6.5 CM as a hunting cartridge... why?

[Caseknife]

I seem to get pretty good speed out of mono's in my 6.5CM. Ruger American, HBN coated 100 TTSX, RL17, 3236fps, should get the job done farther than I want to shoot at an animal.

 

[sclancy27]

@Justabirdwatcher since you asked why 6.5 CM:

1. All the ones I have seen/shot are accurate. Maybe there is a Creed that shoots like shit out there, but it's rare

2. Wide range of bullets.

3. Low recoil (for me, its almost negligible). This means I can shoot it in a real light gun.

4. Ballistically capable to 600 yds

5. Everyone wants the PRCs now (6.5, 7) so the creeds and there components are cheap

6. Legal in every state. Yea, 22 Creed (or whatever 22 cal) kills everything, but it's not 50 state legal and I don't want more than 1 or 2 hunting rifles.


You can also get good performance out of monos, just not Barnes.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

I seem to get pretty good speed out of mono's in my 6.5CM. Ruger American, HBN coated 100 TTSX, RL17, 3236fps, should get the job done farther than I want to shoot at an animal.

Funny you say that. I did get pretty good speed out of 100 grainers (not 3236 though!). But it really fell off with the 120's which were by far the most accurate from my last two 6.5's

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

@Justabirdwatcher since you asked why 6.5 CM:

1. All the ones I have seen/shot are accurate. Maybe there is a Creed that shoots like shit out there, but it's rare

2. Wide range of bullets.

3. Low recoil (for me, its almost negligible). This means I can shoot it in a real light gun.

4. Ballistically capable to 600 yds

5. Everyone wants the PRCs now (6.5, 7) so the creeds and there components are cheap

6. Legal in every state. Yea, 22 Creed (or whatever 22 cal) kills everything, but it's not 50 state legal and I don't want more than 1 or 2 hunting rifles.


You can also get good performance out of monos, just not Barnes.

Excellent, logical, mature answer. Thank you for that.

When you say "ballistically capable to 600" do you mean with 140+ class high bc bullets, or also with others? I was underwhelmed by the velocities I was seeing from 143 ELD-X, generally in the high 2600's and occasionally in the low 2700's. My 7mm-08 140's are always mid 2800's and sometimes 2900's so I just didn't see any real advantage of the 6.5 for me. I also didn't feel any of my 6.5's were any more accurate than my 7mm-08 or .308, with the exception of one 120 grain CX load that would cloverleaf but at a disappointing 2750 fps.

I should probably buy a new chrony. I read some of the speeds others are getting from their 6.5 CM, with the same bullets and powder, and it really makes me wonder how. But my .308 based loads and my .300 WSM are pretty close to book, so I dunno.

 

[TheJason]

A 143 ELDX at 2700 fps is an easy 600 yard gun. How far do you need?

 

[sclancy27]

Excellent, logical, mature answer. Thank you for that.

When you say "ballistically capable to 600" do you mean with 140+ class high bc bullets, or also with others? I was underwhelmed by the velocities I was seeing from 143 ELD-X, generally in the high 2600's and occasionally in the low 2700's. My 7mm-08 140's are always mid 2800's and sometimes 2900's so I just didn't see any real advantage of the 6.5 for me. I also didn't feel any of my 6.5's were any more accurate than my 7mm-08 or .308, with the exception of one 120 grain CX load that would cloverleaf but at a disappointing 2750 fps.

I should probably buy a new chrony. I read some of the speeds others are getting from their 6.5 CM, with the same bullets and powder, and it really makes me wonder how. But my .308 based loads and my .300 WSM are pretty close to book, so I dunno.

Ballistically capable would be the retention of sufficient velocity to reliably expand the bullet. At my elevation, 130 class and 140 class bullets do that well beyond 600 yds.

Having that in a 6 or sub 6lb scoped package that still kicks a decent amount less than my 10lb 270 Win is nice.

I can guarantee a 308 or a 7mm-08 in a sub 6lb gun is going to kick pretty good. And you aren't killing the animals any more dead. Also, the BC of your 7mm 140's is less than 140gr 6.5, it may be worth running a simple ballistic calendar to see that "performance" difference at the muzzle of a 7mm-08 erode at distance. I shoot a 270 win with 126 HH at over 3200 fps and I don't consider that ballistically capable any farther than a "slow" 6.5 Creed with 130 or 140gr bullets at 2700 because of the BC difference.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

Ballistically capable would be the retention of sufficient velocity to reliably expand the bullet. At my elevation, 130 class and 140 class bullets do that well beyond 600 yds.

