Why no 6.5-'06?

H

hammie

New member
Magnum wheel man has a thread going about .25-'06 head stamps, and that thread reminded me of something that I've often wondered about:

Why hasn't some major ammunition/rifle manufacturer commercialized and mainstreamed the 6.5-'06? Is it because the target crowd wants short action cartridges and the hunting crowd is already adequately served by the .25-06 rem and the .270 win?

There seems to be resurgence of interest in the 6.5 caliber. Plus, it seems to me that the 6.5-'06 combines the best of the .25-'06 and the .270, without the supposed problems of the 6.5 Remington magnum and the .264 Winchester magnum.

I'm not sure why this hasn't happened. Does anyone have any ideas or explanations?
 
H

hooligan1

New member
Amen Hammie, where's the brass for our beloved 6.5-06 A Square rifles?

I chose to neck down .270 brass, requiring a heap of trimming the first round but seems to work nicely....I haven't updated my thread on my turk mauser, but the rifle seems to reallyblike everthing I load so far for it.
 
4

44 AMP

Staff
Why no 6.5-06?

Many reasons, but I think, mostly the big makers just don't see enough of a market to justify the costs.

Wildcatters can form cases from several commercially abundant parent cases, so not much incentive for ammo makers to offer ready made brass.

Rifle makers have learned that without good ammo support (and long established support is best) guns in new calibers (particularly wildcats) don't sell, beyond a niche market.

And, also there is the fact that a new round can hurt sales of existing guns. Look how long it took Remington to bring out the .260 Rem. rumor has it that they delayed it due to fears of losing sales of .243 and 6mm. Can't say its true, and won't say its not, but there's been talk....;)

The 6.5-06 is right in a very narrow niche. Its edge over the 6.5x55mm Swede (and .260Rem) isn't tremendous. The .264 Win beats it (although with the cost of magnum cases & powder charges). The 25-06 and the .270 & .280 overlap it too.

Unlike the .25-06 and the .22-250 which survived for decades before becoming factory rounds, the 6.5-06 simply doesn't do enough, enough better than several rounds we already have, and have had for many years.

its a good round, can do a lot of things very well, but I think it will stay a wildcatter's round for the forseeable future.
 
H

hammie

New member
@44amp and others: Your arguments and conclusions are probably right. Bummer.

On the other hand, if you think about it, there sure have been a lot of pointless cartridges introduced and demised in the past 10 years: all the Remington ultra magnums, the Winchester short magnums, the Ruger compact magnums, and the most senseless one of all, the 30 TC. The 6.5mm-'06 is surely more deserving than any of those. Oh well.
 
R

reynolds357

New member
The main reason is the .270 Winchester. .264 vs .270 bullets in identical cases. One can make an argument that one is superior to the other, but from a manufacturing and marketing standpoint, they are practically identical and it is only practical to produce and market one or the other.

The Rum and WSM line is still very much alive and kicking.:rolleyes:
I am a fan of both and own a lot of them.
 
J

JD0x0

New member
Because the .270 covers enough ground to not really need a 6.5-06 and IMO, .25-06 as well.

When you neck down a cartridge and make it more 'overbore' it generally becomes less efficient, barrel life suffers as well.

Generally...
25-06 will shoot 115 grain bullet @ 3000FPS (SD=.249)
6.5-06 will shoot 140 grain bullets @ 3000FPS (SD=.287)
.270 will shoot 150 grain bullets @ 3000FPS (SD= .289)

6.5mm has more choices for VLD bullets, but the 6.8mm also has some good choices and they seem to be getting better.

As much as I would like a 6.5-06 it's just too similar to the .270 win, where you wont really be gaining much, so it doesn't really justify commercializing the cartridge. The only differences are really on paper, if you ask me. In the field there's almost no difference, given comparable loads.
 
M

MarkCO

New member
I own a few 6mms, a few 6.5mms, all short actions and then I jump to .30+ calibers, most long actions. For me, there are a lot of choices from 6m to 7mm inclusive, and it comes down to efficiency, case capacity and accuracy. I just don't see any reason to use a long action cartridge for anything under 30 caliber. If I was tempted into a 6.5-06, I have an idea that I would go through barrels faster than with my .260, but without any better performance.

My Dad used to hunt with a .243 and a 7mm and is now using a .270Win
 
D

Doyle

New member
Because the 6.5x55 swede and the .260Rem already do all that you would normally care to do with a 6.5-06. Even with that, the .260 has a relatively small commercial following (I have rarely seen ammo for it on the shelves - bummer).
 
