I saw that Nosler on their last catalogue has included this cartdrige. Everybody praise it, so why Remington, Ruger, Winchester, etc don't offer rifles chambered for the 6,5-06 ??

Because it's similar to the 270 win ??? or that we already have the 6,5x55 ??

There are so many similar cartdriges out there that this can not be the reason...so which is the real reason ??

Do you think that in the future this cartdrige will be offered by the major gun companies ??

Thanks
L

quote:

so which is the real reason ??

You got me Lorenzo.....This is one cartridge I'd own in a heartbeat....I might even make it anyway as a wildcat!

Lets guess a bit.....
1. the only .264 diameter cartridge to do well in the US is a 6.5 X 55....and then because of a lot of very cheap rifles bought in and probably a lot of cheap ammo as well..... All others have flopped to some degree.....260 Rem, 6.5 Rem Mag, .264 Win Mag, none of them have prospered much at all....and all of them fine rounds!

2. You said it.....similar to the .270 Win and the .25-06.....hard to justify!

Something to remember.....those of us that post here are not the customers.....we're a small minority that has to express an interest in the cartridge....and the vast majority of US shooters don't have any idea about it.....and don't really care.....The know the very popular rounds.....the .30-06, the .270, the .243 and a few others.

This much I can say....If I was at Federal when the .338 Fed came out, I'd have lobbied long and hard for the 6.5-06 instead.....It just makes a lot more sense to me.....but then I'm not representative of the American buying public.....sai-la-vie!

I would buy a 6.5-06 over a 270 any day. But then I would have bought a WSM if they would have made a .257 but they went WSSM with that. I may have bought a 6.5 WSM but no they do 7mm and 8mm even though they tried to disguise the 8mm as a .325WSM

vapodog,

I understand that "we" are a small number, but "we", usually buy and own more rifles than the rest of the people around there...

So we must multiply our number by 4 or 5 times...that makes us a LOT of "us" willing to buy a reasonable gun/cartdrige combo rather than those small extra short propietary magnum cartdriges that really confuse me

L

quote:

Originally posted by Lorenzo:
vapodog,

I understand that "we" are a small number, but "we", usually buy and own more rifles than the rest of the people around there...

So we must multiply our number by 4 or 5 times...that makes us a LOT of "us" willing to buy a reasonable gun/cartdrige combo rather than those small extra short propietary magnum cartdriges that really confuse me

L

Lorenzo.....never in my life has a firearms manufacturer ever asked me what I wanted....not only that, one representing the arms companies has never come on the primary forums (such as this) and started such a thread..... "WHAT DO YOU WANT?"....somehow they seem to think they know the customer.....and clearly it's not folks that post here.....

How they decided to bring out SAUMs and RUMs and WSMs and WSSMs and the like is totally beyond me.....I think a lot of us here would bite on a 6.5-06.....and in a hurry!

I think it is just too hard to get another 06 case off the ground. It took forever to get the 25-06 off and running in a commercial cartidge and by rights it should have put the 243 out of business, and yet many people still haven't even HEARD of the 25-06! I really wish they would chamber the 260WSM. That case is perfect for the 6.5s and slow powders. I like the 264, but it would be nice to lose the belt. I guess if the big gun companies listened to us, many of the small nitch gunmakers would be out of business, so maybe it's for the better.

The 6.5-06 sounds like a fine answer----but what is the question? But what do I know? I think the same about the 25-06 and look how many of them have sold.

I think it would be a great cartridge considering most of the 6.5x55 factory ammo is loaded down to accommodate for older military rifles. I would guess another contributing factor is that the cartridge falls into this gray area between the small bores and the medium bores. You've got the 25-06, which will cover deer down to varmints and then you have the 270 (and 280), which will cover the deer up to most big game. As great as the 6.5-06 would be, I think a lot of the "Average Joe" hunters would wonder why it's better than their 270 (or more so, wonder what it is).

quote:

Originally posted by carpetman1:
The 6.5-06 sounds like a fine answer---- but what is the question?

