Why all the 6.5 Creedmoor Hate?

[mauserhunter]

Is there a typo in there? Am I missing something?

Like Inline6, I have shot the .22 a fair amount in my life, and I have shot, and still shoot, steel out to 1,000 meters (measured), albeit with a .300 Win, and I find this statement hard to believe...

Here is what a 12" plate looks at 600 meters through a 24x scope. Hint, go down 4 MILs to find it:

View attachment 593664

Here is what a 12" plate looks at 600 meters, with naked eyes. See it?

View attachment 593665

Can't see it? OK, I will help...

View attachment 593666

Now, admittedly, 600 meters is 656 yards, and a 9"x16" piece of steel is 4" taller than a 12" steel plate, but, like CoElkHunter, I find it difficult to believe that one can SEE a 9"x16" piece of steel at 600 yards...

As to "ring(ing) 9”x16” piece of steel every shot at 600 yards with an iron sighted cz452 22 lr on a calm day", well, all I can say is that even the .300 Win shooting 180 gr match bullets requires 4.4 MILs of vertical correction, to compensate for its 104" drop (104" = 8.6 feet, mind you!). I cannot even begin to think what the drop of the .22 is at 600 yards...

Not to mention that this day better be "calm" indeed, as in 'no atmosphere calm' because it only takes a whisper to start requiring drift correction at 600 meters even with the .300 / 180 gr, so I cannot even begin to think what the .22 / 40 gr will drift at that distance even on a zero-wind day, if such a thing ever existed.

Like Bob Nelson 35Whelen, I am amazed at what modern CNC machining can do to a barrel, and the CZ 452 is a great rifle, but put it all together, to get to 1) ringing the 9"x16" steel every shot + 2) at 600 yards + 3) with iron sighs +4) with a .22 LR, and I guess that maybe I too need shooting lessons from you, likely after an extended session at a good optometrist

Yeah that's what I thought, a really good 22 set up can have fun at 300 but 400-600 is more of a hope and pray to hit.

 

[One Day...]

Yeah that's what I thought, a really good 22 set up can have fun at 300...

Absolutely! For a few months before each safari I shoot mine constantly at a 6" plate at 150 yards, which is roughly the shooting skills equivalent of shooting a 12" plate at 300 yards, but this is a modern-production Winchester 52, as good as, and likely better than, a CZ 452 (I also have an Anschutz and a Walther to compare, but I prefer the Win for this because it shoots just as well, and it is a little beefier and heavier, hence better from Africa training), with Zeiss glass, and it already takes 8 MOA (32 clicks!) to get from 100 yards to 150 yards with high velocity 40 gr.

 

[MS 9x56]

Is there a typo in there? Am I missing something?

Like Inline6, I have shot the .22 a fair amount in my life, and I have shot, and still shoot, steel out to 1,000 meters (measured), albeit with a .300 Win, and I find this statement hard to believe...

Here is what a 12" plate looks like at 600 meters through a 24x scope. Hint, go down 4 MILs to find it:

View attachment 593664

Here is what a 12" plate looks like at 600 meters, with naked eyes. See it?

View attachment 593665

Can't see it? OK, I will help...

View attachment 593666

Now, admittedly, 600 meters is 656 yards, and a 9"x16" piece of steel is 4" taller than a 12" steel plate, but, like CoElkHunter, I find it difficult to believe that one can SEE a 9"x16" piece of steel at 600 yards with naked eyes...

As to "ring(ing) 9”x16” piece of steel every shot at 600 yards with an iron sighted cz452 22 lr on a calm day", well, all I can say is that even the .300 Win shooting 180 gr match bullets requires 4.4 MILs of vertical correction, to compensate for its 104" drop (104" = 8.6 feet, mind you!). I cannot even begin to think what the drop of the .22 LR is at 600 yards...

Not to mention that the day better be "calm" indeed, as in 'no atmosphere calm' because it only takes a whisper to start requiring drift correction at 600 meters even with the .300 / 180 gr, so I cannot even begin to think what the .22 / 40 gr will drift at that distance even on a zero-wind day, if such a thing ever existed.