M

MarkCO

New member
Doyle, when I got into .260 Rem about 6 years ago, I could find NO ammo. The popularity is increasing rapidly. There is aobut 3 times the number of loads for it as the 6.5CM now, with more coming on line. Remington said that the .260Rem is their most requested cartridge right now. There are new guns and loads in development too.
 
J

jimbob86

Moderator
If you must have one .....

There is a new large capacity, 30-06 length 6.5mm cartridge out there: the 26 Nolser.
 
B

Bart B.

New member
Generally...
25-06 will shoot 115 grain bullet @ 3000FPS (SD=.249)
6.5-06 will shoot 140 grain bullets @ 3000FPS (SD=.287)
.270 will shoot 150 grain bullets @ 3000FPS (SD= .289)
Click to expand...
I don't think so; not at the same peak pressure of 63,000 to 64,000 psi. The .270 with a 150 needs a lot more peak pressure to shoot it out at 3000 fps.
 
P

Pathfinder45

New member
and another thing

There are now, I believe, 3 cartridges of 6.5mm that have the same capacity.
1. 6.5 Remington Magnum, a good cartridge that failed commercially.
2. 6.5-'06, a good wildcat that also will fail as a commercial offering.
3. 6.5-284 Norma, a good wildcat-turned standard that might actually make it; time will tell.
All three pretty much duplicate the 270 Winchester, which pretty much dooms them to failure. The 6.5-284, however is primarily an ultra-long range target round, and thus is not really competing with the 270, which is a hunting cartridge.
 
J

JD0x0

New member
I don't think so; not at the same peak pressure of 63,000 to 64,000 psi. The .270 with a 150 needs a lot more peak pressure to shoot it out at 3000 fps.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you know SAAMI max spec of the .270win is 65K,
With a quick search I found Nosler lists at least three loads that break 2900FPS with a 150 grain bullet that should be within SAMMI pressure spec. 3000FPS might be slightly optimistic for some rifles but as we all know velocities can vary based on barrel lengths and even different bores with equal barrel lengths. A rifle with more 'freebore' may be able to set the 150 out further and fit more powder without breaking 65K PSI, as well.

Not that it's that big a deal since there's at least 3 book listed loads, from Nosler, that are not even a full 100FPS off from what I claimed. I'm sure if I looked a little harder I can find a load within SAAMI pressure specs that breaks 3000FPS, without using a longer barrel to get the velocity up.
 
T

tahunua001

New member
the 6.5 market is kindof flooded right now. between 6.5 grendel, 6.5 creedmore, 260 rem(esentially 6.5-08), 264 win mag, not to mention the military classics like 6.5 swede, 6.5 carcano, 6.5 mannlicher, and 6.5 japanese, there are just so many that are all gradual steps up from eachother that there's really just no room to make money off them anymore. ammo makers really only support the 2 big ones right now, 6.5 creedmore, and 6.5 swede. two that have some support but not really going anywhere fast is 6.5 grendel for the AR crowd and 260 rem for the short action hunting crowd. the rest... kindof slip in and out of production a lot.
 
G

Gunplummer

New member
There was one once. A guy brought in some loaded rounds he got in an auction box and did not know what they were. They were headstamped .256 Newton and if I remember correctly it was Winchester brass. This was the original 6.5-06 factory round. It goes waaay back. Until recently, a metric bullet was a hard sell in the U.S. Look at the way Winchester tried to hide their 8MM with the .325 tag they hung on it. I mean really, a .270 when the 7MM was around for years? You better believe the .260 was never going to be called the 6.5-08 when it was introduced. That is just the way it was years ago.
 
H

hammie

New member
@Reynolds 357 in post #6: Please forgive me. I didn't me to "disrespect" those cartridges. Without making an argument for or against their marketing success, I will have to confess that I have come close twice... real close... to buying a 325 WSM. It sounded like a good elk cartridge, which would also make a good deer cartridge.

As for the 6.5-'06, I think it would offer a substantial advantage over the short action 6.5's, but I am also getting a sense that the 6.5 field is already pretty crowded. I guess I can look for a recently discontinued Stevens long action rifle, throw away the dream whip stock, unscrew the barrel and screw on a 6.5-06 barrel, then re-stock it.
 
T

tahunua001

New member
Tahunua, yes you'd be correct, whats your point?
Click to expand...
my point is that gunplummer was claiming that 270 was not given a metric 7mm designation because it wouldn't have sold well in the US. I think it would be more accurate to say that it wasn't designated 7mm because it's not actually 7mm. another point one could bring up is the 6.8SPC which is very popular in the US which is also a .277 bullet and has never gone by any other name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top