whats all this about 6.5

[PetahW]

I bought a 6.5x55 Swede - a Winchester Model 70 Featherweight Classic - (after years of -06 & larger chamberings) because I figured, if it's good enough for the Swedes to drop a Moose, it's more than good enough for anything I'm likely to run across in Maine.

It certainly doesn't hurt that I get excellent accuracy with Norma 156gr Oryx factory fodder.

.

 

[FrankenMauser]

It's not that the 6.5 is magical, it's that the weight class of bullets with high BC are light enough to be run through a short action with good speeds.

There you go. That's the best statement I have seen for the 6.5mm bore size, in a very long time.

That's what I was trying to bring out in this thread.

Frankenmauser, you are right in that equal BC would make all those calibers pretty equal - if you could find them: The 6.5 hits just the sweet spot between bullet length and BC. Typical 140 gr 6.5 bullets have BC around .6, try to find that BC in a 30 cal. You're looking at 200+gr VLD bullets that won't give you an acceptable OAL in most loadings. In the smaller calibers I haven't found a bullet with a BC over .55.

The .30 caliber, 180 grain Swift Scirocco II has a BC of .520. That BC is about average for 140 grain 6.5mm bullets, as well (particularly for hunting bullets). Everyone likes to swear by the 0.6 BC "magic number", but many of the 140 gr BCs fall closer to 0.5.

You didn't say which cartridge you're referring to, so I'm going to use the magical and over-hyped .260 Rem, and the magical and over-hyped .30-06.

For a direct comparison, the Hornady 6.5mm 140 gr SST works well. They're both tipped hunting bullets of similar design, and both have the same BC of 0.520. Neither bullet is designed to be jammed into the lands, and both are intended to work in box magazines.

Published max velocities for the Scirocco II are 2,700 fps, on average.
Published max velocities for the SST are 2,700 fps, on average.
The only difference between the two loads, from equal weight rifles, will be recoil energy. Sticking the Scirocco II in .308 Winchester (for short action comparison), will provide a max velocity of about 2,650 fps. That 50 fps loss is negligible for hunters.
...And the Scirocco II is known for its controlled expansion, and deep penetration in all calibers and weights.


If you want to compare competition bullets, it does get a little more tricky. For example:
Hornady's 6.5mm 140 gr A-Max has a BC of 0.585. However, they don't offer a comparable .30 caliber bullet, until you hit 208 grains. But that .30 cal 208 gr A-Max eclipses the 6.5's with a BC of 0.648.
It's the difficulty in keeping comparisons equal, that keeps everyone divided.
Since the 6.5's "superiority" in competition has been hashed out many times, I'll let that aspect go.


As hunting cartridges, they're just over-hyped.
I freely admit there will be a difference in recoil energy, when compared to larger bore sizes. How much of that will be noticeable, though, is up to the individual shooter.

If you want a short action, AND like to shoot very heavy-for-caliber bullets, the short 6.5s are the thing for you. If neither of those concepts really matters to you, then the short 6.5s are no better than a .243 Win. I can shoot heavy-for-caliber bullets in nearly any cartridges, and get the same or very similar results.

*OAL limitations do come into play with certain cartridge / firearm combinations - but not all.

 

[GeauxTide]

Frankenmauser's analysis is very good; however, I'd prefer the recoil of the 140 in my 6.5-06 to the 180 in my 30-06 any day and twice on Sunday. I've got two 260s together with two 223s, a 280, 7mmRM, two 308s, and a 338-06.

I enjoy shooting the 26 rifles like I now enjoy the 45LC and 44Spl over my 41 and 44mag Rugers. As I've grown more "manure", I like the comfort without giving up a lot of performance.

Oh, and Savage makes a couple of flavors of 6.5-284 Norma in their fine bolt.

 

[5RWill]

I can't tell the difference between recoil in my .308 pushing 175gr bergers or my .260 pushing 129gr SSTs. Seems to be the same. Now the two rifles are 4-5lb difference in weight. I couldn't really tell the difference in my .308 between 155s, 168s, or 175s.

 

[Usertag]

I'll explain them in a some simple sentence's. They are 6.8 SPC's on steriods, Meaning way higher velocity. The 6.5 Grendel Travels 200ft/s faster than the 6.8 SPC. But the 6.8 SPC has more foot pounds of force then the 6.5. The 6.8 SPC packs 500 ftxlbf more than the 6.5 Grendel.

 

[Longdayjake]

I'll explain them in a some simple sentence's. They are 6.8 SPC's on steriods, Meaning way higher velocity. The 6.5 Grendel Travels 200ft/s faster than the 6.8 SPC. But the 6.8 SPC has more foot pounds of force then the 6.5. The 6.8 SPC packs 500 ftxlbf more than the 6.5 Grendel.

