Yup. So many choices, so little powder gain. I would not do the AI again.

quote:

Originally posted by Atkinson:
I built a 6.5 Gibbs ( 6.5 on and IMP blown out 30-06 case) and about like everything else I tried I found it no better than a 270 Win. or a 30-06...As a matter of fact nothing within this catagory up to the 300 Wby beats a 30-06, just takes years of experimenting to convence most of us of that, did me!..

Because of the fact that I am a rifle looney and I love to play with new and neat stuff. I hate to admit this. But Ray is right on the money here.

That is the truth. Fact is, 220 Swift, 30-06, and 375 H&H and just leave it at that, the worlds problems are all solved. What a boring world that would be! Still, the more I have been working with this 6.5-06, the more I think the rest can go up for sale.

I'll be picking up my 6.5-06 tonight from the 'smith. Looking forward to seeing what it'll do.

quote:

Originally posted by Don Fischer:
I just wonder what it would do if someone brought it out and call it the 256 Newton? Darn near the same cartridge.

I have both of those and the 6.5-06 is a real different cartridge! I think the .256 Newton had something to do with the powders available at the time. Depending on who's load data you read, the results vary but I'm getting close to 300 fps difference in speed with 125-140 grain bullets over my chronograph. The 6.5-06 is a real hum-dinger. I was pretty amazed.

Went back out to play in the wind today and the 130 grain Accubonds are amazing. Also as a note I am using a Leupold VX-3 with the Varmint hunters reticle in 6.5-20x50 and it would seem they used my load to set up the reticle. It is almost eerie. I was shooting in a gravel pit off a 15' pile of gravel with a blanket over the top. I was using the rangefinder (even though I have markers all over the pit)to get some practice with that and picking off orange sized rocks out to about 460 yards with the marks in the reticle. It was surprisingly easy, and the misses were still very, very close and due I think to my guess on wind, not elevation. It was the most fun I have had shooting targets maybe ever. 52 grains of RL22 lit with a Fed 210M primer pushing a 130 grain Accubond seated juuuust off the lands to a smidge over 3100fps. What do you want to bet my SD buck comes closer than 100 yards? Better to have it and not need it than the other way around I suppose.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
IMO, the niche between the 270 and the 25/06 is just too small for it to be a commercial success.

Would be a fun wildcat to fool around with, however.

Not "silly" at all!

Especially when you write it out in that "other" system.

6.35-06, 6.5-06, 6.8-06

the 6.5x 64 has been around a while, just not in the US. I have one in a Ruger #1 almost finished, it's a neat round and will do a lot more than you think.

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
Wouldn't the .260 be considered a 6.5-.308? What sort of reasonable performance would you get from a 6.5-06 compared to a .260?

Yes.

The reasonable performance comparison you ask is an absolute parallel to the 308 and 30.06, the 7-08 and the 280 Remington, and the .277 Titus with a 270 Win.

I went with a 6.5-284. I like the Lapua and Norma brass. Just loaded up a bunch of 130 NABs to test with Re19.

It sounds much better if you say ".256 Newton".

Nice discussion but a 6.5-06 commercial success ain't ever going to be. Nice play thing but that's about it; just like my wildcats. roger

I don't think there's a cartridge between 25-06 and 7mm Rem Mag that is really needed. Then the 7mm Mag could easily replace the the 30-06 and 300 mag would be a crunched by the 338 Mag. I believe the difference in them is the ability to handle bullet's. But some cartridge's really appeal to us for unknown reason's. I have never been a big fan of the 270 win, I even owned one once but never shot a head of game with it. Yet for some reason a 6.5x06 has appealed to me for a lot of years before I actually got one. What one can do so can the other. If I had i to do again, I'd do the same thing. One I will add someday is a 280 rem. Don't ask why!

The .256 Newton, introduced as a factory cartridge in 1913, was the brain child of Charles Newton, who was also responsible for the .22 Savage High Power (5.6X52R), the .250-3000, the .300 Newton and the 35 Newton, the last two being beltless magnum cartridges which approximated the performance of the .308 and .358 Norma Magnums.

