Shooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 44 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
It's very similar to the .260 Remington and 6.5x55SE in performance (a little faster than the SE but about the same as the .260), which are both great whitetail calibers (several of us here on the forums have and use .260s and/or 6.5x55SEs for hunting) and can be used on larger game with the right bullets (black bear and even elk). The only issue with the Creedmoor may be the availability of factory loaded hunting ammo and/or brass availability since it's still pretty new. If you reload, then it won't be an issue.

MidwayUSA (certainly not the final say in the matter, http://www.midwayusa.com/browse/Bro...&categoryId=20296&categoryString=653***690*** ) lists only a few factory loads and two of those are match loads. The SST would be a good hunting bullet. If you reload, there are lots of choices in good 6.5mm hunting bullets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,753 Posts
IMO, it's no better than the 260 and requires a special case to reload. It's a cartridge answering a question that wasn't being asked. With the 260 loaded by more ammo companies, and cases easily made from 7-08 or 243 cases, I see no reason to even think of buying a 6.5worthless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,290 Posts
The 6.5 Creedmoor is, in fact, an answer to a question: Why have 6.5mm calibers done so poorly in the U.S. when they are excellent for big game hunting, especially deer? Perhaps the designers of that cartridge hoped to be a commercial success in their 6.5mm offering, where others have been more or less failures in this country. All three cartridges (6.5 Creedmoor, 260 Remington, 6.5x55 Sweede) are very useful, develop remarkably similar ballistics and are largely ignored by the hunting public. Of the three, the Creedmoor has gotten more attention as a target round than for hunting.

If we had but one of these three cartridges, that would be sufficient. However, since none of them are selling like hot-cakes, you can't blame someone for trying to fix that problem by introducing a new cartridge that might spark some interest. In fairness to Bandit, the 260 Remington is the one that makes the most sense, since it based on one of the most proven and readily available cases on the market. If you want a very effective 6.5mm cartridge, take your pick! With any of them, the gun is going to have more impact on how well they perform than the cartridge itself and you'll probably wind up handloading for whichever one you choose because factory support just doesn't seem to be there for this caliber.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
I think the 6.5 Creedmor is used for target shooting more since it has a longer neck, and allows the bullet to be seated in a way that doesn't impede on the powder charge. I think this is probably more relevant for the longer target bullets. I do think the 6.5 Creedmore cases can be made using 308 Win though. I think the shoulder is just set back some which results in a little steeper and longer neck. Not sure though, haven't really looked into it a whole lot. I would like a 6.5 of one sort though. Pretty good bullet selection. Scotty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,280 Posts
There was a question being asked, the question was why can't we have a longer neck on the .260 for target bullets that shooters didn't want to crowd powder space with. Its a fun cartridge. I have a Ruger M77MKII V/T Target with a 28" barrel in 6.5 Creedmoor.

You can make Creedmoor brass from -08 brass, although it requires a bit of work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
I think it is still fairly new, so ammo isn't really common. Heck, the 260 Rem isn't really common either for the most part. I think Rem only loads one load for their own offspring. Scotty
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,290 Posts
Yeah, I can't think of a single 6.5/264 offering where finding ammo is all that easy and they should be just as popular as the 24's, 25's and 27's, which are pretty easy to get bullets for. When you consider how much more successful the 243 Win and 7mm-08 have been than the 260 Remington, when the difference between each respective cartridge is just .020", it is really difficult to understand. The smallest 308 off spring is enormously popular and the cartridge just one step down is doing quite well, but the 260 is like the red-headed step-child...no love!

Hopefully the 6.5 Creedmoor, with it's ability to fit easily in an AR-10 without encroaching on powder capacity, might benefit from the growing popularity of black gun hunting rifles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
The finding of factory ammo is a bit of a challenge in most area's!:)
As with most things these days, it's only a web browser, a mouse click, and a UPS truck (and a week wait) away ;)

I think it is still fairly new, so ammo isn't really common. Heck, the 260 Rem isn't really common either for the most part. I think Rem only loads one load for their own offspring. Scotty
It's not real common but I see some of both the 120gr AccuTip and the 140gr Core-Lokt in at least one store here. Also, Federal makes Fusions for it, too. However, at MidwayUSA, for example, there's over a dozen choices (not all are hunting bullets, though): http://www.midwayusa.com/browse/Bro...3&categoryId=9331&categoryString=653***690***