The question is:....Given that the .25-06 is a superb deer hunting round as well as pronghorns and other big game under 400 pounds, what is the perfect round?.....How do I improve on the .25-06 by simply adding 20 grains to the weight of the bullet and not increasing the diameter more than a very few thousandths!....and still keep recoil lower than the .270 Winchester!

Why 6.5-06 when we already have a good European 6.5x65 RWS ?

quote:

Originally posted by Lorenzo:
I saw that Nosler on their last catalogue has included this cartdrige. Everybody praise it, so why Remington, Ruger, Winchester, etc don't offer rifles chambered for the 6,5-06 ??

Because it's similar to the 270 win ??? or that we already have the 6,5x55 ??

There are so many similar cartdriges out there that this can not be the reason...so which is the real reason ??

Do you think that in the future this cartdrige will be offered by the major gun companies ??

Thanks
L

No. There just isn't enough demand to justify prodution and marketing costs for a major manufacturer. What a few of us would buy is not related to the mainstream gun buyer.

The 280 Remington is still struggling to stay in production and the 338-06 is one that hovers right behind the 35 Whelen. The 6.5-06 doesn't have the mainsteam press popularity either so, it would have to overcome that issue as well to reach a large enough group of gun buyers to become financially viable.

Because I'm not willing to buy something so close in size and performance to my 270.

That 270 excuse is one I use all the time. I like my M700 and the 270 Winchester round. There isn't much of a reason to buy anything else.

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

Originally posted by Lorenzo:
vapodog,

I understand that "we" are a small number, but "we", usually buy and own more rifles than the rest of the people around there...

So we must multiply our number by 4 or 5 times...that makes us a LOT of "us" willing to buy a reasonable gun/cartdrige combo rather than those small extra short propietary magnum cartdriges that really confuse me

L

Lorenzo.....never in my life has a firearms manufacturer ever asked me what I wanted....not only that, one representing the arms companies has never come on the primary forums (such as this) and started such a thread..... "WHAT DO YOU WANT?"....somehow they seem to think they know the customer.....and clearly it's not folks that post here.....

How they decided to bring out SAUMs and RUMs and WSMs and WSSMs and the like is totally beyond me.....I think a lot of us here would bite on a 6.5-06.....and in a hurry!

Absolutely! I own a ton of rifles from all the major manufacturers and not once have I received a poll in the mail or have a customer service rep ask me for input on future lines of rifles.

You would think manufacturer reps would troll sights such as this and present topics meant to garner information on what the shooting public really wants to see.

quote:

Everybody praise it, so why Remington, Ruger, Winchester, etc don't offer rifles chambered for the 6,5-06 ??

I 'spect it would be as popular as the .17 Rem.

quote:

Originally posted by Jim C. <><:

quote:

Everybody praise it, so why Remington, Ruger, Winchester, etc don't offer rifles chambered for the 6,5-06 ??

I 'spect it would be as popular as the .17 Rem.

AWESOME..

quote:

Originally posted by BISCUT

Absolutely! I own a ton of rifles from all the major manufacturers and not once have I received a poll in the mail or have a customer service rep ask me for input on future lines of rifles.

You would think manufacturer reps would troll sights such as this and present topics meant to garner information on what the shooting public really wants to see.

Herein lies the key statement.....because they don't!.

The prime reason businesses fail (barring infant mortality) is failure to listen to their customers!

vapodog--not to argue--to me I cant tell any difference in recoil with a 25-06 and 120 grain bullet vs a .270 and 130 grainer.

Ruger is offering the 6.5 creedmoore in the hawkeye line and #1 line. Since they are partnered with Hornady on the catridge developement

Savage is offering the 6.5-284 in a couple of models this year. F-class target #18155, and 111 long range hunter #18896

Soooooooo,...they are kind of listening well see how they fair with John Q. Public

With this developement potentially the 6.5-06 may be offered at some point in the future,but more likely it will keep it from being a reality as a standard chambering.

