WildRose
Well-Known Member
No, not even close, it's no improvement on at least three of the prior existing 6.5's.
If there's one "do it all" cartridge it's the .300wm.
Is the 6.5 Creedmoor the best do it all cartridge ever
- Thread starter lee31
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
If there's one "do it all" cartridge it's the .300wm.
MudRunner2005
Well-Known Member
The liberals will always be the liberals and anti-gunners. Trying to compare them to cartridge haters who also like guns and other cartridges seems a bit backwards to me.
You're obviously missing the point. Being a pro-gun or like guns does not warrant hatred to a cartridge or its strong following, no one is forcing anybody to like it, it's really that simple. There's nothing backwards about it.
Last edited:
just country
Well-Known Member
morning, wildrose is correct. GBOT TUM
J E Custom
Well-Known Member
With all the talk about 6.5s I decided that I needed to know more about there capabilities and there ranking. This was just an exercise to place them in some kind of order. Velocity seems to be one of the most Important measures of cartridge performance now days, so that Is what I concentrated on.
These results are by no means the LAST WORD, but gives a good perspective of comparison of the different cartridges in 6.5 caliber.
All numbers are based on the highest velocity within SAMME pressures in loading and same weight bullets for comparison. I realize that some will challenge these velocities because they can load hotter and get more velocity. But comparing apples to apples is the most consistent method in my opinion.
140 grain bullet weights were chosen because all but one cartridge listed the use of 140s and only one did not (The 6,5 Grendel).
Here are the results with no bias of mine (The one that I presently own is in the middle of the pack).
6.5 Grendel (123 grain)= 2508 ft/sec.
(Everything else will use 140 grain bullets for comparison using listed velocities in order of velocities.
6.5 Carcano = 2192 ft/sec
6.5 x 50 Jap = 2414 ft/sec
6.5 mm BR = 2421 ft/sec
6.5 Swedish = 2684 ft/sec
6.5 Creedmoor = 2736 ft/sec
260 (6.5) Rem = 2755 ft/sec
6.5x47 Lapua = 2770 ft/sec
6.5-06 ---------= 2848 ft/sec
6.5x284 ------=2895 ft/sec
6.5 Rem Mag = 2943 ft/sec
264 (6.5) win mag = 3026 ft/sec
26 (6.5) Nosler = 3188 ft/sec
6.5 x 300 Weatherby =3269 ft/sec.
These are most of the current 6.5s and all I could find reliable data on for comparison. Some were a surprise But were modern cartridges with higher design pressures and the 140 grain bullets were not the best performer in some, Pressures varied based on design requirements and age of the cartridge, but again it was for comparison.
This will probably start a firestorm of differences of opinions, But I learned something from it so that's what counts for me.
J E CUSTOM
These results are by no means the LAST WORD, but gives a good perspective of comparison of the different cartridges in 6.5 caliber.
All numbers are based on the highest velocity within SAMME pressures in loading and same weight bullets for comparison. I realize that some will challenge these velocities because they can load hotter and get more velocity. But comparing apples to apples is the most consistent method in my opinion.
140 grain bullet weights were chosen because all but one cartridge listed the use of 140s and only one did not (The 6,5 Grendel).
Here are the results with no bias of mine (The one that I presently own is in the middle of the pack).
6.5 Grendel (123 grain)= 2508 ft/sec.
(Everything else will use 140 grain bullets for comparison using listed velocities in order of velocities.
6.5 Carcano = 2192 ft/sec
6.5 x 50 Jap = 2414 ft/sec
6.5 mm BR = 2421 ft/sec
6.5 Swedish = 2684 ft/sec
6.5 Creedmoor = 2736 ft/sec
260 (6.5) Rem = 2755 ft/sec
6.5x47 Lapua = 2770 ft/sec
6.5-06 ---------= 2848 ft/sec
6.5x284 ------=2895 ft/sec
6.5 Rem Mag = 2943 ft/sec
264 (6.5) win mag = 3026 ft/sec
26 (6.5) Nosler = 3188 ft/sec
6.5 x 300 Weatherby =3269 ft/sec.
These are most of the current 6.5s and all I could find reliable data on for comparison. Some were a surprise But were modern cartridges with higher design pressures and the 140 grain bullets were not the best performer in some, Pressures varied based on design requirements and age of the cartridge, but again it was for comparison.
This will probably start a firestorm of differences of opinions, But I learned something from it so that's what counts for me.
J E CUSTOM
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Puts the Creed right where I have always put it. Lower middle of the pack for performance. Has nothing to do with the fun factor, just is what it is.
Steve
soundwaves
Well-Known Member
good old MAGNUMS.
But why would l want any of these when l can shoot a 7mmRM 140GR bullet faster than all these things can ? and l can shoot heavyer bullets too. l just dont get the hype. l could understand if some people and children think the 7mag has too much recoil for them. but aside of that l just think it aint no magical round. considering what this thread is about, l wouldnt want to choose a 6.5mm for my only gun. because of where l live, l do only have 1 gun, and that is the 7mmRM. most of my mates have 300WM and 30-06s. but 6.5mm creedmoor ? really ? for your only gun do it all ? no thanks.