Yeah, I can't think of a single 6.5/264 offering where finding ammo is all that easy and they should be just as popular as the 24's, 25's and 27's, which are pretty easy to get bullets for. When you consider how much more successful the 243 Win and 7mm-08 have been than the 260 Remington, when the difference between each respective cartridge is just .020", it is really difficult to understand. The smallest 308 off spring is enormously popular and the cartridge just one step down is doing quite well, but the 260 is like the red-headed step-child...no love!
Well... the .243 was introduced 50+ years ago and the 7mm-08 was 30 years ago (has it been that long! Even I remember it ;)) and the .260 was only 10 years ago. I remember people saying "what do you need a 7mm-08 for when you have the .308?" back then, too... it's very popular now, though. From reading about it, it seems the .243 was pretty popular from the get-go, though.

Hopefully the 6.5 Creedmoor, with it's ability to fit easily in an AR-10 without encroaching on powder capacity, might benefit from the growing popularity of black gun hunting rifles.
How much is the .260 hurt in an AR-10? It seems that at least with 120gr bullets it should easily fit within the OAL specs of the AR-10. I haven't read anything about it (just haven't looked for any info on it, really).

The 6.5 Grendel has some following in the AR-15 groups but its main competitor is the 6.8 SPC which seems to be more popular. A few military folks I've talked to have actually said that they preferred the longer range of engagement that the Grendel allows over the SPC over whatever marginal higher effectiveness the SPC supposedly has in closer quarters, particularly for places like Afghanistan. The Grendel also is able to use more effective hunting bullet weights (120gr and even 140gr) while still maintaining proper OAL to be used in the ARs. IMO, it'd be a right nice low recoil hunting round (basically nearly the same performance as Remington's Managed Recoil .260).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
704 Posts
I feel that for the ar platform the 338 Federal is a better all around hunting round and if you want the perfect 6.5 then the 264WM is tops. The range of bullet weights in 6.5 is great and stores like Cabellas and Sportsmans wharehouse carry a varity. None of the other 6.5's interest me because the 264 does it all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
I'm mad at the 6.5 Creedmore, because I love the 260 REM. What little momentum the 260 was having a few years ago to crawl out of the sales doldrums has been hurt by the new Creedmore. I was hoping to get another 260 with a longer barrel, but the few standard rifles that had been offered in 260 are getting less and less. At east one of them (Ruger) was replaced by the Creedmore.

I guess my next rifle will have to be a 264 WM!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
704 Posts
Yah they put a fancy name on something and it becomes the cats meow. The 264 didn't have a fancy name but it is still here and nothing to replace it and will be here long after the creedless is long gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,290 Posts
I feel that for the ar platform the 338 Federal is a better all around hunting round and if you want the perfect 6.5 then the 264WM is tops. The range of bullet weights in 6.5 is great and stores like Cabellas and Sportsmans wharehouse carry a varity. None of the other 6.5's interest me because the 264 does it all.
The 338 Federal is definitely a better "all around hunting round" than the Creedmoor, but it does so with greater recoil than is necessary for small to medium game, such as deer. Also, for any kind of competition shooting, the smaller 6.5 has many advantages over the 338 and 264WM. With today's powders, over-bore offerings like the old 264 are not as hard on barrels, but they still require a substantial increase in powder and barrel length, and create significant muzzle blast and flash, to produce modest increases in velocity.

The 6.5 Creedmoor fits in a short-action or AR-type rifle, giving very good accuracy and ample power for most hunting situations. If more gun is needed, I personally think a larger caliber is in order, not just more speed from the same bullets.

Small and fast bullets are the rule for varmints, while slow and heavy bullets are used for dangerous game. Somewhere in-between is where medium sized, thin-skinned, big-game cartridges are used, and there is a rather large range available for this purpose. This is where the high-velocity vs. large bore argument was founded. Hunters must decide for themselves, within this window of cartridges, what works best for how and where they hunt. Maybe a 224 TDH will work great for your needs, or perhaps a 45/70 shooting a 400gr slug at 1500fps will get the job done?

