Like any caliber down to the 22 rimfire, the 6.5 x 55 will kill about any animal that walks if you hit him right. But the questions I prefer to consider are (a) whether it is adequately powerful to kill the animal quickly and humanely, and (b) whether it will cause a large enough hole and enough bleeding so that the hunter can recover the animal.

I think the 6.5 x 55 is fine for deer and coyotes, but I would stop at anything that weighs 300 pounds or more. It just doesn't have the power for substantial tissue disruption very deep (3-5 feet) within a large animal.

At the SCI convention in January, a guy told me that for grizzly in Alaska, many if not most guides will not let the client leave camp unless he is carrying at least a 338 winchester magnum.

The accomplishments of African explorers with the 6.5x53R/256 Mannlicher and heavy softs are pretty well acknowledged, and their use was not limited to ungulates.

The real question may be, "If my first shot doesn't put him down for the count, and I get his undivided attention, do I want a 6.5x55 in my hands?". Most of us would choose something a bit stouter in those circumstances.

BigIron

quote:

---

Originally posted by Danny Pay:
..is this nice little round is really adequate for these animals?

---

Is it adequate for big bears? Hell yeah. Would it be my first choice for big bears? Hell no.

Did that answer your question?

-- Mats

Beast wishes from the (thawing) North...

Bears charge very fast and is quite massive animals. Even if the 6,5X55 penetrate well with heavy bullet the energy it delivers is not so fantastic. My choice for Bears would be a 30cal with 180-200 grain bullets, preferably a 340Wby. I have used the 6,5X55 for swedish moose once, and will never do it again. The 6,5X55 is marginal for larger game.

quote:

---

Originally posted by JOHAN:
I have used the 6,5X55 for swedish moose once...

---

Wow, what an enormous wealth of knowledge...

-- Mats

Just kidding you guys!

I'll take a .338 Winchester, .375 H&H, or .416 Remington for my own big bear hunting, thank you...

Allen

To my thinking the 6,5 should not be used for moose,wildboar, bears. There are more effective and suitable rounds for this. The only reason that 6,5 is allowed is because it's a old swedish militairy round and people are sentimental.

My experince of this round is not large, why? I have never owned a 6,5X55 because i have more suitable rounds for my hunting, and have never feelt that it would do anything better than the calibers i already have.

In my hunting syndicate there are not one who use the 6,5 for hunting moose. Most have 7mm mag, 3006, 300 mag, 338, 9,3 rounds. Some use it for roe deer, and fallow deer, but never moose.

In the end facts beats old belives and myths about the 6,5X55. Are you a beliver?

[This message has been edited by JOHAN (edited 05-23-2001).]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Danny Pay:
...6,5x57R -- is ranked in class 1.

---

Uh, nope. It ain't. You have some iliterate folks at your local police station.

-- Mats

quote:

---

Originally posted by JOHAN:
In the end facts beats old belives and myths about the 6,5X55.

---

Yup, they do. BTW, I'm sorry for my snotty remark - thank you for being so civil in your reply.

When it comes to facts they weight heavily over to the x55's justification as a legal moose slayer. Stories like yours can be told about every cartridge you can name; someone, somewhere has gotten bad results at some time with every chambering on this earth. I've shot moose with a .375 H&H and it did react more to the shot than what they usually do with a 6.5, but it wasn't no deader... You can't kill them more dead than dead.

I know what cartridges are involved whenever we have to follow a moose that didn't know it was supposed to be dead, can't recall it has ever been a 6.5 (except the time yours truly shot clean above the back of a big bull). Instead, .308 Win, 8x57 IS and .30-06 are the usual culprits - with the odd 9.3 thrown in for good measure. More often than not are the first shots misplaced so that not enough damage are done to the interior of that moose. If you have a hole on both sides of a moose, it ain't going far... This is what makes the 6.5 so lovely, unless you use those damn toy bullets (9 gram Vulkan for example).

I know some who opt for a .308 instead of a 6.5 on moose, IMO they're dumber than doorknobs - the .30-06 does penetrate a bit more and often gets the job done reasonably fast, but that pathetic little pip-squeak .308? That's a wounder if I ever saw one, it has absolutely no place in big game hunting. Good roe cartridge though, and often accurate. For larger animals the 7-08 is a far better choice, IMO.

-- Mats

quote:

---

Originally posted by Danny Pay:
...in my new book for jagarexamen it is(6,5x57R) mentioned class one too and 6.5 rem mag is ranked class 2!

---

Yeah, the book that says that you should chop off the stock to get the correct eye releif on your scope..? "P� en studsarkolv �r det i f�rsta hand eventuellt kikarmontage som best�mmer hur l�ng kolven skall vara. -- Kravet p� att f� fullt synf�lt i kikarsiktet utan att beh�va str�cka p� halsen �r helt avg�rande n�r studsarkolvens l�ngd skall anpassas."

That the 6.5 Rem Mag is a "Klass 2" cartridge is due to the fact that no 139 gr/9 gram or heavier bullet was offered in that particular chambering way back yonder when it came and died... I'm apparently wrong in my statement that the 6.5x57 R is a "Klass 2" cartridge too, but I haven't seen a factory load for it that places it in "Klass 1" - for the 6.5x57 there are, but not for the rimmed one.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mats:
"iliterate"

---

LOL, ROTF: What better word to misspell? Ain't really my day today...

