.270 versus - 6.5 Creedmoor for Hunting and Target

[two70]

Adding to this benefit is that the rifle I am looking at is 1:8 twist in 6.5 creedmoor and 1:10 in .270 which puts me in the roughly range of 130 to 140 grain ammo in either with similar fps and ft lbs. (51/49 advantage 6.5) with the .270 have a marginal hunting advantage in downrange energy (50/50 split again...).

With both having similar barrel lengths the .270 will have 200-400 fps more velocity then the 6.5 Creedmoor with those bullet weights and the .270 likely has a bit more room for pushing performance too. However, for your intended purpose I'm not sure that is a distinction of significance.

I think 6.5 would be great on Elk, just use the right bullet construction for weight retention and penetration/expansion.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but once you get past a couple hundred yards, the 6.5 outperforms the 270 cuz of...
- with similar velocities, weights, and bullet designs the smaller diameter bullet will penetrate deeper
- better ballistic coefficients to retain better velocity/energy at distances over 300 yds
right??

They're both ample cartridges for the task at hand. If I were buying new, it'd be sixes choosing between them (6.5 if you reload, 270 if you don't). If I had an old 270 laying around, I would not replace it.
plz Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yes and no. The 6.5 has certain ballistic advantages but you are not going to see those advantages appear until well past reasonable (and respectful) hunting range, ie well beyond 300 yards. It takes a lot of distance to beat a much higher initial velocity with a slightly higher BC.

 

[avboiler11]

In this day and age of modern bullet construction, is it really worth splitting hairs about a couple hundred ft/lbs of energy or a couple hundredths of bullet diameter?

The .277 140gr Berger Classic Hunter (about the best bullet available for the common 1:10 twist) has a G7 of .271, whereas the .264 140gr Berger Elite Hunter has a G7 of .310...a non-insignificant increase. Sure a 270 can drive its 140gr bullet faster than a 6.5 Creed of similar length, but using 35% more powder which equates to more recoil.

Of course for typical hunting distances, pretty much none of this matters - either caliber will kill a whitetail, or mulie, or elk, or bear just as dead as the other with Bergers or a box of $20 Interlocks from DSG. At longer ranges present out west, however, the higher BC bullet will narrow the velocity/energy advantage of Cooper's Cartridge and provide a higher hit probability...and lets be honest, this side of a 338 Lapua shot placement matters a heck of a lot more beyond 300 than energy does.

In the end, both will cleanly and ethically put down any North American game animal provided the operator chooses the proper bullet and puts that bullet in the proper location...and I seriously doubt one has any advantage on the other for suboptimal shot placement.

Disclaimer: my first whitetail buck was taken with a Savage 110 in 270 Winchester, 55 yards, 130gr Core-Lokt. I was 11.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Disclaimer: my first whitetail buck was taken with a Savage 110 in 270 Winchester, 55 yards, 130gr Core-Lokt. I was 11.

One of my best friends has a crappy Rem 710 in .270 Win. It's more accurate than it has a right to be - especially with 130gr Core-Lokt.

 

[JettaKnight]

In this day and age of modern bullet construction, is it really worth splitting hairs about a couple hundred ft/lbs of energy or a couple hundredths of bullet diameter?

You must be new to [STRIKE]INGO[/STRIKE].
[STRIKE]The internet[/STRIKE].
Gun culture.

 

[SSGSAD]

In case you don't know ..... the .270, is a 30-06, necked down, to .270 .....

I read Jack O'Connor, when I was a kid, and I have wanted a .270,

ever since .....

If you are under 600 yards, why not go with a .308 .....

at that distance, there is so little difference .....

Unless you just want to buy a new rifle .....

Don't let your sig., other read my post .....

 

[mcapo]

You must be new to [STRIKE]INGO[/STRIKE].
[STRIKE]The internet[/STRIKE].
Gun culture.

NO KIDDING!!!!

In case you don't know ..... the .270, is a 30-06, necked down, to .270 .....

I read Jack O'Connor, when I was a kid, and I have wanted a .270,

ever since .....

If you are under 600 yards, why not go with a .308 .....

at that distance, there is so little difference .....

Unless you just want to buy a new rifle .....

Don't let your sig., other read my post .....

There are a lot of other calibers that could be considered alternatives. 257 WBY is in third place. I like my AR-10 and have good accuracy results, but I am really looking for an intermediate cartridge for this gun and, yes, a large part is just the want of something different and a new reloading caliber to toy with.

My original question was not about which cartridge is "better", as I do not believe the differences are significant enough to really find one superior to the other (we can leave that to another 9mm, 40 or 45 is best thread (BTW the answer is 357 mag...lol). The comments here continue to most helpful and have me thinking about my actual use more than my perceived use. At best, this gun would hunt Elk every couple of years and at less than 400 yards; supplementing my favorite 300 WBY.