I think the Creedmoor pushes 6.5mm bullets at about the right speed, but then again the 6.5x55 had that figured out over a century ago, so it doesn't take a genius to arrive at that conclusion! I'm glad we have more than one 26 caliber cartridge to choose from...I just wish one of them would be successful enough that we could count on it being readily available for the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,008 Posts
I'm mad at the 6.5 Creedmore, because I love the 260 REM. What little momentum the 260 was having a few years ago to crawl out of the sales doldrums has been hurt by the new Creedmore. I was hoping to get another 260 with a longer barrel, but the few standard rifles that had been offered in 260 are getting less and less. At east one of them (Ruger) was replaced by the Creedmore.
Don't lose hope yet. It seems that ArmaLite has just started producing their AR-10 in .260 Remington.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/09/24/armalites-new-ar-10-in-260-remington/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
The .260 doesn't need a longer barrel Jake. It shines with the short barrels just fine, as does all of the .308 family. The Ruger Compact is a perfect platform for the .260 and is still readily available. http://www.ruger.com/products/m77HawkeyeLaminateCompact/index.html
Well, I sit corrected! I must have been looking at the standard Hawkeye when I noticed that the 260 was replaced by the Creedmore.

I don't plan to get rid of my Compact...I just was wondering how the 260 would perform without being somewhat saddled by the loss of fps in the short barrel. Since I posted my original note on this thread, I did some research and now I think I'll try loading some 110 gr bullets in my 270 and try to approximate 25-06. I know the Sierra 90 gr hollow points scream put of it. Lots cheaper to mess around with the guns you have than buying brand new guns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,958 Posts
Very true, playing with guns you already have is a lot cheaper. I have some of the 160gr TTSX for my .338 but havent loaded the first one yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
704 Posts
I can't see any advantages over the 264WM because I can back off on powder and duplicate the creadmoor balistics. There is no bullet out there that the creedmoor shoots that I can't load in the 264.
So the creedmoor would be a waste of money to me. With my 30-06, 264WM and soon to be 338 Federal I will have all the bases covered


The 338 Federal is definitely a better "all around hunting round" than the Creedmoor, but it does so with greater recoil than is necessary for small to medium game, such as deer. Also, for any kind of competition shooting, the smaller 6.5 has many advantages over the 338 and 264WM. With today's powders, over-bore offerings like the old 264 are not as hard on barrels, but they still require a substantial increase in powder and barrel length, and create significant muzzle blast and flash, to produce modest increases in velocity.

The 6.5 Creedmoor fits in a short-action or AR-type rifle, giving very good accuracy and ample power for most hunting situations. If more gun is needed, I personally think a larger caliber is in order, not just more speed from the same bullets.

Small and fast bullets are the rule for varmints, while slow and heavy bullets are used for dangerous game. Somewhere in-between is where medium sized, thin-skinned, big-game cartridges are used, and there is a rather large range available for this purpose. This is where the high-velocity vs. large bore argument was founded. Hunters must decide for themselves, within this window of cartridges, what works best for how and where they hunt. Maybe a 224 TDH will work great for your needs, or perhaps a 45/70 shooting a 400gr slug at 1500fps will get the job done?

I think the Creedmoor pushes 6.5mm bullets at about the right speed, but then again the 6.5x55 had that figured out over a century ago, so it doesn't take a genius to arrive at that conclusion! I'm glad we have more than one 26 caliber cartridge to choose from...I just wish one of them would be successful enough that we could count on it being readily available for the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,290 Posts
I can't see any advantages over the 264WM because I can back off on powder and duplicate the creadmoor balistics. There is no bullet out there that the creedmoor shoots that I can't load in the 264.
So the creedmoor would be a waste of money to me. With my 30-06, 264WM and soon to be 338 Federal I will have all the bases covered
Given that the 264WM takes 20 grains more powder, a long action and 4 more inches of barrel to generate it's modest increase in velocity, I agree with you completely that you could reduce your charge and get Creedmoor performance. However, depending on the rate of twist in your barrel, it is entirely possible that a match rifle chambered for the Creedmoor round could stabilize a heavier bullet and its shorter powder column might result in better accuracy. Hundreds of target shooters can't be wrong? It's more a question of ballistic efficiency than bashing the old 264WM.

I have to concede that a hunter with a 264 Winnie does not need a 6.5 Creedmoor, but aside from 500 yard shots on speed goats, what does it give you that your '06 doesn't? Maybe sell the Win Mag and get a hot 22 for varmints n' such? All in all, your 3-gun arsenal will be pretty effective. I would just prefer something a little smaller for targets and varmints and a little more case capacity for the 338, or step up to a 35 or 37.
 
1 - 20 of 44 Posts
Top