlock-spire-point-box-of-20
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2...nition-65-creedmoor-143-grain-eld-x-box-of-20

308 ammo
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/2...ter-150-grain-interlock-spire-point-box-of-20
https://www.midwayusa.com/product/5...tion-308-winchester-178-grain-eld-x-box-of-20

more oooommmppphhh ?

Forget energy numbers, bullet penetration is what kills stuff. The bullet on the left is a 143 gr 6.5. Bullet #2 is a 150 gr 308. While the 308/150 leaves the muzzle 100 fps faster the 6.5/143 out penetrates it at any range, on any game. And within 200 yards the 6.5 is faster with more energy, shoots flatter, and has less wind drift and with 20% less recoil.

Bullet #3 is a 178 gr 308. Now we have equal penetration compared to 6.5 and similar energy, wind drift and trajectory numbers out to about 500 yards. But now with about 25% more recoil.

For hunting inside of 500 yards there isn't much difference other than recoil if you use the heavier 308 bullets. but with the more commonly used 150-165 gr 308 bullets the 6.5 is the better choice. Beyond 500 yards for target shooting it isn't close. The 308 starts running out of gas at about 800-900 yards. The 6.5 is still viable well past a mile.



I've used 30-06 since the 1970's. I'll never say anything bad about the round. But until you get to big bear, moose, or elk it isn't necessary. It probably was always more gun than needed, but certainly with todays modern bullets it is way more gun than 95% of hunters need. I downsided to 308 years ago to get less recoil. I have lots of 308 rifles that I like and ain't selling. But I've experimented enough with the 6.5 CM to say it is the better cartridge. At this stage of my life I'll just use what I have for the rest of my hunting career. But I'd advise any new shooter to go with the 6.5 over 308 every time.

For hunting it is probably more closely compared to the 270 which is 6.8mm and is a proven game killer. The 6.5 CM shoots the same bullet weights 100-150 fps slower than the 270. But within 200 yards have almost caught up in speed. Anything the 270 will kill, the 6.5 CM will kill and at the same ranges. And do it with less recoil.

 

[horsey300]

Gotta vote creed of the options given.

 

[SunnySlopes]

My wife bought me a BLR LT Monte Carlo 30-06, 22" barrel 5 rounds box magazine black walnut stock. I can't pick it up for ten days at my local FFL.I will post a picture when I bring it home in ten days.

I have an older BLR in 308 that's a peach of a field gun. It's all steel receiver but only weighs ~6 pounds, thereabouts. And it's got an old Redfield 1-4 scope that makes it ideal for hunting in thick woods. I like the BLR because unlike my Winchester and Marlin levers of old, the BLR has locking lugs on the bolt. Plus is the detachable magazine. The other levers, excepting my Golden Boy Henry, necessitate cycling the action to unload the gun. With the Browning you just drop the mag and then eject the chambered round. It also dispenses with the side loading gate. I always hated loading like that, especially on a cold day with cold hands.

Finally is the trigger group which is integral to the lever. Other levers leave the trigger and lever separate. Nothing like pinching your fingers in a quick follow up shot.

Anyway, you'll love it.

 

[IdaD]

My 30-06 is pretty light and I've never found the recoil bothersome. For hunting I'd go '06 all the way. Ammo is everywhere, it's pretty inexpensive and you can go with lighter recoil rounds or hot loads that bring plenty of heat and have ballistics that aren't too far behind some of the magnums. For my purposes the two most versatile hunting rounds are 30-06 and 7mm Mag. I had a 30-06 first so that's my do-all between the two, although I've also acquired some more targeted (pardon the pun) game rifles over the years so the 30-06 doesn't get used quite as much these days.

For target shooting the 6.5 would be more comfortable, and it should be adequate up to deer size game if that's all you plan to hunt.

 

[ColoradoMinuteMan]

As has been alluded to already, what ethically kills animals is a projectile that maintains enough velocity, sectional density, bullet integrity and shot with enough precision to make a deep, destructive penetration into vital circulatory, pulmonary and central nervous systems.

