I know that there is a lot of redundancy in several of today's calibres but this what we enjoy so I say go ahead + reinvent the wheel if it suits you. I know that I have done it myself many times over the years on wildcats. I know it's serious, but it's also our hobby.

Just bought one on a remodeled Winchester 1917 action. No idea what reamer was used so will heat up the Cerrosafe and see what I have.

I'll be interested to hear what you think of this new rifle/cartridge Bill.

The .256 Newton is a 6.5-06. Maybe that has something to do with it.

As I said, redundancy. the .256 Newton never was factory chambered or ammo mfg. to the best of my knowledge but a few years ago there was 6.5/06 head stamped brass available. Maybe still is.

Simple- Hornady marketing team never got ahold of it.

They made the 250-3000 the awe inspiring 25 creedmoor
22-250 morphed into the 22 creedmoor

But the lowly 6.5/06 just never got no love. Never written about or marketed. It’s what the current crop of 6.5s wish they could be.

The .256 Newton was manufactured commercially by Western Cartridge from about 1921 to 1939. Remington briefly manufactured it from 1916 to 1921, from what I can find.
The .256 was chambered in Newton's rifle line.
https://revivaler.com/newton-rifle-256-newton/

Back when I was in University of Wyoming (1978) I heard of a couple guys shooting 6.5-06 rifles. I had a 7mm Express in a Rem 700 which I loved. I picked up a R700 in 25-06 for antelope but had always kept the 6.5 in the back of my mind.

Couple years ago I saw a guy was selling a Cooper Excalibur 6.5-06 with Redding dies so I traded for it. 26" fluted barrel to boot. It shoots 130gr Sierra TGK bullets at .75". I haven't hunted with it yet but I think that will change soon on an upcoming hunt in March.

quote:

Originally posted by surefire7:
I'll be very interested in following this development Saeed!

I found one of our 6.5-06 Improved.

I am running a batch of 277 caliber bullets through our CNC lathe right now.

As soon as I am done I will run some 264 caliber and try it.

Thanks for the info Saeed!

Back in the day, I was for a period of time a sho nuff wildcatter..As to the 6.5/06 I built one and shot some mule deer with it, then punched it out to a Ackley, and later a Gibbs...bottom line is I had a very expensive .270 Win or 280 Rem as far as a hunting rifle goes...Like most all wildcats, they are fun and games, but expensive in the long run, and duplicate some factory rifle caliber....

I recall Bob Jourdan wrote what I considered an excellent article in Precision Shooting on the.260 Remington a little after it came out. It ended up being less about the .260 than 6.5's in general. Seems he was a real fan of the 6.5mm and the .256 Newton in particular, considering it the best compromise of the 6.5's with the 6.5-06 (which was popular) a bit overbore, the AI version a barrel burner and the those with less capacity than the 6.5X55 a bit lacking. He had mentioned that the .270 was developed during the hayday of the Newton and just barely bested it on paper, using more powder. I believe he went on to build a Newton on a Sako action and was pleased with it. He also worked with the AI version of the 6.5X55, which Ackley apparently did not do. I had intentions of building a .256 Newton on a 1909 Argentine action but decided on 7X57 in the end. I had not nearly the success with cast bullets in the 6.5X55 as in the 7X57 and don't shoot many jacketed bullets compared to cast.

I always thought the 6.5/06 suffered from the same issues the .264 had back when- it was a natural rebarrel/sporterization round that had the problem of being overbore in the days before we had wholesale availability of slow powders. Also, 6.5 bullets were not what they are now.

Thus, it was either a mostly empty case with little ballistic advantage or a very high pressure barrel eater.

Nowdays, I’d think it would be a great light magnum, but everyone wants either short action efficient rounds or maximum performance bragging rights.

Right now, it seems no one wants something in the middle if you look at popular media.

I think it’s a much better option for a bigger 6.5 as far as hunting than the .264 WM on up, but it’s not going to compete in the short action minimal recoil group.

Since it has been around for years, there is no money to be made by a maker adopting it and marketing it.

