The 6.5 of the Future

J

jackstrawIII

New member
Ok, so I need some input.

I'm looking to fill the gap between 223 and 308 and have decided I want to with one of the 6.5's. It's a big enough step up from 223 to be significant, and it's a big enough step down from 308. Sweet spot.

With that said, how the heck am I supposed to choose between: 6.5x55 Swedish, 6.5 Creedmore, and 260 Remington? They're all so similar.

Here are the pros and cons from what I can see:

6.5x55 Swedish
Pros - been around forever (isn't a fad), everyone makes ammo for it
Cons - not many rifles made in this chambering, ammo not available locally (I do reload, but having factory ammo accessible is a perk)

6.5 Creedmore
Pros - tons of guns made in this chambering, most readily available ammo (of the three), can build an AR in this caliber (if I ever move to a free state)
Cons - very "recent" development (meaning, will it stand the test of time?)

260 Remington
Pros - can make brass from 308 cases
Cons - factory ammo is expensive, limited rifle selection

They all have pros and cons, so I guess my decision will boil down to choosing a cartridge that is HERE TO STAY. Which of these rounds will still be commonplace in 50 years?
 
Last edited:
K

kraigwy

New member
Your "Cons" for the 6.5 CM doesn't hold water. Yes compared to many, its relatively a new cartridge, but its certainly not a fad.

It will be around for as long as we have cartridge rifles. Its super accurate, for both hunting, and competition.

Your PRO about lots of rifles being made for it, plus competitively priced factory ammo, and reloading components will assure its long life.
 
S

salt and battery

Moderator
Who ever figured to attach creedmoor to the 6.5 should win a medal for the best advertising slogan in 50 years. how this round took off is beyond me which is 99.9999% like the 260 rem which was horribly marketed by rem so maybe that is the answer. maybe some dream about the famous match against the british where the American won it in long island. a lot is made of the good factory ammo but who shoots long distance with just factory ammo? what if the rifle does not like it? with reloading you can do a lot more shooting and tailor a load for your rifle
 
P

P71pilot

New member
I vote 6.5 Creedmore,

It is doing so well in the short few years it haw existed. I am getting a ruger american predator in 6.5 CM as soon as i have the cash saved up
 
J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
CM will standardize the 6.5 bore like 308 for 30.
CM name is 2nd best marketing trick in cartridge naming history. First being "magnum".
 
Last edited:
J

jmr40

New member
The 260 was a good idea, the 6.5 improved some shortcomings and is the 6.5 of the future. If building a custom rifle the 2 are a virtual tie, but off the shelf the 6.5 is a little better. Hand loaded the 6.5X55 is a classic that can best the other 2. The 26 Nosler is the fastest.

I 100% agree that it is the perfect fit between 223 and 308. I have those 2 and can see a 6.5 Creedmoor in my future.
 
A

alex0535

New member
There's also the 6.5 grendel and 6.5x47 Lapua, both of these little 6.5's have great potential.

If I was going for an 6.5 AR-10, the 6.5 creedmoor was made to be cheap to shoot and accurate, don't have to worry about brass getting beat up and/or lost so much. The grendel offers better ballistics than a .223 and can fit in an AR-15, I'd really like a little bolt gun in the grendel.

The 6.5x47 Lapua was never meant to be the cheapest to shoot, more to be the most accurate round at 300 meters that wouldn't be hard on barrels Lapua could come up with. Plenty of energy and bullet selection to make it an adequate medium game rifle at the distances I hunt. I'd also like a relatively short lightweight bolt gun in this caliber. I'd probably just buy enough brass to last the life of the barrel with reloading.
 
J

johnwilliamson062

Moderator
There's also the 6.5 grendel and 6.5x47 Lapua, both of these little 6.5's have great potential.
Click to expand...
Grendel has effective, even if not technical, reliability issues in standard equipment. Mass market will not adopt such a cartridge.
6.5X47 is not going to take over the hunter/target plinker segment of the market. Have they even surrendered the patents to SAAMI?

The 6.5 PCC would have potential if it was standardized through SAAMI, but it seems the owner is not interested.
 
S

Stugotz

New member
'Background Story'

6.5 Creedmoor Breaks Mold Again - Wins Shooters Over

New product introductions usually struggle. The innovation has to win over skeptical consumers, induce them to try it, and have a price that justifies switching from current brand favorites. That said, dramatic product launches that change the paradigm do happen. Look no farther than the Apple iPod or iPhone to see how breaking the mold in product development can change the rules of the game. The introduction of the 6.5 Creedmoor echoed Apple’s success in shaking up an industry.
Upending Accepted Practice to Meet Consumer Needs

The introduction of the 6.5 Creedmoor had really flipped the script. Dennis DeMille and Dave Emary had taken the radical step of designing a cartridge that had no gun barrel to chamber in. It met a lot of consumer needs because it addressed a very specific wish list DeMille had written, detailing exactly what competition shooters needed in a high-performance cartridge case. (Find that list here.)

