wonder why no 7.62 creed

small town life

small town life

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2022
Messages
286
Location
Top O' Texas
Going thru some cartridge list I noticed the 30t/c. Being a collaboration of Hornady and Thompson Center makes sense on how the creed line came about. Using QL the 30t/c is a better option than 308win, especially for the mid to heavy bullets. If I had all the BS items and time to get/make cases for this I would choose it over the 308win. Making a 27 and 28t/c would be a good option also. Anyone with experience with the 30t/c?
 
A lot of chatter today about making Creedmoor cartridges in other calibers. I get the feeling that a lot of people don't understand what the 6.5 CM does and why. There isn't much need for a CM in 30 caliber.

The 260 is the basis for the 6.5 CM. When the 260 was developed Remington envisioned it as a whitetail cartridge and designed it around 120 gr deer hunting bullets. With 120-130 gr bullets it actually outperforms 6.5CM.

But as time passed shooters wanted to shoot heavier bullets with higher BC's. They found that the 260 case wouldn't hold enough powder with bullets seated to fit in 260 magazines and chambers. And that the barrels were twisted wrong. The 6.5CM simply copies the 260 loads some guys were using from custom rifles and out of spec 260 handloads. They could have called it 260 improved or whatever, but they chose 6.5 Creedmoor.

For whatever reason the 270, all of the 25 caliber cartridges and the 243 had the same issues. All of those cartridges were developed with light for caliber bullets. All of those would benefit from something similar to what Hornady did to tweak 260. The 6mm CM makes sense for all the same reasons.

But the 7mm and 30 caliber rifles were designed to shoot heavy for caliber high BC bullets since inception. You could use a different case such as the 30 TC and get more speed, but that isn't what the Creedmoor is about.
 
IMG_0162.jpeg

I necked up the 6.5 creed case a few weeks ago to put some tangibility into some nonsense I was seeing online. There was a misguided soul on FB a few weeks ago swearing that a long seated 200grn bullet in a 7.62 creed would have bigger case capacity than a 308win, turns out he was lying about all of his loading data and velocity data, because QL and GRT proved he’d have to be over 130kpsi to achieve the speeds he was claiming. The reality is really that 308win doesn’t really have the case capacity to be fruitful with heavies, and really doesn’t have any issue getting these big bullets into mag length. The long 208 pictured here is short enough still (with only ~.1” shank seated into the neck) to fit into AICS magazine length.
 
jmr40 said:
A lot of chatter today about making Creedmoor cartridges in other calibers. I get the feeling that a lot of people don't understand what the 6.5 CM does and why. There isn't much need for a CM in 30 caliber.

The 260 is the basis for the 6.5 CM. When the 260 was developed Remington envisioned it as a whitetail cartridge and designed it around 120 gr deer hunting bullets. With 120-130 gr bullets it actually outperforms 6.5CM.

But as time passed shooters wanted to shoot heavier bullets with higher BC's. They found that the 260 case wouldn't hold enough powder with bullets seated to fit in 260 magazines and chambers. And that the barrels were twisted wrong. The 6.5CM simply copies the 260 loads some guys were using from custom rifles and out of spec 260 handloads. They could have called it 260 improved or whatever, but they chose 6.5 Creedmoor.

For whatever reason the 270, all of the 25 caliber cartridges and the 243 had the same issues. All of those cartridges were developed with light for caliber bullets. All of those would benefit from something similar to what Hornady did to tweak 260. The 6mm CM makes sense for all the same reasons.

But the 7mm and 30 caliber rifles were designed to shoot heavy for caliber high BC bullets since inception. You could use a different case such as the 30 TC and get more speed, but that isn't what the Creedmoor is about.
Click to expand...
That's probably the thing I hate most about the 260 haters them saying why it wasn't made for heavy bullets.
 
troy fairweather said:
That's probably the thing I hate most about the 260 haters them saying why it wasn't made for heavy bullets.
Click to expand...

The 1:10 twist and perhaps mag length are limiting factors for the super long high BC bullets.

But the original 6.5-08 wildcat was conceived by long range shooters who had faster twist barrels and single loaded. Remington could have done a better job developing the .260 but that's another story. For some reason American companies were stuck on 1:10 twists. They are slowly coming around though.
 
When mag length @ 2.800" contributes to cartridge failure along with slower twist barrels you can only change it to a faster twist and/or find a mag that can get you the longer lengths. BC's will diminish when going up in calibers within the same bullet weight (we all know), but bc might not be everything. Do you buy for the bc or the caliber (not cartridge) game? Having the 260rem w/8t is my preference over the 6.5creed (I have both) and can loaded to 2.870" in an AR.
 
Pushing the shoulder and neck back allows more room for longer ogive bullets within the same mag length (an example - we can't load 75 ELD/A-max's in 223/5.56 at mag length because the ogive has to be seated down into the case neck, BUT 22 ARC can use this bullet without issue). Moving the neck and shoulder back so also can move the neck/shoulder junction farther back to align with the base (or bearing shank/boattail junction) of bullets for a given cartridge length, which reduces lateral forces on the base of the bullet during primary ignition. Blowing out body taper and using steeper shoulder angles helps give back some of the powder capacity lost by pushing back the shoulder. A prime example of these differences in practice is the 300 PRC or 300 Win Mag - We shortened the case and pushed back the shoulder AND made the neck longer so we could improve a LOT of shortcomings of the 300WM, and resultingly, the PRC is easier to tune than the WM. Another example is the 6 ARC - we had 6 Grendel wildcats for almost 2 decades before the 6 ARC came out, but we couldn't get long ogive, heavy, high BC bullets into mag length with the full length Grendel case (I can load 105 Hybrids in my 243LBC/6 Grendel, but can't load 108 or 109ELD's or 110 A-tips). So there are a LOT of reasons we see so many "new" cartridges being released which improve upon a similar but older case design (not to be confused with "Ackley Improved" vernacular).