It is odd that the 6.5-06 is not offered. The 6.5x284, 6.5 Grendel, and 6.5 Creedmore came out, you'd think the 6.5-06 would offer a lot more economy of scale since it would be based on the most commonly used case out there. Every ammo mfgr is already set up for 25-06, 270, 280, 30-06, 35 Whelen - this would seem a natural addition. Maybe it will.

Remington brought out the 6.5-308 some years back. It's known as the "260 Remington". Pretty darned efficient little chambering!! Came to life as a 1000 yard BR cartridge! Using 120 or 140 grain bullets, kills deer(vermin) graveyard dead at extended ranges damn near as well as the 25-06! BUT can hold up a bit further than the tried and true 25-06 (GOD'S GIFT TO RIFLEDOM!!) due to aerodynamics and physics and bullet selection..............If the manufacturers had really been thinking and wanted to sell a boatload of new rifles,(Winchester and Browning did with the 300WSM)one of the biggies would have brought out a 25 or 6.5 WSM or 25 or 6.5 SAUM!! My personal opinion is either one based on the SAUM case would have been better than either on the WSM case but even REMINGTON didnt have the balls to keep promoting the SAUMS!! But then again look at history of Remington!! There are no 222 REMMAG chamberings offered by them(Superior to the 223),there are NO 6MMREM offerings from them (SUPERIOR TO THE 243win)they only offer one variation of the 25-06 and the 260 is about devoid of offerings from them!! They come up with superior chamberings and then prostitute themselves into offering inferior stuff and languish in the squalor of their decisions!!I like the 260 Remington!! No need for the 6.5-06!! GHD

quote:

Originally posted by groundhog devastation:
No need for the 6.5-06!! GHD

Although I might agree with you, Me thinks that your infatuation with the 25-06 eliminates you from rendering an unbiased opinion. roger

Iam going to tick off a whole bunch of people on here, but there is nothing to be gained by chambering a rifle in 6.5-'06. Vapo is right on the money...

The .270 offers everything the 6.5-'06 would offer, including a heavier projectile. It also eclipses the .25-'06, because there aren't really a lot of choices in 120-grain bullets that will hold together at the velocities the .25-'06 launches them, and last time I checked that was the heaviest 25-caliber bullet available.

And now, for my best chance at getting flamed, there isn't enough difference in the 7MM RM and the .270 to really justify buying one if you own the other, which incidentally I do. I have a BDL in both .270 and 7RM. But just for grins, check ballistics on the two. There just isn't that much difference.

Okay, boys, fire away.

Why-because they like to make money from their products. 90% of the production would be offered at clearance prices on CDNN within a year I reckon. It would be cost prohibitive to make the 15-20 that people would buy. Just pick the smith of your choice and send him an action and voila you are there. PH

Recently I was thinking about how Winchester came up the the 270, which uses a unique bullet diameter, when they did back in 1925. They were already making 7x57 cartridges so they had .284 bullets, and they were making the 256 Newton, which used .264 bullets, so the .277 had to require new equipment. Were they trying to market something no one else did? Could be, as the 280 Ross came out two decades earlier, and the 7x64 Brenneke in 1917. Could the leaders at Winchester have known about the 7x64 and made the decision to go with a "new" bullet diameter? Had Winchester not done that, Jack O'Connor may have been touting a 265 or 266 Winchester instead of the 270...

will someone please compare/contrast the 6.5x284 to the 6.5x06 for me so I don't have to look it up?

I'm wondering what both would do with a 140 bullet in terms of speed and bbl life. I understand the 6.5x284 is hard on bbls.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
will someone please compare/contrast the 6.5x284 to the 6.5x06 for me so I don't have to look it up?

I'm wondering what both would do with a 140 bullet in terms of speed and bbl life. I understand the 6.5x284 is hard on bbls.