Unfortunately, the .256 was only offered in Newton rifles, which, like the cartridge, were way ahead of their time, but for various reasons did not sell. The .270 Winchester, which appeared in 1925 with the Winchester Model 54 bolt action rifle, did.

The main difference between the two cartridges was the diameter of the bullet, which in the case of the .270 was .3mm larger, .277" instead of .264". (.256 refers to the bore diameter)

I have had an original 1913 Newton rifle in .256 since the early 1970's, and it is a marvellous rifle. I also have an original 1922 Newton rifle, which was rebarrelled to .270 Winchester by the Niedner company in the mid- 1930's, about the time that factory loaded .256 Newton disappeared from the scene.

The main advantage the .256 Newton or 6.5-'06 has over the .270 Winchester is the much greated variety of bullets available to the handloader. I suspect that the reason it has never made it as a factory cartridge is the evident aversion the American buying public has for cartridges with metric designations.

If Winchester had chosen to go with it in their Model 54, rather than developing their own .270, I have no doubt that the .256 Newton would still be with us.

quote:

Originally posted by Don Fischer:
I just wonder what it would do if someone brought it out and call it the 256 Newton? Darn near the same cartridge.

The problem is that the .256 Newton case is 2.440" (62mm) in length, the 30-06 case is 2.494" (63.3mm) in length, while the 270 Winchester is 2.540" (64.5mm) in length. Longer case equals greater case capacity. If the 6.5mm is going to compete against the 270 Winchester then it requires an equal, or slightly greater, case capacity with the same SAAMI 65000 PMap loading specification. To do otherwise would be recreating the 280 Remington in a smaller bullet diameter...a sure loser.

As I see it the only justification needed for a new or different cartridge is that someone wants to try it. It may have been done before or it may be virtually the same as a slightly different cartridge. That doesn't really matter. The fun of the sport is being able to try something new to the individual. If there is a "perceived" need for it that is just all the more reason to try.

quote:

If there is a "perceived" need for it that is just all the more reason to try.

I couldn't agree more with Paul. All this paper argument is BS and for the writers. If you like it, build it and shoot it.

Jerry

There really isn't that much difference in bullet drop between a 140 grain out of the 6.5-06 and the .30-06 and a 165 grainer or the .270 with it's best bullets at 500 yards it looks like. I certainly notice the lack of recoil shooting a 125 grain Nosler Partition at close to 3150 FPS as opposed to a 30-06 at 2850 FPS shooting a 165. I got a good deal along with a set of dies and it's a custom rifle with a Shilen barrel all for 500 bucks so grabbed it. As far as "needing" it...well, I just had to have it!

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
IMO, the niche between the 270 and the 25/06 is just too small for it to be a commercial success.

Would be a fun wildcat to fool around with, however.

Not "silly" at all!

IMO, the niche between the 6.5x06 and the 280 Rem is just to small for the 270 to be a commercial success.

Sorry, couldn't help myself!

quote:

Originally posted by wasbeeman:
Wouldn't the .260 be considered a 6.5-.308? What sort of reasonable performance would you get from a 6.5-06 compared to a .260?

I am not sure what speed you will get from a 260 with a 120 grain Barnes TTSX bullet as I have never owned or fired one, but I get 3367 fps with that bullet from my 20+ year old 6.5-06 and it shoots 3 shot groups in less than 1/2" at 100 meters with that load all the time.

I have owned and own many other guns and cartridges, but my 6.5-06 has always been my favorite cartridge and gun for all my hunting in Scandinavia, including Moose.
And I know for sure that I will always own and hunt with one till the day I am not able to hunt anymore.