What the heck? Nothing you said here makes any sense. Just not true. Where in the fetch did you get this from? FrankenMauser is correct in his analysis that you can get the same performance out of other calibers, but I think that he is missing the big point. 6.5 is just cool.

 

[tirod]

Usertag, the comparisons you made are completely worthless. Think twice, post once.

If there is a common theme in discussions on high BC bullets, it's a focus on the statistics. They do reflect a superior ability to lose less energy, and it's a quality that is given serious consideration when compromising it.

Cartridge designers balance case diameter and length, powder capacity, bullet diameter, bullet length, and overall length, matched to the desired range and amount of power they have as a goal. There's lots to juggle, but the further out they need to hit, the more BC rises as a priority.

Deciding which caliber/case you want to use is a bit similar, what's the longest range you need to hit for 85% of your shooting? I say 85%, because that sets the reality, not the projected what if's in shooting. They happen regardless, and regardless of what you carry, it still either won't reach or won't be big enough. Going for the 15% solution optimizes it for that, not the 85%.

If you can use the extended range higher BC bullets offer, by all means do so. But they are not the optimum choice in every situation, principally because other factors of the cartridge design may have more priority. Since most calibers are NOT optimum high BC designs, there's a lot of agreement with that. Not every application is distance - it may be a need for more delivered power at common hunting ranges.

The .30-30 Winchester was about the first popular smokeless powder cartridge, it's not a good BC in round nose flat based bullets, but arguably Americans #1 overall choice for 100 years consistently, based on sales. And reputedly has dropped more whitetail deer than any other. While limited by the action to a round nose, shooters accepted the compromise for increased ammo available in the gun. The effective range limit of 250-300 yards wasn't a major disadvantage in that use.

In that example, the BC is pretty low priority, and nonetheless, the cartridge is still effective - to this day.

Aside from the lore and cachet of a cartridge, how it actually works for what you need should get some consideration. We all seem to approach it from the cool factor, then justify the performance, when we'd be serving our needs better with a more factual examination.

 

[mapsjanhere]

FM, all these calibers won't make a difference if you look at hunting bullets. If you're not optimizing for long distance shooting, the 6.5 does not have any great advantage. My personal long distance gun btw is a 30, using the 210 Berger VLD, but it's single shot so the COAL restrictions don't matter.

 

[sir_n0thing]

Aside from the lore and cachet of a cartridge, how it actually works for what you need should get some consideration. We all seem to approach it from the cool factor, then justify the performance, when we'd be serving our needs better with a more factual examination.

Overall well thought out post, tirod. I especially appreciate the wisdom in the closing thoughts.


Sent via Tapatalk ~Android~

 

[Smaug]

Seems like another fad caliber to me >

> for those guys who just have to have the perfect cartridge for every occasion. For example, what will it do that a .243 Win won't do? or a .270 Win?

For rifles, I make do with .22LR, 6mm Rem, and .44 Magnum myself.

 

[Longdayjake]

.243 Win won't do? or a .270 Win?

It will throw heavier bullets than a .243. It will throw bullets about the same as a .270 and do it with less powder and recoil. However, you can get heavier bullets for the .270. It really just depends on what you want to do. I like 6.5 stuff because I find it to be a better compromise between 7mm stuff and 6mm stuff than the .270. It is true that you can get most similarly sized casings to throw bullets of different diameters about the same, but some people have a prefered caliber to do so.

We all seem to approach it from the cool factor, then justify the performance, when we'd be serving our needs better with a more factual examination.

In the end I think the best way to pick a cartridge is on how cool you think it is. When cartridges of similar size can do pretty much anything that either one can do, what else is there to go off of? Then to get the most out of the coolness of your choice in caliber, you then have to tell everyone that you have the coolest thing in the world. (internet sarcasm off).

I personally like the 6.5 and believe that it deserves the hype. The bullets do a good job in any application you put them in. For some situations there may be a better choice, but if thats the case for you then have fun with what you think is the better choice.

 

[5RWill]

What Tirod said is true and goes for every caliber. Depending on application and it's use, will factor in if it's the right caliber for you.

With the line of berger vld hunting bullets, and some Hornady A-max bullets you can have both desired BC and a good knock down power.

As for what can it do that the .270 can't... besides have superior ballistics @ 400yds and on, they're pretty equal i guess, but i just don't the like the bullet choice of .270. I've never been a .270 fan and probably never will be. I just don't see the point when i can accomplish the same results and more with a 30-06 or .280.

 

[Fullboar]

^The key to all the misinformation about the 6.5mm bore size.