Those of you who reload for the 6.5-06 are you able to neck down 30-06 in one step? Do you need to neck turn the brass. I've thought about a 6.5-06 for quite a while. Being able to use 30-06 brass and making it in a simple process is what will push me one way or another.

If I have to use .270 or .25-06 brass I wouldn't be as interested because I don't have piles of that stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by deadibob:
Those of you who reload for the 6.5-06 are you able to neck down 30-06 in one step? Do you need to neck turn the brass. I've thought about a 6.5-06 for quite a while. Being able to use 30-06 brass and making it in a simple process is what will push me one way or another.

If I have to use .270 or .25-06 brass I wouldn't be as interested because I don't have piles of that stuff.

I had a Brno with a Douglas Supreme barrel in 6.5-06 for a while. Had been spruced up with very nicely finish wood, after market recoil pad etc. An acquaintance had used a 6.5-06 for decades and swore by it. I could get 3000fps with the Sierra 140gr SPT bullet but could get within 100fps of that with a shorter barreled short action 7mm-08.

I used 25-06 cases, seating bullets straight into new cases, and also 30-06 cases necked down without any neck turning required.

If I wanted more than the 7mm-08 could give I would go the 7mm Magnum way with a 160gr bullet at 3000fps (used a 7x61 S&H for decades). Just couldn't really see a purpose for the 6.5-06, didn't do anything that the 7mm-08 accomplished quite well without fuss and could never match the 7mm Magnum.

Bob, you can resize the 06 brass in one stroke. Be generous with lube on the neck but not so much on the shoulder. Best bet is if you have a Hornady 6.5 neck die.

6.5x65 RWS is still active in Europe. But it isn't popular there either.

I'm still enamoured with the 6.5X54 M/S but then I'm a dinosaur.

I have a 6.5/06 AI. The requirement for neck turning will depend on the rifle. Mine with 30/06 Lapua brass needs the necks turned to get the proper neck tension / clearance.

Too close to a .270 Winchester to matter? Maybe the name 6.5 A-square was not flashy enough? Would a 6.5 Winchester have gotten more notoriety and attention?

the 6.5 has always had a mystique about it from its days in Africa where it slew many elephant etc and got a few Englishmen ate..It does have penetration as do a dozen other calibers..I shot both the 6.5/06 in various forms and the .270 in std form and preferred the 270 and 7x57 hands down, on deer and elk.

In fact was sorely disapointed in the 6.5x57 and the 6.5x06..but thats a decision each person has to make for himself.. I found the 6.5 Manlicher shonauer an awesome little gun, but the caliber again didn't impress me, other than it worked on deer, but so do many other caliber

Anyway thats my assessment to your original post, right or wrong and its certainly argueable.

Back in the 50s and early 60s if you wanted a 6.5 you would just buy a lovely 264 Win Mag in a Pre-64 Model 70.

I've had many 6.5's over the years. x54, x55, x57, 06, Gibbs. All worked well, I'd probably choose the x57 version overall, but they are very close. - dan

quote:

Originally posted by NormanConquest:
True. When it was designed American's were a bit leery of metrics, in 6.5 at least, not like today. I think that was in large part the demise of the 264 WM (*not to mention the acceptance of the 7MM RM)

This. ^^ A lot of great metric rounds were passed over in favor of something more "American". The most popular wrenches were 1/2", 7/16" and 9/16", (10MM wasnt even a thing yet) and the two most popular calibers were 30-06 and 270. That is just the way it was back in the day. If that were not the case the venerable 270 Win might have never existed and the 6.5X55 might have been Jack O Connors favorite round.

Just today I was musing about the way "Long range hunting" has been re-defined. During the hey-day of calibers like the weatherbys and the 270 things like velocity, trajectory and boat tail spitzers were all the rage. Now things are a little more sophisticated and extraordinarily high BC bullets, turret tweak able scopes and tack driving machines are the order of the day. In other words, the real benefits of 6.5 bullets that have been around for ages have only recently, finally got the public's attention.

One thing needs to be clearified, With a one shot DRT kill, control feed is not required!!!

