6.5 Creedmor- the Holy Grail?

[Capt RB]

Any SAMMI 264 reamer not a custom is out of sorts with the angle of the throat. A 2 degree lead is going to create a shorter throat than a 1.5 degree common to modern cartridges. Right on the print it says 9tw. If a gun company makes it an 8they better put it on the barrel next to the cartridge designation. Thank a lawyer for it's issues.
I'd like to see a +P designation with a twist and angle correction. Everyone wins cept the land sharks

 

[Capt RB]

https://screenshots.firefox.com/tOMXxwhVYbhMMBGh/saami.org

BTW 43 pages!

 

[Savage16Hunter]

I read in one of my hunting/shooting/gun magazines that one of the reasons for the MARKETING success of the 6.5 Creedmoor was that since it was developed by Hornady (an ammo manufacturer) and not a gun manufacturer, most major arms manufacturers got on board and built (and marketed) guns for it, since they were not boosting their competitors. It's partly why most ammo manufacturers were late to support the cartridge - because they didn't want to support THEIR competitor (Hornady). The .260 Remington (which is ballistically identical, but in a longer COAL) has not enjoyed similar support because it was "Remington". The popularity of Pet Rocks in the mid-70's is evidence that the world belongs to the Marketers, and the 6.5 CM has enjoyed extremely strong marketing.

 

[Don A Parsons]

And the thread of good times continues. Ha.

As I'd mentioned in a earlier post,,, the key to the holly grail is the shooter,,, with out that,,, "all firearms lay dormit."

Don't get me wrong nor right, I'm not the numbers dude with math and science,,, I've spent most of my life sleeping, working, and my free time hanging around in the wilds,,, most of it lost now thinking about it. LOL

The Creed 65 is a good cartrage, it has some advantages we hope,,, purhaps the same thing could be said for most cartridges as well.

All firearms go Bang, the bullets zip on down to the target, some fast,,, some slower,,, that make a "Wack" sound when they crash into the critter's Wrapper,,, Ha... The younger generation call it this.

Hopefully we planned the chunk of lead or Alloy in the delivery process,,, this "Might" be where the grail takes over,,, actually it started long before that. Let's think of it as stage 7.0 category of grail. LOL

The flying trajectory will Alloy is part of the mix,,, and the critter(s) structure, angle, densities, mass, bones, grissel and muscle fiber will dictate the performance of the little pill and how well it will perform.

There are no constance in hunting or critter harvests, each one is different,,, yes,,, millions apon millions of critters have become the substance of food to feed us,,, but each one harvested could of been a little bit different then the ones before it,,, and probably the ones waiting to be harvested.

I sure don't know, I buy a rifle, some heavy bullets, go hunting and hope it works out,,, knock on plastic,,, its been working out so far.

Our old hunting brothers and sisters have been at this for alot of years, I'll follow their lead since its been working for me for many a moons.

The new generation gets to do what works for them since there are more choices for them to confuse things. Ha

Us old school tool heads keep things simple because it works. At least we hope it does. Ha.

 

[djm670]

To the bolded, that just isn't accurate. It's true probably in the US with the 30-30 a close second but the .303 British has been in service since 1889 and the German 7.92x57/8mm Mauser since 1905. The 6.5x55 first went into service in 1894 but was developed in 1892.

The 06 was developed in 1906.

As for the rest, it's up to the idiot pulling the trigger to pick a bullet for the intended target and POA and not to take a poor shot or one at a range their not fully competent at.

Just don't exceed your capabilities and those of the equipment select the right bullet and POA and things will work out just fine over 90% of the time.

.45-70 1873 Military Cartridge took a while to get in civilian hands
(I have a 1886 Winchester .45-70 so know civilians had it in 1886)
.30-30 1885
.30-06 1906 Military Cartridge took a while to get in civilian hands
.270W 1925

 

[bigngreen]

Sorry but that just doesn't make any sense. I've shot modern ammo from the 90-Mid 2000 production in Pre 64 and XTR .264's without issue and know quite a few others who have as well.

The "barrel burner" bad press and the advent of the 7RM combined to relegate it to a cartridge for a small clique market.