If you’re a believer, like I am, that shot placement, velocity and bullet construction are the key ingredients to making that successful ethical kill, then there is absolutely no performance differential between two equitably constructed 6.5 Creedmoor and 30-06. With similarly constructed cartridges velocity and trajectory are nearly identical. With a similarly constructed bullet you can expect that both will penetrate, expand and destroy tissue with very similar results. If you don’t believe me please look at the data below. As you can see, the only area in which a 30-06 performs significantly “better” is in remaining energy on impact. As many expert are beginning to accept and repeat, is that energy doesn’t kill when it comes to small arms. Where energy does destroy is when it comes to things like explosive devices or large artillery shells where the concussion itself does the a significant amount of the damage and you aren’t relying upon projectiles to damage vital organs.

If you prefer 30-06 for reasons like local availability, selection, etc. I can understand that, but from a performance perspective there is no practical reason to choose it. Another consideration is a .308 Winchester which is generally more affordable than 30-06 with arguably more selection and availability. You can also see that the data supports that from a practical hunting perspective there is really not much difference unless you really get into long distances and heavy for caliber projectiles. Using a compatible .308 you can see that out to common hunting ranges velocity is within the range of deep penetration and expansion limitations (1800 FPS lead and copper constructed bullets, 2000 FPS solid copper bullets, 1600 FPS long range hunting projectiles like ELD-X). You can easily get expansion on anything out to 600 yards with 6.5 and 30-06, and 500 yards safely with anything but solid copper.

Let’s face it, if you’re a hunter beyond 500 yards you probably wouldn’t need to ask the question. Most hunting engagements are going to be far under 300 for the average hunter in which case there isn’t a single practical performance difference between the 3, or many other common big game cartridges for that matter (7mm-08, .270, etc).

 

[MrBorland]

shot placement, velocity and bullet construction are the key ingredients to making that successful ethical kill, then there is absolutely no performance differential between two equitably constructed 6.5 Creedmoor and 30-06.

Under ideal conditions, no. But whenever these discussions come up, some very experienced hunters here (cough...cough... @H&Hhunter ) often note that hunting conditions aren't always ideal, so the round with more oompf offers a bit more margin of error. How would the two rounds compare, for example, if they entered an elk or big mulie a bit quartered and/or hit a big bone?

 

[horsey300]

Under ideal conditions, no. But whenever these discussions come up, some very experienced hunters here (cough...cough... @H&Hhunter ) often note that hunting conditions aren't always ideal, so the round with more oompf offers a bit more margin of error. How would the two rounds compare, for example, if they entered an elk or big mulie a bit quartered and/or hit a big bone?

Considering the number of big mulies we've smoked with the .243, or elk that my grandma took with either .243 or 25-06, I'd say you're still ok. The trigger operator makes a bigger difference than frontal diameter.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I'm a huge fan of the .30-06, but if I was going to spend more time on the bench than hunting, I'd go with something else.
I'm not particularly recoil sensitive, but full throttle loads off the bench with the '06 gets tiresome quickly.

 

[IdaD]

Under ideal conditions, no. But whenever these discussions come up, some very experienced hunters here (cough...cough... @H&Hhunter ) often note that hunting conditions aren't always ideal, so the round with more oompf offers a bit more margin of error. How would the two rounds compare, for example, if they entered an elk or big mulie a bit quartered and/or hit a big bone?

I agree with this. I've taken big game with a 30-30, 7mm-08, 30-06 and 300 Weatherby. The ballistics of those rounds vary a lot but with good shot placement all of them, as well as a 6.5 CM, are capable of cleanly taking a deer or elk. I've never dressed out an animal taken with a 6.5 CM but there can be a significant difference in tissue damage in the other 4 cartridges I listed. Especially when it's not an ideal shot and you've put one, for instance, directly into a shoulder - the greater energy on target can absolutely make a big a difference. The tradeoff for the greater energy downrange is higher recoil, though, and everybody's tolerance for that varies. For me personally, I don't think recoil in a hunting rifle is a big deal at all - I don't fire them much and I've yet to feel any recoil when I'm shooting at game regardless of the rifle. If you're into long range accuracy in a target rifle I can see recoil being a significant consideration, though.

