Having a 6.5 decision debacle.....

[Viking264]

Lots of great opinions posted in this thread lately. I would like to clarify something from my previous post. In addition to having a career in the natural sciences, I am also a farmer. On our farm, we raise crops and livestock, namely heritage breeds of waterfowl (>100 ducks and geese). I use a 22" barreled 6.5x55 for protection of the farm from everything ranging in size from woodland rats to coyotes. So far, I have not had to actually take a shot at a black bear, but we get them here in the 500 - 600-lb. size range; while I would not hesitate to use this rifle for that purpose, I would prefer to do it with my .284 Win.
I also use the 22" Swede from time to time for local whitetails, which are in the 125 - 160-lb. class. Even in the worst of weather conditions on our farm, I am looking at 1000 ft-lb. at ~640-yds. with a 58K psi load behind an LRX 127. That would be a hunting load. For a defense load from the rats and predators, I either load subsonic 100-grain or full-power 120 TSX. I would use this rifle, with the 22" barrel, for any deer out to maybe 500-yds with the LRX and feel completely confident in the ability to cleanly and ethically drop the animal on the spot, assuming proper shot placement. I would not add much more range if using the 24" barreled version. The difference in MV is generally 40 fps between the two, give or take. It could be done for elk out to ~600 (my elk hunting is done at an altitude of ~950 - 1050' ASL), however were I going to go hunting for elk, specifically, expecting it to be impossible to get close, then I would grab the .284 Win. (since I own it already) with either the 145 LRX or 175 TSX and feel greater confidence that at the same distance there will be significantly greater energy delivered, improving the chances that a 'DRT' is the result. I agree with the post alluding to getting in close and actually hunting; it takes a lot of this discussion comparing one cartridge to another out of play. Bottom line is that I'd feel fine going for that same elk with the 127 LRX if I could hit it with 1,500 ft-lbs. That's a lot closer than 600 yds. with even my "hot" Swede and the 24" bbl.

 

[MarshMello]

I went through the same thought process primarily hunting Midwest whitetail and desiring the capacity to get out West at extended ranges for deer and speedgoats well as elk. I settled on a 6.5 PRC. I handload and just as easily could have gone with the SAUM. IMO it's not an extended long range elk gun but will do the job well at moderate ranges with tolerable recoil and that was my compromise, wanting the one gun for as many jobs as I can task it with and tolerable recoil. Really good deer rifle out to 600+. For elk, my target is 400 yards and under. That's subjective but what I came to terms with and landed on.

 

[257WTBY]

I have had the gambit of 6.5's. I kept two I have a 6.5-300 weatherby and a 6.5 creedmoor. I rationalized it this way I love my little CTR 6.5C its lights out on deer but a little light if I run into a bull at 600 yards so I use my creedmoor deer hunting and my weatherby for elk. Not that this helps you to decide its just what I decided to do. If i was in your shoes I would look at hard 6.5 SAUM, seems to me it would meet all your parameters. Dead is dead put one in the boiler room and about any of the 6.5's will kill if you do that some might be a tad faster then the others but its hard to pass up back strap either elk or deer...

 

[Nomad8961]

I'd say if your only running a 20'' barrel I think anything above a 6.5cm is a waste of a good barrel and a waste of powder. I have a new 6.5x284 Norma that I haven't even fired yet, but I went with a 26" barrel so I was getting the "most" out of the round. It just doesn't make sense to me to build a hot rod and not have a long enough track to run it on.

 

[CVCOBRA1]

No body has mentioned the Grand Daddy of the 6.5's, the .256 Newton. In 1913 Charles Newton along with the Western Cartridge Company necked down the 30-06 to 264. Did change the taper and shoulder a little but was way ahead in the 6.5 game. Newton went bankrupt and the cartridge was dead by 1938. No slow burning powders back then, death to another one. The first USA 6.5........

 

[okie man]

You said elk, that right there takes the 6.5 anything out of running for me. Big bore lever gun for dark timber and 7mm mag or bigger for everything else. I'm not asking anyone I hunt with to go on a death march into some hell hole for a elk I shot with a pea shooter.

 

[Mackinaw BOB]

You said elk, that right there takes the 6.5 anything out of running for me. Big bore lever gun for dark timber and 7mm mag or bigger for everything else. I'm not asking anyone I hunt with to go on a death march into some hell hole for a elk I shot with a pea shooter.

I might print this out and frame it. Nicely stated sir

 

[Steve Sheasly]

I might print this out and frame it. Nicely stated sir

That is why I shoot a 338 lapua.

 

[Stevenstl86]

6.5 is definitely a game changer but if I had to do it all in one it has to be a hot rod to cartridge to get maximum shock wave on a big animal. You can also slow it down on smaller game.

.260 at 1000 yards with 139 senars

 

[Nomad8961]

Re: the 6.5x55, I have used one for many years, and it will drop elk no trouble at the max range that you are listing, using Barnes 127 LRX or 130 TSX. The brass is the least expensive of all those mentioned by the likes of Lapua and Norma due to the fact that the cartridge is the one used in the Scandi countries for national marksmanship competitions, so they produce a massive quantity.

