An Interesting Coincidence: .270 WCF and 6.5x55mm

[Garandimal]

All my .270 WCF's are scoped 22" Bbl'ed bolt field rifles. (M700/M70/MP)

The 6.5x55mm is an aperture sighted 24" Bbl'ed bolt field rifle. (RH-AF)

Enamored w/ both high SD heavy-for-caliber bullets and mild recoil, and bein' genetically graced w/ "stingy Scottish fingers"...

... have settled on the inexpensive cup-n-core Speer Grand Slam (~ $0.22/pop, w/ rebate) for both calibers as a basic field load.

.270 WCF: 150 gr. GS @ ~ 2800 fps (~ 18.5 ft-lbs of recoil for an 8.5 lb scoped rifle)
- SD: 0.279
- BC: 0.378
~ 55.0 gr. IMR 4831/ 57.5 gr. H4831
- CCI 200 primers

6.5x55mm: 140 gr. GS @ ~ 2740 fps (~ 16.0 ft-lbs of recoil for a 7.5 lb aperture sighted rifle)
- SD: 0.287
- BC: 0.498
~ 45.0 gr. IMR 4831/ 47.0 gr. H4831
- CCI 200 primers


The LOS offset is ~ 1.5" for the scoped .270's, and 15/16" for the aperture sighted 6.5x55mm.

When all are sighted in for 200 yards...?

... they have the same ballistic trajectory to 300 yds., and < 2" difference at 500 yds.

From 100-500:
+2/0/-8/-24/-48.

Wind drift: is ~ 50% greater w/ the .270/150 gr.




GR

 

[High Plains]

As long as both consistently give you the accuracy you want, it seems to me like you have a good problem on your hands———which one to take hunting?

 

[Poper]

As long as both consistently give you the accuracy you want, it seems to me like you have a good problem on your hands———which one to take hunting?

I, too, have both in a Tikka. I hunt with whichever strikes me as I am ready to leave the door. The .270 (T3 Lite) throws 140 grain Bergers into a 2.75" - 5 round group at 500 meters and the 6.5 x 55 (T3 Hunter) shoots 5 rounds into dime sized groups at 200 meters with 140 gr. Sierra GK. What's not to like? Both are great Silhouette guns with 6-24x50 Vortex Viper scopes. Both have killed deer and prairie dogs, too!
Not a lick of difference in field performance. Just grab one and go.

 

[Garandimal]

As long as both consistently give you the accuracy you want, it seems to me like you have a good problem on your hands———which one to take hunting?

Generally hunt w/ the .270 Win and field shoot w/ the 6.5x55mm.

But, havin' essentially the same trajectory, one is practice for the other.

Haven't hunted the 6.5x55mm yet, but will eventually.

7.5 lbs - makes for a nice still hunting rifle.




GR

 

[Riomouse911]

I also have one of each, a Mauser American 96 straight pull .270 and a CZ 550 6.5x55.

Like you I found them to be near duplicates in performance and recoil, so I’ll agree that it’s 6 of one or a half-dozen of the other for most of my applications.

Stay safe.

 

[Garandimal]

I also have one of each, a Mauser American 96 straight pull .270 and a CZ 550 6.5x55.

Like you I found them to be near duplicates in performance and recoil, so I’ll agree that it’s 6 of one or a half-dozen of the other for most of my applications.

Stay safe.

While it might be the long way round to get to 6.5 CM performance...

Sure like the 6.5x55 cartridge w/ the 24", 1:8" twist Bbl..


And, PPU loads for it in 140 gr. (139?), as well as the .270 Win/150 gr.

Not so the 6.5CM.

At $13.86/20 box and $13.99/20 box, respectively, by the case, delivered, last - makes for some inexpensive brass, and Marksmanship practice disassembling it.




GR

 

[Armorer 101]

The 6.5x55 is a very fine cartridge, with many fine rifles made for it. My custom Mauser and Rem 700 rifles are very handy, very accurate and very deadly. I made one for each of my family members whenever they expressed an interest in having a centerfire rifle.

 

[Random 8]

Not a coincidence at all. If you look at most military loads from the early to mid 20th century. Swiss GP11, .30M1, Swedish M41, 7x57 154 FMJBT, Finland D166, 7.92x57 sS 196, the trajectories are quite similar as extended range performance from infantry rifles and MGs was a primary consideration. All the cool kids were doing it.. The 270 heavy for caliber fits right in. It's what the 30-06 wanted to be.

 

[Garandimal]

Not a coincidence at all. If you look at most military loads from the early to mid 20th century. Swiss GP11, .30M1, Swedish M41, 7x57 154 FMJBT, Finland D166, 7.92x57 sS 196, the trajectories are quite similar as extended range performance from infantry rifles and MGs was a primary consideration. All the cool kids were doing it.. The 270 heavy for caliber fits right in. It's what the 30-06 wanted to be.

That's how I've come to regard it as well.

.270/150 gr.: Shoots like M2 Ball - hits like 180 gr. SP.




GR

 

[Garandimal]

Not a coincidence at all. If you look at most military loads from the early to mid 20th century. Swiss GP11, .30M1, Swedish M41, 7x57 154 FMJBT, Finland D166, 7.92x57 sS 196, the trajectories are quite similar as extended range performance from infantry rifles and MGs was a primary consideration. All the cool kids were doing it.. The 270 heavy for caliber fits right in. It's what the 30-06 wanted to be.

Surprisingly...

It's also the same trajectory as the M2 Ball out of the 24" M1 rifle.

+2/0/-8/-24/-48

Lucky me.






GR

 

[Dr T]

I have noted a similar coincidence with tlhe 129 gr. 6.5 CM Hornady Superformance and the 117 gr 25-06 Hornady American Whitetail.