Anyone switch to 6.5 Creedmoor?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • clfergus

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    49   0   0
    Mar 9, 2009
    1,464
    38
    Southeast Indy
    Just curious if anyone has switched to 6.5 Creedmoor from .308 or .270? I hunted with a Howa 1500 in 6.5 Creedmoor last year and had the opportunity to take two doe at 130 yards. Both dropped where they stood using Winchester Deer Season XP from Walmart.

    I use to use a .308 but the recoil at the range is much lighter with the 6.5. I know it has the label as the new fad caliber but I think it really lives up to the hype. Just curious if anyone else has seen similiar results.
     

    Tactically Fat

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Oct 8, 2014
    8,270
    113
    Indiana
    I don't hunt - so I have nothing to switch to. But that it's available at Walmart is an amazing sign of the times, isn't it?

    I'd like to shoot a 6.5 C one of these days. I"ll miss the target, though.
     

    clfergus

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    49   0   0
    Mar 9, 2009
    1,464
    38
    Southeast Indy
    I don't hunt - so I have nothing to switch to. But that it's available at Walmart is an amazing sign of the times, isn't it?

    I'd like to shoot a 6.5 C one of these days. I"ll miss the target, though.


    Last year they only had the Winchester. This year I went and looked and they have the same Winchester, Federal, Rem Core lokt, and Fusion. All are hunting rounds. Walmart has a better selection of 6.5 Creedmoor for hunting than Cabelas in Noblesville does.
     

    ChrisK1977

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 23, 2009
    476
    18
    I used a 6.5 Creedmoor to take one doe at 130 yards. I was using Core-Lokts. My new Creedmoor doesn’t like them that much. Right now I have it sighted in with the Winchester ammo that you used last year. I glad someone has used this ammo and tell us how it performed.
     

    yetti462

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    May 18, 2016
    1,627
    113
    Unglaciated heaven
    I popped a doe at 200 yds. Was using 120 hornady American whitetail. Bullet didn't exit and no blood trail. I've got a bunch of 140 loads in development just not had time to test. I like the round and rifle. Shooting a Browning x bolt Western hunter.
     

    teddy12b

    Grandmaster
    Trainer Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    40   0   0
    Nov 25, 2008
    7,661
    113
    The 6.5 creedmoor is here to stay. I was on the fence for a long time and within a week I read a couple articles from writers who I'd consider to be slow to change just like I am and they had jumped on the wagon. When I ordered my custom rifle I asked the builder how many rifles they make in varying calibers and he said it's overwhelmingly in 6.5 creedmoor anymore. He then proceeded to tell me that Hornady now sells more 6.5 than they do 308. S&B makes a 6.5 round that's around .60 cents give or take so there's a full range of options from less expensive FMJ rounds, to soft point hunting rounds, to high grade match rounds. My personal rifle has never been fed anything but hornady's 140gr eld match and it'll do a bug hole at 100 yards, and it should for what it cost.

    I'm not saying any of that to take anything away from the 308 though. I'm not selling the 308 that I've got just because that ammo will always be on the shelf.
     

    clfergus

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    49   0   0
    Mar 9, 2009
    1,464
    38
    Southeast Indy
    I used a 6.5 Creedmoor to take one doe at 130 yards. I was using Core-Lokts. My new Creedmoor doesn’t like them that much. Right now I have it sighted in with the Winchester ammo that you used last year. I glad someone has used this ammo and tell us how it performed.


    The winchester performed like the other poster Hornady 120, similar weights. Both did dropped but not exit wound. The lungs were scrambled, I couldn’t even make them out to be lungs.
     

    Michigan Slim

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 19, 2014
    3,375
    113
    Fort Wayne
    I've shot the 6.5. Accurate and reasonable recoil. That said, I'll stick with my Ruger M77II in .270. Kills deer dead and always an exit. No advantage in the 6.5. Nice round but no thanks.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Without belittling the 6.5C at all, I've only seen it used by someone hunting with us. It didn't seem to me to have anything better than the .380/.270 the rest of us were using (or even the .223 75gr that we had).

    Single hunt, so not really a useful sample size. All shots at less than 100 yds (or thereabouts).

    It must work, or else it wouldn't be so popular. I'm just not convinced it works any better than what I already have.
     

    teddy12b

    Grandmaster
    Trainer Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    40   0   0
    Nov 25, 2008
    7,661
    113
    If I didn't have an old Spanish bolt gun & an M1A both in 7.62 NATO, I'd consolidate calibers and switch everything to 6.5. My PSA-10 in 6.5 seems to be a fantastically accurate shooter. It took some work with the M1A to get the groups I'm getting right out of the box with the PSA-10. Springfield now sells the M1A in 6.5. Maybe I should sell both of my 308 guns and get a new M1A. :dunno:

    [edit] there is something to be said about having a NATO round capable rifle sitting in the safe for a SHTF scenario though...