Well I bought a 270 in a Savage just to get the action to build a 6.5-06 AI.
I am curious as to the gents comment on a "no" on the AI version? Brass should last forever or close to it. A bit more powder space but not enough to get excited about.
All the AI's I have had there is no complaint from me. Last one I picked up was a 30-06AI. A lot of old bad press on that one. It really shines over and above with anything 180 and above in weight. We also have a larger variety of powders to work with than 50-75 years ago. If you can find them.
I also agree on the comments of the 270 being tough on edible meat. I am going to try the Barnes TTSX next time around with this one.
Love the 25-06 with 117-120 bullets no issue with damage with the Hornady bullets.
Jeff

Just for those that knock a 6.5 compared to a 257 or 277. How many 1k matches do you see a 25 or 27. Let alone 5-600 yards.
Weights in the 6.5 sure make 25 and 27 cals look sparce.
Jeff

jsh, I commented no to doing another 6.5-06AI because it really provides nothing over the non-AI version. I will admit to being a little anal and doing the fireforming, which I have subsequently stopped. Now I just neck down, trim and go hunting. I have found no practical use for the AI. Since I neck size anyway the brass life is no different between AI and non.

Don't get me wrong, mine shoots .5-.75" all day long, but the AI is just not necessary. If someone wants to do it, fine, but I would not again.

jsh: The 270 being tough on edible meat? It isn't any more than any other high performance cartridge. It's all about velocity and bullet construction, and oh yes that critical and often overlooked "bullet placement" thing.

For the past 45 or so years the 270 Winchester has always been my go to rifle for any game from elk to ground squirrels. I find it as fantastic a cartridge, as Jack "O" and our early fathers wrote and told us about. The 6.5-06 is fantastic also, once again it's a matter of the bullet.


Jerry

I will have to say all of my 270 loading and shooting involved a 130 of some sort with a lead core. I was soured on the WW super x stuff loaded with the silver tips. Makes a lot of burger is all I will say. I then went to Sierra 130 pro hunters. They were better.
I bought factory ammo to tinker with velocities. Never lost a deer with either though.
Jerry, have you settled on a particular bullet?
Have a few lead core projectiles left and am thinking of giving the Barnes or Hornady GMX a try. The GMX has shown excellent accuracy and performance out of my long barreled 243.
Jeff

For most shooting on game, I like Nosler Partitions. And as a serious hunting bullet, that's what I'd recommend. Most are pass thrus even at longer ranges. You know I also use ballistic tips, with great success, but if I do, I am looking for a shot out at 300 yds or so. I have shot a couple Arizona white tails, with the ballistic tip 130's, at moderate (100-175 yds) and have not had what I would call a lot of meat loss.

You know, and this is funny or ironic or whatever, but the most dynamic shot I have made on game, any game, was a 920lbs bull 6X6 elk. I shot the poor guy with a 270 and a 130 grain Winchester bulk bullet, I had loaded to around 3150fps. The shot was around 80 yds, and I hit him behind the 3rd rib. The bullet went into the heart, went straight up hit the spine he collapsed right there and never moved. Maybe a lot of perfect conditions but! It was the last time I was going to shoot the rifle, as I was going to turn it into a 35 Whelen, which I did. I had worn out the barrel form 1969 to 1995, and had bought a new 270 by then so I wanted to show it a little respect, if you know what I mean. I little long winded, but I hope you enjoyed it.

Jerry

http://www.saami.org/PubResour..._5-06%20A-Square.pdf

I have a 6.5-06. It a fun little whitetail getter. Shines at long range, too, with the various 140gr pills out there. I'm not a 270 or 25-06 fan so the 6.5-06 was just the ticket. That being said, the 6.5x55 is my favorite after having owned both. It's a very efficient round in a modern rifle loaded to European pressures. 6.5x57 is good too, just not as common in the US. Although, if I were to go elk hunting with something other than my 338-06, I'd reach for my 280. It sure doesn't sound sexy, but those 175gr 7mm Barnes TSX's are really something out of a 280. Just be aware of what is beyond your target...

G'Day Fella's,

Quintus, I'm the same as you!
I've wanted one for some time now!!!

To answer your question (and I haven't read all the other posts), IIRC A-Square legitimised the 6.5-06 at the same time it did the same with the .338-06!

Doh!
Homer

The manufacturers know that each new chambering drives up costs and cannibalizes sales from their existing line.

6.5 cartridges dominate the 1000 yd benchrest circut. 25's and 270's do not. This is more than happenstance. Although some of those folks are begining to rediscover the 270 what with new monster BC .277 bullets arriving on the market.

