new CM cartige on the way.
- Thread starter eastbank
- Start date
FrankenMauser
New member
At least it's meant to be seen but not heard...
FrankenMauser
New member
It's a 6.5 Creed chopped to something like 1.8", a new shoulder formed, and necked up to .338".
Basically a bloated .300 Blk, in order to give a couple marketing departments something to do.
Basically a bloated .300 Blk, in order to give a couple marketing departments something to do.
Model12Win
Moderator
The Sixer Fife Creeder Critter is a neat cart, but not so sure about 8.6???
dakota.potts
New member
I'm a big fan of the 6.5 Creedmoor, and without playing with the 6 Creedmoor it appears that it's very impressive as well. I could even see going up to a 6.8 or 7mm.
I'm not quite sure about 8.6 though. It doesn't really seem to fulfill any of the same long range niches as the 6.5 and 6mm do. In terms of ballistic capabilities, I'm having a hard time seeing what it does that's extraordinarily different than the .338 Federal. It's not like components or rifle compatibility is an issue with the Federal since it's based off of the .308 Win.
Curious to see how the marketing affects this one.
I'm not quite sure about 8.6 though. It doesn't really seem to fulfill any of the same long range niches as the 6.5 and 6mm do. In terms of ballistic capabilities, I'm having a hard time seeing what it does that's extraordinarily different than the .338 Federal. It's not like components or rifle compatibility is an issue with the Federal since it's based off of the .308 Win.
Curious to see how the marketing affects this one.
First if you think the 8.6 Creedmoor is designed to do what the 6.5 and 6mm versions do you're about 180 degrees off. The main focus of the 8.6 CM is to run heavy subsonic bullets from AR10 magazines, this is made directly to compete in the .300 BLK market. It will definitely appeal to the subsonic fans.
Is it going to survive and thrive like the .300 BLK, it's too early to tell. I think it'll definitely fit a niche with some markets both in the tactical crowd and the suppressed night hunting pig eradicators. Is it going to be converted into a mainstream bolt action hunting round? I highly doubt it, but you never know!
Is it going to survive and thrive like the .300 BLK, it's too early to tell. I think it'll definitely fit a niche with some markets both in the tactical crowd and the suppressed night hunting pig eradicators. Is it going to be converted into a mainstream bolt action hunting round? I highly doubt it, but you never know!
T. O'Heir said:
Well here we go again, just because you wouldn't ask the question doesn't mean someone else didnt. Then there's the fact a .338 300 grain subsonic bullet is going to carry a lot more energy down range than a .308 220 grain subsonic bullet. The fact that you don't understand the niche market isn't surprising.
stagpanther
New member
Hmmm--I'm still having a tough time finding a sweet spot load with my 338 fed build. Have fun with that. 
I like my 6.5X54, 8X57 9.3X57. They are over 100 years old and have class dripping off of them. Most of the new stuff leaves me cold and often wondering "what question was this an answer for"? Not all, but most. I throw in my 25-06 270s 6.8SPCs, 308s and 30-06s, 300 H&H, 9.3X62, 375H&H and 404, and I see few holes to fill.
Not a thing wrong with them and if someone likes them they should buy them. But I get bored hearing them try to convince me that it's something "New and Improved" and that I should like them too. In most cases the ballistics of the new stuff is a duplicate (or nearly as good) as something that is 85 to 120 years old.
I am just not interested I guess.....
Not a thing wrong with them and if someone likes them they should buy them. But I get bored hearing them try to convince me that it's something "New and Improved" and that I should like them too. In most cases the ballistics of the new stuff is a duplicate (or nearly as good) as something that is 85 to 120 years old.
I am just not interested I guess.....
Anybody (else) remember the really old days, when they designed a cartridge to deliver a certain level of performance, and then built a gun to shoot it in??
Seems like every "new" round in the last few decades has been designed to fit in a specific gun, and deliver the same, or as close as they can to the performance of older rounds that won't fit in that specific gun.
Seems like every "new" round in the last few decades has been designed to fit in a specific gun, and deliver the same, or as close as they can to the performance of older rounds that won't fit in that specific gun.
Double Naught Spy
New member
But you are missing the whole point about performance. {Sarcasm} The new rounds have some particular feature or features that makes them slightly better such that each new cartridge occupies a special marketing niche.
Take the new Wilson Combat .300 Ham'r. It is the most powerful .30 cal cartridge for the AR15 that uses a standard 5.56 bolt. It is slightly more powerful than the 7.62x39, but uses a 5.56 bolt and the 7.62x39 doesn't.
However, I love this claim. It is capable of duplicating the ballistics of the legendary .30-30, but in an AR15 with a 5.56 bolt. https://www.wilsoncombat.com/300-hamr/
Isn't that special?
If you put in enough caveats, just about any caliber can be consider special in its own special sort of way.
I shoot 220 grain SMKs (subsonic) out of my integrally suppressed .308. At 330 yards I get 2" groups, at 400 yards, opens to 8".
But yes, it is dropping an inch/yard at around 350.
Double naught points out:
However, I love this claim. It is capable of duplicating the ballistics of the legendary .30-30, but in an AR15 with a 5.56 bolt.
I see his point very well............and I also ask.
Then what is wrong with my 70 year old 30-30? And why would I want to change rifles, spend a lot more money and get ............. nothing?
I won't kick too many shins here. I do own and love 2 ARs in 6.8SPC, but I can buy brass (instead of making it) and the dies cost $31. It killed VERY well and I have 33 head of game killed with it so far, with 34 shots.