In 1990, I had a Rem 700 classic 30-06 rebarreled to 6.5-06 by Bill Wiseman of College Station, Tx (#4 contour, 9" twist, 25" long). This is the most accurate rifle that I own excluding my heavy barreled rifles. I have probably shot deer with 15 different cartridges but if I was forced to pick a favorite, this would be the rifle. I have mainly used the 125g Nosler partition at 3150 fps using H4831 powder.
Why 6.5-06? I was a big fan of gun writer Charles Benke who wrote about the 6.5 mm cartridges and I absolutely loved the 25-06, so building a 6.5-06 seemed like the logical thing to do! I also built a 260 as soon as Remington introduced it. I have always thought necking down the 30-06 and 308 case to 6.5mm was such a natural choice. With so many cartridges available, it is difficult to find a niche to fill and that is probably why the 6.5-06 & 260 are not that popular today; however, it is great to see 6.5mm caliber finally getting some attention!!

Oak, I remember Charles Benke's articles on the various 6.5s in Rifle and Handloader. I enjoyed them.

Bill - I remember Charles Benke saying that nobody was writing about 6.5mm cartridges, so he focused almost exclusively on the 6.5's. He wrote many articles on all the 6.5's. I have every issue of Handloader & Rifle magazine since the mid 70's. Another article on 6.5-06 is in the 10th edition Handloaders Digest titled "Just One Good Bullet" by John Masters. This article intrigued so much on the 6.5-06, I have probably read it over a dozen times. It is about the 125g Nosler Partition in 6.5-06.

I had an A-Square rifle in 6.5-06. It was my Coyote rifle for a while. It was very accurate and would flatten a Coyote right now.

I went on a Gibbs craze some 60 or more years ago, and it pushed the shoulder forward all that was possible and then some..Old Gibbs sold forming dies using a die you filled with oil and hit a plunger with a big hammer, I spewed oil all over the user and shop and barely worked..I used the 6.5 gibbs on some mule deer, antelope and whitetail..Considering the trouble to reload etc, and cost even back then, I much preferred the 7x57, 270, 280 and most of all the 30-06 and passed on all the 6,5s, they in my opine or the epitome of nostalgia and days of yore!!

The 256 Newton is a great cartridge for a mauser action. Feeds slick as can be, easy to make the brass. I have two at this point, along with a dozen or more other 6.5 cartridge rifles. If I couldnt kill something with one of my 6.5's, I would choose something way bigger than a 270 or 06 to do the job.
I have the 256 reamer if someone gets the bug.

I'm with you there Tony, if you can't kill it with a 6.5 you need to jump up quite a few calibres. I still have the 265 RCBS Mod 70 that Larry Sims built and its still my favourite ( for various reasons ) and I only use 129gr Hornady's, same with my 6.5x55 Imp and standard 6.5x55.

Roger

I think it was a combination of a bunch of things:

1) Overlap with the 270
2) Metric cal not many bullet choices at the time
3) Recent unsuccessful introductions of new cartridges in years past. Remember the 243 (despite gun magazines proclamations) did not do well until the late 1960s and the 358 winchester never did well.
4) Gun companies had other things they were busy with at the time.

I think the same can be said for the 270-08 almost the perfect balance of bullet diameter and case size never stanadardized.

Ray, I played with the 30 Gibbs years ago but I didn't mess with that oil sizing malarkey. I just made a tapered spud that was threaded to fit to the decapping die shaft. It was 35 cal. 1 stroke through the die then resize to 30 cal. in the same die w/ spud removed. Made a dbl. ridge in the case mouth but when fireformed in the Gibbs chamber, you now had brass. Clean + easy. This was using 30-06 brass + can't see any reason that the same results would not be achieved in a 6.5 mm.

Sorry, not mouth but shoulder. Pays to proofread before posting.