In many instances, no, these advantages aren't enough to ever warrant someone trade in their old rifle - BUT - there are 3,000 Americans turning 18yrs old every day, becoming of age to legally purchase longguns, and there are over a million new firearms being sold every month, so it should be quite obvious that there is plenty of market and plenty of room for new cartridges which offer tangible advantages over older designs. Personally, I tend to buy/build at least one new rifle every year, even though I would tell you that I have what I need, and have had what I've wanted enough to just not really want many/any more, so I'm certain I'll own at least 20 new/different cartridges in the future which I don't currently or haven't ever loaded in the past... Frankly, I'm absolutely stoked about a 25GT or 25 Creedmoor, and plan to convert one of my rifles in the near future, and I have a 37" blank on my shelf with a .416" groove diameter which will be a Hellfire or Stroker in the next ~18mos... Probably mix in either a 300 Norma Improved or a 338 Lapua Improved in the next couple of years also... I've had 9 F-150's so far, and I'll buy another in the next 2 years, and my wife will probably get a new Explorer shortly thereafter... I'll probably have around 40 more pairs of boots and 100 more pairs of running shoes before my time is up... Not sure I'd get mad about any of those choices if anyone else made them...
 
jmr40 said:
A lot of chatter today about making Creedmoor cartridges in other calibers. I get the feeling that a lot of people don't understand what the 6.5 CM does and why. There isn't much need for a CM in 30 caliber.

The 260 is the basis for the 6.5 CM. When the 260 was developed Remington envisioned it as a whitetail cartridge and designed it around 120 gr deer hunting bullets. With 120-130 gr bullets it actually outperforms 6.5CM.

But as time passed shooters wanted to shoot heavier bullets with higher BC's. They found that the 260 case wouldn't hold enough powder with bullets seated to fit in 260 magazines and chambers. And that the barrels were twisted wrong. The 6.5CM simply copies the 260 loads some guys were using from custom rifles and out of spec 260 handloads. They could have called it 260 improved or whatever, but they chose 6.5 Creedmoor.

For whatever reason the 270, all of the 25 caliber cartridges and the 243 had the same issues. All of those cartridges were developed with light for caliber bullets. All of those would benefit from something similar to what Hornady did to tweak 260. The 6mm CM makes sense for all the same reasons.

But the 7mm and 30 caliber rifles were designed to shoot heavy for caliber high BC bullets since inception. You could use a different case such as the 30 TC and get more speed, but that isn't what the Creedmoor is about.
Click to expand...
I like your post for sure but some did get the 1:8 twist right and later even Remington did.
But yeah throated for heavies is a different story isn't it.👍
 
small town life said:
Going thru some cartridge list I noticed the 30t/c. Being a collaboration of Hornady and Thompson Center makes sense on how the creed line came about. Using QL the 30t/c is a better option than 308win, especially for the mid to heavy bullets. If I had all the BS items and time to get/make cases for this I would choose it over the 308win. Making a 27 and 28t/c would be a good option also. Anyone with experience with the 30t/c?
Click to expand...

50fps separates every single cartridge.
Some are more inherently easy to load .much easier sometimes with any powder and bullets compared to others.
For hunting nothing will know difference.
Competition is different game or long range shooting.a little barrel length and velocity helps and or ability to shoot high bc pills
 
Last edited:
Hey I get you op.
There's tons of cartridges out there.but

The biggest left behind cartridge that's most efficient cartridge ever produced is 338-06 for a hunting cartridge.theres nothing else that produces same power that uses less powder and brass and loading is easy.

Not trying to hijack just understand what your saying .same situation

Now I don't run quick load but I'm running 230gr eldx at 2730 fps 24" barrel with no pressure signs.338-06 it's a hammer and data does it no justice when you run pressure test.its crazy what necking up 30-06 to 338 does
 
Last edited:
That's all good reading . But Im not the type to fall for a new cartridge !!!!
My 30 Remington AR upper has them all beat. " power of a .308 in an AR15 " Full page ads and Remington support.
It's sighted in and ready for all three cartridges I have left. Very popular . If only I had gotten the camo lower to match the camo magazine.
 
Longer, higher BC bullet on a 7.62x51/308 Winchester case in a short action. Several iterations before the soup de jours.
i.e. 2005 - 6.5x47mm Lapua
several similar wildcats since the 1950s.
Nothing new under the Sun, just new names and marketing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_Next_Generation
  • Locked
Why it's time to stop recommending 308Win, tips for new "long range" shooters.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Replies
180
Views
11K
Robert
Robert
U
  • Locked
GREAT Factory Sniper Rifle
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
stubbicatt
S
O
  • Locked
Is there are market for the return of Sharps rifles & ammo???
Replies
17
Views
1K
Sam Cade
S
xphunter
  • Locked
6 Creed XP-100, Yotes, and Playing @ Distance
Replies
3
Views
419
xphunter
xphunter
K
  • Locked
Softening the Mosin Nagant's Kiss
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
aka108
A
Back
Top