    308 will always be able to be picked up in small town mom and pop stores. Maybe the 6.5 will too, but odds are always going to be in favor of the 308 just because of it's history and use.
     

    Hohn

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    4,444
    63
    USA
    I wouldn't say I "switched", but when I wanted to buy my first non-.223 center fire gun, I did a lot of research on calibers. Getting straight advice from the Internet is shall we say, a challenge.

    I'm coming from the perspective of someone who wants a caliber that is capable of both good hunting and effective target shooting potentially at distance. Here were my requirements:

    1) Must have premium brass available (Lapua, Peterson, maybe Starline, etc). Bonus if you can choose SRP and LRP versions.
    2) Must have muzzle energy about double that of .223
    3) Must be able to feed from a detachable box magazine, and must have factory rifles offered in that arrangement
    4) Must offer bullet sectional density no worse than a 105gr .243 in the heavier bullet weights with more definitely being better. (.254)
    5) Factory rifles must offer fast enough twist to shoot the heaviest bullets in a caliber range.
    6) The case cannot have a belt


    Not an unreasonable list. But you'd be surprised what doesn't make the cut. Everything standard/long action is basically out as you won't really find detachable box mag for those, and there's nothing like an AI pattern that is standardized and ubiquitous. .270, ..280 30-06 etc are all eliminated.

    .243 would have been a contender but the SAAMI twist rate is too slow for 110 and 115gr target bullets. Also, the overall Sectional Density of the heaviest 6mm bullets pales in comparison to that offered by a step up to 6.5mm or 7mm class bullets.

    25 caliber and .277 caliber bullets are eliminated because of the absence of good target bullets.

    It was pretty clear early on that really I wanted a 6.5mm, 7mm, or .308.

    7-08 was eliminated because the factory twists are too slow for the heaviest 7mm bullets. You can find load data for up to 175s in this caliber. Good luck finding a factory rifle fast enough to stabilize that. You're basically limited to 160s by the common twists.

    .308 is always an acceptable choice, but it loses to 6.5 at longer ranges because it either starts out with too little BC or too little MV--or both. Many 6.5 loads will actually put more energy on target at extended range. And a .308 that gives more recoil yet less energy on target is not the way to go.


    Ballistically, the 6.5 Creedmoor is a modernized Swedish Mauser. It will push similar bullets and similar speeds. The hunting credentials of this cartridge speak for themselves. The bottom line is that you cannot blame the cartridge if your hunt fails with this caliber. It might have been a poor bullet choice or a poorly placed shot, but it's not at all a shortcoming of the 6.5mm.

    The 6.5 is within a whisker of the .270 in performance. Alliant load data shows a 130 bullet in 6.5 at speeds up to 2932fps. The .270 can push a 130gr projectile up to nearly 3200fps in the Alliant data. HOWEVER- because that projectile has worse BC, the 6.5 is closing the gap with each passing yard.

    By 300y, the factory 129gr Hornady SST load has essentially tied the Federal 130gr Partition load. After that distance, the 6.5 has more punch.

    But that .270 load will have 55-60gr of powder or more. The 6.5 is using about 40gr. That means barrel life. That means less recoil. That means cheaper loading cost.



    In the final analysis, picking the 6.5 was easy because it beats so many rounds in so many ways. It has no real disadvantages. It's just too well-rounded to find much fault. The combination of case efficiency, high BC, reasonable speed, high SD (related to high BC) give an all-around cartridge that I suspect in 20 years will all but replace the .308 as the most popular short action round in American bolt rifles. It will NOT replace the .308 in any autoloader anytime soon.

    (.308 is hampered by initial requirement to feed full auto, which means excessive case taper and shallow shoulder angle. These make it less efficient than a round tailored to the modern bolt action rifle).

    Congrats to Dave Emary and friends on one for the history books. He basically created a cartridge as good at target shooting and hunting as chicken is at being food for us.

    Gratuitous shot of my newly upfitted 6.5:

    YbgzdYs.jpg
     
    Last edited:
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    Oct 3, 2008
    4,187
    149
    On a hill in Perry C
    I use the old school 6.5- the 6.5x55 Swede! If I hadn't already been set up for the old Swede I'd probably would have gone with the Creedmoor. It's a good round, no doubt about it. Actually I'm really surprised it caught on as good as it has, considering most 6.5s previous to it were really not that popular.
     

    two70

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    19   0   0
    Feb 5, 2016
    3,725
    113
    Johnson
    The 6.5 is within a whisker of the .270 in performance. Alliant load data shows a 130 bullet in 6.5 at speeds up to 2932fps. The .270 can push a 130gr projectile up to nearly 3200fps in the Alliant data. HOWEVER- because that projectile has worse BC, the 6.5 is closing the gap with each passing yard.

