I grew up in a period of strong "anti magnum" sentiment over here. Strangely enough everything that people complained about has been sought out again with different magnums that do nothing that the old ones didn't do just fine.

I do think the 6.5 craze is more of a thing than the moderate cartridges craze. Otherwise the 7x57 / 308 etc. would have been gaining in popularity for hunting and my sense is that they aren't really.

I also get the sense that the 6.5's are being ascribed some mystic capability. A mild rifle that you shoot well kills well, because you hit well, but I am sensing a trend towards rifles that are on the light side of enough for some hunting. And particularly at somewhat extended ranges.

One of Barsness' replies regarding the 6.5CM.........

The "wondrous charms" of the 6.5 Creedmoor are not limited to long-range shooting. It's just as good for short-to-medium range hunting as any cartridge with similar ballistics, whether the other "mild" 6.5's like the 6.5x55 and .260, or the 7mm-08 and .270.

I killed a mule deer back last fall with the 6.5 Creedmoor and factory Hornady ammunition loaded with the 143-grain ELD-X bullet at the vast range of 101 yards (laser- ranged after the fact). The buck was standing broadside in Gambel oak brush which blocked most of his body except his shoulder, so that's where I put the bullet. The buck collapsed instantly, dead right there. The bullet broke both shoulders and was found under the skin of the far shoulder, retaining 60% of its weight. The buck yielded exactly 100 pounds of boned meat, and while I have killed bigger-bodied mule deer, he may have been in the top 10. Yet despite the shot placement, the moderate muzzle velocity of the load (advertised at 2700 fps, which it actually approaches in my rifle) resulted in little meat loss.

Yet the same load was also very effective on an even bigger-bodied buck my companion killed with a rib shot at 311 yards. That buck kicked up his hind hooves at impact, then staggered maybe 25-30 yards before collapsing.

The rifles we used, both factory models costing around $500, shot groups well under an inch at 100 yards with the factory ammo, and in fact mine shot a 4-shot group at 300 yards of 1-1/2 inches, strung out horizontally due to a perhaps 5 mph breeze. That ammo costs around $25 a box at most stores.

All of those factors--superbly accurate yet affordable factory rifles and ammo, and very effective "killing power," whether up close or further out, are among the reasons the 6.5 Creedmoor has become so popular. Another is moderate recoil, around 14 foot-pounds for the above load in an 8-pound rifle.

Part of its popularity here in Montana is indeed due to some hunters waiting to shoot "long range," but more of its popularity comes from the fact that it recoils more like a .243, yet works not only on big mule deer at normal ranges, but whitetails along the riverbottoms at close range, and elk as well. This is why quite a few guys buy one for their wife or kids--and then discover the rifle shoots so well, and is so effective despite kicking a LOT less than their .300 magnum that they buy a 6.5 Creedmoor for themselves.


and another........

but one of my PH friends also owns a big sporting goods store in Kimberley, South Africa, and reported to me last year that 80% of the new rifles he sells are 6.5 Creedmoors. Essentially the same thing was told to another Campfire member, RinB, at another RSA store. Apparently South Africans really like the round for culling plains game, and of course they do a lot of that, for the same reasons as many American hunters--affordable, accurate rifles and ammunition, fine accuracy and light recoil, which can indeed be a factor when shooting dozens of animals a day.

quote:

Originally posted by AFRICAN LEADWOOD:
I grew up in a period of strong "anti magnum" sentiment over here. Strangely enough everything that people complained about has been sought out again with different magnums that do nothing that the old ones didn't do just fine.

I do think the 6.5 craze is more of a thing than the moderate cartridges craze. Otherwise the 7x57 / 308 etc. would have been gaining in popularity for hunting and my sense is that they aren't really.

I also get the sense that the 6.5's are being ascribed some mystic capability. A mild rifle that you shoot well kills well, because you hit well, but I am sensing a trend towards rifles that are on the light side of enough for some hunting. And particularly at somewhat extended ranges.

Newer magnums like the RUM and Nosler (not even called a magnum) are much more accurate IMO than the old belted variety. And for some reason, they seem to do things I couldn't do before. I always had a hard time getting 3000 fps with a 160 gr bullet from a 7mm RM, but have no trouble getting 3000 fps with a 195 Berger. Perhaps newer powders have caused me to be a bit jaded...

I think part of the flash with the Creed is that it is chambered in rifles that are inherently accurate - you don't see many chambered in actions that long ago were stopped being competitive in the accuracy game (yea, I am talking about the Mauser).

I like the .308 but I have never been a 7x57 fan - it is neither fish nor fowl - too long for a short action. Now maybe if you throated it long in long action like folks are doing with a 28 Nosler you might have something, but then why do that when you can use a 28 Nosler? Who is using a landline with a cord these days?

And another Barsness gem when responding the people with "Creedmoor Derangment Syndrome".....

Do pro-Creedmoorites knock on your door and demand you turn over your .257 Roberts, .270 or even your 6.5x55? So far none have in my neighborhood, the reason I still have my .270, plus a pair of .257's and another pair of 6.5x55's.

Do pro-Creedmoorites gather in public places, demonstrating for the confiscation of rifles chambered for such "antique" cartridges? Do the more generous pro-Creedmoorites lobby for "buy-back" programs for those hunters unfortunate enough to be burdened with such old and inadequate rounds?