 

[Legionnaire]

I no longer own a .30 caliber rifle, either .30-06 or .308. I made the switch to short actions a few years ago (sold my last .30-06) and the switch to 6-7mm this year. My hunting battery now includes .223, .243, .260, and 7mm RSAUM. For your application--mostly targets, some medium game--I'd vote 6.5 Creedmoor all the way. The .30-06 is a capable classic, but in my opinion, the 6.5 is far and away the better target cartridge, and it is more than adequate for medium game at reasonable distances. Plus, you said you already have a .30-06 #1 that you can use if you think you need the extra energy.

6.5 Creedmoor, regardless of launcher.

 

[SunnySlopes]

I went to Bass Pro and checked out their Tikka line of rifles. Man, that's a smooth action. I'm sorely tempted to get one in the 6.5 cal. But I had read about complaints that the bolt shroud was plastic. Then I read the TX3 has a "metallic" bolt shroud. What's that mean? Why not say "metal?" Because I looked at the bolt shroud on the TX3s and it appears to be plastic.

Anyway, thanks for the suggestions. I'm going to wait for deer season to end to make a final selection. Gunbroker always has an abundance of deer rifles for sale then.

 

[H&Hhunter]

Under best case scenarios rounds like the 6.5 CM will absoloutly kill elk and moose out to 400 even 600 yards. When I say best case I mean the typical hunting show/magazine broadside pose with the hunter having a perfect prone rest and time to range said perfectly calm, perfectly posing critter on a sunny, windless evening. I would say that in real world hunting conditions in most of the country and in the situations which I hunt, that happens in about 5% of the kills I make.

Of course I don’t consider an 06 or the 6.5 CM to be a great choice for a long range hunting. Given similar velocity and similar bullet construction I’ll take a heavier, larger diameter bullet on large game every time. A 140 gr 6.5 round is not going to have the inertia to penetrate heavy bone and muscle like the 180 gr .308 round will. If you are doing long range hunting I’d go skip both the 06 and the 6.5 CM. Inside of say 500 yards on deer either will work, on stuff larger than deer, either will work but the 06 will work more “ better” under real world hunting conditions.

Don’t get me wrong the 6.5 CM is an okay round. But given the choice of quality 6.5 rounds available in a short action I’d take a .260 all day every day over the CM and a 6.5 PRC all day everyday and twice on Sunday over the CM. Or I can just shoot my daughters 6.5-06 in a standard action which gives 6.5 PRC performance and accuracy. In my opinion the 6.5 CM has only taken off over the .260 Remington due to a cool name a marketing hype. It offers nothing over a .260 Rem in fact it offers less.

Now back on topic.

If I was banging volume steel or paper and occasionally shooting a deer the 6.5 CM is the way to go. If I was buying a rifle for general hunting with the west included, and occasionally banging steel and paper I’d be looking more towards the 06.

 

[someguy2800]

Myself I’ve owned and hunted with a T3 for 15 years and I have no idea why someone would complain about the bolt shroud or desire to replace it, but they do make aftermarket aluminum ones. It’s a waste of money though as the original one is just not a problem.

 

[Gtscotty]

Mostly target shooting. Some medium game hunting.

For the actual uses you're asking about, between the two, 6.5 Creedmoor all day, everyday and twice on Sunday. Cheaper to shoot, better external ballistics, less recoil, easier to shoot better.

It seems obvious to me that by "some medium game hunting" you're saying mostly targets and steel, some deer or pigs. For some reason these threads always slide away from the normal game 95% of folks hunt into elk/moose/bears, etc. I personally believe that you should plan your purchases around your actual realistic uses, not theoretical maybe, someday, "if I win the lottery" type uses. Even as a WY resident I need something like 10-12 years worth of preference points to draw a moose tag in a nearby area... I'm not too concerned about how any rifles I buy this year will perform on moose. For medium game, the Creedmoor is plenty, I don't really believe that the '06 offers an advantage worth worrying about, but for high volume shooting it certainly does bring disadvantages.