Like Bob Nelson 35Whelen, I am amazed at what modern CNC machining can do to a barrel, and the CZ 452 is a great little rifle (I own 2 for the kids and now grand kids), but put it all together, to get to 1) ringing the 9"x16" steel every shot + 2) at 600 yards + 3) with iron sighs +4) with a .22 LR, and I guess that maybe I too need shooting lessons from you, likely after an extended session at a good optometrist

Or maybe just a bad case of tinnitus.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Is there a typo in there? Am I missing something?

Like Inline6, I have shot the .22 a fair amount in my life, and I have shot, and still shoot, steel out to 1,000 meters (measured), albeit with a .300 Win, and I find this statement hard to believe...

Here is what a 12" plate looks like at 600 meters through a 24x scope. Hint, go down 4 MILs to find it:

View attachment 593664

Here is what a 12" plate looks like at 600 meters, with naked eyes. See it?

View attachment 593665

Can't see it? OK, I will help...

View attachment 593666

Now, admittedly, 600 meters is 656 yards, and a 9"x16" piece of steel is 4" taller than a 12" steel plate, but, like CoElkHunter, I find it difficult to believe that one can SEE a 9"x16" piece of steel at 600 yards with naked eyes...

As to "ring(ing) 9”x16” piece of steel every shot at 600 yards with an iron sighted cz452 22 lr on a calm day", well, all I can say is that even the .300 Win shooting 180 gr match bullets requires 4.4 MILs of vertical correction, to compensate for its 104" drop (104" = 8.6 feet, mind you!). I cannot even begin to think what the drop of the .22 LR is at 600 yards...

Not to mention that the day better be "calm" indeed, as in 'no atmosphere calm' because it only takes a whisper to start requiring drift correction at 600 meters even with the .300 / 180 gr, so I cannot even begin to think what the .22 / 40 gr will drift at that distance even on a zero-wind day, if such a thing ever existed.

Like Bob Nelson 35Whelen, I am amazed at what modern CNC machining can do to a barrel, and the CZ 452 is a great little rifle (I own 2 for the kids and now grand kids), but put it all together, to get to 1) ringing the 9"x16" steel every shot + 2) at 600 yards + 3) with iron sighs +4) with a .22 LR, and I guess that maybe I too need shooting lessons from you, likely after an extended session at a good optometrist

@One Day...
Maybe with that nice 257 Weatherby you could do it a bit easier than with the 300. A nice 110gn ELDX @3,300fps. A lot better than the creedemore.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Absolutely! For a few months before each safari I shoot mine constantly at a 6" plate at 150 yards, which is roughly the shooting skills equivalent of shooting a 12" plate at 300 yards, but this is a modern-production Winchester 52, as good as, and likely better than, a CZ 452 (I also have an Anschutz and a Walther to compare, but I prefer the Win for this because it shoots just as well, and it is a little beefier and heavier, hence better from Africa training), with Zeiss glass, and it already takes 8 MOA (32 clicks!) to get from 100 yards to 150 yards with high velocity 40 gr.

View attachment 593673


View attachment 593672


View attachment 593674

@One Day...
Get rid of that scope and get a Hawke Vantage 22 rim fire scope and I guarantee you will be doing it easily at 200yards .
Check out the scopes.
Bob

 

[Doug Hamilton]

The rifle industry clearly both follows trends and shapes them with advertising, production, and sponsorship.

They pick up on the next hot thing and then push that to make sure their investment in r&d and retooling pays off. Remember the short/fat magnum craze?

It’s good business though. It’s hard to convince people they need to buy new rifles en mass for a cartridge that’s been available for 100 years plus.

I don’t blame them for wanting to make money and sometimes the cartridges actually stick. Most don’t. That’s just the business and it’s happened for decades. 308 win has managed to establish itself while the 280 rem never quite caught on. Cartridges of the World is full of objectively good cartridges that never made it big and have either died out or remained obscure wild cats.

