6.5 CM as a hunting cartridge... why?

[BAKPAKR]

@Justabirdwatcher, I just saw your 300 WSM thread — https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/reloading-the-300-wsm.327580/

In that thread, you stated:

“Initial mid-range break in/zero loads showed a lot of promise. 150 grain cup and core soft points and Barnes TTSX over 66 grains of H4350 were good for ~3030 fps. and 3/4-1 MOA. Exactly what I wanted. Something fairly lightweight but in a short action with '06 or better performance.”

Do you realize that a 6.5 CM loaded to 2680 fps* with a 147 grain Hornady ELD-M** out of a 6.5 CM has, at 500 yards, more velocity, more energy, and less wind drift than your 300 WSM Barnes load, but with about 24 grains less H4350? The 6.5 would drop a little more but that is what dialing turrets are for. Perhaps that explains why some people are smitten with the 6.5 CM.

* velocity from Hodgdon manual.

** yes, the 147 gr Hornady ELD-M works on elk

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

Yes, I do realize what the manuals say the 6.5 CM can do. But how often do real world velocities match the manuals? (hint: almost never). I wanted to like the round - enough that I bought and sold three 6.5 CM's, coming back to it not once but twice, after reading comments singing its praises. But the issue I have with it is that most of the great attributes of the cartridge disappear as soon as you shoot something other than 143 ELD-X or 147 ELD-M's, neither of which I am interested in using. When you drop monos into a 6.5 CM, the performance is lackluster and it just doesn't push them fast enough for reliable expansion at any distance beyond 150-200 yards. Is this a cartridge issue, or a bullet issue? You could argue either way. But I almost never see people shooting monos from the little creed and singing its praises. There is a reason for that. (cue the one-offs that love monos from the creed...) So, I have my reasons for moving on. Others love its qualities. We have lots of choices. Someone not choosing your choice should not offend, nor should anyone feel like they need to defend their choice. A simple explanation is sufficient, if even that. I mean, we are here to learn after all, right?

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

spend some time with him, he's laughing

Funny. He doesn't strike me as the type. Came across as an adult to me.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

Sooo, back to my point. Was rifle weight in the back of anyone's mind when they reached for the 6.5 CM? I think it's a logical connection.

 

[ismith]

Sooo, back to my point. Was rifle weight in the back of anyone's mind when they reached for the 6.5 CM? I think it's a logical connection.

I think a light 220 Swift with a fast twist is the ticket.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

I think a light 220 Swift with a fast twist is the ticket.

I know practically nothing about that round, but I have been intrigued by the new-ish fascination with shooting big game with .22 cal high speed bullets. I'm guessing it's a carry over from the ASR .223 crowd?

 

[WapitiBob]

Sooo, back to my point. Was rifle weight in the back of anyone's mind when they reached for the 6.5 CM? I think it's a logical connection.

If I ever need to spot impacts, I'll quit hunting.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

If I ever need to spot impacts, I'll quit hunting.

If not spotting impacts, then maybe just reduced recoil?

 

[The Hedgehog]

I know practically nothing about that round, but I have been intrigued by the new-ish fascination with shooting big game with .22 cal high speed bullets. I'm guessing it's a carry over from the ASR .223 crowd?

Boo-boo say “no likely the .223.”

 

[MTTW]

I know practically nothing about that round, but I have been intrigued by the new-ish fascination with shooting big game with .22 cal high speed bullets. I'm guessing it's a carry over from the ASR .223 crowd?

My dad and plenty of others were shooting elk and deer with a 220 Swift in the 1960s. There is nothing new, it just comes back around like bell bottom jeans.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

My dad and plenty of others were shooting elk and deer with a 220 Swift in the 1960s. There is nothing new, it just comes back around like bell bottom jeans.

Interesting.