Having that in a 6 or sub 6lb scoped package that still kicks a decent amount less than my 10lb 270 Win is nice.

I can guarantee a 308 or a 7mm-08 in a sub 6lb gun is going to kick pretty good. And you aren't killing the animals any more dead.

I guess the difference really only shows up if you want to shoot monos, as I discovered. 7mm-08 will expand 120-140 class monos further than the 6.5 CM and the .308 further still, mostly due to the fact that as bullet diameter grows so does velocity from the same case. IOW a 140 grainer will be going 2700 from the 6.5, 2800 from the 7mm-08 and 2900 from the .308 with roughly the same powder charge. The trade off of course is BC. So for reasonable ranges (under 400 yards) the edge in my mind still goes to the older cartridges unless a person commits to those higher BC conventional bullets. If so, I can see some appeal to the 6.5, especially for recoil sensitive shooters or in extremely light rifles.

 

[sclancy27]

I guess the difference really only shows up if you want to shoot monos, as I discovered. 7mm-08 will expand 120-140 class monos further than the 6.5 CM and the .308 further still, mostly due to the fact that as bullet diameter grows so does velocity from the same case. IOW a 140 grainer will be going 2700 from the 6.5, 2800 from the 7mm-08 and 2900 from the .308 with roughly the same powder charge. The trade off of course is BC. So for reasonable ranges (under 400 yards) the edge in my mind still goes to the older cartridges unless a person commits to those higher BC conventional bullets. If so, I can see some appeal to the 6.5, especially for recoil sensitive shooters or in extremely light rifles.

I would only caveat that by saying "some monos". Barnes like monos are not made for slow calibers. I would be fine pushing a 124gr HH out of the Creed past 400 yds. But if I chose to shoot Barnes, I would shoot faster calibers

 

[Dave N]

Wondering if the lettering is going to pass inspection.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

I would only caveat that by saying "some monos". Barnes like monos are not made for slow calibers. I would be fine pushing a 124gr HH out of the Creed past 400 yds. But if I chose to shoot Barnes, I would shoot faster calibers

I can see that. I like Barnes because they are always available, but maybe I need to give the Hammers another look. The 131's did pretty well in my -08.

 

[cohunter14]

Stay on track here folks...let's not roll this thread into the ditch.

 

[Brad]

I've never quite understood having to be against something in order to be for something different.

 

[cgasner1]

I would only caveat that by saying "some monos". Barnes like monos are not made for slow calibers. I would be fine pushing a 124gr HH out of the Creed past 400 yds. But if I chose to shoot Barnes, I would shoot faster calibers

I don’t understand why people don’t pick a bullet they like then from there find a caliber that fits the bill before they start rifle shopping.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

A 143 ELDX at 2700 fps is an easy 600 yard gun. How far do you need?

Late to the game here (as usual) but it only dawned on me that without the 143 ELD-X or it's kin, the cartridge loses some luster, after trying to roll monos (Barnes in particular) out at a velocity that will ensure expansion at 300-400 yards. As some have said, wrong application for the tool, which I finally accepted and have moved on. So the answer I was looking for was what you just said - ELD-X it.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

I guess this is why forums like this have an ignore feature (sigh). I had always enjoyed a higher class of conversation here, but maybe we just can't have nice things.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

I don’t understand why people don’t pick a bullet they like then from there find a caliber that fits the bill before they start rifle shopping.

I suppose that's one approach. Are you suggesting then that the 6.5 CM is only a good choice with a specific bullet?

 

[cgasner1]

More 6.5 death

 

[cgasner1]

I suppose that's one approach. Are you suggesting then that the 6.5 CM is only a good choice with a specific bullet?

No I’m suggesting that bullet selection is insane these days. Only you can decided between high bc or mono and the distance you wanna shoot. So pick a bullet you like and a distance you wanna shoot then figure out what caliber will get you to that. I got my gun I knew I wanted to shoot out of it and if it hadn’t shot that bullet I would have sold the gun. It did everything I wanted now I have one rifle I hunt with. I’ve killed about 8 different species with it from a antelope to a moose and it has literally knocked all them to dirt where they stood

 

[sclancy27]

I suppose that's one approach. Are you suggesting then that the 6.5 CM is only a good choice with a specific bullet?

No. But, like everything, it's good to do some investigation into the capabilities of the gun to confirm it fits your use case. It is akin to buying a Honda Fit and then complaining it doesn't have an 8ft bed or can't haul a trailer.....

Full disclosure, I own a Honda Fit.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

I've never quite understood having to be against something in order to be for something different.

How is walking away from something with unanswered questions the same as being "against" it?