Absolutely right. The rifle manufacturers follow the trends and try to shape them. They are in business to.make money. They have no interest in killing off older cartridges but they do want to market buyers. If certain older cartridges do not sell as well as something newer the ammunition manufacturers will make the cartridges that sell.

 

[Forrest Halley]

Is there a typo in there? Am I missing something?

Like Inline6, I have shot the .22 a fair amount in my life, and I have shot, and still shoot, steel out to 1,000 meters (measured), albeit with a .300 Win, and I find this statement hard to believe...

To be fair he said the rifle had iron sights. There was not any attestation to using them for the sighting. He's probably got a big old Vortex and Area 419 50 MOA mount firing forty seven CCI standard loads to one hit.

It could be done with something prominent enough to hold on and a very steady rest. One does not have to see one's target if one can fire indirectly with some repeatability through use of a hold off point.

 

[thriller]

I am not buying all new stuff. It’s more economical for me to be a hater. Also the memes are already written so it’s easier too. Besides that I just don’t care. I like big bullets and long range holds no appeal to me I prefer my shots on game to be close as I can get. I feel like I am actually hunting and not target shooting that way. I know some people don’t feel the same way but hey. Shoot one at 10 steps and shoot one at 500 see which one gets your heart pumping more and is more challenging.

 

[Tra3]

The marketing aspect of the 6.5 CM is interesting to me. Here in MN, there are about 500,000 deer tags sold per year. The average hunter has a 30-40% chance of tagging a deer during the deer season. The average hunter would be very well served by using a 6.5 CM for deer hunting. The average new hunter would be ideally served by a 6.5 CM.

Presuming there are about 400,000 people in Mn who buy one or more deer tags in Mn, imagine if they all decided to go to Africa? That would be over 6 full 747 jets per day landing in Joberg with just MN folks during a 150 day season. Those of us who have flown to Africa recognize our fellow hunters on the plane. Maybe 10-20 total hunters is normal (or less).

This forum is not comprised of average hunters. We need more particular equipment and training/practice. I could hunt deer sized game with a 6.5 CM for the rest of my life and be happy and appropriately equipped. When the game animal gets larger, so should the caliber.
The 6.5 CM has been (very) effectively marketed to the 95% of hunters/shooters who don’t need a bigger rifle.
Admittedly, it has also been effectively marketed to hunters who don’t “need” another rifle but bought a 6.5 anyway.
Good luck trying to buy the same pair of jeans for 20 years. Or the same leatherman. Or the same truck. Or the same drill. We are guaranteed change.

 

[Inline6]

To be fair he said the rifle had iron sights. There was not any attestation to using them for the sighting. He's probably got a big old Vortex and Area 419 50 MOA mount firing forty seven CCI standard loads to one hit.

It could be done with something prominent enough to hold on and a very steady rest. One does not have to see one's target if one can fire indirectly with some repeatability through use of a hold off point.

Actually he said he could nail it every shot on a calm day. When asked what sights he was using, he said "factory with a wooden wedge under the back sight to gain the elevation required". Asked about ammo "winchester power point".

Post #573 if you want tonread his words.

 

[Velo Dog]