I honestly don't recall the total number of rifles that I have had chambered in this round through the years; more than 10, I believe. I have pared my selection down to two hunting rifles these days, chambered in the Swede and in .284 Win. Average barrel length for the former has been 24" +/- 0.10". In all but the 1896 era Swedish Mauser actions, I have loaded to ~58K psi. My current rifle with a 24" barrel will launch the both 127 LRX and 130 TSX at ~3000 fps, using Reloader 26, and this is below the 58K psi figure. In all of the years that I have been loading for this cartridge to the max 58K figure, I have not experienced issues indicating brass fatigue due to overpressure.

Your talking loading your 6.5x55 to 58k psi? What action are you running and what is your load for the RL-26? I've got a Carl Gustav 96 with the 24" barrel and have the same bullet selection you have and would like a faster load. The 140gr Berger's just don't give me the wound channel I wanted.

 

[window licker]

Run a .260 or a creedmoor with a stiff load of RE23 or 26, and a good 140grain+ bullet and abide by your 600yd or less cap, and you will be fine.

 

[sable tireur]

I'd say if your only running a 20'' barrel I think anything above a 6.5cm is a waste of a good barrel and a waste of powder.

And under some load constraints you might be correct.

However, one of the great benefits of new cartridges and bullets comes improvements in powders also. There are some powders currently (which I tested) which will power the 26 Nosler and the 130 and 140 class bullets in a 20" barrel perfectly well with all the powder being consumed inside the barrel. Sure you're going to lose velocity but that's the trade off you make with choices such as this. But you wouldn't know that unless you tested it or someone you trusted told you the truth. So many rely on just the bad information pushed at us through web. If we spent more time testing and adjusting we'd have much better information to work with from the start and I wouldn't have to keep typing these same admonitions over and over.

You said elk, that right there takes the 6.5 anything out of running for me. Big bore lever gun for dark timber and 7mm mag or bigger for everything else. I'm not asking anyone I hunt with to go on a death march into some hell hole for a elk I shot with a pea shooter.

And once again, this kind of statement grossly flies in the face of truth and reality because most of the Scandinavian countries use the 6.5x55 and the Europeans often hunt stag with a 6.5mm something. Yes, of course you are entitled to an opinion but in these situations, stated as you have, precludes logic and honesty. The same answer can be applied to those who think you have to have a .338 Lapua to kill an elk. There are thousands of hunters who use sharp sticks to kill elk and no one says anything about their choice! No, I'm not against archery hunting but the disparity between bullets and arrows is distinctive. Yet the cause of death for the animal is still the same. Disrupt the blood supply permanently and the animal expires. The methodology doesn't matter.

As with all answers to questions such as this, the hunter needs to pick the equipment, cartridge and bullet to fit the animal being sought. Bullet construction is often more important than the cartridge which launches it. Always know your limits and your strengths and try to stay within those bounds. Practice, practice, practice!

Enjoy the process!

 

[window licker]

The .338 lapua is a great one for elk, but not a great one for most shooters to employ on elk. There is a reason the 6.5 caliber took the overall at the nightforce ELR match in Wyoming this year. Easier to shoot well. I would rather guide a solid shooter with a 6.5 whatever on elk at 600, than an average shooter with a .338 lapua at 600.

 

[Nomad8961]

And under some load constraints you might be correct.

However, one of the great benefits of new cartridges and bullets comes improvements in powders also. There are some powders currently (which I tested) which will power the 26 Nosler and the 130 and 140 class bullets in a 20" barrel perfectly well with all the powder being consumed inside the barrel. Sure you're going to lose velocity but that's the trade off you make with choices such as this. But you wouldn't know that unless you tested it or someone you trusted told you the truth. So many rely on just the bad information pushed at us through web. If we spent more time testing and adjusting we'd have much better information to work with from the start and I wouldn't have to keep typing these same admonitions over and over.



And once again, this kind of statement grossly flies in the face of truth and reality because most of the Scandinavian countries use the 6.5x55 and the Europeans often hunt stag with a 6.5mm something. Yes, of course you are entitled to an opinion but in these situations, stated as you have, precludes logic and honesty. The same answer can be applied to those who think you have to have a .338 Lapua to kill an elk. There are thousands of hunters who use sharp sticks to kill elk and no one says anything about their choice! No, I'm not against archery hunting but the disparity between bullets and arrows is distinctive. Yet the cause of death for the animal is still the same. Disrupt the blood supply permanently and the animal expires. The methodology doesn't matter.

As with all answers to questions such as this, the hunter needs to pick the equipment, cartridge and bullet to fit the animal being sought. Bullet construction is often more important than the cartridge which launches it. Always know your limits and your strengths and try to stay within those bounds. Practice, practice, practice!

Enjoy the process![/QUOT
I'm sure you can use other powders and do ok but your still going to be sacrificing your barrel and not really getting the speed you want so it's kind of a waste is it not? Why not just run a 26" tube and get the full potential?