People always compare same-weight bullets when looking at the 6.5s. The problem is that comparing same-weight bullets from different bore sizes is like comparing same-displacement engines, when one is in an industrial truck, and one is in a small car.

If you want to compare apples to apples, use bullets with the same BC in each bore size. Then compare trajectories and "efficiency".

With a .243 Win, .270 Win, 7x57mm, .30-06, or even 7.62x54R, I can do everything the 6.5mm bore size can do.

Keep the comparison "apples to apples", and it's just another cartridge with a lot of hype based on misinformation and improper comparisons.

But if you want to compare bullets with "high" like the 6.5mm (139gr Lupua Secnar, 140gr Berger VLD, 142gr SMK ect) in say a 30 cal you have to at least go close to and over 200 grains. I am not saying there isn't but I haven't seen a premium B/C in 6.8mm (270) that was over (or much over) .5 B/C.

The "fact" is the 6.5mm is a "sweet spot" as far as B/C and S/D is concerned.
Please show me "where" in any other caliber other then 6.5mm where you can get a (around) 140 grain bullet up to and over .6 B/C and .3 S/D.
That is why the 6.5 (like the 260 rem) is so popular in long range shooting to drive a bullet anywhere near the speeds of a 6.5mm .6 B/C bullet in 7mm or 30 cal you have to go to a magnum in a long action rifle.

The .30 caliber, 180 grain Swift Scirocco II has a BC of .520. That BC is about average for 140 grain 6.5mm bullets, as well (particularly for hunting bullets). Everyone likes to swear by the 0.6 BC "magic number", but many of the 140 gr BCs fall closer to 0.5.

You say "most" 6.5 bullets are around .5 B/C
Well "most" 30 cal bullets are around .4 B/C
If you want to compare aples to apples as you say if you take a 260rem with a .6 B/C 140 grain bullet (they are pretty common in 6.5mm) and a 300 wm with a 190 grain bullet (SMK have high BC and are pretty common) the 260 rem will have better trajectory and less wind drift (they are almost the same with trajectory and wind drift) but the 260rem with only a 140 grain bullet at 1000 yards will have around 85% of the 300wm's energy (and the 300wm has a 190 grain bullet and alot more powder pushing it) if that is not magic I dont know what is.

PS: But what people should know (in hunting anyway because most rounds shoot flat to around 300 yards) that S/D is more important then B/C, but when you go to longer ranges then B/C becomes more important.

 

[5RWill]

The 190 SMK while a good BC is still low for an full size .30 cal bullet shape. It's hard to explain in a sense but 190 SMK is actually just the beginning of where the .30 cal bullets hit their stride to to speak.

http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/30cal_fullVersion.pdf

 

[FrankenMauser]

Please show me "where" in any other caliber other then 6.5mm where you can get a (around) 140 grain bullet up to and over .6 B/C and .3 S/D.

Having a BC of 0.6 and a bullet weight of 140 grains is not something the 6.5mm bore size does well. It's a byproduct of the bore size.

I can make that same argument for anything.

Show me any other caliber, other than .50 caliber, where you can get a 750 grain bullet with a BC greater than 1.0.
See how that works? It's a byproduct of the bore size.

If you want to say you really like the lower recoil of the 6.5s, and like shooting heavy-for-caliber bullets (140 gr+), just do it. Just because the 6.5s hit a "sweet spot" for your type of shooting and personal preferences, doesn't make the cartridges and bore size "magical".

If you want to compare aples to apples as you say if you take a 260rem with a .6 B/C 140 grain bullet (they are pretty common in 6.5mm) and a 300 wm with a 190 grain bullet (SMK have high BC and are pretty common) the 260 rem will have better trajectory and less wind drift (they are almost the same with trajectory and wind drift) but the 260rem with only a 140 grain bullet at 1000 yards will have around 85% of the 300wm's energy (and the 300wm has a 190 grain bullet and alot more powder pushing it) if that is not magic I dont know what is.

You're comparing apples to ambiguously unspecified objects. You're trying to be specific about the 6.5mm bullets, but not at all specific with your comparison.

And... do you understand the theoretical outcome of two bullets with the same BC, launched at the same velocity? They will have exactly the same flight path. Wind drift, drop, and retained velocity will be exactly the same, at any given point along their trajectory. That's the whole point of using Ballistic Coefficients. It is a prediction of flight characteristics. It doesn't matter what the weight, size, or shape is; so long as the BC is the same.

If all else was equal (which it's not in your example) in the 6.5mm 140 gr vs .308" 190 gr comparison, the 140 would not retain 85% of the 190's energy. With a 0.6 BC, launched from the muzzle at 2,700 fps, both bullets are predicted to be traveling at 2,567 fps when striking their target at 1,000 yards (sea level, 65 degrees F). That leaves the 6.5mm 140 gr bullet with 2049 ft-lbs of energy, and the .308" 190 gr bullet with 2779 ft-lbs of energy. That works out to the 6.5mm 140 gr bullet having 73.6% of the 190's energy.

Which is much easier to calculate, than using ballistics calculators (as I have above, to get the downrange velocities).
Since identical BCs mean for identical flight characteristics, you can simply divide the 6.5's bullet weight by the .308" bullet weight. 140/190 = 0.736 or... 73.6%.

FM, all these calibers won't make a difference if you look at hunting bullets. If you're not optimizing for long distance shooting, the 6.5 does not have any great advantage.

When people stop touting it as the best hunting cartridge ever, I'll stop the comparisons of hunting applications.



I have absolutely not problem with the 6.5mm bore size. My problem is with all the incorrect analysis, improper comparisons, and "magic" people throw around. If you like the 6.5s, good for you. Enjoy it. It's not different than any other bore size, though.

 

[Longdayjake]

like shooting heavy-for-caliber bullets (140 gr+),

How is a 140 grain bullet heavy for caliber out of 6.5x55 or .260?

 

[RwBeV]

I started big game hunting with a 300 WM when I was 14 years old, I guess my dad figured I needed the crap kicked out of me every time I shot it. I kill a few Elk with it and a Moose. As soon as I was out on my own I traded that kicking thing off. A few years later I built my first 6.5 and never looked back, it will do everything I want it to do with a heck of a lot less recoil and and weight. Until I had to have back surgery I packed in 3 miles into one of our Wyoming wilderness areas, and everything was packed out on our backs so weight was a big deal. I don't think there is anything "magical" about the 6.5 but it will do anything that any of the other calibers mentioned in the other replies. I base what I say on experience rather than what you can read in books, what really matters is what happens in the field not on some calculator. Non of the 30 or so elk I have taken at either 30 yards or 500 could read anyway.

I have worked in gun shops since the 70's and always had the same question asked "what gun should I buy?" My answer was always the same you buy the gun and caliber that you can shoot well. Whats the point in buying a .375 H&H if you cant hit crap with it. I have taken a lot of crap over the years for "shooting such a small caliber for elk" most from folk that read it in a book let alone ever killed an elk. My point is if you like the 6.5 then shoot it!! If you like some other cartridge with in reason then shot it.

Bob

 

[Fullboar]

Having a BC of 0.6 and a bullet weight of 140 grains is not something the 6.5mm bore size does well. It's a byproduct of the bore size.

That doesnt matter if it is the "By Product" of the caliber. Like I said "show me a bullet that has the same B/C for the weight". You can't
So please tell me why is the 6.5mm so popular as a long range cartridge?
(I will tell you) Because the 6.5mm has great B/C for the size and to get the same thing in another size cartridge you have to go bigger (ie: heaver bullet more powder). What you are saying is that Long Range shooters don't know what they are about because the 6.5mm is just same as other size cartridges? The truth is for what you get you wont find a more efficient size bullet.
Comparing it to a 50 cal is just stupid.
Go back and have a look at my comparison it was between a 260rem shooting a 140grain bullet vs a 300wm with a 190 grain bullet @ 1000 yards (energy). The 300wm is burning almost twice the powder and the 190 grain bullet was used because it brings up the B/C and its about the most common weight shot in the 300wm.
I dont know what a 308 with a 190gr bullet VS a 260 with a 140gr bullet @ the muzzle? For a start you dont shoot anything (game or targets) @ the muzzle?

 

[5RWill]

The 168gr 7mm VLD has a .617 thats only a 28gr difference, thats about as close as it gets. Like i said the only thing that makes it special is the fact it's weight class of bullets are light enough to be run in a short action, while having a high BC. IMO if you compare bullets you don't go by weight, you go by BC equivalence. Going by the BC compares both bullets where they were equally designed and are in their premier form so to speak. Thats how i feel about it. .30 cals really get good up in the 200+gr bullets.

 

[Fullboar]

I have absolutely not problem with the 6.5mm bore size. My problem is with all the incorrect analysis, improper comparisons, and "magic" people throw around. If you like the 6.5s, good for you. Enjoy it. It's not different than any other bore size, though.

Please show me when you compare bullet weight or a bullet with the same B/C as the 6.5mm bullets I listed, that will do the same as the 6.5mm? (ie: for the amount of powder used).
That is what everyone is talking about, how effient you can be with the 6.5mm bullets. IE: to get the same thing as you are getting with the 6.5mm, you have to burn more powder and that = more recoil, longer action and in alot of cases more money.
The only reason you can get that is because the 6.5mm size is a sweet spot as far as B/C is concerned.