Okay Paul,

Let"s look at this. In 1912 Holland and Holland came out with the .375 H&H. The belt was deemed necessary due to head space issues. Following market demand for a .30 caliber (.308) round that was more powerful than the .30-06, they necked down the .375 to .308. From these two many people dreamed up wildcat designs including "magnum" cartridges that would fit into a standard length action, but all still based on the original H&H case. In 1958 Winchester came out with the .458 Winchester Magnum. The plan was to have a cartridge that was capable of taking the largest and toughest game on earth with a cartridge that fit in a standard length action. The belt was still necessary as the .458 has no bottle neck at all. More cartridges followed, now based on the .458 case. The belt was already there. The .338 WM was a big success.the .264 (6.5mm) not so much. Then Remington came out with the 7mm Remington Magnum in a new PF action, the Model 700. It was huge. The belt comes from the history of these cartridges, not some marketing ploy. The 700 was less expensive to build and sell than the M 70. To compete with Remington's market share Winchester resorted to the PF M 70 in 1964. They thought they were going after the Rem market share but their customer base didn't go for it in big numbers. So eventually they went back to CRF. BTW, I also love the .30-06. In 1973 at the age of 18 and not understanding the two action types I bought a M 70 in .30-06. To be fair, it has been a good rifle and I have taken many blacktails, one bear, one pronghorn, and several African PG with it. Eventually, I had it restocked and rebarreled, still in .30-06, and I still have it. It is very accurate.


Now for the short action rifles and cartridges. They are pretty much all based on the 7.62x51mm (.308 Win.). I do not know why the military changed from the .30-06, but they did. Now with many people having experience in the military and because it was easier to fit into lever actions, semi-autos, and even pumps there was.308 brass everywhere. Then Winchester came up with the .243 to go into the M 70, M 88 and M 100 for those that wanted or needed less recoil. It was a big hit. People wildcatted the brass every which way. Bench rest shooters in particular created the the 7 and 6.5mm. So then we got the .260 Rem, 7-08, .358 Win. 6 and 6.5 Creedmoors, etc. Some sold well, some didn't but again it was the manufacturers pursuing the market.

Best wishes,

Doug

Thanks Doug,

I appreciate your responses.
And, I suppose I’m whipping a dead horse here so, one of these days, I had better quit typing along through so many paragraphs, just to state my observations and opinions.
I’ve heard closing arguments in serious criminal trials that were less windy (and less tedious) than my over-wordy rants here.

I’ve already posted something on certain cartridges for repeaters needing the belt and some not.
So, I agree with you that the .458 Winchester requires the belt, for safe head spacing.
The “magnum belt” on sharp shouldered, bottle neck cartridges isn’t a marketing trick ?
We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.

I once read something that Charles Askins wrote about that very topic.
He said words to the affect of, Winchester consulted him, during their design phase of their .338 Winchester.
According to himself, they asked him what he thought about their making it with or without a belt.

He suggested they leave the belt in place, as it would “sell better” or perhaps he said something like “it will be better received” or “more recognizable as a magnum” or, some such reply to Winchester’s soliciting his opinion.
If that’s not a marketing “ploy”, I don’t know what is.
I think I read about that exchange in his book “Unrepentant Sinner”.
But, it was 30-something years ago.
So, perhaps my recollection is not entirely accurate.
But, perhaps it is.

Short cartridges, beginning with the .308 Winchester, “fit easier into lever actions”, I agree with you.
Fit easier into semi-autos and pump actions ?
On that one, I respectfully do not agree with you.

Looks like you and I both do not know why the USA switched from the .30-06 to the .308 Winchester 7.62x51 cartridge.
So, we agree on that for sure.
Seems like I heard a rumor of some Army big shot shaking a live .30-06 round beside his own ear.

Noticing that it sounded as if there was generous air space in the cartridge he, via his administrative position, started the ball rolling toward the military arsenal/s eventually shortening the cartridge.
I cannot remember where I heard or read that.

Back on topic, It appeared to me that the 6.5x55 was steadily gaining popularity here in the USA.
Ruger, Winchester and CZ to name but 3 large volume rifle makers, had begun to offer hunting rifles in this cartridge.
Now I’ve noticed that the ammunition makers have stopped loading this cartridge.
Meanwhile, shelves in the local Cabela’s store here, are festooned with plenty of live ammunition to fit the ballistic twin Creedmoor version.
Seeing that as creating the market or following it, I suppose is not really important.
What’s important is that a lot of hunters now suddenly, cannot get ammunition that was for a time, becoming more and more available for our rifles.

