Is There Really Room For so Many 6.5mm's?

[USSR]

I don't know many competitors using the 6.5 X 55 Swede...

Well, you do now. There was several us shooting the Swede in 1,000 yard F Class competition. At that time (~ 10 years ago), the 6.5-.284 reigned supreme, but it was a cartridge that was deliberately downloaded to under 3,000fps with the 139-142gr bullets due to extremely short barrel life when loaded up all the way. Also, while the cartridge was based on a short action cartridge, with the LONG 6.5mm bullets it was really too long for a short action. If you wanted to remove a loaded round from the chamber in a short action chambered rifle, you had to partially remove the bolt. The .260 Remington was new on the scene and was a good choice EXCEPT, there was no quality brass (Lapua) available for it, and guys were forced to either neck up .243 or neck down .308 Lapua brass. This has since been rectified, and I believe Lapua .260 Rem brass is available. So, with Lapua 6.5x55 brass being readily available and convinced that I could get 2900+fps from the cartridge (and I did), I had my rifle chambered in 6.5x55.

Don

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Another capable looking rifle there Don, thanks for the pic... What scope is on that rifle?

I so much want to shoot longer distances but there is nothing anywhere near me that's over 250 yards. I would love to shoot 600 yards to start out. The locals are telling me to set up a reduced target on the 200 yard range to simulate 400 yards but as we all know that's not the same! A smaller target can't simulate bullet drop and how the wind effects the bullet over the 400 yards instead of only 200 yards. I really wish!!!

 

[FiveInADime]

Just try shooting a .22LR at 200yards lots of windage and elevation to play with.

If the sun is right you will be able to see the bullet falling into the target at a steep angle through the scope.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Just try shooting a .22LR at 200yards lots of windage and elevation to play with.

If the sun is right you will be able to see the bullet falling into the target at a steep angle through the scope.

Yes Sir, that's what I have been doing and it's very challenging without a doubt!

I bought a new Savage Mark II BV w/heavy barrel rifle specifically for shooting 200 yards with a .22LR round. I fitted a bi-pod on it and put a decent scope on it, a Nikon 4-12X40 ProStaff, and I went shooting. I tell you, anything over 100 yards with a .22LR is very challenging, but tons of fun!

 

[USSR]

Another capable looking rifle there Don, thanks for the pic... What scope is on that rifle?

That's a Sightron SII 6-24X. Ran out of money after having the rifle built, so didn't have a lot of money to spend for glass. Still, it's not a bad scope for the money.

Don

 

[ArchAngelCD]

That's a Sightron SII 6-24X. Ran out of money after having the rifle built, so didn't have a lot of money to spend for glass. Still, it's not a bad scope for the money.

Don

I truly understand that, all the parts on a very accurate rifle will cost you dearly. Good glass is on the top of that list, VERY expensive component but luckily there are good choices in a less expensive package. (not that over $500 is anything to sneeze at lol)

In reality I was hoping it wasn't one of the $2000 or $3000 scopes so that it was something I could consider. Thanks...

 

[Coltdriver]

I think the appeal is in the highest sectional density of any bullet you can get and that is the 160 grain 6.5 bullet. They fly nice too.

Mine is a modern Steyr in 6.5X54MS. I load it up to 6.5 Swedish levels and it is a great deer rifle.

So as long as shooters keep discovering the traits of 6.5 bullets I think the proliferation will continue. Some will stay and some will go, but the 6.5 will be around for a long time in 15 or 20 forms or so

 

[CB900F]

Fella's;

In essence, the marketplace determines the size of the room. Companies can spend large amounts of money to introduce a "new" product, but if the man with the wallet doesn't buy it, it's at best an oddball collecter's item. As a case in point: The Creedmore and the .260 Remington attempt to provide a different answer to the question the Swede answered over a century ago. Will the Creedmore eclipse the Remmie? I don't know, nor do I care. Vice-versa? Same answer from me. What I do know is that I doubt that there's a sustainable market for both, one of them's gonna go. The Swede looks as though it's gonna be around as long as firearms are.

900F

 

[taliv]

as far as the remington is concerned, the 260 is a deer hunting cartridge. if they're even aware of people shooting it at long distance i'd be surprised. i only say this because they don't make a rifle with a decent twist, and they don't sell factory ammo with a high bc bullet

 

[Palehorseman]

Fella's;

An interesting discussion point, that's for sure. I'm a huge fan of the original also, the 6.5 X 55mm Swedish Mauser.

