Thread: 6.5 Creedmoor? whats everyones thoughts? on hunting performance

Originally Posted by buzzman

All my mates use something 6.5 they are deadly killers far past 300 yards more so if you reload for them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nah didn't you read Barry's post. After 300m they turn backwards and bounce off

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

I know a few (quite a few) people in the guiding industry.
There's an understanding that when guiding bowhunters the guide carries a rifle. A few are considering adding creedmore hunts to that understanding due to the percentage of cockups.
Probably not the calibers fault. But it seems like a percentage of creedmore owners are in the "all the gear but no idea category."

Yeha, it will just be a bunch of new hunters. The creedmoor is massively popular at the moment, so it makes sense lots of new hunters are adopting it.
Which means more fucked up shots, they'd still be fucked up shots if 308 was the cool new kid.

In all honesty it's a pretty good first rifle option. Decent quality and variety of ammo available, low recoil, good external ballistics and decent killing power. If a mate came to me tomorrow asking what to buy for his first deer gun I'd point him in that direction.
I bought one because I've always liked the medium 6.5s having owned both the swede and the 260 but it's nice having the factory ammo availibility.

The difference of all these new chamberings is that the throats and barrel twists are correct for the heavey for caliber projectiles.

Originally Posted by Chilli_Dog

The difference of all these new chamberings is that the throats and barrel twists are correct for the heavey for caliber projectiles.

Heavy bullets with a high balistic coeficient. 270

If you don't understand balistic coeficient and what it dose to your trajectory and energy...
Also sectional density.
But if ya cant shoot then it's all for 0.

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

I will add this for the 6.5 crudmore lovers - old Barry would go into the hills with a Holland and Holland 7x57 open sights - mauser action - old craftmanship - subtly engraving maybe even my name on it - hand checkered - and be happy as a little sand boy - and you lot can use ya bloody tikkas in 6.5 crudmore

The rifle i grew up hunting with was a husqvarna 7x57 with a fixed 4 power kahles helia on it. Probably shot more deer with that than i have with 6.5 Creedmoor, 7x57 never let me down but neither has the creedmoor. I dont think the deer cared either way, they all died from an overdose of lead. Call it a crudmore all you want but it kicks a 7x57s ass all day long in every way you look at it.

All a pointless debate at the end of the day because almost any calibre is capable of killing almost any animal when the rifle is in capable hands.

Times change, technology moves on and things get better. People taking the new technology/calibres and not knowing how to use them properly or having the required skill for longer shots is a people problem not the calibres fault.

Originally Posted by 6.5 CRD

All a pointless debate at the end of the day because almost any calibre is capable of killing almost any animal when the rifle is in capable hands.

If we want to be more specific in regards to 'good deer cartridges/calibres', then I would start with a bullet weight between 120gr up to about 180gr max, with a diameter of between .25 and .30, with a velocity of between 2700fps and 3200fps.
Also, unless you want a heavy rifle (>4kg all up), you will probably want to limit your bullet weight to about 150gr if shooting unsuppressed due to recoil.
Choose the rifle and cartridge from within this criteria, and then the one that is best will be the one that you get the best accuracy from. Accuracy comes from practice. Practice comes from sending rounds down range.

Then everything works.... just shoot things with the right projectile in the right place.

Originally Posted by 6.5 CRD

The rifle i grew up hunting with was a husqvarna 7x57 with a fixed 4 power kahles helia on it. Probably shot more deer with that than i have with 6.5 Creedmoor, 7x57 never let me down but neither has the creedmoor. I dont think the deer cared either way, they all died from an overdose of lead. Call it a crudmore all you want but it kicks a 7x57s ass all day long in every way you look at it.

All a pointless debate at the end of the day because almost any calibre is capable of killing almost any animal when the rifle is in capable hands.

Times change, technology moves on and things get better. People taking the new technology/calibres and not knowing how to use them properly or having the required skill for longer shots is a people problem not the calibres fault.

you are right more deer shot in NZ with the 303 than any other calibre and many with full jacket army ammo - its what they had - and no scopes back in those days - but I bet they had those old girls well zeroed - the 6.5 CRD is perfectly adequate - and does have a few good points for a new shooter like low recoil- because thats the problem with the real long range calibers and new shooters - the recoil can be quite off putting until one learns how to manage it -I tried a friends 338 lapua bloody hell would not like to fire to many thru it -yes technology moves on and we will see advancements for hunters especially I think in thermal gear - scopes well range finding built in will become more compact and ballistic read outs part of the parcel- but long range one cant do much about those variables like wind - still a real skill set to learn -and practise makes perfect - just please dont try long shots unless you are well practised and very confident of a clean kill - my thoughts

Originally Posted by ariki

The issue is that the loading is biased the 270Win has another 10 grains of powder capacity and will push a Nosler 150 LRAB at over 3050 fps with Norma MRP or Re26. Which puts it up against 6.5 PRC or 7mmMag.
Hornady are good at pushing there new cartridges and loading the old ones down. My 2c

Surely the 270 can't be compared to the rem mag. Massive difference there

Originally Posted by Nick-D

Nah didn't you read Barry's post. After 300m they turn backwards and bounce off

nah thats 44.40 if it actually got there

Originally Posted by Remmodel7

Surely the 270 can't be compared to the rem mag. Massive difference there

I dont think it can be directly compared to the rem mag, but theres no denying you can get some good performance out of the .270 if you do something custom with a fast twist, heavy projectiles good brass and a very stiff load, but by this point your starting to get out of the realm of what most hunters would do, and if your building a custom rifle i can think of many better calibres to build a rifle on rather than .270

My original comment comparing 6.5 Creed vs .270 was more aimed at what the majority of people do, buy an off the shelf rifle and shoot factory ammo through it. In that instance, the creed is for the most part on par if not better than the .270, In my opinion (emphasis on the in my opinion part). Creedmoor comes with a 1:8 twist standard, and theres a huge amount of great factory ammo available with high bc bullets & it will push similar weight projectiles at not much slower speeds with considerably less powder charge and felt recoil compared to the .270, which generally comes with a 1/10 twist and the heaviest factory ammo is around 150gn.