Hopefully it will re-appear, as there is a market for it (7x57 ammunition as well).
If so, I certainly will stop whining about this.
Recently, I had noticed that Remington has issued a run of also much needed .30-40 Krag ammunition.
Sadly, it is $80. USA dollars per 20 rounds.
But it is a spark of hope.

Anyway, once again I’ve blathered on way too long again today.
And so, I’ll quit my nonsensical typing here.

Cheerio for now,
Paul.

 

[MS 9x56]

To be fair he said the rifle had iron sights. There was not any attestation to using them for the sighting. He's probably got a big old Vortex and Area 419 50 MOA mount firing forty seven CCI standard loads to one hit.

It could be done with something prominent enough to hold on and a very steady rest. One does not have to see one's target if one can fire indirectly with some repeatability through use of a hold off point.

Or to be fair if he has tinnitus he will hear the steel ring every shot. Honest mistake

 

[CBH Australia]

The marketing aspect of the 6.5 CM is interesting to me. Here in MN, there are about 500,000 deer tags sold per year. The average hunter has a 30-40% chance of tagging a deer during the deer season. The average hunter would be very well served by using a 6.5 CM for deer hunting. The average new hunter would be ideally served by a 6.5

The average hunter would be well served by a 7mm-08
The average new hunter would be well served by a 7mm-08

 

[SaintPanzer]

The marketing aspect of the 6.5 CM is interesting to me. Here in MN, there are about 500,000 deer tags sold per year. The average hunter has a 30-40% chance of tagging a deer during the deer season. The average hunter would be very well served by using a 6.5 CM for deer hunting. The average new hunter would be ideally served by a 6.5 CM.

I'm sorry, I lost track. It sounds like you are describing the 6.5X55mm Swede...

 

[Velo Dog]

The average hunter would be well served by a 7mm-08
The average new hunter would be well served by a 7mm-08

It sounds like you are describing the 7x57 cartridge...

(I’m sorry SaintPanzer for ripping off your humor line, but it fit so well).

 

[MD Driver]

This looks like a nice one. Out of my budget though.

Purdey Bolt Action Rifle 31199

The double square-bridge action is engraved with our traditional rose and scroll pattern and fitted with a Swarovski Z8i 1.7-13.3x42 telescope-sight in quickly-detachable ‘scope-mounts and rings, with a three-position safety and black finish. The highly figured stock has a cheekpiece, a full...

www.purdey.com

On the budget end, Winchester is offering their Model 70 in this caliber.

Many of the younger British deer stalkers are using the 6.5 Creedmoor for roe deer these days.

Saw that one. Went there to size up and order a Sporter, and they showed off that one (pretty sure) as well. Stunning work, as you’d expect. Maybe in the $45,000 range?

 

[CBH Australia]

It sounds like you are describing the 7x57 cartridge...

Yeah that too, no argument as both are suitable for hunting.

 

[CoElkHunter]

It sounds like you are describing the 7x57 cartridge...

(I’m sorry SaintPanzer for ripping off your humor line, but it fit so well).

Or describing one of Townsends @Bob Nelson 35Whelen proprietary wildcats the 6.5 Samurai?

 

[Doug Hamilton]

Thanks Doug,

I appreciate your responses.
And, I suppose I’m whipping a dead horse here so, one of these days, I had better quit typing along through so many paragraphs, just to state my observations and opinions.
I’ve heard closing arguments in serious criminal trials that were less windy (and less tedious) than my over-wordy rants here.

I’ve already posted something on certain cartridges for repeaters needing the belt and some not.
So, I agree with you that the .458 Winchester requires the belt, for safe head spacing.
The “magnum belt” on sharp shouldered, bottle neck cartridges isn’t a marketing trick ?
We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.

I once read something that Charles Askins wrote about that very topic.
He said words to the affect of, Winchester consulted him, during their design phase of their .338 Winchester.
According to himself, they asked him what he thought about their making it with or without a belt.

