Hi,
Considering a new rifle, but not sure what to go with.
First possibility is a Mod.77 in 6.5x55. I'd probably shorten the barrel to 20-1/2" (just a personal preference), then glass bed the action/free float the barrel, and have the trigger worked on some.
Another possible in 6.5x55 is the Winchester Featherweight stainless.

Second possible is a Ruger Ultra-Light in 270Win. Here too, I'd have the action bedded, and the trigger adjusted.

I'm kind of leaning to the 6.5 Swede as I already have a 270 (Remington 700LSS Mtn.rifle).

Any potential problems or issues I should be aware of with the Swede? Anyone have one? What's your experience? Accuracy? Etc.?
(Note: I'm not a handloader. Rifle will be used for hunting whitetails in Virginia, PA., and N.Carolina)
Thank you.

Either 6.5 or 270 will serve you well. But I would tend toward something based on a 308 win case with a short action to complement the shorter barrel.

This relates to another thread, but I really have no use for a .270. I would go w/ the 6.5x55. If I wanted a short action, short bbl. round, I would look @ the .260 or 7-08, they are a bit more efficient in a short bbl.

Performance-wise, there isn't a lot of difference between the two for your purposes. Since you already have a .270, that's reason enough to buy a Swede in my book.

The only significant difference that I could think of, since you don't handload, would be the cost and availability of ammunition. You can buy .270 ammo relatively cheap, and find it just about anywhere. The same can't be said for the 6.5x55.

RXM

I have 3 Swedes and love them, but if I were getting a short barrel, short action new rifle and I didn't reload, I'd get a 7mm-08...they're sweet and do a number on deer!!

Just a thought. But the CZ 550FS comes with a 20-1/2" barrel in either caliber. The Howa 1500 is also available in 6.5x55 (and stainless). Barrel length is 22".
You already have a 270. Do you really need another one. The Swede Has a fine reputation for accuracy and terminal ballistics.

Yes I'm a 6.5x55 user (30 years) and that's probably why I don't own a 270.
Ammunition is MUCH harder to find locally anywhere, but is easily found on the net. Plan ahead.

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
This relates to another thread, but I really have no use for a .270. I would go w/ the 6.5x55. If I wanted a short action, short bbl. round, I would look @ the .260 or 7-08, they are a bit more efficient in a short bbl.

The above is much as I thought when reading your post. Draw from this what you will.

The 6.5 X 55 is a very good round.....and as a deer cartridge as good as it gets. It's as good as a .270 IMO and properly handloaded will shoot about as flat.

If you go with this just get a bag of winchester brass and not buy any factory swede ammo. There are some chicken crap issues with head sizes and the winchester brass is of the .30-06 size. Same shell holder and no problems at all with extraction.

Don't think I saw short "action" mentioned in VA7"s origonal post. Both the 270 and 6.5x55 are standard length action rounds in the models listed.
The Model 94 Swedish Mauser carbine has a barrel length of about 18-1/2 inches if I'm not mistaken.
Now that IS a short barrel. And it is on a small ring action, therefore shorter than a standard model 98.
Sorry, got of on a rant here

Dog,
Problem is , He isn't a reloader. It was in his origional post.

quote:

Originally posted by James C Scott:
Dog,
Problem is , He isn't a reloader. It was in his origional post.

Thanks James.....I screwed up

In that case I'd have a .270.....IMO the 6.5 swede is a handloaders proposition.

Dog,
Cant disagree, But there are Igman (Hotshot) and S&B available. Can't say anything from personal experience about them, but they only cost arond 8 or 9 bucks per 20. You'll pay that much for 270 most places.

I got out of shooting and reloading .270 completely and switched over to .264 bore with a 6.5x55 (CZ550 FS) and a .260 Rem (Kimber 84M). The little CZ and wears a Leupold 1.5-5 Vari XIII. It is my "woods" carbine and will be blooded this year.

BH1,
Are you handloading for the 6.5x55, or shooting factory ammo?

Both. I got some 140gr Federal factory ammo with the rifle and shortly afterwards acquired a Redding die set and Lapua brass. IIRC the factory ammo wasn't too bad in the accuracy department. We have a few gun grottos around here that carry 6.5x55.

I used my 6.5x55 for many years for deer .It was what Aagard called the perfect deer cartridge ,I agree.Today I think it's a handloaders cartridge because of the lower velocity ammo available .The accuracy question is surprising since the 6.5 is known for exceptional accuracy !! For a factory ammo cartridge today ,I would opt for a 7mm-08 .

Mr Scott,

You're right...I was thinking light and short and the short action popped into my head. Since he doesn't reload 270 or 280 is the answer in a long action. The 7mm-08 and the .260 are nice too.