The 6.5 and .30-06 are my main two hunting rounds, I got my cow elk last year, a muley buck this year and an antelope buck this year with the 6.5, and my cow elk this year with my .30-06. A buddy shot his two muleys, two antelope and cow elk this year with a 20" 6.5 at ranges from 200 yds to 400 yds using pedestrian 140gr SGKs; no problems and he did just about the same last year. I'd probably give the '06 a slight advantage on elk, but in general, I used similar bullets (Accubonds, LRXs) and they performed similarly, on medium game the 6.5 is plenty.

In my opinion the 6.5 CM has only taken off over the .260 Remington due to a cool name a marketing hype. It offers nothing over a .260 Rem in fact it offers less.

The .260 offers less than the 6.5 in the way of factory rifles (especially properly set up), factory ammo options and availability. .260 factory loads and even published load data are usually slower than the equivalent 6.5 loads and load data for the popular bullets. What does 6.5 offer less of these days?

 

[Jack B.]

Are you going to be buying factory ammo or reloading your own rounds. Check the prices and availability of factory ammo or components and compare. Then make your decision on your budget and what's easy to get your hands on and really look at what type of shooting you plan on doing.

 

[Llama Bob]

My advice would be to avoid the 700 like the plague regardless of caliber. They haven't been well made for a while. The ones I saw last time I was in a gun store were some of the worst non-discount rifles I've seen.

As far as the calibers, .30-06 is neither particularly useful nor particularly efficient. The combination of relatively large bore, long action, small base, high taper, and shallow shoulder produces a cartridge that does less downrange for more powder, more recoil, and more rifle weight. It's too big for the vast majority of NA game, and too small for truly large game or as a stopping rifle for dangerous game.

The fact is it's a loser of a cartridge and the following for it exists entirely because it was a service rifle cartridge. Unless your concern is ammo available in very small rural stores, it offers no advantage over better designed cartridges. So this choice is easy - 6.5CM.

 

[FL-NC]

6.5 CM, both for the caliber and the fact that it wouldn't be a newer 700.

 

[H&Hhunter]

The .260 offers less than the 6.5 in the way of factory rifles (especially properly set up), factory ammo options and availability. .260 factory loads and even published load data are usually slower than the equivalent 6.5 loads and load data for the popular bullets. What does 6.5 offer less of these days?

Of course the rifle availability and factory load option advantage is the result of the popularity of the 6.5 CM not because it’s got so much to offer over a .260. When looking at load data the 6.5 CM and the .260 are almost identical until you start getting into the heavier bullets and that’s where the .260 pulls away from the CM due to a slightly higher case capacity. It’s all a mute point, the 6.5 is the popular kid and the .260 has braces and horned rim glasses. So the man bun of rifle rounds the 6.5 CM wins the popularity contest.

No matter which way you cut it, or explain it, or rationalize it both are good rounds and the .260 has a slight ballistic advantage potential but not enough to lose any sleep over. They are so similar it always baffles me that the Creedmoor took off and the .260 died. It’s the cool name and an effective marketing campaign that pushed the 6.5 into the stratosphere because it sure as heck didn’t do it on stand alone performance.

 

[mgmorden]

Either will do both jobs. The 6.5 is a better target rifle. The .30-06 is a more capable hunting round (more capable as in it's good up into elk/moose weight animals, if it's deer or pronghorn they'll both do fine).

Since you mentioned mostly target shooting, then I'd say the 6.5. Or split the difference and get a .308. It kicks just a wee bit less than the '06, hits a bit harder than the Creed, and ammo for it tends to be fairly cheap.

 

[Gtscotty]

When looking at load data the 6.5 CM and the .260 are almost identical until you start getting into the heavier bullets and that’s where the .260 pulls away from the CM due to a slightly higher case capacity.

I see this repeated alot, but it's not really true. Sierra, Hornady, Speer, Alliant and Western powders load data all show higher max velocities for the 6.5 than the the .260 with the heavier 140gr bullets.