I have a 257 AI that matches a 25-06 all day long and because of bullet selection (or lack thereof) there are simply things that a similar 6.5 is capable of that I wouldnt even attempt with the 257. A 270 is a different story. At least that's my 2 cents worth..

African leadwood is right, the 6.5 RM factory design was a braindead turd. Completly wrong bbl and factory loads for it and it really needs at least a medium length action for seating larger bullets out.

I have built three 260 Rem's, sold two and it is fantastic, but I think for driving 140 and larger bullets the 06 platform is a much better engine.

I think if a major manufacturer had a mind to they could use something like the 6.5/284, 6.5 RM or 6.5-06 and in the right package they could make a strong appeal to the booming long range hunting crowd. I doubt if it will happen though. Not enough whiz-bang factor..

Yeah whiz Bang factor see "6.5 Nosler". Unfortunately as soon as brass is available I will probably be snake charmed into getting one...you know, just to see what all the fuss is about.

Just tell people it's a 256 Newton, and everything is golden...

quote:

Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Just tell people it's a 256 Newton, and everything is golden...

I bought one of those from a little gunstore as the price was right and it had an Ackley bull barrel, Mauser action, custom stock. Was a little disappointed when I realized it was a 6.5mm as I was set up for .25 caliber with moulds and bullets and "boolits". Later on, I got it's big brother 6.5-06 and was alot happier with it. Later on, we had a chance to do some work alongside a .264 Win. Mag. The 6.5-06 didn't give anything up to the .264. If you want to see visual difference in cases between the Newton and the 6.5-06, I'll bring a couple of cases to the next Homedale gun show. I'll be at Bill's booth.

Read about Charles Sheldon in some old books.

The late Charles Sheldon killed over five hundred head of big game including Alaska brown bear, grizzly, moose, elk, sheep and caribou. Yet, the only rifle he ever used was a .256 Mannlicher. Mr. Sheldon wrote "This is the perfect rifle." This was written in 1904.

This was in an Ackley book written in 1959 and I agree with Charles Shelton. Most people are over gunned.

quote:

Originally posted by Nordic2:
6,5 06 is the most common wildcat in scandinavia.

Yes, because the "30-06 of Scandinavia" is the 6.5x55 and any long action rifle can be readily converted to 6.5x55 with a chamber reamer.

I should also note that the 6.5x55 is the MINIMUM cartridge for hunting Moose.

Also what should be brought up is what THE most popular chambering in Norway/Sweden is... the 30-06Sprg

quote:

Originally posted by Quintus:
Just picked up a peach of a 6.5-06. I have wanted one for years and this one is a gem. The question I have is why has no one commercialized it? Cheap brass, easy to load for, perfect capacity to bore ratio, and with the 6.5 craze where it is right now it just seems like a no-brainer. I thought maybe that was why Winchester let Norma steal the thunder on the 6.5x284, but now years later no 6.5-06 or Ackley introduction. Sure would be nice if Nosler would make the brass.

Good question. We got the 6.5 Creedmoor, Winchester magnum, .264 Winchester, .260 Remington, etc. Why not a 6.5 Winchester? Too close to the .270 (.277)? Who knows. I think the round would stick. 6.5 Remington? Hmmmm. Might shadow the .260 Rem or kick it down a notch. I'm sure they have their reasons.

I have a 25-06 and a 270 I guess if I could find a free market 6.5-06 at a good price I would have one of those too.

A friend of mine has a factory rem 700 6.5 mag with a 24 inch barrel.I think remington built about 750 of these in the late 60s. It is absolutely brutal on whitetails with a 100gr ttsx.
Shoots very flat and accurate. I agree that the model 600 and 660 18 and 20 inch barrels were a poor choice for this round.Never had a chance

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I have a 25-06 and a 270 I guess if I could find a free market 6.5-06 at a good price I would have one of those too.

Me too if the action was worthy.

The same argument can be said about the 338-06, ballistically awesome but just not popular enough.

quote:

Originally posted by Captain Finlander:
The same argument can be said about the 338-06, ballistically awesome but just not popular enough.

6.5-06 and a 338-06.. What a fantastic pair of matched rifles that would make..