6.5 Creed Spoon

[Wetwork]

Can't help myself gotta say something. Never been a long range hunter everything inside of 200 yards with my .270 elk, deer, bear. The neighbor kid calls say's he's coming over the hill to show me a few toys and will be dropping gongs along the hill side above my house.

Off my deck, at 635 yards at a 10 inch gong, first shot, I drilled it center . I have never in my life took a shot at anything that far away. Now this kid had his spoon dialed in, scope doped..spent tons and tons of time reloading the perfect round for it. Basically all I had to do was lay down and do my part. Hit after hit til it was boring. Then for fun we started plinking at a small sage brush that was 930 yards away. And hitting it....

I'm no commando, or some sort of high speed low drag fella. I don't talk the talk, or refer to stuff in meters. It just was so astonishing to so easily be putting lead on target at those ranges.

That 6.5 had a muzzle brake, a fancy scope, and I guess it was a fairly midrange priced. It had zero kick or muzzle climb. I could watch the gongs get nailed way before the wack of impact. And I will say this it was no joke how hard that round hit the plate. Amazing...I'm still giddy and was shooting last night. I know this isn't a hunting forum, but can't help myself. If any of you are thinking about a amazing kids or ladies spoon give this some serious thoughts, just the lack of recoil, noise blast, would be perfect for a new shooter. I'm a old shooter and this might just be the caliber that puts the ole .270 away for dust collection. Anyway cheers.-WW

[Wetwork]

Originally Posted by NotaBRG

Very cool. I would have thought that at that range you'd need to account for the wind at least?

Amazing enough, not as much as you'd think. They were pretty heavy bullets (140grain ELDx with high BC) If you saw how hard the wind was blowing last night you wouldn't think any of that was possible, I didn't. It was almost pure Kentucky windage too. That 900 yard stuff we walked in, but the 600 was so close just holding a tad right or left got hits. I was blown away...and been hunting for close to 40 years.-WW

[vash]

if i got another rifle..besides the .22lr of my dreams.

i would build up a bolt action 6.5 creedmore. i am not attracted to all the "tactical" looking offerings. they even make a bolt action look like a technical thing. i just want a nice modern bolt action. my limitation is the ability to shoot the thing. our rifle ranges are retarded and crowded. it's the reason i dont really enjoy rifles right now. if i had to reload and test loads? hahaha..i would go insane. not gonna happen.

one day..the scopes are insane now..super expensive.

[tabs]

The 6.5's have always been an accurate cartridge. The Swede Mauser and Mannlicher Schoenaeur.

Mannlicher 6.5's were use by the African PH's to hunt Elephant in the early 1900's. The density of the bullet would penetrate the brain. You had to be very good to do that.

[Wetwork]

It was certainly a eye-opener. I'm not big on the tacki-cool myself, just want a accurate, light, wee-bit longer range, hunting rifle other than my .270. Been hunting for years and years, I've shot everything from belt-fed M60's to 25MM chain guns. 375H&H to my good ole'meat gun .270. So I know some stuff and what I'd need for what I do. I think that 6.5 might just be the ticket in my neck of the woods. No recoil, fairly quiet, hard hitting longer range mulie medicine.

As I was working around the ranch today, I couldn't help but range stuff, hillsides and valleys that for most of my life I'd figure on having to pull a big sneak to get into range. If I pick up something even remotely as accurate as what I played with last night, it opens up some really interesting situations. I am not a long range guy for hunting, but that little rifle would easily add another couple of hundred yards with confidence. I do not take non confident shots, I just sneak closer til I am. It was a Bergera 6.5 I was playing with last night.-WW

[vash]

man..Wetwork. if i had property to shoot on..i would do it for sure.

you see what the long range shooters have done in the rangefinder market? man, there are some amazing options out there. i think they were the catalyst to the influx of fantastic binoculars with built in rangefinders.

[vash]

and the 270 is one of my favorite rounds. i love the 270 WSM.

My 6.5 CM Savage GUN is extremely accurate. And it's a gun/weapon/firearm. Not sure what this whole spoon BS is about.