Do anti-Creedmoorites go to the local range and get mobbed by 6.5 Creedmoor shooters, who refuse to let them use the range until they at least pull the trigger on one Creedmoor round?

Perhaps my simple mind isn't up to imagining what that anti-Creedmoorites constantly encounter in our increasingly contentious society. But I am certainly open to hearing about any obvious cases of abuse from pro-Creedmoorites, and would gladly publish an article in RIFLE LOONY NEWS exposing such anti-American horrors.

quote:

Originally posted by AK_Stick:

That's kind of an odd sentiment considering that the whole drive of the 6.5 is to fire a bullet faster, so as to shoot flatter......


I think its more just flashy marketing, and new, which means better in todays market.

And most shooters don't shoot enough to see the downside to the 6.5, though I haven't seen many hunting rifles in 6.5 creedmore showing up where I am.

Barsness has replied to this "new marketing" BS many times as well..........

Have pointed out a number of times on the Campfire that Hornady did NOT "create a marketing craze" with the 6.5 Creedmoor. Instead ithey introduced it in 2007 as a target round with relatively little fanfare. But hunters who tried it over the next few years found it worked very well--which is how I "discovered" it in 2010--and said so in that first article. Only AFTER so many hunters started using it did so many magazines cover the round. (I hadn't even really grasp the virtues of the cartridge when writing that article, using a 120-grain bullet on my first big game animal, because it got over 3000 fps. Have learned a lot more since, partly through firing thousands of 6.5 Creedmoor rounds at targets out to 1000 yards, and seeing quite a few big animals slain.)

My point, however, is that Hornady didn't push the 6.5 Creedmoor as a hunting round for several years--until hunters started using and liking it. Even then the publicity push didn't always come from Hornady. I bought my rifle and several boxes of factory ammo at a local store (as stated in the article), because the store was selling so many. (I do admit phoning one editor before buying the rifle and ammo, to be sure he'd be interested in an article.)

Some interesting posts.

Over the years I have collected and hunted with a few magnum rifles including:

Wby 7mm Mag
Win 300 Mag
375 Ruger
416 Rem Mag.

I've also hunted with:
243 Win
270 Win
308 Win
45-70 Govt

The primary reasons I am now moving to milder calibers are:

a) I don't shoot game at over 300 yards, most are shot at between 50 and 200 yards.
b) I enjoy carrying a lighter rifle and lighter ammo.


My accuracy seems to be good off the bench regardless of what I am shooting, but I find I shoot less, with the magnums (especially if using a light rifle).

In the field I never notice recoil, but the more I practice with a rifle, the more I enjoy shooting.

I have found that with the right bullet, anything in the 270 to 308 range will kill any deer or elk in North America provided you have the right bullet and hit it in the right spot.

After 45 years of hunting, I am finally realizing the wisdom of Jack O'Conner.

BH63

quote:

Originally posted by JGRaider:

quote:

Originally posted by AK_Stick:

That's kind of an odd sentiment considering that the whole drive of the 6.5 is to fire a bullet faster, so as to shoot flatter......


I think its more just flashy marketing, and new, which means better in todays market.

And most shooters don't shoot enough to see the downside to the 6.5, though I haven't seen many hunting rifles in 6.5 creedmore showing up where I am.

Barsness has replied to this "new marketing" BS many times as well..........

Have pointed out a number of times on the Campfire that Hornady did NOT "create a marketing craze" with the 6.5 Creedmoor. Instead ithey introduced it in 2007 as a target round with relatively little fanfare. But hunters who tried it over the next few years found it worked very well--which is how I "discovered" it in 2010--and said so in that first article. Only AFTER so many hunters started using it did so many magazines cover the round. (I hadn't even really grasp the virtues of the cartridge when writing that article, using a 120-grain bullet on my first big game animal, because it got over 3000 fps. Have learned a lot more since, partly through firing thousands of 6.5 Creedmoor rounds at targets out to 1000 yards, and seeing quite a few big animals slain.)

My point, however, is that Hornady didn't push the 6.5 Creedmoor as a hunting round for several years--until hunters started using and liking it. Even then the publicity push didn't always come from Hornady. I bought my rifle and several boxes of factory ammo at a local store (as stated in the article), because the store was selling so many. (I do admit phoning one editor before buying the rifle and ammo, to be sure he'd be interested in an article.)

All well and good but the Creedmorites do often try to imply that it has some mystical power to lay low game at some pretty silly ranges just because it was designed to shoot paper that far away. Two entirely different purposes. Years back there was a minor resurgence of the 6.5x55 which caused several gunmakers to chamber for the round but never in anything that I read anyway did shooting at extreme ranges come into play.

Yes the various 6.5's are great for medium game at medium distances and I don't think anyone would fault that but somehow if anybody disagrees with "Creedmore hype" than its assumed they must hate it. Like I said earlier I'm perfectly happy with my Swede version and therefore have never really had much interest in the Creedmore but if somebody wants one then welcome to the 6.5 club.

My RUM kicks like a 25-06 with a Witt Machine brake on it.

I got a 6.5 Swedemoore for my wife and loaded up some 120's at starting load levels for her since she is very recoil sensitive. She could handle a 243 just fine but I like the 6.5 for if she gets a chance for an elk. On deer the 120 or 129 softpoints will be great and for an elk I expect I would load a 120 TTSX.

-------
A good marksman can hit a target at 500 yards or farther, a good hunter never needs to.