    By 300y, the factory 129gr Hornady SST load has essentially tied the Federal 130gr Partition load. After that distance, the 6.5 has more punch.

    I have absolutely nothing against the 6.5 CM, it is a fine cartridge. The nearly identical .260 Remington is equally fine for almost all purposes to which the medium 6.5 mms are suited. There are a some real advantages to choosing a medium 6.5 cartridge in many situations, however, the line of reasoning in support of the 6.5 CM above in bold drives me nuts(not picking on you Hohn, you just happened to post it and showed your work). The vast majority of big game, including western big game, is shot within 200 yards. Outside of those who purposely seek long range shot opportunities and outdoor writers who often pad their shooting distances, most hunters are not shooting past 300 yards let alone far enough beyond 300 yards to notice a significant difference between two cartridges of reasonably similar performance. That being the case, selecting a cartridge that has more punch at 300+ yards over a cartridge that has more punch from 0-300 yards seems like a case of putting the cart before the horse. There are times and locations, sheep/goat hunting or elk in open very terrain for example, where a rig capable of shooting 400+ yards is highly beneficial but in both of those cases a wise hunter is probably going to choose a more powerful cartridge.
     

    Hookeye

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Dec 19, 2011
    15,039
    77
    armpit of the midwest
    Kicks rocks............bought a .30-06




    LOL




    Yeah, I might get a 6.5.................Grendel. For a deer AR.



    Have .243 that does well. Looking to buy another (Ruger #1A).
    Still have a fondness for the 7mm Rem mag.


    No love of .45-70, .30-30, .308 or 6.5 CM


    I don't care to be one of the cool kids.
     

    Hohn

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    4,444
    63
    USA
    I have absolutely nothing against the 6.5 CM, it is a fine cartridge. The nearly identical .260 Remington is equally fine for almost all purposes to which the medium 6.5 mms are suited. There are a some real advantages to choosing a medium 6.5 cartridge in many situations, however, the line of reasoning in support of the 6.5 CM above in bold drives me nuts(not picking on you Hohn, you just happened to post it and showed your work). The vast majority of big game, including western big game, is shot within 200 yards. Outside of those who purposely seek long range shot opportunities and outdoor writers who often pad their shooting distances, most hunters are not shooting past 300 yards let alone far enough beyond 300 yards to notice a significant difference between two cartridges of reasonably similar performance. That being the case, selecting a cartridge that has more punch at 300+ yards over a cartridge that has more punch from 0-300 yards seems like a case of putting the cart before the horse. There are times and locations, sheep/goat hunting or elk in open very terrain for example, where a rig capable of shooting 400+ yards is highly beneficial but in both of those cases a wise hunter is probably going to choose a more powerful cartridge.

    No offense taken, you are completely correct and it truly is important to recognize the facts you point out.

    At the shorter ranges reasonable and mature hunters will use, the .270 would clearly be better. But how much better?

    My intent was not to recommend shots over 300y (never would), nor to claim the 6.5 is better (better at what?). Rather, I was just showing that the perceived differences between the 6.5 and classic rounds like the .270 can be smaller than one might think.

    Let's go back to my comparison of of the 129 SST and Federal 130 Partition. Instead of looking at energy at a given distance, let's look at shorter distances. The .270 has about the same energy at 75 yards as the 6.5 does at 25y.

    In other words, at shorter range, the advantage in muzzle energy of the .270 is about 50 yards of range and only decreases as you go farther out until eventually the 6.5 starts carrying more energy.


    The 6.5 has no glaring weaknesses. It's not that it has any particular strength over another caliber. It's not more powerful than a .270, it's just remarkably close for something that's short action instead of long and uses ~40gr instead of ~60gr.

    If your caliber is giving you no worse than a 50y range disadvantage to the immortal .270 while using significantly less powder, delivering less recoil and feeding from a short action box mag, then I think that's significant.
     

    omegahunter

    Plinker
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 7, 2019
    27
    1
    Daviess County
    Switch? Nah, but I did find a great deal on a used 6.5 Creedmoor and bought it. It is a Ruger Predator and will make for a light rifle for my Dad to carry.

    For what it's worth I enjoy shooting my 35 Remington, 358 WSSM, muzzleloaders, ... just as much as shooting the Creedmoor.
     