But I really doubt I could find any deer/antelope cartridge that fits an AR15 at any price that would beat the 6.8 by enough to make me want to spend more money on it. If someone comes up with their favorite round and tries to convince me of how much better it is I would then ask them a simple question:
Is it better then my 25-06?
My 25-06 weights 7 pounds with the scope, loaded and with a sling, and shoots 3 shots touching at 100 yards, fired a 120 grain bullet at 3150 FPS and has a lot of range. So is your Stupendous 6.5 or 7.5324MM superduper double-shoulder UberTAC round going to beat my 25-06----- and do so for "only" about $1600 dollars more? My guess is that my 25-06 is lighter, slimmer, has better range, and is more accurate. And I am also betting you can do much the same at Wal-Mart by buying a Ruger, Savage, or Mossberg for much less then a "custom" AR.
I have nothing against the new offerings. What I get amused by are the sales pitches. They are designed to fill the heads of those that just believe any claim because someone said it and they loose sight of the fact that the ballistic parameters of what's being sold have existed for well over 100 years in many cases.
The AR is a wonderful rifles and I believe it's the wave of the hunting future. As bolt actions were in the 20s the weapons young men were trained on from their service in the military, so will be the AR now and in the future. And there is some wisdom is duplicating the old tried and true ballistics that are so well proven that there is NO argument as to how well they work.
I am all for this.
I just smirk when these salesmen try to convince us all that their cartridge is so much better.
No.....they are not!
A 6.8 SPC is giving us the same ballistics as the 257 Roberts did in the 1930-1960s
A 6.5 Grendel is getting close to a 6.5 Jap or a 6.5X64 Mannlicher with light bullets. If you look at capabilities of the 2 old shells with heavy bullets, (156 and 160 grain) the Grendel doesn't get all that close. The Jap dates from the late 1800s and the M/S from around 1903
The sadly forgotten 30 Remington-AR gives us 300 Savage and 303 British ballistics. I have never even seen a factory rifles for this round because Remington seemed to kill it in it's crib, but the shell had a lot to offer.
300 Ham-r = 30-30. So does the 7.62X39 with 150 grain bullets.
The 300 Blackout come withing about 300 FPS, so it doesn't even come up to the 30-30 in power.
However, I love this claim. It is capable of duplicating the ballistics of the legendary .30-30, but in an AR15 with a 5.56 bolt.
I see his point very well............and I also ask.
Then what is wrong with my 70 year old 30-30? And why would I want to change rifles, spend a lot more money and get ............. nothing?
I won't kick too many shins here. I do own and love 2 ARs in 6.8SPC, but I can buy brass (instead of making it) and the dies cost $31. It killed VERY well and I have 33 head of game killed with it so far, with 34 shots.
But I really doubt I could find any deer/antelope cartridge that fits an AR15 at any price that would beat the 6.8 by enough to make me want to spend more money on it. If someone comes up with their favorite round and tries to convince me of how much better it is I would then ask them a simple question:
Is it better then my 25-06?
My 25-06 weights 7 pounds with the scope, loaded and with a sling, and shoots 3 shots touching at 100 yards, fired a 120 grain bullet at 3150 FPS and has a lot of range. So is your Stupendous 6.5 or 7.5324MM superduper double-shoulder UberTAC round going to beat my 25-06----- and do so for "only" about $1600 dollars more? My guess is that my 25-06 is lighter, slimmer, has better range, and is more accurate. And I am also betting you can do much the same at Wal-Mart by buying a Ruger, Savage, or Mossberg for much less then a "custom" AR.
I have nothing against the new offerings. What I get amused by are the sales pitches. They are designed to fill the heads of those that just believe any claim because someone said it and they loose sight of the fact that the ballistic parameters of what's being sold have existed for well over 100 years in many cases.
The AR is a wonderful rifles and I believe it's the wave of the hunting future. As bolt actions were in the 20s the weapons young men were trained on from their service in the military, so will be the AR now and in the future. And there is some wisdom is duplicating the old tried and true ballistics that are so well proven that there is NO argument as to how well they work.
I am all for this.
I just smirk when these salesmen try to convince us all that their cartridge is so much better.
No.....they are not!
A 6.8 SPC is giving us the same ballistics as the 257 Roberts did in the 1930-1960s
A 6.5 Grendel is getting close to a 6.5 Jap or a 6.5X64 Mannlicher with light bullets. If you look at capabilities of the 2 old shells with heavy bullets, (156 and 160 grain) the Grendel doesn't get all that close. The Jap dates from the late 1800s and the M/S from around 1903
The sadly forgotten 30 Remington-AR gives us 300 Savage and 303 British ballistics. I have never even seen a factory rifles for this round because Remington seemed to kill it in it's crib, but the shell had a lot to offer.
300 Ham-r = 30-30. So does the 7.62X39 with 150 grain bullets.
The 300 Blackout come withing about 300 FPS, so it doesn't even come up to the 30-30 in power.
Double Naught Spy
New member
EXACTLY!
Only you failed to drink the Kool-Aid and recognize the fact that this is the only AR15 caliber that can do this from with an original 5.56 bolt. These caveats are important, by God! These calibers won't sell themselves without some bizarre factoids of distinction!
All this caliber chasing is fun and all, but there is so much overlap in performance and virtually none of us use a given caliber in the fairly narrow region where it might be actually better than any other caliber. If you are shooting the 7.62x39 instead of the very expensive WC .300 Ham'r, is it really that much trouble to do a slightly higher hold at 200 yards to shoot a pig?
Where I am going with this is that I find little reason to go out and buy the latest and greatest caliber that promises to improve my position very marginally with a specific set of caveats. It makes no real functional sense and and doesn't make financial sense. It might be fun for some, and that is fine, but not for me.
Last edited: