Changing habits

When I collected up the spent cases from the last week's shooting, it struck me how the 6.5mm has taken over my brass prep and reloading. The majority of brass used to be either .223, .243 or .308, with the odd novelty cartridge thrown in. But that's all changed now.

This mix from last week reflects the paper shooting when sorting out the .308 problems, that's why I've used so much .30 cal. Normally it would be half a dozen empty .308 cases. But the 50+ Creedmoor cases, that's a constant now. I reload for 6.5 Creedmoor at a rate of 3x that of all the others put together.

For our kind of country - steep, narrow valleys - the Creedmoor is damn close to perfect in a heavy field rifle for classic medium range culling. Consistently accurate, great ballistics, low recoiling, heavy hitting. What's not to like? I haven't gone down the light bullet varmint route with this rifle yet, its on the list though.

A 95gr V-Max at 3,400fps sounds like it should do the bizzo.

Attachment 119145

You are 100% correct!
Go the mighty CMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Awesome dude!

I don’t have a Creedmoor but it’s certainly an interesting cartridge... be interesting to see how the 6.5 ORC takes off... wonder if it will surpass the Creedmoor?... wait & see as time will tell.

Nice pile of brass there Dave, been bombing any animals lately ? Deer are starting to move around the local area now.

Attachment 119147

Here y'are @Mooseman, two red ones. A lot of goats too. Forty? Yup we're getting close to chasing some spring BOP deer eh.

Apart from the usual reasons why did you end up getting a 6.5 creed more? To me a 6.5 and a 308 cover the same bases.

All the normal reasons @Russian 22. Inherently accurate, easy to load for, great performing bullets, makes me feel 30 years younger, turns me into a tacticool sniper. That kind of thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russian 22.

Apart from the usual reasons why did you end up getting a 6.5 creed more? To me a 6.5 and a 308 cover the same bases.

---

I don't like .308 except when I have one, then I enjoy it. But if I sat two identical rifles in 6.5CMR or .308 with a big pile of ammunition and said "have at it" if you were still shooting the .308 at the end I would be shocked.

The 6.5s are better all day for the reasons Flyblown mentioned and you just can't get away from it. It is a mathematical sweet spot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flyblown

All the normal reasons @Russian 22. Inherently accurate, easy to load for, great performing bullets, makes me feel 30 years younger, turns me into a tacticool sniper. That kind of thing.

---

The trusty 308 is all of that too ! It just recoils more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LRP

The trusty 308 is all of that too ! It just recoils more.

---

If the .308 is that, so is everything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tussock

If the .308 is that, so is everything else.

---

No. Is a 308Win the same as a 300RUM ? Dont think so. The recoil difference between the 6.5cm and the 308Win is actually a big deal. I can totally see why the 6.5 option has taken off. It's a very efficient cartridge with plenty of high BC bullet options to choose from. The 308 is also a famous cartridge for lots of reasons like : inherent accuracy, easy to load for ....... buts its higher recoil will allways make it harder to shoot consistently well for LR applications. The terminal energy value is another story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LRP

No. Is a 308Win the same as a 300RUM ? Dont think so. The recoil difference between the 6.5cm and the 308Win is actually a big deal. I can totally see why the 6.5 option has taken off. It's a very efficient cartridge with plenty of high BC bullet options to choose from. The 308 is also a famous cartridge for lots of reasons like : inherent accuracy, easy to load for ....... buts its higher recoil will allways make it harder to shoot consistently well for LR applications. The terminal energy value is another story.

---

Are either of those real outside the imagination of .308 loyalists?

My first rifle was a 6.5 x 55 and my second a .308. Yes both very easy to reload. Both my rifles were/are very accurate with no great effort on my part. Is that what “inherent accuracy “ is? Dunno.

@Mooseman et al. The first shoot of the season for the Te Puke rifle club at Paengaroa is this Sunday now; not Saturday. Got 4 loads sorted for the 6.5*55 all grouping between .3 and .5 moa at 200m :) Be good to test them at 600.

Love the 6.5*55 but a .308win sending a 165 grain at 2750fps is something to be reckoned with for NZ hunting, as is 30-06 and 180gn at 2700,and still under 3/4 moa.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WillB

My first rifle was a 6.5 x 55 and my second a .308. Yes both very easy to reload. Both my rifles were/are very accurate with no great effort on my part. Is that what “inherent accuracy “ is? Dunno.

---

'Inherent' accuracy suggests some cartridges are more inherently accurate than others. In the short range benchrest world the obvious candidates are the PPC cartridges. Was the 222Rem I believe before the PPC's came along ? Accuracy is a very looooong story. Stick with the Swede and the 308 I suggest and do the basics right !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LRP

'Inherent' accuracy suggests some cartridges are more inherently accurate than others. In the short range benchrest world the obvious candidates are the PPC cartridges. Was the 222Rem I believe before the PPC's came along ? Accuracy is a very looooong story. Stick with the Swede and the 308 I suggest and do the basics right !!!

---

Cheers I fully intend to!!

The following is a couple of short articles from the past that may interest some re the "inherent accuracy" topic. The articles relate to what was discovered amongst the Highpower Target shooters in the USA in the 50-60's when the 308Win came along.

Brent Danielson (jessie@iastate.edu) wrote:

: Why is it that handloaded 30-60 can't be made as accurate as a .308
: given the same quality of rifle?

Because the '06 powder charge is longer and heavier. That tends to
be more difficult to uniformly ignite and delivers a harder blow to
the bullet before it gets into the rifling.

: In fact, I would think that a 30-06 could be more accurate since
: there is the option of loading it with more powder and getting the
: bullet to the mark quicker - thus reducing the opportunity for wind
: drift and other environmental anomalies.

A common belief, but it doesn't prove out in reality. Competitive
shooters would rather have a cartridge that is more accurate even if
the bullets leave the barrel 100 fps slower. The difference in wind
drift is overcome by the smaller cartridge shooting much smaller groups.
The '06 can shoot a 190 gr. about 100 fps faster than a .308. That gives
a one-half inch deflection advantage per MPH of crosswind at 1000 yards.
In real deflection, it's 9 inches for the .308 versus 8.5 inches for the
.30-06. With the best '06 match rifles shooting about 13-inch groups at
that range, their size opens up horizontally to about 30 inches with a
crosswind varying +/- one MPH. The best .308 rifles at 1000 yards
shoot about 7-inch groups. Those would increase horizontally to about
25 inches with the same crosswind variance. So, the increased velocity
of a .30-06 is in reality not an advantage compared to the .308 Win.
However, given equally accurate cartridges, less wind deflection of
one over the other would be an advantage.

In the '50s , when the .30-06 was the only cartridge allowed in highpower
competition for most matches, the best of 'em would shoot 5- to 6-inch
groups at 600 yards. The target used at 600 yards had a 12-inch V-ring
inside the 20-inch 5-ring. Shooting possible scores at 600 yards was
an every day thing. Then along came the .308 Win. and folks immediately
found out that in equal quality rifles, that new cartridge would shoot
groups half the size as the venerable '06. Scores instantly became much
higher and a few years later the target's scoring ring sizes were made
smaller. It was attributed to the .308's shorter and smaller powder
charge. Perhaps other things helped too, but it all boils down to the
fact that the .308 Win. has better accuracy at all ranges through 1000
yards.

Outside of competitive shooting, the difference between these two
cartridges is miniscule.

BB

SECOND ARTICLE FOLLOWS

C. Daniel Myers (myersc@ucs.orst.edu) wrote:

: I keep hearing how .308 Win is more accurate than .30-06 Springfield.
: Is this true?

Yes it is true. The .308's improved accuracy is why the NRA reduced the
scoring ring sizes on highpower competiton 200 and 300 yard targets in 1966.
And the 1000-yard target's scoring ring sizes were made smaller in 1971.

Reasons why the .308 Win. is more accurate than the .30-06 are primarily
due to its smaller (lighter weight) powder charge:

* Being the same diameter, but shorter in length, it ignites and burns
more uniformly. This results in smaller velocity spreads which means
vertical shot stringing is smaller. Tests in the early 1960s showed
the .308s cut vertical group size about in half over the .30-06.

* As the smaller charge causes the front slope of the pressure curve to
not rise as fast, the bullet is pushed more gently into the throat/leade.
This causes less bullet deformation which results in the bullet being
less unbalanced as it leaves the barrel. More balanced bullets shoot
more accurately than less balanced ones.

* Another reason is barrel twist. .30-06 barrels standardized on a 1:10
twist in the early 1900s. That is way too fast for best accuracy with
150 to 180 grain bullets they mostly used. A 1:12 twist would have been
much better but folks didn't understand that at the time. With the .308
having 1:12 or 1:11 twists, their slower-velocity bullets were perfectly
stabilized and they shot smaller groups. Only with 200-grain bullets
did the .30-06 hold its own, but they had to shot with maximum charges
and that meant recoil started getting difficult to consistantly manage.

The best 600-yard groups competition .30-06es got in the 1960s was about
5 to 6 inches for twenty shots. As the .308 Win. cut that in half, the
bigger matches would have the top five or so competitor's with the same
perfect scores; tie breaking became a nusiance. With a few people having
a score of 100-20V, the NRA's tie-breaking rules didn't work; match
sponsors had to share awards between two tieing scores.

On those old military targets, the B target used at 600 yards had a 20-inch
5-ring and its V-ring inside was 12-inches. Putting 20 record shots inside
the V-ring happend once in a while. But the 1966 decimal midrange (MR)
target has a 12-inch 10-ring with a 6-inch X-ring inside of it. Now, the
discrimination between scores and competitors is much easier to make. Yes,
perfect scores are still shot on the new target; the record is 200-19X.

But in the pursuit of game animals, the differences are rather small when
sporting rifles are used.

BB

Yes; But; apply bullets other than the "old" style bullets and powders and things change IMO. I like both.

I use both the 6.5 CM and the .308 for different hunting. The Creedmoor is great for longer open country shooting with 130 - 143 gr bullets on lighter deer such as sika, fallow and average sized reds. However, the .308 with 165 - 180 gr bullets just excels in the bush for large red stags. During the roar I"ll take the .308 every time over my 6.5 Creedmoor.

I don't have a problem with recoil using 180 gr in warm loads in a .308. Stock design has a big influence on recoil. The 6.5 CM is definitely more pleasant to shoot for extended shooting sessions though, but I don't use my .308 Sako for that.