I do enjoy playing with different loads trying to get a .4 moa group to a .39 moa group and the 6.5 Creedmoor is, with current bullet selection, tailored made for that. If this was "just" to hunt with, .270 would be my choice. Given my two uses, the nod, I think, goes to 6.5 Creedmoor 50.5% to 49.5%. At least, today....maybe...

 

[two70]

In this day and age of modern bullet construction, is it really worth splitting hairs about a couple hundred ft/lbs of energy or a couple hundredths of bullet diameter?

The .277 140gr Berger Classic Hunter (about the best bullet available for the common 1:10 twist) has a G7 of .271, whereas the .264 140gr Berger Elite Hunter has a G7 of .310...a non-insignificant increase. Sure a 270 can drive its 140gr bullet faster than a 6.5 Creed of similar length, but using 35% more powder which equates to more recoil.

Of course for typical hunting distances, pretty much none of this matters - either caliber will kill a whitetail, or mulie, or elk, or bear just as dead as the other with Bergers or a box of $20 Interlocks from DSG. At longer ranges present out west, however, the higher BC bullet will narrow the velocity/energy advantage of Cooper's Cartridge and provide a higher hit probability...and lets be honest, this side of a 338 Lapua shot placement matters a heck of a lot more beyond 300 than energy does.

It is kind of hard to avoid splitting hairs when discussing two cartridges even remotely similar in performance let alone when the OP asks about two cartridges that are much closer in performance. That is not to say there is not actual real world differences though that bear some discussion.

I'll give Berger credit for a brilliant marketing strategy but I hope most people have enough respect for game animals not to risk wounding one based on that marketing hype. Of course I would hope most people had enough respect for the animals not to go seeking 500+ yard shots on purpose either.

Shot placement matters more than energy at any distance but that doesn't mean that energy doesn't matter at all. Both energy and bullet performance can mean the difference between a dead animal that is recovered in a timely fashion and one that is recovered too late or not at all.

 

[two70]

There are a lot of other calibers that could be considered alternatives. 257 WBY is in third place. I like my AR-10 and have good accuracy results, but I am really looking for an intermediate cartridge for this gun and, yes, a large part is just the want of something different and a new reloading caliber to toy with.

My original question was not about which cartridge is "better", as I do not believe the differences are not significant enough to really find one superior to the other (we can leave that to another 9mm, 40 or 45 is best thread (BTW the answer is 357 mag...lol). The comments here continue to most helpful and have me thinking about my actual use more than my perceived use. At best, this gun would hunt Elk every couple of years and at less than 400 yards; supplementing my favorite 300 WBY.

I do enjoy playing with different loads trying to get a .4 moa group instead of a .39 moa group and the 6.5 Creedmoor is, with current bullet selection, tailored made for that. If this was "just" to hunt with, .270 would be my choice. Given my two uses, the nod, I think, goes to 6.5 Creedmoor 50.5% to 49.5%. At least, today....maybe...

For your stated purpose I would say the 6.5 has more of an advantage than you give it credit for. Another thing in the 6.5's favor is that the barrel will likely last a bit longer than a .270's would if you intend to shoot it a whole lot.

 

[rugertoter]

Seems to me that both calibers would be just as efficient as the other. I would say it would come down to a long action or short action bolt design.

 

[ru44mag]

This is very true. When the ammo sinks into a lake on the hunting trip...just run to the store and get more.

On the other hand, bullet selection (referring to hand loading; not factory ammo) for the 6.5 is geared toward the range with some real impressive BC's. I get a kick out of seeing how tight I can get a particular rifle at 500 to 1000 and I will shoot that much more than I will hunt. (that makes it 50/50 .270 to 6.5 creedmoor).

Adding to this benefit is that the rifle I am looking at is 1:8 twist in 6.5 creedmoor and 1:10 in .270 which puts me in the roughly range of 130 to 140 grain ammo in either with similar fps and ft lbs. (51/49 advantage 6.5) with the .270 have a marginal hunting advantage in downrange energy (50/50 split again...).

I don't think you can loose. Flip a coin. Years ago I could not make up my mind between the 30-06 and the .270. I bought the 30.06. Did I make the right choice? Who knows? Worked really well last fall on 2 different whitetail. If I would have bought the .270 all those years ago, the deer would have been just as dead.

 

[mcapo]

Someone just sent this to me and found it someplace on the internet...gives a great comparison for those that like to parse numbers. Crazy high BC on that 6.5 skews the numbers a bit in to the 6.5 more than a 130 to 130 grain comparison.

6.5 Creedmoor

270 Winchester

 

[sailordave]

Interesting. Their velocity graphs cross at 500 yds. I never get tired of looking at these charts.

 

[throttletony]

thanks for posting those charts.
as has been said many times, both will work.

If i were looking for a new rifle, I'd get 6.5 because I reload. I'd get the .270 if I didn't reload.
If I had either one in the basement, I wouldn't sweat it.

 

[natdscott]

If I had either one in the basement, I wouldn't sweat it.