I always wondered why a 6.0/06 wasn't made as well

Chuck, pick up a copy of P.O. Ackley Vol. 1. Personally every time I came up with a "new idea" I would get his book out + damned if he didn't do it 40 years previously. The book is worth the price as it is good educational reading in a subject we have an interest in. Lots of good loading data as well. (But a word to the wise; start lower than he recommends)

I have a Pac-Nor Barreled 6.5-06 on a Springfield action. I use Remington 270 Winchester brass shortened to 2.484, the 30-06 trim too length. I use Remington Brass, as I use Winchester Brass for my 270'S, to eliminate mix ups. When I use 30-06 brass, I neck down in 2 steps and don't worry about reaming.

It is interesting to note, and I have gone thru this myself, The A-Square version has a lead (throat) at about.250. Don't know what they were thinking on that one. The 30-06 uses about .060 which is what my current rifle is built too. If I can, I like to seat the bullets close to the lands,.010 if I can do it. Hunting circumstances and magazine length sometimes, not in my particular setup my dictate this.

I am shooting, by preference Sierra 120 grain Pro Hunters, at about 3140fps. Nice groups.

On game I have shot various deer, an antelope, Texas hogs, a variety of varmints from Coyotes to Prairie Dogs, a few rocks and tin cans also. Always, to my satisfaction.

The 6.5-06 is one of my favorite calibers, along with many others including 270 Winchester.

A couple tips if you decide to build one, DONOT build the A-Square version. Be sure your barreler understands this. And also build it on an action that'll let you seat the bullets where you'd like. A 700 Remington or Springfield would work fine. Mauser 98'S are great but the magazine may be a little short

I've shot this cartridge a bunch and have always been very happy with it's performance.


Jerry

I believe it was because it was too close to the .270, that was available everywhere. 6.5-06 was a custom only option that didn't even equal the .270 or the .280. The 6.5-.284 has the same performance, but the platform is vastly superior.

Just like the .25 Souper and .270-08, it's a good cartridge with too much competition around it.

I remember when 30 caliber was king in NRA competition. Pretty much it went from 30-06 to 308 because that was what the US Army was using. The 5.56 round did not have good bullets till the middle 1990's. The 69 SMK was a tack driver out to 300 yards and then floated like a spit wad at 600 yards. Then came the 75 Hornady and 80 SMK and the 30 caliber service rifle went on the ash heap of history, in so far as Service Rifle Competition.

Similarly, the only good match bullets were 30 caliber. Somewhere in the 1990's, good 7mm and 6.5 mm bullets started appearing. If you shot match rifle, ballistic coefficient was your God. I think this is due to the semi conductor revolution where CAD/CAM and CNC machines made iterations and change overs a lot easier on the factory floor. It could be, since the advancement of bullets and calibers has accelerated in tandem with semi conductor advancement.

There has always been a fight between ballistic coefficient and barrel life. Cartridges that eat barrels in 1000 rounds are risky to use. You have to shoot the thing in matches, to get your zero's and gain confidence, and then you go to the National Matches. A number of competitors have gotten to the nationals only to have their barrel puke and die on the firing line. An F Class bud of mine when to the F Class nationals with a 6mm round, and had 400 rounds through the tube. The barrel died before the end. He went from top of the class, to the bottom mid week. He was cleaning his barrel between relays, hoping that might do something. That was wishful thinking, but it was worth trying. Miracles happen.

Those who want less bullet drop at long range are migrating to the 6.5 caliber. I consider long range hunting unethical and basically a sport for narcissists who don't care about wounding an animal that runs off and dies a suffering death. Yes, if you are one of those legends in your own mind, and want to hit things at 700 plus yards, the 6.5 is a much flatter shooting bullet than any 30 caliber. Whether the bullet expands is another issue.

Out to 300 yards, which is a long way, I don't know if there is any lethality advantage to any of the 6.5 bullets to larger bullets. What is the wound channel?, how deep, how wide? Basically any cartridge in the 308 Win class is flat enough shooting that sights don't require elevation adjustments to hit a pie pan at 300 yards. And the velocity at 300 is enough for cup and core bullets to expand.

I think the 6.5-06 never had the Corporate backing to make it a standard cartridge. And it would have been a barrel burner, and it has a long throw, making it a hunting round only.