Close to two peas in a pod, Doc. The 6.5x.284 can be used in a shorter rifle but that may be a mistake as heavier bullets extend into the powder room. There is no reason one should be harder on barrels than the other. As a hunting rifle I doubt if either would be used enough to burn out a barrel. I'm sure I would burn out sooner than either of them. roger

Thanks Roger. I have an extra LW bbl in 6.5 8 twist and was thinking of doing another 6.5x284 but would consider the .06 version just to have something different. Lapua brass available in 30.06 could be necked down and neck turned for a good fit. Hmmmmm.

Thoughts?

quote:

but would consider the .06 version just to have something different. Lapua brass available in 30.06 could be necked down and neck turned for a good fit. Hmmmmm.

As long as the 6.5-06 is already a wildcat and frankly little hope of it becoming a SAAMI standard round, why not look to the 6.5 Hawk or the 6.5 Gibbs.....still on the .30-06 case but a bit more interest!

quote:

Originally posted by johnnyreb:
Recently I was thinking about how Winchester came up the the 270, which uses a unique bullet diameter, when they did back in 1925. They were already making 7x57 cartridges so they had .284 bullets, and they were making the 256 Newton, which used .264 bullets, so the .277 had to require new equipment. Were they trying to market something no one else did? Could be, as the 280 Ross came out two decades earlier, and the 7x64 Brenneke in 1917. Could the leaders at Winchester have known about the 7x64 and made the decision to go with a "new" bullet diameter? Had Winchester not done that, Jack O'Connor may have been touting a 265 or 266 Winchester instead of the 270...

I've read that Winchester was making 6.8x57 cartridges for the Chinese military several years before making the 270 Win, so they had 270 bullet-making dies available.

Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by vapodog:

quote:

but would consider the .06 version just to have something different. Lapua brass available in 30.06 could be necked down and neck turned for a good fit. Hmmmmm.

As long as the 6.5-06 is already a wildcat and frankly little hope of it becoming a SAAMI standard round, why not look to the 6.5 Hawk or the 6.5 Gibbs.....still on the .30-06 case but a bit more interest!

don't know anything about them. where can I find comparison info? what modifications are needed to .06 cases?

Maybe not in South America where Lorenzo lives...but in the USA, the typical person who would buy a non specific marketed caliber, isn't the average Joe Schmoe who buys his rifles and ammo at Walmart...

Despite all that is available, most of the market still is a 243, 308, 270, 30/06, 30/30 7Rem Mag, 300 Win Mag world...all other calibers combined make up less than 40% of the market...

for most of us who read and participate in forums like this, shoot a lot more than the average.. we hand load, and we buy or have custom rifles built..

myself, who cares what comes out of the big makers in a turnkey package? as long as I can purchase the bullets, the powder and the brass when needed, and I can get a barrel of about any contour I want, in about any caliber I want..

GHD/Charlie mentioned the 260 Rem, a caliber near and dear to my heart...'the experts' say it is a dying cartridge... commercially maybe..for we handloaders and rifle purists, nothing can be further from the truth...

mine have never fired a factory round down their barrels..

if ya want a 6.5/06... get the action you want, and have a custom barrel made and spun on her..

its all about Marketing and the 6.5/06 doesn't make the grade in the marketing dept, regardless of how good a cartridge it is otherwise..

Thank gentlemen for answering my question.

Obviously my point of view is different from yours as I live in a country where the biggest caliber someone can own without to much hassle is the 6,5 mm everything else from there you need a special collector licence from the army that every year you have to present all the paper work again.

I have that licence so I also own a 6,5 x55, a 270, a 30-06 and a 300 wm.

But the idea of a 6,5-06 in a country where you have thousands of military 30-06 brass and plenty of 25-06 brass makes a LOT of sense.

You can push a 130 gr Nosler AB at nearly 2,900 or more...it makes a good alternative for those who can´t own bigger calibers as the 270.