Around these parts, you should always be sweating it if your firearms are in the basement. And buy lots of oil. Good oil. Like Eezox.

 

[mcapo]

...AND THE WINNER IS: 6.5 CREEDMOOR. No doubt .270 is a equal choice but the current bullet selection of the 6.5 with the high BC's will allow me a new range toy that I can use those same 130-140 grain loads to hunt hog, deer and maybe elk.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Good choice. Look into the Berger Hybrids for long distance plinking. Those things are nuts.

 

[oldpink]

Good choice. Look into the Berger Hybrids for long distance plinking. Those things are nuts.

Yep
And get a quality premium bullet if hunting elk or moose, assuming that it's legal to use 6.5 guns on them where he's hunting.
Any decent expanding bullet should do nicely for deer on private land in our state, though.

 

[two70]

Someone just sent this to me and found it someplace on the internet...gives a great comparison for those that like to parse numbers. Crazy high BC on that 6.5 skews the numbers a bit in to the 6.5 more than a 130 to 130 grain comparison.

Congrats! The 6.5 is a good choice and that is a nice looking rifle.

That must be one very long barreled 6.5 to hit 2750 with a 140 grain bullet and a shorter barreled .270 to only reach 2950 with a 140, lol, but it does illustrate several interesting points. First, if you are punching paper at very long range, then a high BC bullet gives you a significant advantage toward printing the smallest group possible. On the other hand, for hunting the advantage of an ultra high BC bullet is not realized until beyond the range that most people have any business shooting at an animal. This is even more apparent when you look at a more extreme example where the ballistics charts incorporate both a very large difference in BC and very large velocity difference. Note- I chose to stick with one cartridge(.270 win) to eliminate variables and simplify the comparison between high BC and high velocity:

.270 Win 24" barrel, 150 grain Berger VLD, BC .535 Velocity 2950 fps Wind 10 MPH

Indices	Range 0 -1000 yards
Range	0	100	200	300	400	500	600	700	800	900	1000
Velocity - fps	2950	2774	2604	2441	2284	2134	1989	1850	1718	1593	1478
Energy - ft.-lbs.	2898	2562	2259	1984	1737	1516	1317	1140	983	845	727
Momentum - lbs-sec	1.96	1.84	1.73	1.62	1.52	1.42	1.32	1.23	1.14	1.06	0.98
Path - in.	-1.5	1.5	0.0	-6.6	-19.1	-38.3	-65.1	-100.7	-146.5	-204.1	-275.4
Drift - in.	0.0	0.3	1.1	2.5	4.6	7.4	11.0	15.4	20.9	27.4	35.1
Time of flight - sec.	0.0	0.1	0.2	0.3	0.5	0.6	0.7	0.9	1.1	1.3	1.4

.270 Win 24" barrel 110 grain Nosler Accubond BC .370 Velocity 3500 fps Wind 10 MPH

Indices	Range 0 -1000 yards
Range	0	100	200	300	400	500	600	700	800	900	1000
Velocity - fps	3500	3213	2947	2694	2456	2230	2017	1817	1630	1462	1314
Energy - ft.-lbs.	2992	2522	2120	1773	1472	1214	994	806	649	522	421
Momentum - lbs-sec	1.70	1.56	1.43	1.31	1.20	1.09	0.98	0.88	0.79	0.71	0.64
Path - in.	-1.5	0.9	-0.0	-5.0	-14.7	-30.2	-52.8	-83.9	-125.6	-180.5	-251.6
Drift - in.	0.0	0.3	1.3	3.0	5.5	9.0	13.5	19.4	26.6	35.5	46.2
Time of flight - sec.	0.0	0.1	0.2	0.3	0.4	0.5	0.7	0.8	1.0	1.2	1.4

Even in this extreme example both bullets retain enough energy to meet recommended minimums for elk(1200 ft lbs) out to 500+ yards(500 and change for the 110 and ~650 for the 150), the wind drift difference between the two are negligible until 600+ yards, and retained velocity remains in the effective range(for proper bullet performance) to 600+ yards. The high BC bullet has a clear advantage in retained energy at least in this extreme case but even that doesn't really appear until a long, long way downrange.

 

[avboiler11]

That must be one very long barreled 6.5 to hit 2750 with a 140 grain bullet

22" 6.5 Creedmoor, 42.5gr H4350, 140gr Hornady HPBT....2750fps per Magnetospeed.

I had a 18" 6.5 Creedmoor that got 2640 with the same load. Factory 140gr Amax Match ammo ran ~20fps faster.

 

[two70]

22" 6.5 Creedmoor, 42.5gr H4350, 140gr Hornady HPBT....2750fps per Magnetospeed.

I had a 18" 6.5 Creedmoor that got 2640 with the same load. Factory 140gr Amax Match ammo ran ~20fps faster.

I stand corrected then, neither of the reloading manuals that I have that list Creedmoor velocities that high with a 140 and a 24" barrel.