6.5: Swede v. CM

they were made under rudimentary process controls out of inferior materials.
Click to expand...

Perhaps its just me reading in what isn't intended, but when I see the word inferior used this way, it implies, to me, that it was something deliberate on their part, that they chose to use rudimentary and inferior. And that simply is not the case. The methods and materials used were state of the art at the time.

Of course we do things so much better today, we've had over a century to figure it out, (in the Swede's case).

I think there are two standards at work here, or there should be. Honest comparison of capabilities vs. modern, and honest appreciation of the design and execution judged by the standard of their era.
 
I once drove an air cooled super beetle across a major metropolis with NO brakes. No foot brake and no hand brake. Only breaking with the engine. One of the best times I have ever had.
Still wary of firing the old Swede.

Anyone want to buy an M96 Swede barreled action?

I was totally unawre the 6.5X55 was available as an AI cartridge. I wonder what the groups or the standard round would be out of an AI chamber. I assume any modern 6.55X55 round could be rechambered to AI.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to scare people too badly, basically if you use these older actions, keep within period pressure limits, watch the action for any signs of lug set back. Sticking extraction would be a clue, headspace increase in fired cases would be another. Look for cracks or cracking. I recommend keeping them in the original cartridge. I consider it inadvisable and technically unsupportable to convert military 8 X 57 MM Mausers to high pressure, high load cartridges such as 300 Win Mag or 338 Win Mag. Not only is the average operating pressure above the proof loads for the original actions, the load on the mechanism is increased by the increased diameter of the cartridge.

I am of the opinion that action design hit its peak in the M98 Mauser action. Mauser designed in so many safety features, and the action is so reliable in feed extraction. Part breakage is virtually non existence without shooter negligence, or manufacturing mistakes. A modern made M98 action is just the thing. I quickly purchased a Dumoulin Mauser action, and am waiting for the gunsmith to build it into 35 Whelen :mad:



Still, process control technology has improved, and the steels now are much cleaner than they ever have been before. Way back in 1987, when this paper came out, we can see the effects of the microprocessor revolution in the improvement of the quality of steels. I am certain improvements are still on going.

Improvements in Bearing Steel Cleanliness and the Effect on Integral Wheel Bearing Systems

Ghassan S. Tayeh and Helmut R. Woehrle
1987


Inclusions present are characterized as one of four morphological types sulfides,aluminates, silicates, and globular oxides - with each type further divided into two series based on inclusion width.

From the start of 1982 through 1986 the average macroinclusion level of 1070 Mod. has been reduced by 92%. Steelmaking process consistency for 1070 Mod. with respect to macroinclusions has also improved as indicated by a 83% reduction in macro inclusion level standard deviation. Regular production integral wheel bearing made in 1984 show 70% improvement in fatigue life over those made in 1983, and 1985 production shows 250% improvement over 1983 production.

The data shows little improvement in performance for new bearings (one year old). However, older bearings, with more mileage, show significant improvement in performance, particularly from 1982 to 1983 and from 1983 to 1984. Examination of replaced bearings shows that early bearing problems (within the first year of use) are very seldom due to metal fatigue. This fact leads to the conclusion that improvement in fatigue life of the integral wheel bearing after extended service is due, to a large extent, to the reported improvement in steel cleanliness.
Click to expand...
 
lonniemike said:
Lets see if I got this right the CM pushes projectiles 200 fps faster than my Norma factory fodder. And the 260 will do 100fps better than my Norma. Interesting. Somebody explain how the 264 Winmag fits into the schemme of things?
Click to expand...