-- Mats

the 6,5x57R is legal for Moose, and perhaps the reason is that RWS some few years ago loaded it with a 10 Grammes H-jacket (H-Mantel). I�ve got that cartridge in my combo, but I find it less efficient on roe than my dear 8x60 which make them drop at the spot.

I would hesitate to use the 6,5 on moose and merely thinking of using it on bears give me nightmares!

Fritz K.

You are very right about the meat destrucion, but i rather loose a few pounds of shoulder meat than loose the whole animal. Moose is big and if you should have all meat without any destruction you have to shoot them with a ray gun or catch them in traps.

No game could be killed to dead, but in an shooting situation were the shoulder is not visible rounds like the 338 are more reliable than 6,5X55. This situation can ocurr then moose is wonded by someone.

I always try to be nice when i answer, i'm not very offended by your reply.

[This message has been edited by JOHAN (edited 05-24-2001).]

I always get torn on the issues of minimum rounds and prudent choices.

This is what it really comes down to, every round has limitations on what it can and can't do, and where you need to, and where the best not place the bullet. If one is fully aware of their cartridges limitations, and lives within them, then I see no problem with their choice, and applaud that approach.

Personally, I would not want to hunt large, and or dangerous game with a 6.5 bore, based on its limitations. My personal criteria is minium of 33 caliber, 250 gr 2500 fps, and the more the better. Under ideal situations I certainly have no advantage on the small bore, but under less then ideal situations, I have very real advantages. If the 6.5 was all I had, would I use it, absolutely. Being that I have better choices available, it seems foolish or arrogant to hamstring myself with a minimum, why not go after them with a bow and arrow if one is after adventure and sport.

As far as polar bears, the terrain they are hunted in is vastly different then a brown, or grizzly bear. Shooting a polar bear some distance off in the ice is worlds different then being 20 meters away from a brownie that escapes into alders that provide 3-5 meters visibility.

The post is well said and that is the story I would stick with.

Daryl

Thanks for the kind words. You live in a nice city, we enjoyed a few days in Whitehorse last summer, too bad its such a long drive, I'm sure we'd visit more often.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Danny Pay:
...frankly it is not a big diffrens between 3006 and 308 in power.

---

Well, I rank the ought-six second to the x55 anyhow. But using the bullet weight I like in the .30 cal (220 grains), it's a helluva difference between it and the .308 Win.

I won't participate much in the discussion for a few days, have a few cars to buy and sell (found a mint condition 1978 Saab 99 Turbo, two owners, green metallic WITH the original wheels... Fell in love, had to have it - it's THE Swedish classic. Traded myself a Suzuki Samurai too, have to find a mudhole or five to get stuck in... )

But I will be back!

TC guys,

-- Mats

To my Defence about 308 being a crap round. My thoughts about the 308 is not very high because on 200-300 meters a bullet like swift A-frame will not open that good since velocity has dropped. the 7-08 imp launch bullets that in general better SD and BC in simular weight. A 3006 with handloads will do better than the 308.
Since there are some guys on this forum that got pissed off about this statement.

I can't say more than oppinions are like asses, Everyone has got one. What I like, someone is disagreing on, and the reversed. In some way it's good because the world would be quite dull place if there were no difference in opinons about calibers and guns.

Well the 6,5 would kill big game, but the good old man W.D.M. Bell loved his 275 rigby more than 6,5 because the bulets never took the banana shape after penetating and had a more straight penetration in the brain. He was quite confused about the performace of the 6,5 on Elephants.

Bell also liked 318 W.R because of it's performance with 250 grainers on Elephants, If i'mright he took his largest bag with the 318 on one hunt.

[This message has been edited by JOHAN (edited 05-25-2001).]

[This message has been edited by JOHAN (edited 05-25-2001).]

My point is that allthough I would want a bigger gun in a tight spot and to increase my chance of putting that once in a lifetime trophy in the bag as it quarters away from me, I would have put myself in more dangerous situations through misplaced complacency (I've allready come unstuck on the 'just point it in the general direction and pick up the trophy' luckily I didn't get to the stage of 'just let any bear try messing with this')than if I had had my 'marginal' 6.5x55 in my hands.

I would be willing to bet that one of the reasons the 6.5x55 is so effective is because not only is it accurate and that people are not afraid of it but they know they have to stick it in the right place or they will come unstuck. Now that is a healthy attitude to have when hunting something!

[This message has been edited by 1894 (edited 05-25-2001).]

For deeper hunting knowldge join "PRO"
PRO where the best hunters belong.

danny

Okay, it�s not the best caliber for bear, but I defenetly use it if i ran in to one, and I wouldn�t feel "outpowered".

I�m only allowed to own three (3) rifles (new Swedish bullshit rules). And how often do I hunt bear? Two weeks maybe...and then the bearhunt gets called of. And how many bears do we have here in Sweden? Not so many, so the chance of even seeing one is very slim. So I don�t feel that a bigger caliber like a 375 i nessesary when I know my 6,5 i enough to kill a bear whitout a problem.

------------------
From my cold, dead hands!
Thanks Chuck!