The original release and the original ammo was different than what you have now, if you look at the first run rifles and the ammo that was released for them and measure them you'll find it was originally a bore riderish or dual diameter bullet and throat to match, if you search you'll find more info on the original guns. Those rifles we're awesome with that one bullet but every guy I've talked to who still has one who shot the original designed bullet quit shooting them because everything else sucked in it. Really just needed throated out a little and problem solved but the original release is what killed it in the first generation. The dual diameter bullet let the 264 run fast for the powder and bullets in the late 50's but then you take that same rifle at the time and loaded any other bullet and velocity was flat. Basically at the time the guys who decided it's fate could only run to what was marketed with one bullet everything else at the time sucked in comparison, every one of the guys I know who had one in that era lived it with that one bullet, hated it with everything else at that time.

 

[farmboykjb5.9]

Why would he Sell it cheap when fools keep buying fool's gold at the price of real ore?

Isn't that the truth.

 

[Eagle eyes 17]

I don't hate it! If I was gonna buy a new gun for my kid or girlfriend I might consider it but nothing about it thrills me enough too replace what I have already! Now the 6.5 prc does have my interest!

Yep, it's another one of those " gotta keep up with the Jones's " Rifles .... I prefer the 243, 270, 7mm 08 Rifles myself ...

 

[Golovkin]

Bigger guns = more options. You can kill a bull elk with a .22 short as long as you shoot it in the head, point blank, on the day it was born.

Add 6 years of growth, plus 400yds of air to penetrate plus a poor shot angle and now you need a BIG gun.

Public ground, high pressure, real world shots, I'll take a 300wm as my minimum.

I would only consider a 6.5 creedmore if it were a guaranteed tall fence hunt, that I knew would produce an easy shot.

If your willing to pass up opportunities, a 6.5cm is fine but I can't afford to leave opportunities on the table.

 

[WildRose]

.45-70 1873 Military Cartridge took a while to get in civilian hands
(I have a 1886 Winchester .45-70 so know civilians had it in 1886)
.30-30 1885
.30-06 1906 Military Cartridge took a while to get in civilian hands
.270W 1925

The 6.5x55 was dual issue/sold to the public from it's inception throughout Scandinavia concurrently. The .303 British traveled throughout "the colonies" with colonial officers who also hunted with them as soon as they were issued. They became extremely popular wherever the Brits, Belgians, and other militaries using them traveled. Same with the 7.92 Mauser.

In Europe the officers were part of the aristocracy and got all their privileges afforded thereto even when on assignment in the colonies.

The Mauser came really into prominence during the Boer wars when the Boers equipped with them shot the pants off of the much larger and better supported British units and it really took off fast from there.

 

[WildRose]

The original release and the original ammo was different than what you have now, if you look at the first run rifles and the ammo that was released for them and measure them you'll find it was originally a bore riderish or dual diameter bullet and throat to match, if you search you'll find more info on the original guns. Those rifles we're awesome with that one bullet but every guy I've talked to who still has one who shot the original designed bullet quit shooting them because everything else sucked in it. Really just needed throated out a little and problem solved but the original release is what killed it in the first generation. The dual diameter bullet let the 264 run fast for the powder and bullets in the late 50's but then you take that same rifle at the time and loaded any other bullet and velocity was flat. Basically at the time the guys who decided it's fate could only run to what was marketed with one bullet everything else at the time sucked in comparison, every one of the guys I know who had one in that era lived it with that one bullet, hated it with everything else at that time.

I know quite a few guys shooting pre 64 .264wm's with modern factory ammo who still love the performance.

 

[fariswm]

To the bolded, that just isn't accurate. It's true probably in the US with the 30-30 a close second but the .303 British has been in service since 1889 and the German 7.92x57/8mm Mauser since 1905. The 6.5x55 first went into service in 1894 but was developed in 1892.

The 06 was developed in 1906.

As for the rest, it's up to the idiot pulling the trigger to pick a bullet for the intended target and POA and not to take a poor shot or one at a range their not fully competent at.

Just don't exceed your capabilities and those of the equipment select the right bullet and POA and things will work out just fine over 90% of the time.