[John Rogers]

Those 6mm and 6.5 Creedmoor bullets are amazing when loaded right and shot from the correct action/bolt/barrel and stock. We had a shooter at our range in Dulzura who was a past national champ and west coast champ but he sure spent a ton of $$$$$ on his sport. He burned through 4 or 5 barrels a year and would buy them a dozen at a time. He had a local San Diego gunsmith do the mounting and such. He could punch 10 shots in one small hole at our 300 yard line (longest we have) even with wind blowing. He finally retired from designing drones for General Atomics and move up to Montana if I remember right.

Those bullets make my 540 grain black powder 1500 FPS rounds seem really slow!

[vash]

The creedmore benefits from a long barrel, right?

Makes for an odd awkward mtn rifle.

[Wetwork]

Originally Posted by vash

The creedmore benefits from a long barrel, right?

Makes for an odd awkward mtn rifle.

Vash, the Bergara I shot only had a 22 inch barrel. Had a nice scope also, can't remember the power (12X at the most) but was pretty small as far as long range scopes go. I know it was a VX4 Leupold but the field of view really sucked. Took forever to lock onto a target with it. But once you did the image was very clear. I'm not sure on barrel life, in the old day's I've heard the 6.5s toasted barrels pretty quick. I really don't know if its that way anymore.

I'm a little fella, 140 soaking wet, just 5'9. Do not care for heavy guns. Or guns so light they kick like a mule. So there's a happy medium for me. My .270 is a ancient wood stocked Remington probably around 14lbs scoped. This thing weighed a little less to me. We were shooting at a probably 12 x 12 sagebrush at 930 yards. And with the spotting scopes it was punching center, throwing up dirt behind it.

The whole shoot was ad hock, a few beers, punk rock music (I'm a enigma to the Eastern Oregon Cattleman Association) and hanging out on my new deck, playing with the neighbor kids toys.

[svandamme]

if the gun is dialed in, and there isn't much wind(to which 6.5 is relatively insensitive off compared to say .30), then a 10 inch gong is at 650 yards is peanuts out of a good gun.. Even with .30 it shouldn't be an issue to hit that consistently.

[John Rogers]

Check the website "Accurate Shooter" where they did a test of barrel length by starting with a long barrel and cutting off an inch after each set of test data was run. Seems to not be a whole lot of difference in accuracy although velocity did drop off.

[svandamme]

for the most part velocity is good for 2 things

1 keep the heavy pills spinning
more velocity = more spin for the twist you have.

You can take a 1:12 . 308, and if you have a long barrel
and slow powder, you can get a better spin on the heavier pills where a shorter 1:12 barrel would just only marginally stabilze the bullet past certain distances.

Obviously if you have a 1:10 barrel, you can chop off and trade some of the velocity off, since you have the spin from the twist anyway.

2 to stretch out by keeping things supersonic
once the bullet slows down to transonic, weird **** happens.
So the more velocity at the muzzle, the further out you can stretch it.

Hence the 155 palma bullet was designed to keep subsonic with low twist at Palma ranges.


The story bout faster bullets having less problems with wind , I don't buy that.

Most people can't read wind well enough for it to matter. (I sure can't outside a fixed gallery range)

The bullet might need half a minute less windage at 900 yards if it goes a bit faster.
But whatever that gains, is wasted in poor wind reading anyway

He who can read the wind better doesn't care bout that 5% less wind sensitive bullet. from that hotter load...
As long as the ammo is consistent his wind reading at long range will be much more relevant.

[flipper35]

Originally Posted by John Rogers

Check the website "Accurate Shooter" where they did a test of barrel length by starting with a long barrel and cutting off an inch after each set of test data was run. Seems to not be a whole lot of difference in accuracy although velocity did drop off.

A shorter barrel is a stiffer barrel, though it can have an adverse effect on harmonics on some cartridges.

[svandamme]

but heavy bull barrels counter act that problem. That's what they used for that velocity test

[Jeff Higgins]

The 6.5 sure is the current darling, isn't it? I remember a time when the gun companies could give away a 6.5 anything to American shooters. Those of us who discovered the various 6.5's years ago had our own little secret for quite some time.