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
This relates to another thread, but I really have no use for a .270. I would go w/ the 6.5x55. If I wanted a short action, short bbl. round, I would look @ the .260 or 7-08, they are a bit more efficient in a short bbl.

I have all of the above except the 7/08....

YOU not being a handloader, my recommendation would be the 7/08... It will do everything a 270 will do with a short barrel with a lot less recoil....

Ammo availability etc, would be easier with the 7/08 over the 6.5 x 55....

If someone doesn't handload, with the price of ammo the last time I looked at it on store shelves..... it is still a 243, 270, 308, 30/06, 30/30 world out there for most people when it comes to ammo availability....

7 Mag and 300 Win Mag if you are a Mag Boy...

cheers
seafire

THANK YOU ALL for the responses. Some good info. here to mull over.
Thanks again.

V7, Couple of other issues with the 6.5x55 that you may want to consider:
1. The factory ammo from US manufacturers is loaded very mild. I have chronographed the 140 gr Federal softpoints in the Blue box and they barely made 2300 fps out of my 22" barrel Howa. The Federal Premium 140 gr Trophy Bonded Bearclaws made a little over 2400 fps. Handloading can push the 140 gr bullets to over 2500 fps without straining anything. I haven't shot any of the european factory ammo, although the Sellier & Bellot is priced right.
2. Many of the Swedes come with very long throated barrels, and shoot best when loaded to a very long overall length. My Howa needs to be loaded to the SAAMI maximum cartridge length of 3.15" and won't shoot the shorter, lighter bullets worth a darn. No big deal if it is intended for deer/antelope only, but if you would like to shoot smaller varmints, it would be nice if it could shoot the lightweight bullets accurately.
All said and done, I think the 6.5x55 Swedish Mauser is a great example of being the perfect combination of effectiveness with mild recoil and it is truly hard to imagine a better medium game cartridge, but it truly shines when handloaded. Not sure I could live with one if restricted to factory ammo, it just performs so much better with quality handloads.

I have no arguments with the fact that US factory loadings for the 6.5x55 are lower velocity than the norm for other factory calibers. What seems to be lost here is that the lower velocity round is entirely adequate for Eastern whitetail hunting.

It's adequate Western muley hunting, too. Though it starts slower, it loses less velocity, both because of the longer bullet and because faster bullets always lose a higher percentage of their velocity.

We often forget that deer and elk aren't armored, and people have been taking deer for a long time with less powerful rounds than the mild-kicking factory 6.5 Swede loading. FWIW, I got exceptional accuracy with an el-cheapo Federal factory loading and wouldn't hesitate to take it deer hunting.

Jaywalker

I have a Remington Classic in 6.5x55. It's a sweet rifle, but I think Remington may have blown it with the 1 in 9" barrel twist. 1 in 8" would have been better. It's a very accurate rifle and kicks very moderately. This caliber is known for playing merry odle hell with an animals boiler room. You'll get your best results by handloading and with Lapua bullets and VihtaVouri powders. We're just learning what a terrific caliber this is even though its been around for 110 years. I really think you'll like it. Best wishes.

Cal - Montreal

270 Win easily, based on the not a handloader comment.

If you are in the US or North America, get the .270; if you are in Europe, then maybe the 6.5x55 would be better.

I don't know about Africa, Asia, Australia, or South America.

quote:

Originally posted by SDhunter:
270 Win easily, based on the not a handloader comment.

Ditto.

-Bob F.

quote:

270 Win easily, based on the not a handloader comment.

As an owner of a 270 Win Ruger Ultralight, I'd say 6.5 Swede.

This is one hard-kicker! You could use what Ruger uses as a buttplate/recoil pad as a jack-hammer head.

Jaywalker

One of each works well for me!!

quote:

One of each works well for me!!

Cal Sibley

I have a Remington 700 classic in 6.5X55 swede, 1994 classic model, and it has the one in 8" twist rate. Actually all of the American swedes have the one in 8" rate, this is the Win M 70 feather weight, and Ruger Mk ll M77. As far as i can tell only the .260 rem have a one in 9" rate.

quote:

One of each works well for me!!

My Dad has a 270 so I went with the 6.5x55. Go figure.

They'll both get the job done, but I like the Swede for a light weight rifle. The 270 Win with a max load is a handful in a light rifle.

i'm sorry to bring up an old thread.

are there any real differences on recoil/meat damage between these cartridges?

Interesting you ask, Steffen-9.3, back in college, the city library had a copy 'Handloading-by Don Zutz, since deceased, seems it was copyright in 1950's/60's.