Originally Posted by 6.5 CRD

I dont think it can be directly compared to the rem mag, but theres no denying you can get some good performance out of the .270 if you do something custom with a fast twist, heavy projectiles good brass and a very stiff load, but by this point your starting to get out of the realm of what most hunters would do, and if your building a custom rifle i can think of many better calibres to build a rifle on rather than .270

My original comment comparing 6.5 Creed vs .270 was more aimed at what the majority of people do, buy an off the shelf rifle and shoot factory ammo through it. In that instance, the creed is for the most part on par if not better than the .270, In my opinion (emphasis on the in my opinion part). Creedmoor comes with a 1:8 twist standard, and theres a huge amount of great factory ammo available with high bc bullets & it will push similar weight projectiles at not much slower speeds with considerably less powder charge and felt recoil compared to the .270, which generally comes with a 1/10 twist and the heaviest factory ammo is around 150gn.

Yup agree. Next purchase for me will be a creed but by then it won't be cool anymore anyway. Just need to find one in a Kimber. Light weight, lite recoil, good ballistics. Sounds good to me
I'll still have the only real 6.5 also. The grendel.
All you creed guys are compensating

Gotta love a good cartridge thread to kick off the week lol. I shoot a 260 which is basically a creedmoor. Love the little thing, it’s my meat gatherer shooting 135 classic hunters - deadly. If i’m on the hunt in big country or looking for wall hangers then my 7mm SAUM comes out of the cabinet.

6.5s are bloody efficient calibers. They just need to be used within their ethical limitations as at the end of the day they are still a 140gn pill as opposed to say a 180gr 7mm or 200gr 30cal with a bigger wound channel where heavy hitting really matters. A good mate of mine was lucky enough to film an overseas hunter in NZ during the roar as he hunted down south for his TV show. Long story short he had a crack at a big red stag at 800 with a 6.5 PRC. Bloody shambles and just poor form. That sort of stuff is where the big guns come in, no matter how silky the 6.5 is, when things get big and long the 7mm and 30cal should be in action on big game. Anything normal that most of us do, 5 - 600 MAX and below (depending on the animal type/size etc), the 6.5 is a good option among many others.

Originally Posted by stagstalker

Gotta love a good cartridge thread to kick off the week lol. I shoot a 260 which is basically a creedmoor. Love the little thing, it’s my meat gatherer shooting 135 classic hunters - deadly. If i’m on the hunt in big country or looking for wall hangers then my 7mm SAUM comes out of the cabinet.

6.5s are bloody efficient calibers. They just need to be used within their ethical limitations as at the end of the day they are still a 140gn pill as opposed to say a 180gr 7mm or 200gr 30cal with a bigger wound channel where heavy hitting really matters. A good mate of mine was lucky enough to film an overseas hunter in NZ during the roar as he hunted down south for his TV show. Long story short he had a crack at a big red stag at 800 with a 6.5 PRC. Bloody shambles and just poor form. That sort of stuff is where the big guns come in, no matter how silky the 6.5 is, when things get big and long the 7mm and 30cal should be in action on big game. Anything normal that most of us do, 5 - 600 MAX and below (depending on the animal type/size etc), the 6.5 is a good option among many others.

yeah good stuff - my next rifle will be a 22.250 - why - meat gathering - I dont shoot much over 300 yards and for fallow just a bit more bang than my .222 - reds out comes the .308 - but would not mind if spending allows looking at 300 WSM - the one caliber would not go back to is .243 had a bad run with it when I tried one in seventies and it put me off for life - yet others really rate it - could have been the ammo at the time - back in seventies ammo choice was limited in many sports stores

Originally Posted by 300CALMAN

Heavy bullets with a high balistic coeficient. 270

.

Ibelieve not that long ago Mr Songhurst did a custom build to utilise just that very thing..... the 27Nosler fast twist n all poking out big bergers from memory
but if you shooting past 350 you will be rangeing and dialing anyway so whats a few clicks between friends
I dont so I dont so doesnt matter to me LOL. tell you what though,looking up the stats etc for the 170grn ROUND NOSE its actually not that shabby for trajectory...not the flying brick I first thought..well not out to 300 anyway.

Originally Posted by Barry the hunter

yeah good stuff - my next rifle will be a 22.250 - why - meat gathering - I dont shoot much over 300 yards and for fallow just a bit more bang than my .222 - reds out comes the .308 - but would not mind if spending allows looking at 300 WSM - the one caliber would not go back to is .243 had a bad run with it when I tried one in seventies and it put me off for life - yet others really rate it - could have been the ammo at the time - back in seventies ammo choice was limited in many sports stores

I can not believe Im going to type this....
in defence of the .243
it was always loud...but other than that has always been a good choice for younger,smaller or recoil shy shooters.... the ammunition has come ahead leaps and bounds and so has our knowledge (rather than ability) of where is best to poke that bit of lead
the funny part of the .243 is it really gets used 2 ways..with short fat blunt 100grn loads and shoulder shoot..by bush hobbits and as a tack driver for precision placement into head/neck/meatsaver,crease by fellas in the open..with cross over between the two
if you were to use a light mono in .243 is is nearly a 22-250 if you got a fast twist 22-250 and use a heavy cup n core its nearly a .243
I dont own one..love to poke the shit and owners of them,but admit its a pretty darn good cartridge for all but "shooten them up the jacksee"