Last edited:
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
Lol. Why would I ever shoot a 7mag when I can shoot a 300wm that will out perform it in all the same ways? And on it goes. My experience with 6.5 has been better than with 7mm. That said I am getting ready to build a light weight 280AI for myself.
Steve
J E Custom
Well-Known Member
I totally agree Steve. Speed is relative only to use. I am sure that some of the slower cartridges could safely be loaded up with modern powders and in modern rifles but if a person doesn't know much about re loading and the firearm it is risky business.
The 6.5 Lapua was a surprise in a way, when compared with other 6.5s but with modern design and great brass they loaded at higher pressures. some of the other cartridges did not fall where I thought they would, but it was an interesting exercise.
The one thing I did get from it was that there is a broad range of 6.5s and somewhere there should be one that appeals to anyone wanting a 6.5.
J E CUSTOM
Capt RB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2014
- Messages
- 1,994
Thing that sold me was watching lowlight's videos. Here he takes it to a mile and the load for the 22" creed is supersonic to 2100 yds. Add 4" of barrel and your going to see 2000yd plinker that's far less $$ compared to a feeding big bore. Of course you can do this with every 6.5 however nobody did yet
soundwaves
Well-Known Member
there you go. thats what l was refering too. best do it all cartridge, you chose the 300WM over the 6.5mm and 7mm. some would say 30-06 some may be 308 and some 6.5mm. l respect every ones taste. but it aint for me
RockyMtnMT
Official LRH Sponsor
I like them all! They all have their purpose. When it all boils down, what guys don't like and causes discontent, is when people make claims that a smaller less powerful cartrige will out do a larger more powerful cartridge. It is false. The guys that get sucked into the false nerative and continue to make the claim with huge vigor, just further aggrivate the guys that know better. Nothing wrong with the Creed, just not the unicorn slayer it has been made out to be. Probably won't have one since we have a 6.5 Dasher reamer. Creed simply can't come close in any way. We did pick up a 6mm Creed but have not had a chance to shoot it yet. It should crush the 6.5 Creed, after all it is a smaller dia on the same case with faster twist.
Steve
Steve
Here is what I came up with for a comparison based of H4350 and Berger 140 VLD with the middle road cartridges, as H4350 is very popular for both, low barrel erosion and Good temp stability, to keep it even I used 24" barrel for all and Ran each one to its design pressure. All to Default COAL listed in QL
So here is my unbiased findings:
Cartridge , Design Pressure, QL Pressure calculation, Speed,
6.5x55 Swedish, 55,114, 55,085 , 2726
6.5x47 Lapua, 63,091 , 63,062 , 2743
260 Reminton, 60,191 , 60,179 , 2748
6.5 Creedmoor , 63,091 , 63,053 , 2803
6.5-284, 59,465 , 59,426 , 2879
6.5-06, 60,200 , 60,147 , 2883
Not a lot of difference in velocity with the middle Cartridges within their design spec. but the 6.5 Lapua is just were I expected it to be within design pressures, less powder capacity same design pressure as Creedmoor equals less velocity.
I did not bother with cartridges like 264 Win Mag or other magnums as H4350 is not a powder for them, even case capacities like the 6.5-284 and 6.5-06 are handicaped using H4350 as far as speed goes.
Before someone says QL is not an accurate method of calculating go to Berger Bullets They also use software for some of their data "The loading data in this manual has been developed using a combination of handloading software and live fire testing."
http://www.bergerbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Safety_Info.pdf
That answers why My QL software and Bergers Data on RL26 with 135 Classic Hunter is spot on, they must have used QL calculations.
And if we check them out to the best powders for each we would still end up the same.
So here is my unbiased findings:
Cartridge , Design Pressure, QL Pressure calculation, Speed,
6.5x55 Swedish, 55,114, 55,085 , 2726
6.5x47 Lapua, 63,091 , 63,062 , 2743
260 Reminton, 60,191 , 60,179 , 2748
6.5 Creedmoor , 63,091 , 63,053 , 2803
6.5-284, 59,465 , 59,426 , 2879
6.5-06, 60,200 , 60,147 , 2883
Not a lot of difference in velocity with the middle Cartridges within their design spec. but the 6.5 Lapua is just were I expected it to be within design pressures, less powder capacity same design pressure as Creedmoor equals less velocity.
I did not bother with cartridges like 264 Win Mag or other magnums as H4350 is not a powder for them, even case capacities like the 6.5-284 and 6.5-06 are handicaped using H4350 as far as speed goes.
Before someone says QL is not an accurate method of calculating go to Berger Bullets They also use software for some of their data "The loading data in this manual has been developed using a combination of handloading software and live fire testing."
http://www.bergerbullets.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Safety_Info.pdf
That answers why My QL software and Bergers Data on RL26 with 135 Classic Hunter is spot on, they must have used QL calculations.
And if we check them out to the best powders for each we would still end up the same.
Last edited:
