6.5x68s - I never heard of it - until I bought it.

I was offered to purchase a commercial Mauser 98 in 6.5x68s caliber. It was built in 1941 by Chr.Friedr. Triebel. Suhl, and retailed by Wilhelm Eblen, Stuttgart. It has a 25-1/2" barrel, double-set triggers. It came with a basket weave sling, ammo, dies, and 2 Khales claw mounted scopes; a variable 1.5x-4.5x, and a larger fixed 8x. Overall condition was near-new showing little use.

I had never heard of a 6.5x68s cartridge, and found with a little research, that in its day, it was a very popular caliber in Europe, and still has a following today. Its ballistically equivalent to today's 264 Win Mag., having a slightly larger case but without a belt. Much information is available on the internet, i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5%C3%9768mm

This is a fun rifle and a great shooter. I also acquired the rifle's "big brother" - a Sauer/Weatherby in 8x68s caliber. I will post about it also.

http://www.buckstix.com/buckpi...UTTGART-MARKINGS.jpg



http://www.buckstix.com/buckpics/6.5x68-000.jpg



http://www.buckstix.com/buckpics/6.5X68-targ-000.jpg

quote:

Originally posted by buckstix:
6.5x68s Its ballistically equivalent to today's 264 Win Mag.

Well, the two cartridges share the same bullet diameter and have similar case capacities, but they differ in how they were intended to be used.

The 6.5x68 typically used a twist of about 1-11" and was intended for 90-120 grain bullets. It was a favorite of the ultra-high velocity school of shooting which believed in lighter bullets at higher velocities for longer range and inflicting more trauma to the hunted animal.

The .264 was conceived for heavier bullets and rifles were typically equipped with a 1-9" twist for heavier bullets -- most typically a 140 grain, although 160 grain RN's will work. Not that the 140 grain bullet at ~3100 fps is "slow", but its high sectional density provides an advantage over the light bullets of the 6.5x68 in terms of downrange energy and penetration.

You "pay your money and take your choice". I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of either a "light/fast" bullet from a 6.5x68 anymore than one from a "heavy/notquiteasfast" bullet from a .264.

Regardless, your rifle sounds like an interesting piece which I'm sure you're proud to own.

I will be testing a full range of bullet weights from 80g up to 160g to see what happens.