 

[cgasner1]

Yes, I do realize what the manuals say the 6.5 CM can do. But how often do real world velocities match the manuals? (hint: almost never). I wanted to like the round - enough that I bought and sold three 6.5 CM's, coming back to it not once but twice, after reading comments singing its praises. But the issue I have with it is that most of the great attributes of the cartridge disappear as soon as you shoot something other than 143 ELD-X or 147 ELD-M's, neither of which I am interested in using. When you drop monos into a 6.5 CM, the performance is lackluster and it just doesn't push them fast enough for reliable expansion at any distance beyond 150-200 yards. Is this a cartridge issue, or a bullet issue? You could argue either way. But I almost never see people shooting monos from the little creed and singing its praises. There is a reason for that. (cue the one-offs that love monos from the creed...) So, I have my reasons for moving on. Others love its qualities. We have lots of choices. Someone not choosing your choice should not offend, nor should anyone feel like they need to defend their choice. A simple explanation is sufficient, if even that. I mean, we are here to learn after all, right?

My take from this is you need a new reloading manual most are based off a 24” barrel and usually are pretty close for velocity. I assume you must be trying to shoot your creedmore sub sonic if your only getting enough fps to open up a mono out to 200 yards

 

[Redmt]

Never considered weight. I also shoot a .300 Weatherby mag that has a pencil barrel and a McMillan stock. It kicks pretty hard but I'm not target plinking with it either.

 

[ismith]

My take from this is you need a new reloading manual most are based off a 24” barrel and usually are pretty close for velocity. I assume you must be trying to shoot your creedmore sub sonic if your only getting enough fps to open up a mono out to 200 yards

My take away from this thread is 6.5 Creeed < 220 Swift.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

My take from this is you need a new reloading manual most are based off a 24” barrel and usually are pretty close for velocity. I assume you must be trying to shoot your creedmore sub sonic if your only getting enough fps to open up a mono out to 200 yards

I'm aware most manuals are based off 24" barrels. Even accounting for that, seldom do real world results ever match book data. This is universally well known among reloaders even if it isn't your specific experience (there are always exceptions and some barrels are just faster than others).

I don't understand your subsonic comment. I've never even heard of someone loading monos for subs. Makes no sense. Rather, if you follow the recommendations of manufacturers like Barnes, then survey real world results, you typically want 2200+ impact velocity for most monos to reliably expand. With the reduced BC's of monos and the below book velocities, this combination does not favor cartridges like the 6.5 CM at ranges past 200 yards or so. My real world loading and chrono results reflect this. Typical 120 grain TTSX's and CX's did no better than 2800 fps. out of my 21 and 22" barrels. With their modest BC's, that doesn't leave much velocity downrange. But perhaps my chrono is bad. I suppose it could just be that?

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

Never considered weight. I also shoot a .300 Weatherby mag that has a pencil barrel and a McMillan stock. It kicks pretty hard but I'm not target plinking with it either.

so, something new and different then? cheaper to reload? All good reasons.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

On page 16 we hear its about pushing monos fast enough.. A modest cartridge that is designed around pushing heavy for caliber bullets to make hay with higher BC and lower recoil isn't going to be ideal for monos that have a low BC and need some more velocity.

 

[Justabirdwatcher]

On page 16 we hear its about pushing monos fast enough.. A modest cartridge that is designed around pushing heavy for caliber bullets to make hay with higher BC and lower recoil isn't going to be ideal for monos that have a low BC and need some more velocity.

View attachment 356637

Maybe I missed the memo that the 6.5 CM is only suited for 140+ grainers. I suppose they should put a warning label on all those lighter 6.5 monos then.

 

[WapitiBob]

If not spotting impacts, then maybe just reduced recoil?

I’m shooting 195’s out of a 7stw.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Maybe I missed the memo that the 6.5 CM is only suited for 140+ grainers. I suppose they should put a warning label on all those lighter 6.5 monos then.

There are some 130 class lead pills that are still decent in that regard as well. A 130 TMK, ELDm, AR hybrid, etc.

No warning label needed, its just that low BC, modest velocity monos is not an appealing combo. Doesn't mean it wouldn't kill stuff fine.