Truth be told, there is nothing special about that particular bore size. It succeeds partly for the same reasons the .270 succeeded - it offers less recoil (than the .30'06). Beyond that, it has traditionally been rifled with a very fast twist with which to stabilize heavy for caliber bullets. This gains two notable advantages - outstanding penetration on game with the right bullets, or outstanding long range performance with suitable bullets. It does nothing that other bore sizes are not capable of doing, so long as they are rifled with a properly fast twist and shoot their own heavy for caliber bullets.

For example, it is quite incorrect to say the 6.5 has less wind drift than a .30 caliber. Shooting bullets with the same ballistic coefficient at the same velocities, they will perform identically. Nothing is free, however - that .30 caliber will have substantially more recoil, through its far heavier bullet, than the 6.5. In the same weight rifle...

And that is where the 6.5 has come in. Each and every competitive rifle shooting sport of which I am aware restricts rifle weight. So, if all one has to do is hit a target, and we really don't care how hard, there is no reason to punish ourselves with a .300 Winchester Magnum shooting 220 grain bullets when we can get the same trajectory and wind drift with a 6.5 shooting 140 grain bullets.

Speaking of wind drift - it is a function of deceleration, not velocity. For any given bore size, we have a choice of lighter bullets we can drive faster or heavier bullets that will necessarily have to be driven slower. The heavier bullet, with a higher ballistic coefficient, will drift less in any given wind than the lighter, faster (initially) bullet. At some point downrange, the heavier, higher B.C. bullet will actually overtake the velocity of the lighter bullet that started faster. 300, 400, 500 or more yards - somewhere out there - the heavier bullet is going to retain more velocity. It will have decelerated less.

[flipper35]

A 230gr 30-06 will remain supersonic out past 1200 yards and a 160gr stays supersonic out to just over 1000 yards.*

* Info from CMP when discussing hitting steel at those ranges with the Garand. The article is probably still out there somewhere.

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

For example, it is quite incorrect to say the 6.5 has less wind drift than a .30 caliber. Shooting bullets with the same ballistic coefficient at the same velocities, they will perform identically. Nothing is free, however - that .30 caliber will have substantially more recoil, through its far heavier bullet, than the 6.5. In the same weight rifle...

Well yes and no
the common bullet weights for 6.5 available, that work with standard 6.5 twists, are better then the comon bullet weights for .308 that work with common 308 twists.

Those 6.5 boolits will outperform those 308's.

Obviously if you get custom 30 call barrels with higher twists then commercially available rifles, you can go up in bullet weight and length and obviously all bets are off.

I know a guy who has a 32 inch 308 , and he can pretty much equal 338 lapua ballistics.

But it sure as hell isn't a commercially available gun, and he sure as hell can't shoot commercial ammo for those results.

6.5 offers better bullets with better wind resistance out of standard 6.5 barrels then you can achieve with 30 cal barrels and bullet weights.

[Jeff Higgins]

Using what you have chosen as a basis for comparison, I agree - everything you say is correct. No .308 shooting 155g Palma bullets or 168g Match Kings will ever match the 6.5 Creedmoor with 140g match bullets for downrange performance. That's not the point I was trying to make.

When we match B.C. for B.C. and velocity for velocity, bore diameter makes no difference in trajectory or wind drift. I was pointing out that to accomplish this with a .30 caliber, we have to go up to the .300 Win Mag and very heavy bullets, like 220g - and few will want to get hammered by a load like that out of a rifle similar in weight to what is available in the 6.5's.

There is no shortage of rifles chambered in .300 Win Mag. Their standard 1:10" twist handles these bullets easily. Many platforms that are available in the 6.5 Creedmoor are also available in the .300 Win mag. It remains a very popular long range match or "tactical" choice, at least for those who can both put up with its recoil and might actually be trying to kill something (or someone) way out there. I believe our armed forces have even begun phasing out the .338 Lapua in favor of their .300 Win Mag in the Mk248 Mod 1 configuration - with the 220 grain bullet.