But it came at the problem from a fresh direction that demanded a shift in the way barrel, gun and ammunition producers worked together.

Banking on a Strong Reputation

Dennis and Dave had to convince a number of key industry leaders to support their new case design, but won them over. With production challenges overcome, now came the big test. Would shooters try it, and love it enough to switch or modify guns to use it?

People were naturally not ready to order new barrels and give the new cartridge a trial without seeing evidence of value, so Dennis had to put his reputation on the line by using the product himself first. And he had to convince people who trusted him to put a bit of their own reputations on the line by putting the new design to the test in competition.

“To start, there were only a few people like me shooting it across the course in conventional high power. People wanted to see how I did with it before committing to it. However, I have a good friend, Kent Reeve out of North Carolina who is a long-time member of the U.S. Palma Team and a phenomenal long range shooter. He took a strong interest in chambering his rifle in 6.5 Creedmoor, so I provided him with the load data. From the very first match he began crushing the competition at 600-1,000 yards. That really brought attention of this round to the long-range shooting crowd.”

In short, the new cartridge delivered on its promise, which is the foundational step in launching a new product or brand. Not everyone jumped on the bandwagon immediately. There were a lot of people deeply invested in their current favorite shooting solutions, and setting those loyalties aside took time.

“There were some naysayers and internet forum conversations that questioned the need for the round when so many perfectly good rounds already existed. And some folks acted as if we were demanding that they re-barrel their rifles in this new caliber, which was creating a problem that did not exist. Dave Emary warned me this would be the case; Dave was the one who came up with the .17 HMR, so he was very familiar with that particular breed of online stone-thrower!”

The next surprise, which was definitely unexpected, was the way the 6.5 Creedmoor was adopted as a hunting round. Ruger helped by putting out a hunting rifle with a barrel ready to chamber it. And, again, Dave’s design did what it promised: held its power and elevation over distance. Where you aim is where it goes, and quickly, which is what you need when the target is moving!

Ruger came first, but a lot of smaller custom guys picked it up fairly quickly as well. Savage was the second big company to pick it up several years later. “After they did it was pretty much off to the races,” said DeMille. And finally, the press caught on quickly, too.

“The gun press became the cartridge’s biggest advocates surprisingly quickly, as contributors put the cartridge to the test and submitted positive reports. This was news: Flipping the script, performing as advertised, and so forth. So, they loved it from the get go and were quite prolific in writing about it.

“By the end of the first year it had begun to take on a life of its own. Hornady and Creedmoor had also done what we promised and made sure components were readily available. I have long since lost track of who makes what rifle in that cartridge now…still fun to watch it gain in popularity though, having been there since its inception!”
 
R

ranger56528

New member
I also needed something between the .223 and 308/30-06/30-30 and went with the 6.5 Creedmoor caliber and a Savage model 12 LRP for target shooting,in short I'm a happy camper :).
 
T

tahunua001

New member
to clarify, the 6.5 creedmore and 260 can both be had in AR10s, which are quite a bit heavier and larger than the AR15s that everybody and their dogs are in love with.

there is also the 6.5 Grendel which also a very recent addition but is picking up speed fast. not a lot of rifles are still available in 6.5g but now that Wolf is making affordable ammo for it, a person could just about shoot 6.5 grendel for dang near the same price as 223 for practice, and still benefit from the added stopped power of the more expensive stuff when you hope you don't need it.

there are also the 6.5x50 Japanese, 6.5x52 Mannlicher Carcano, and 6.5x54 mannlicher schoenaur which did not withstand the test of time, have no modern rifles chambered in them, and which ammo is only manufactured in batches by a couple companies about once a year.

I really love the 6.5mm. I've taken blackbear with the 6.5 japanese, and elk and deer with the 6.5 grendel and am loaded up for the 6.5 swede for hunting but really have only really shot it in vimbar competitions. based on your criteria of wanting an intermediate between the three, I would say the 6.5 creedmore. it has become an overnight success and will not likely die any time soon. if it does fail the test of time, it will be 5 to 10 years down the line. the 260 rem is already on its way to the graveyard thanks to more efficient cartridges like the 6.5 creedmore. 6.5 swede will probably take another 50 years to die, if not more, but if nobody in your area has it, then they don't have it.

personally, what I did was bought 800 rounds of swedish blanks, pulled the wood bullets, dumped the powder, and ended up with a lifetime supply of brass that I don't have to worry about scrounging around in the grass after word, and can load whatever I want into... I have loaded everything from 120gr prvi hollow points to 160gr hornady round noses, some of which was loaded for as little as .25 per round... that's an awful lot of cheap shooting for a bolt action.
 