There are several of the old 6.5 military cartridges that are completely obsolete and therefore, for all practical purposes, are completely dead except for the collecters. Some of the newer ones could be said to be on life support also, the 6.5 Remington magnum comes to mind. And, speaking of Remington, the .260 is so completely redundant to the Swede it isn't funny. It's only reason for existance seems to be to provide Carmichael with an income source & Remington with another albatross to hang around their neck. Can ya say: 8mm magnum, the 710, 5mm magnum, and the .17 Remington? Yeah, it can be put in a short action, so what? First of all, prove you can outshoot the Swede in a standard length action, then tell me you need a short action.

Not being involved in the AR platform thing, what's the difference/reason for both the 6.5 Grendel & the Creedmore? Or is this just someone wanting to avoid paying Alexander Arms their royalties, as in the .300 Whisper/Blackout affair?

900F

M38 1942 Husky

 

[browningguy]

speaking of Remington, the .260 is so completely redundant to the Swede it isn't funny. It's only reason for existance seems to be to provide Carmichael with an income source & Remington with another albatross to hang around their neck. Can ya say: 8mm magnum, the 710, 5mm magnum, and the .17 Remington? Yeah, it can be put in a short action, so what? First of all, prove you can outshoot the Swede in a standard length action, then tell me you need a short action.

Not being involved in the AR platform thing, what's the difference/reason for both the 6.5 Grendel & the Creedmore? Or is this just someone wanting to avoid paying Alexander Arms their royalties, as in the .300 Whisper/Blackout affair?

Lot's of people seem to be talking about personal preference instead of the real world. Although I don't have the numbers in front of me I'd be willing to bet that ammo/dies in .260 outsell the 6.5 Swede by a decent margin. That's what the market wants. And the .260 is far from an albatross, plenty of people using it in modern competition rifles and even a few for hunting. I don't use either personally, but I haven't seen any 6.5 Swedes winning the top level F-class matches.

The 6.5 Grendel and Creedmore aren't even in the same league of cartridges. The Grendel is made for the AR15 action and the Creedmore is really just an improved .260. As already mentioned there were issues years ago with not being able to buy quality brass for the .260 so they had the bright idea to tweek the specs and get it standardized, then you could get the match grade equivalent of .260 ammo.

My long range rifle is in .243, because I could get good brass and I just like the round. However when it's time to re-barrel I'll probably go with the Creedmore.

 

[rayatphonix]

I sure hope they last as I've got several 6.5's: 260, CM, Grendel and 6.5 Rem Mag. The Mag was my first and I believe it'll be history very shortly. While it has higher velocity that the CM or 260 for some reason it's not nearly so accurate. I've searched the net for years and it seems many have the same issue with the RM.

 

[MtnCreek]

Hard to beat the original. That said, most 6.5mm bullets I shoot are through a creedmoor. I do wish Lapua would start making brass for the creedmoor, even if I wasn't going to use it, it would help the cartridge stay around. They already made .260 and then they came up with the 6.5x47, so they may not want to introduce more competition for their own 6.5mm.

Since we're posting pictures, M96 in 6.5x55

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I think the appeal is in the highest sectional density of any bullet you can get and that is the 160 grain 6.5 bullet.

The sectional density of a 160gr .264 bullet is 0.328 PSI. The 220gr .308 is 0.331 PSI. There are lots of commonly available bullets with higher SD.

Here is the list of equivalents to the nearest grain:
0.224 115
0.243 136
0.257 152
0.264 160
0.277 176
0.284 185
0.308 218-220 common
0.338 262-275 common
0.358 294
0.366 308
0.375 323
0.4 367 ?
0.41 386 ?
0.458 482-500 common

It is the smallest and lightest cartridge for which such high SD bullets are available, the others being "too much gun" for lots of purposes. Also historically (but not currently) similar SD bullets for other calibers have been of the RN or SP type not spitzers.

Mike

 

[ThomasT]

Archangel you forgot one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauser-Vergueiro

I had never heard of it until I bought the selected Works f Finn Aagaard. He had an article on the 6.5s in Africa. I am sure its long dead.

 

[itsa pain]

It seems recently there has been an explosion of 6mm, 6.5mm and even 6.8mm cartridges, some long but mostly short and fat. I'm just wondering, is there really room for all of them? I would think eventually a few will become very popular but most will fade away or stick around with a cult-like following. (the the .41 Magnum in handguns) Lets talk about the 6.5mm cartridges here.