Hodgdon shows one 142gr .260 load that is 10fps faster than than the equivalent 6.5 load, but the max loads for the 6.5 are faster than the .260 for 140gr and 147gr bullets.

Nosler is the only load data I can find that shows a real velocity advantage for the .260 with heavier bullets, but their 6.5 velocities are nearly 100 fps off of most other sources.Maybe they know something all the other companies don't...

No matter which way you cut it, or explain it, or rationalize it both are good rounds and the .260 has a slight ballistic advantage potential but not enough to lose any sleep over.

It really doesn't have any advantages in a hunting or general purpose rifle beyond the "I was 6.5 before 6.5 was cool" hipster factor, which does appeal to some folks. I don't have anything against the round, I'm sure it kills deer with aplomb, but the mythos around it is a bit confusing when it doesn't offer any obvious advantages, and falls short in several tangible ways.

 

[Legionnaire]

Well, "I was 6.5 before 6.5 was cool ..."

If you want to "split the difference," go 7mm-08 rather than .308. But I still say stick with the 6.5 Creedmoor.

 

[someguy2800]

Of course the rifle availability and factory load option advantage is the result of the popularity of the 6.5 CM not because it’s got so much to offer over a .260. When looking at load data the 6.5 CM and the .260 are almost identical until you start getting into the heavier bullets and that’s where the .260 pulls away from the CM due to a slightly higher case capacity. It’s all a mute point, the 6.5 is the popular kid and the .260 has braces and horned rim glasses. So the man bun of rifle rounds the 6.5 CM wins the popularity contest.

No matter which way you cut it, or explain it, or rationalize it both are good rounds and the .260 has a slight ballistic advantage potential but not enough to lose any sleep over. They are so similar it always baffles me that the Creedmoor took off and the .260 died. It’s the cool name and an effective marketing campaign that pushed the 6.5 into the stratosphere because it sure as heck didn’t do it on stand alone performance.

I disagree for two very important points. The 260 rem was released with the wrong twist rate for the caliber. They were originally 1:10 and later 1:9. It needs a 1:8 to properly utilize the bullets available. The 2nd important point is that its too long. Even if you make a 260 barrel with 1:8 twist It will not fit in the magazine of most short action guns when loaded with 140 grain eld bullets out to the lands. What good is a cartridge that can't stabilize the bullets available for it and won't fit in the magazine if it did? The 6.5 corrected both of those by standardizing with a 1:8 twist and shortening the case length allowing longer bullets to be loaded to standard 308 OAL. Problem solved. They cemented its popularity by released it to market with excellent and cost effective match ammo to reach a market that otherwise was ignored, people who want long distance competitive ammo but don't reload. So its not just marketing fluff and a flashy name.

 

[H&Hhunter]

I see this repeated alot, but it's not really true. Sierra, Hornady, Alliant and Western powders load data all show higher max velocities for the 6.5 than the the .260 with the heavier 140gr bullets.

Hodgdon shows one 142gr .260 load that is 10fps faster than than the equivalent 6.5 load, but the max loads for the 6.5 are faster than the .260 for 140gr and 147gr bullets.

Nosler is the only load data I can find that shows a real velocity advantage for the .260 with heavier bullets, but their 6.5 velocities are nearly 100 fps off of most other sources.Maybe they know something all the other companies don't...



It really doesn't have any advantages in a hunting or general purpose rifle beyond the "I was 6.5 before 6.5 was cool" hipster factor, which does appeal to some folks. I don't have anything against the round, I'm sure it kills deer with aplomb, but the mythos around it is a bit confusing when it doesn't offer any obvious advantages, and falls short in several tangible ways.

Thanks for the heads up. I was actually quoting load data from the Nosler book. Between you and someguy2800 I learned something today.I guess I'm going to have to grow a man bun AND buy a 6.5 Creedmoor!

 

[Nature Boy]

the man bun of rifle rounds

I'm writing that one down

 

[LoonWulf]

.I guess I'm going to have to grow a man bun

Pictures!