L

quote:

I live in a country where the biggest caliber someone can own without to much hassle is the 6,5 mm everything else from there you need a special collector licence from the army that every year you have to present all the paper work again.

I'd be ordering a 6.5-06 reamer pronto!

how does 6.5-0.6 compare to a 6.5 WSM?

Can't you take a 270 WSM and size it down to 6.5 with the right die?

I'd be interested in velocity and bbl life in the 6.5WSM, as well as feeding problems, etc.

Ingvar: "Why 6.5-06 when we already have a good European 6.5x65 RWS ?"

Well, who the heck can get that brass or the dies?!

I've got a 6.5 Swede and the 260Rem. I'm probably going to barrel my next VZ24 action for the 6.5-06. What I can't figure is why guys go for the 257 Weatherby when you can find better bullets in 6.5mm and push a heavier bullet almost as fast.

The 6.5-06 was a commercial round. It's essentially the same as the 256 Newton, (though not interchangeable). I built a 6.5-06 on a mauser action just a few years ago. It just seemed to make sense to me. Brass is easily resized from 25-06 and 6.5mm bullets are highly effiecient with a good selection from several manufacturers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.256_Newton

quote:

Originally posted by Lorenzo:
Thank gentlemen for answering my question.

Obviously my point of view is different from yours as I live in a country where the biggest caliber someone can own without to much hassle is the 6,5 mm everything else from there you need a special collector licence from the army that every year you have to present all the paper work again.

I have that licence so I also own a 6,5 x55, a 270, a 30-06 and a 300 wm.

But the idea of a 6,5-06 in a country where you have thousands of military 30-06 brass and plenty of 25-06 brass makes a LOT of sense.

You can push a 130 gr Nosler AB at nearly 2,900 or more...it makes a good alternative for those who can´t own bigger calibers as the 270.

L

Lorenzo,

Your argument makes perfect sense. However I would recommend that you go with the 6,5x64 Brenneke instead. The Brenneke case is identical to the 280 Remington case length but uses the same base to should length, shoulder diameter, and shoulder angle as the 25-06 and 30-06 cartridges. Would give you a commercial cartridge…though not readily available outside of Europe…that would easily be formed from the 25-06 (commercial) and 30-06 (military) brass.

quote:

Originally posted by bcp:

quote:

Originally posted by johnnyreb:
Recently I was thinking about how Winchester came up the the 270, which uses a unique bullet diameter, when they did back in 1925. They were already making 7x57 cartridges so they had .284 bullets, and they were making the 256 Newton, which used .264 bullets, so the .277 had to require new equipment. Were they trying to market something no one else did? Could be, as the 280 Ross came out two decades earlier, and the 7x64 Brenneke in 1917. Could the leaders at Winchester have known about the 7x64 and made the decision to go with a "new" bullet diameter? Had Winchester not done that, Jack O'Connor may have been touting a 265 or 266 Winchester instead of the 270...

I've read that Winchester was making 6.8x57 cartridges for the Chinese military several years before making the 270 Win, so they had 270 bullet-making dies available.

Bruce

I own a 256 Newton and a 6.5-06. I also believe that Winchester did not bring out the Model 54 in 256 Newton for two reasons.

1). Companies in those days liked/preferred to bring out proprietary cartridges and not providing another chambering for the 256 Newton would have been to Winchester's benefit vs. the struggling Newton Arms Co.

2). The primary reason Newton shortened the 30-06 case to make the 256 Newton had to do with powder availability at that time. With slow burning powders not available, The optimum case capacity for a 6.5-06 type case vs. the 6.5 bore was the 256 Newton. Same reason the 25 Neider was always considered "overbore" at that time vs. the 257 Bob. By expanding the diameter of to 270, Winchester could build a cartridge (based on the 30-06) that with available powders produced good velocities with no "overbore". Realize that with modern powders today, many cartridges that were "overbore" in the early 20th century are not considered so today.

Barstooler