I shot my first deer with a .303 when I was 16. Had to be 16 to get a license in Alberta, Canada at that time. Bought the gun for $9.00 by mail. (Try to do that in Canada or the USA now) It came in the original cosmoline wrapper from WWII. I cut the stock off, broke a glass jar and used the broken glass, which was very sharp, and scraped the stock down. Sanded it well and oiled it with Linseed oil. The Finn's didn't think solid bullets were the way to go during the war so they used soft point bullets. I bought me a box of surplus Finnish Military rounds, a box of Surplus Military solids and a box of tracers. The tracers were fun to shoot at night into a large earth filled dam south of town. We could watch the arc of the bullet. Saw a lot more of that in Vietnam, but the arc was a lot flatter. Took my .303 out and practiced, with iron sights, on gophers out at Dick Kinsey's place. He came out and wasn't very happy I was shooting gophers with a .303. He called me .303 every time I saw him after that until I left home to go to school in the U. S. Shot that first deer at about 100 yards as he walked down off a ridge into a draw. I was sitting on the other side. One shot and the deer crumbled. I have no idea how heavy the bullet was or what it's sectional density was, or it's ballistic coefficient. I just knew if I could get a decent sight picture with my iron sights on that deer that it was dead.
Since then I have owned and shot game with everything from a 22-250 on up. After I got back from Vietnam I finally found myself doing my big game hunting with a 7mm Rem Mag using bullets from 139 gr to 175 gr.
I still am a huge fan of the 7mm caliber, but I own and shoot a plethora of calibers including big bores.
Each caliber and cartridge within that caliber genre has a place and purpose for which it is efficient. Stretching the limit of any of them to me is a mistake, be it weight and size of bullet, ballistics, or caliber when taking the life of one of God's creatures he has placed here on earth for our benefit.

 

[JemezDave]

I think a lot of this "you need a big magnum" talk is psychological. I've been there too - when i bought my first 30 cal mag (300 weatherby) it was for a colorado elk hunt 15 years ago. I didn't shoot it real great, but I felt cool telling everybody in camp what I shot. I went through the whole 300 ultra mag phase - bragging to everybody at camp about "hydrostatic shock" and then the deer I shot ran 150 yards lol. Its like the little guy who buys and owns the big jacked up truck trying to compensate for something.

When i bought those big 300 mags I was trying to compensate for a lack of experience - my dad didn't hunt and I would just tag along with whoever would let me. I thought if I had a big caliber there would be more respect at camp I guess.

Now they stay in the safe most of the time. Hunting with a lot of different people and groups has opened my eyes thats for sure. I've seen Lots of ---- poor shots with big magnums that the night before were bragged about around the campfire. I have a lot more experience now and am totally comfortable rolling into camp with my 270 wsm, 25-06 or 260 Rem.

Well, so you're saying a poor shot with a light caliber light bullet is better than a poor shot with a super sizzle big caliber heavy bullet? Seriously I know what you're saying, ha!
I went full circle the opposite direction. Dad had an '06, but for some reason he wanted me and my two brothers all have a different caliber. Me being the oldest I got a .270, my younger brother had the 7 mag, and the youngest had a .243. We hunted deer and elk. I reloaded for all these starting at age 13 when, fortunately for me, dad had the bright idea of getting me a reloading outfit so I could hand load for all our guns economically. Set me up with a couple of his buddies to show me how to do it right. Over the next 40 + years I gained first hand performance based knowledge of these caliber differences on game. Recovered a lot of bullets and most of the game we shot barring 2 deer we never found. Never lost an elk so far, but we never took a 6mm for elk. Of the four cartridges the .243 was the most marginal on deer, so it follows that it would be automatically excluded from elk hunts. Keep in mind I loaded the best bullets/components as hot as I could safely do for each caliber, the most accurate loads I could develop, up until 2012 when dad died. I can safely say bigger and faster is better. Of course, shooter ability is the essential other half of the equation.
I continued to hunt deer and elk with the .270 up until a few years ago, but now it's with a .300WM.
This decision was based on performance seen on elk with the .270 but also the need for longer range, especially now that I'm older I can't climb mountains like I used to nearly as fast.
A good rifleman that can shoot and knows his dope for the cartridge he/she carries can hunt with any legal caliber they want and they'll bring game home. It's the rest of the crowd that doesn't fit in this category I worry about. Especially if they're carrying a Creedmore which is a light caliber for elk to begin with. believing they can do no wrong with it because that's what those sheeple were led to believe or for bragging rights further compounds the problem.

 

[Don A Parsons]

I sure thought about scaling back more from the 30 caliber line up of cartridges,,, I still remember the 243 and 270 hunt a few years ago ,,, oh my ,,, talk about alot of running and pocket fulls of ammo to bring that buck down.

All of us plan for that perfect shot ,,, it just didn't pan out as planned ,,, mother nature sometimes puts a kink into our plans. Ha

Our group of shooters scaled up from those days,,, mostly larger chunks of lead ,,, now things are happening .

Don't get me right or wrong,,, its only fair for people to pick and choose what works for them.

Purhaps this is why I'm in the category I'm in. It's working ,,, so the plan is to stay where I'm at.

Who knows ,,, maybe the day will come when change happens .