Faster. :D

Low to high, in the 6.5 family, looking only at 140 gr bullets:

Using the 9th edition Hornady manual, highest published load

6.5 X 50 Jap: 2600 FPS
6.5X55 Swede: 2600 FPS
260 Remington: 2700 FPS
6.5 Creedmoor: 2725 FPS
6.5-284: 2700 FPS (this number seems low)
6.5-06: 2900
6.5 Rem Magnum: 2900
264 Win Mag: 3000

Lets also look at the latest Sierra manual (edition V, 6th printing)

6.5 X 50 Jap: 2500 FPS
6.5X55 Swede: 2700 FPS
260 Remington: 2700 FPS
6.5 Creedmoor: (no load listed)
6.5-284: 2900 FPS (that is more like it)
6.5-06: 2950
6.5 Rem Magnum: 2800
264 Win Mag: 3000

Now I have a 6.5-06, and I love it, but the barrel life is not great, in fact mine is due for a set-back/rechamber. Right now, if I was building a 6.5 target rig, I would look at the 6.5 CM or the .260 Remington (neither existed when I built my rifle). You get most of the performance of the 6.5-06 with a short action and longer barrel life, and in the case of the .260 excellent Lapua brass available off the shelf.

Slamfire said:
Still, process control technology has improved, and the steels now are much cleaner than they ever have been before
Click to expand...

That is not just limited to steel, all manufacturing has come a ridiculously long way. I just got a flyer from Cabela's, listing a Savage Axis for $220 after rebate. Now they may not be much to look at, but that is an excellent shooting rifle for dirt cheap, and pretty much all the manufacturers are making sub-MOA shooting bargain basement rifles.

The other thing is scopes. In the old days, if you bought a cheap scope, you were asking for trouble, but that really isn't the case any more, pretty much any scope at the ~$100 price point will be quite serviceable, particularly for a hunting rifle where you zero it and leave it alone.
 
I am of the opinion that action design hit its peak in the M98 Mauser action
Click to expand...

it is kind of a bummer that we were so fast to adapt mauser96 instead of holding out for the 98

don't get me wrong, they are well built, accurate, shoots a great cartridge and possible to sporterize

but

they are not the mauser 98:mad::(

cock on close is a subpar solution imo, not as strong of an action and the 98 is so superior in every which way

probably lucky in a sense that if we had a ton of surplus m98s floating around Sweden there would hardly any other options available

people do still use m96s, nowadays mostly rifles that stem from civilian target shooting associated with the reserves and whatnot. common to make varmint type rifles and many are still hunted with

even in 9,3 calibres and 8mms but i wouldn't shoot too modern ammo with higher pressures in them
 
kraigwy said:
No one has ever came up with a legit advantage of the short action over the long action.

Its just not there.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I can cycle the short action 260 Rem without lifting my head from the scope. Can't do that with a long action. Ergonomics is definitely a legitimate reason.
 
I can cycle the short action 260 Rem without lifting my head from the scope. Can't do that with a long action.
Click to expand...

If you have to lift your head to clear the bolt throw, either you crawl the stock or it doesn't fit you correctly.

(or the scope is too far forward)
 
Not everyone has the luxury of having a custom stock fit to every rifle.

The improved ergonomics and weight of short actions are a substantial advantage. The real question is why, if they're not looking for the higher end of magnum velocities, anyone is shooting a long action?!? :D
 
"I disagree. I can cycle the short action 260 Rem without lifting my head from the scope. Can't do that with a long action. Ergonomics is definitely a legitimate reason."

I can do that with my Tikka T3 6.5x55 Swede. It's a long action.
 
A 260 will work well in either a long or short action. The long action is more forgiving in seating long bullets out in the 260 which is longer than the Creedmoor.

The 6.5x55 is also a great cartridge. It has been used for hunting and competitions for many years in Europe. About the only drawbacks I can think of is the larger head size and lack of brass and loaded ammo over here.

The Creedmoor and Lapua versions are true short action cartridges. Although the Lapua will not hold as much powder it can be loaded hot because of the good brass. The only problem is that Lapua is your source for brass for all except the Creedmoor and Hornaday is the only option there. It sure would be nice if Lapua would make Creedmoor brass since they make 260 Remington brass.
 
Not everyone has the luxury of having a custom stock fit to every rifle.
Click to expand...

No, not everyone does have that luxury. However most everyone can lengthen a stock that is too short with a simple and cheap slip on recoil pad.
 
44 AMP said:
No, not everyone does have that luxury. However most everyone can lengthen a stock that is too short with a simple and cheap slip on recoil pad.
Click to expand...

When the trigger reach is already too long, that's not a good option. It's also nice to be able to remove the bolt without moving the cheek riser.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top