J

Jimro

New member
The 6.5x55 is great if you want to get a Tikka or CZ.

The 6.5 CM is great if you want a Ruger or Savage.

So if you plan on buying a European rifle, get the Swede, if an American rifle, get the Creedmoor.

Handloading considerations make all three comparable in price and performance, but my personal choice would be the Creedmoor.

Jimro
 
J

jackstrawIII

New member
Gunplummer,
The 7mms are very intriguing, but they're more of a 1/2 step down from 308. I know it's all subjective and we're splitting hairs to some extent, but I think I've decided that 6.5 is more "in the middle" of the 223 and 308, which is what I'm looking for.

Regarding guns, I'm an unashamed CZ fanboy. I love them. The gun that got me thinking about the 6.5 is the CZ 550FS in 6.5x55. It has such vintage charm and I love the idea of shooting a classic cartridge out of a "classic looking" gun.

The only catch is, if I want to get another gun in that caliber down the road, my options are severely limited. I try to limit the number of cartridges that I have, and there just aren't that many 6.5x55's out there that appeal to me.
 
S

stagpanther

New member
I built AR's in both Creedmoor and 260--just to see if there really is a difference between them There is--but mostly if you reload IMO. I would say both calibers favor the reloader--but the Creedmoor, in my humble unexpert opinion, has the edge over the 260 by virtue of it's set-back shoulder which allows the use of a greater variety of high BC bullets seated long while not taking up as much case capacity--the same difference between the grendel and something like a 6.5 x 45. However--again, like the grendel--that long high secant ogive can occasionally be problematic finding it's way upstream from magazine to the chamber in a semi-auto, and the designs based on a simply neck up or down of an existing design--like the 260--seems to feed more easily and reliably.

Either one shoots very well--but the Creedmoor is truly a cartridge of beauty and tunable to laser accuracy if you reload. My first shots with my Creedmoor build were with Hornady's factory GMX--more of a hunting load than target--and it delivered sub-MOA the first time out.My next go with Berger's phenomenal VLD's did not go very well but I eventually tuned that issue away. Swift Scirroco's also yield very accurate loads in my Creedmoor.
 
Last edited:
J

jackstrawIII

New member
Jack, I love shooting my 308s!! I'm just looking to expand my collection and am intrigued by the 6.5s. Just can't seem to choose which one.

At this point, I'm leaning towards the Swede.
 
F

fourbore

New member
MY take on this is the 6.5 creedmore is the best choice (of those) for bench shooting or any long range sport. Long range heavy rifle with a big scope and bipod. Is this what you want? Seems a clear choice for the sport. You say shooting not hunting, this is clearly way to go. Unless I miss something in your question? It is not just the round, it is the available and suitable rifles.

The 260 is best suited for hunting, based on ammo selection and twist rates most often seen factory rifles. This is pretty new, but excellent. I like 7mm-08 in this space. But, I also like the 260 design and performance. if I wanted a deer rifle, I would choose between 7mm-08 and 260 based on the gun not the round. That would be either a 260 or 7mm-08. It is not just about filling a gap. It is about filling a need for light weight deer rifle.

The 6.5 sweed is a great nostalgic round available in specific guns that either you want that gun or forget. such as Swedish Mausers or cz. I might get one some day, maybe?? If you have to ask, you dont want this. Same as 7x57. You dont just decide to buy a 7x57, but; you see a great old classic rifle and it happens to be a 6.5x55 or 7x57. Both are a very useful old caliber.
 
Last edited:
T

tobnpr

New member
Who ever figured to attach creedmoor to the 6.5 should win a medal for the best advertising slogan in 50 years. how this round took off is beyond me which is 99.9999% like the 260 rem which was horribly marketed by rem so maybe that is the answer.
Click to expand...

^^ This.

"Blackout"
"Whisper"

This is an extremely competitive arena where ballistic charts matter little.
As stated, the .260 Rem has been around for ages, yet Rem made very few offerings in that chambering.

It wasn't until the hobby of long-range shooting became more popular that "wildcat" style chamberings began to become the standard.

Practically speaking, flip a coin between the .260 and the 6.5 Creedmore- and the Swede isn't much different either.

You didn't mention your application, or if you handload- I'm assuming you don't, because you didn't get into the 6mm wildcats like the 6mm Creedmore- which has become much more popular than the 6.5 in competition.

Do a search here, pro's, con's and other has been discussed many times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top