Don wrote about a friend who seen more 'radial damage' with a 6.5x55, attributing the high twist, some quote 7.7 or thereabouts, others, simply 7 1/2 or 7.5 for the old Swedish mausers, not sure if the guy was using a shorter bbl (1894 carbine was 17.7 I believe, and the 1938 or M38 Swedish was around 24 IIRC-while the 96 long version was 29.1), anyway, the point was that the friend noted greater damage on deer with the I believe 129gr Hornady vs a 130gr from a 270.

As we know, all bullets are not created equal so there are many variable. Don noted that the high rpms of the 6.5mm over-emphasized if you will, the damage vs the 10 twist in a 270.

It is not hard to calculate RPM, but one can imagine 8 twist turning 1.5x in a foot, 3k mv, x60 seconds in a minute, if I did the math right it is 270,000 RPM, whereas a 10 twist 270 is 1.2x (turn per foot) x 3000, x 69 = 216,000 rpm.

Comparing a buzzsaw going 270,000 vs 216,000 rpm is interesting, as the 6.5 would be churning 25% faster RPM. Those are ballpark numbers but you get the idea. This has been debated, some say yes it matters, others not. The KE, kinetic energy is very small component of centrifugal force, in foot lbs, but I'd have to think a faster twist throws off lead shards and enhances expansion. Another author/shooter did test in a 60 or 70's era Gun Digest or Handloader (annual book), Robert Sherwood comes to mind, comparing an HVA Swedish mauser with maybe a 9 twist, and the 1894 carbine 7.5 or 7.7".

The bullets from the faster twist looked more deformed, and stopped sooner, also did more damage to the make shift ballistic media, dry newspaper or telephone books IIRC. I have the book it somewhere in my garage.

An accurate test would be to shoot modern ballistic gel and compare wound channel size, depths etc.

Both rounds are similar it seems in what they do, killing effect and trajectory. The 6.5 has a little more comfortable level of recoil, but no own ever said a 270 hurt them too bad, to my knowledge. Hope that helps.

BTW, on the twist note if it matters, many 55's come in 8 that were non military mausers, though howa did 9 twist, CZ 8.6, Ruger and Rem 700 Classics were 8, Sako's are 8. Ironically Rem did the Saami spec 260 (close ballistically equivalent of a 55) and used a 9, which is interesting as it w/in 2 grain capacity of the larger 55 round. Newer small rounds i.e. the 6.5x47 Lapua and now Hornady 6.5mm Creedmore are being mfg. in 8.

Unless you are worried about the expense of having 2 different calibers, I would go with the 6.5 since you already have a .270. If you were to only have one medium in this range I would go with the .270 as it beats the 6.5x55 in about all categories except recoil, match bullets (though this is getting better for the .270 with Bergers), and possibly nostalgia for some.

Lou

6.5BR: thank you for a rather technical post, to sum it up, the .270 won't destroy more meat than the old faithful 6.5x55

Lou270: i've just sold nearly all of my guns, so all i got is a .300Wby
what really gets my juices flowing about the .270, is that it shoots flatter(important for a seal gun), it's SD and BC is good enough for my use.
and since i'm a handloader it's not a very impractical cartridge, and last but not least, you won't encounter a .270 on my range.

Buy a second 270 and go for the Remington Lite cartridge if recoil really is a problem. The 6.5 x 55 is however "in fashion" here in Great Britain at the moment. The only possible objection would be that as it is classed as a military calibre you won't be able to shoot in countries where such are prohibited EVEN IF OBSOLETE.

One last thing, if you are intending to handload. .277" bullets are made just for the .270 WCF and "the other one". .264" bullets can be made for such "express" rifles as the .264 Win Mag so MAY NOT be suitable for good expansion in your lower velocity "Swede"...especially with a short barrel.

If I were going for a short barrel and short action and factory ammunition only I would look at .308 Winchester...or cartridges based on that parent case.

I'm a huge 6.5X55 fan.

If you don't reload and can deal w/the ammo availabiltiy issue, get the 6.5. Otherwise get a .270.

For shots in the woods a slower moving 140 in the 6.5X55 would be my preference to a .270, but it's all splitting hairs. No flies on either.

The Winchester would be a nice rifle.

since you don't reload go with the .270. Some of the imported 6.5x55 ammo isn't that great ,especially Hot Shot.

The .308 and it's breed are all right but will not out perform the .270 or 6.5x55. By design they "optimumly" religated for the light for caliber bullets. Short action preference is more whimm than substance and is also restrictive to optimum performance. .270 roger

quote:

Originally posted by Steffen-9.3:
i'm sorry to bring up an old thread.

are there any real differences on recoil/meat damage between these cartridges?

I've shot deer with both and consider them about equally devastating.

Use the heavier bullets if this is a concern.