He suggested they leave the belt in place, as it would “sell better” or perhaps he said something like “it will be better received” or “more recognizable as a magnum” or, some such reply to Winchester’s soliciting his opinion.
If that’s not a marketing “ploy”, I don’t know what is.
I think I read about that exchange in his book “Unrepentant Sinner”.
But, it was 30-something years ago.
So, perhaps my recollection is not entirely accurate.
But, perhaps it is.

Short cartridges, beginning with the .308 Winchester, “fit easier into lever actions”, I agree with you.
Fit easier into semi-autos and pump actions ?
On that one, I respectfully do not agree with you.

Looks like you and I both do not know why the USA switched from the .30-06 to the .308 Winchester 7.62x51 cartridge.
So, we agree on that for sure.
Seems like I heard a rumor of some Army big shot shaking a live .30-06 round beside his own ear.

Noticing that it sounded as if there was generous air space in the cartridge he, via his administrative position, started the ball rolling toward the military arsenal/s eventually shortening the cartridge.
I cannot remember where I heard or read that.

Back on topic, It appeared to me that the 6.5x55 was steadily gaining popularity here in the USA.
Ruger, Winchester and CZ to name but 3 large volume rifle makers, had begun to offer hunting rifles in this cartridge.
Now I’ve noticed that the ammunition makers have stopped loading this cartridge.
Meanwhile, shelves in the local Cabela’s store here, are festooned with plenty of live ammunition to fit the ballistic twin Creedmoor version.
Seeing that as creating the market or following it, I suppose is not really important.
What’s important is that a lot of hunters now suddenly, cannot get ammunition that was for a time, becoming more and more available for our rifles.

Hopefully it will re-appear, as there is a market for it (7x57 ammunition as well).
If so, I certainly will stop whining about this.
Recently, I had noticed that Remington has issued a run of also much needed .30-40 Krag ammunition.
Sadly, it is $80. USA dollars per 20 rounds.
But it is a spark of hope.

Anyway, once again I’ve blathered on way too long again today.
And so, I’ll quit my nonsensical typing here.

Cheerio for now,
Paul.

View attachment 593945

I'm not sure what.happened to Velo Dog's thread but Paul if you are still reading this, here goes.

We don't really disagree on whether or not the .308 length cartridges fit better into semi autos or pumps. I had read that.somewhere but it clearly isn't true as we know both Remington and Browning have sold semis in .30-06 length actions, and Remington had (has?) a pump in that length. I have.hunted with friends who have used.both, but since both action types seem to have chronic function problems, I don't pay much attention to either one. I know, someone will write that they have one of those and never had a problem, but I have been hunting with guys that had both of those makes in semi autos and were unable to fire more than one shot before the guns stopped working. The one friend that had a Remington pump found it to be woefully inaccurate. Off a bench we couldn't get it to shoot better than 4" at 100 yards. I tend to follow my own experience.

Now as far as leaving the belt on the bottle necked cartridges. You and I clearly have different ideas as to what constitutes a "marketing trick." As we have already discussed, there was a whole bunch of magnum cartridges that were all based on the .375 H&H case, which has the belt. Starting in the 1940's, Weatherby was making rifles. with sharp shoulders based on the H&H case. Wildcatters started using that case in a cut down version to fit into standard length actions. The trend was already there Winchester came out with the .338 WM. Charles Askins liked the belt as did the shooting public. If they would have said they disliked the belt, the manufacturers would have gotten rid of it in a heart beat. People also started talking about how the belt was there to contain all the power without exploding. I remember being a young kid in the '60s when the older brother of my friend showing me a .264 Win. or

 

[SaintPanzer]

It sounds like you are describing the 7x57 cartridge...

(I’m sorry SaintPanzer for ripping off your humor line, but it fit so well).

No worries. I was just sticking with 6.5mm. I've yet to be convinced that for hunting, there is nothing the Creedmoor can do that the Swede can't do. One could say the same for the 6.5X54 MS. 7X57, ditto. 7mm-08, .270, .308. Hell, why not a .30-30? Do we really need another rifle for white tail, or is that market fully saturated?