    EGParatrooper

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 18, 2011
    255
    18
    I don't hunt anymore. I have my Winchester 30-30 that I used for years hunting on my property in NW Pennsylvania, but after leaving the military, I haven't been hunting. I do have a 6.5C that I use for putting holes in paper, or striking steel. I enjoy the 6.5, it is comfortable to shoot, and it puts holes where I point it. I use factory loads or hand load my own rounds.

    6.5 creed.jpg

    Shot group.jpg
     

    clfergus

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    49   0   0
    Mar 9, 2009
    1,464
    38
    Southeast Indy
    I wouldn't say I "switched", but when I wanted to buy my first non-.223 center fire gun, I did a lot of research on calibers. Getting straight advice from the Internet is shall we say, a challenge.

    I'm coming from the perspective of someone who wants a caliber that is capable of both good hunting and effective target shooting potentially at distance. Here were my requirements:

    1) Must have premium brass available (Lapua, Peterson, maybe Starline, etc). Bonus if you can choose SRP and LRP versions.
    2) Must have muzzle energy about double that of .223
    3) Must be able to feed from a detachable box magazine, and must have factory rifles offered in that arrangement
    4) Must offer bullet sectional density no worse than a 105gr .243 in the heavier bullet weights with more definitely being better. (.254)
    5) Factory rifles must offer fast enough twist to shoot the heaviest bullets in a caliber range.
    6) The case cannot have a belt


    Not an unreasonable list. But you'd be surprised what doesn't make the cut. Everything standard/long action is basically out as you won't really find detachable box mag for those, and there's nothing like an AI pattern that is standardized and ubiquitous. .270, ..280 30-06 etc are all eliminated.

    .243 would have been a contender but the SAAMI twist rate is too slow for 110 and 115gr target bullets. Also, the overall Sectional Density of the heaviest 6mm bullets pales in comparison to that offered by a step up to 6.5mm or 7mm class bullets.

    25 caliber and .277 caliber bullets are eliminated because of the absence of good target bullets.

    It was pretty clear early on that really I wanted a 6.5mm, 7mm, or .308.

    7-08 was eliminated because the factory twists are too slow for the heaviest 7mm bullets. You can find load data for up to 175s in this caliber. Good luck finding a factory rifle fast enough to stabilize that. You're basically limited to 160s by the common twists.

    .308 is always an acceptable choice, but it loses to 6.5 at longer ranges because it either starts out with too little BC or too little MV--or both. Many 6.5 loads will actually put more energy on target at extended range. And a .308 that gives more recoil yet less energy on target is not the way to go.


    Ballistically, the 6.5 Creedmoor is a modernized Swedish Mauser. It will push similar bullets and similar speeds. The hunting credentials of this cartridge speak for themselves. The bottom line is that you cannot blame the cartridge if your hunt fails with this caliber. It might have been a poor bullet choice or a poorly placed shot, but it's not at all a shortcoming of the 6.5mm.

    The 6.5 is within a whisker of the .270 in performance. Alliant load data shows a 130 bullet in 6.5 at speeds up to 2932fps. The .270 can push a 130gr projectile up to nearly 3200fps in the Alliant data. HOWEVER- because that projectile has worse BC, the 6.5 is closing the gap with each passing yard.

    By 300y, the factory 129gr Hornady SST load has essentially tied the Federal 130gr Partition load. After that distance, the 6.5 has more punch.

    But that .270 load will have 55-60gr of powder or more. The 6.5 is using about 40gr. That means barrel life. That means less recoil. That means cheaper loading cost.



    In the final analysis, picking the 6.5 was easy because it beats so many rounds in so many ways. It has no real disadvantages. It's just too well-rounded to find much fault. The combination of case efficiency, high BC, reasonable speed, high SD (related to high BC) give an all-around cartridge that I suspect in 20 years will all but replace the .308 as the most popular short action round in American bolt rifles. It will NOT replace the .308 in any autoloader anytime soon.

    (.308 is hampered by initial requirement to feed full auto, which means excessive case taper and shallow shoulder angle. These make it less efficient than a round tailored to the modern bolt action rifle).

    Congrats to Dave Emary and friends on one for the history books. He basically created a cartridge as good at target shooting and hunting as chicken is at being food for us.

    Gratuitous shot of my newly upfitted 6.5:

    YbgzdYs.jpg

    Very nice looking rifle.
     

    Goodcat

    From a place you cannot see…
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    151   0   0
    Jan 13, 2009
    3,382
    83
    New Pal
    If you are hunting 100 yards and in, 6.5 cm is not something you need. Any other calibers rifles are pointless if something else does the job, don’t buy another rifle! Never shot anything but steel with 6.5, but consistently hitting 1000 yard 14” and got some hits at a mile with custom ammo.
     
    Top Bottom