We have the 6.5mm Creedmoor (2008) which seems to be growing in popularity and it fits well in an AR-10 platform. IMO it's a good round and it reminds me of the 7mm-08.

Then there's the .260 Remington. (6.5mm-08) (1997) It produce good velocity with fairly heavy bullets and I think it's a good hunting round.

How about the 6.5X47 Lapua? (2005) This is one of the new bread of long range competition cartridges and from what I've read, it's a good one.

There's also the 6.5mm Grendel (2003) This one fits in an AR-15 platform and again, is gaining in popularity. It's meant to add more punch over the .223/5.56mm. This one reminds me of the 7.62X39 AK round.

The 6.5mm BR, as you can see by the name it's a Benchrest round. This one and even more the 6mmBR and 6mm Dasher are very popular in the Benchrest game. All 3 are extremely accurate!

6.5mm-06 (A-Square) (1997) Is one of the long 6.5mm cartridges which is a necked down from a 30-06. Like the 6.5mm-284 the case is very large so it holds more powder and delivers high velocities. I'm a little surprised anyone bothered to make this one since the 25-06 is almost identical. The difference between the .264" and .257" bullet is minimal.

Will they all survive considering we already have very good century old 6.5mm rounds like the 6.5X55 Swede, the 6.5mm Carcano and the 6.5X50mm Japanese which are popular and for the most part do the same job? There's also the 6.5-284 which isn't over 100 years old but it is pushing 50 years old and is also popular. (and a few 6.5mm Magnum's too)

SO, what do you all think? Likes, dislikes, good points, bad points, which will make it and which won't? Also, if I forgot any of the new 6.5mm cartridges feel free to add them to the discussion...

the 260 rem and creedmore (or less) are like coke and pepsi no difference. the 260 to me is better because of the case. the 6.5 06 is a lot better then 25-06 because of higher BC bullets.

 

[itsa pain]

as far as the remington is concerned, the 260 is a deer hunting cartridge. if they're even aware of people shooting it at long distance i'd be surprised. i only say this because they don't make a rifle with a decent twist, and they don't sell factory ammo with a high bc bullet

if Remington was the first to come out with the 30-06 they would have destroyed in a year and it would be obsolete. the 260 rem is the cheapest way to get to 1000 yds with fairly good barrel life and in a 9 lb gun very little recoil. most rifle makers make the 260 like savage with correct twist etc

 

[nastynatesfish]

Mine shoots pretty decent

 

[loosehorse]

I currently have #3, 6.5x55. My Tikka is by far the most accurate of all of my firearms. Originally, I fell in love with the Swedish Mauser, own a couple of them still and shoot them every chance I get.
I have to say it is a sweet round, and probably the only 6.5 that I will fall in love with.

 

[Andrew Leigh]

And now we have the 6.5mm Nosler. Who persuaded Nosler that we needed another proprietary calibre, any of you boys?

 

[TRX]

6.5x55 is still going strong... I have an AK slated for a 6.5 Grendel conversion, and two rifles going together with a semi-wildcat I call "6.5 Ross", basically a .303 case run into a 6.5x54 Mannlicher die. One is a 1905 Ross straight-pull rifle, the other is a PSL with Bren mags.

The real question is, "do we need so many .30 caliber cartridges?"

 

[theotherwaldo]

I've got two Swedes, a Carcano, and a Japanese (well, sort of - a training rifle.)
I'm intrigued by the Grendel, but it'll have to wait until I'm employed again.

 

[tdoyka]

6.5 creedmoor, t/c encore s/s, 16 1/4" MGM s/s barrel, Sapphire Laminate high plains gunstock(rifle), swift scope 3-9x

i handloaded 120gr nosler ballistic tip with a load of superperformance that goes .3" at 100 yds.

i can't wait for deer season

 

[cdb1]

The 260 Rem is a great option in the AR10 platform. The 6.5x55 is also a great option loaded to modern pressures or factory pressures. You will always find

Mike

I totally agree. I have a Swede and my next project is to get an AR in .260 Remington.

 

[Jcinnb]

WHen I saw the first press release, I thought of this thread. That cartridge looks pretty good. Someone suggested they rename it, "The Phoenix" Pretty clever.