Why the 6.5 Creedmoor?

[Brasso]

Ok, it's a good round. But why is it so popular all of a sudden? There have been several comparable 6.5mm cartridges available for years. 6.5x55 Swede, the .260 Rem, the .264 Mag., etc. And all of these out perform the Creedmoor at basically the same overall size cartridge. So what's the deal with the Creedmoor? What is its advantage that's making it so popular lately?

And secondly, does anyone have a Ruger Scout Rifle in this caliber? Opinions?

 

[22/45 Fan]

The advantage of the Creedmore is it's long neck. That allows the case to hold heavy, long bullets securely so they "start" well aligned in the chamber.

 

[ditto1958]

Partly it’s true that it’s the latest and greatest craze. But the other part is that those long and skinny bullets fly flat and straight and are very, very accurate.

 

[Ray Newman]

I think a great deal of the "why" pertains to what shooters want or perceive they "need" to be in the winner's circle.

Saw this happen in Black Powder Cartridge Rifle Silhouette. Over the years, I watched the match results and the .45-70 was kicking butt. Then one year, the national match was won by a Sharps .45-2.4" (erroneously called a .45-90). The next year, match results reflected an increased use of the .45-2.4". Same the same with the .40 calibre rifles.

The other parts of the"why" are better ballistics and down range performance.

 

[Dranrab]

The round was designed from the ground up to be accurate. I can't explain the technical details, but I have read about it and understand. Hornady also invested time in developing accurate factory ammo for it. Match grade ammo that you could buy over the counter. It was designed so that heavy for caliber, high BC bullets would work in a short action. Rifle manufacturers developed affordable accurate rifles for it, and the round took off. It was a brilliant marketing move coupled with technical excellence in the manufacture of rifles and ammunition. For 95% of what 95% of the people use them for, it won't do anything a 260 or 6.5x55 won't do. There's no need to rush out and sell your 257 Roberts, 25-06, 270 or 7mm08, but if you are looking for a rifle in 24-28 caliber, the Creedmoor makes a lot of sense as a starting point.

 

[Rocdoc]

Never knew much about them or considered one until the K77RSI version came to the table

 

[pisgah]

Why the Creedmoor? One word -- marketing.

Yes, the comparatively long neck allows for longer/heavier bullets and theoretical improved accuracy at extreme long range -- an attribute that 99.9% of the folks who buy it will never use. But of course, to read the hype you'd think it was the be-all to end-all, even though it really does nothing that ain't been done -- and that is the very definition of marketing.

Not to say it's a bad cartridge -- but I won't be buying it. I already have a 6.5X55 and a 6.5 BRM that nicely fill the niche.

 

[22/45 Fan]

Why the Creedmoor? One word -- marketing.
Not to say it's a bad cartridge -- but I won't be buying it. I already have a 6.5X55 and a 6.5 BRM that nicely fill the niche.

Two other words---match success. The Creedmore has proven itself in numerous matches. So, if you want to get started in long range precision shooting it's an excellent choice.

If that's not your intent than there is absolutely no reason to buy one given what you already own.

 

[Rockrat]

Plus lighter recoil for some people

 

[kmoore]

As a NM shooter and Smallbore ISU and NRA. When someone wins with a new style or new anything item many will copy it and think they will also win. That cartridge was developed to give another edge over others and it works. Does it work so good you should ditch your 260 Remington match rifle at the national champion matches, no. But, if your going to buy the newest latest greatest then yes. Read up on how and why it was developed. Then decided do you need one. Why do you buy a new rifle? caliber, brand, style, need? or just want one. For me, now that I gave up winning medals at matches. I just wanted one because I did not have one and my wallet was full of money.

 

[BigBlue]

Most of our gun choices fall into the want category more than our need category. Give me a .22 LR, a .30-06 and a 45/70 and I could in the future take any game that I've taken in the past. The thing is that I like to fill in the blanks with wanted rifles. Therefore a .22 mag., .223, .243, 6.5 Creedmoor, .270, 7mm-08, .280, .308 and a .44 mag. have crept into the cracks. Wow I need, excuse me, want a .33 or a .35!

 

[grobin]

Well try the .338 Lupua. Savage makes a very nice rifle at a reasonable price-Ruger should chamber the precision in it!

The other 6.5s were not by design but by accident.
If I owned one I would not consider the Creedmore unless it is for competition. If I didn't I'd buy a Creedmore.

 

[COSteve]

Deleted

 

[kmoore]

That's a interesting cartridge. I have watched but, never shot rounds that where sub sonic into the target. It is not a way to win a match. Here's my question if I was going to use it. What is the bullet drift vs the 6.5. In the past the lighter bullets always had more drift. That is another way to not win a match. The add stated it has less drift than others in it's class.
But, no mention what they think is it's class. I will make a guess they mean .224 or AR semi autos not the 6.5, 260 rem etc.

 

[COSteve]

Deleted

 

[COSteve]

Deleted

 

[kmoore]

Well, that tells us the facts. For me there is not much difference, for some that 10 inches difference at 1000 yds may make them stay away.
My days of match shooting is also over. I really liked shooting the AR15s in the NM course but, we needed to use only iron sights and that short sight radius on the ARs compared to the M14s and even the M1s would give me problems at the 600 yd line. If I still shot, I might use the AR at the 200yds and 300yds than go to a M1A at 600yds in 308.

 

[picketpin]

How does that tell you anything??? How do "comparing" the two using different bullets of different weights and different speeds??

If you are going to compare the 6.5 Creedmore then use the same information and the other 6.5s. I own one rifle in 6.5 Creedmore a #1 "V". It will NOT shoot anu bullet other than light for caliber as fast as my #1S in 264 Win Mag. It might be "better" bore balanced but if reasonable recoil, high velocity and impact on big game I'll stick to my 264 Min Mag.

There is nothing WRONG with the Creedmore BUT it's sole advantage is it can be fired in an AR. Not being a BLACK rifle guy it simply has no particular use in MY battery.

When comparing the newest, great, fastes etc most people fail to add/subtract the 150 fps+ tha can be documented just between a "fast" barrel and a "slow" barrel using with everything equal other than the actual bore of the barrel.

As for the longer neck, ok fine but how and if you can actually use all of it is dictated by OAL based on the magazine and the throat in an individual rifle. Throated long the the bullet will have to be seated out. So length has more to do with grip as opposed to actual placement in the chamber. Any issue can/is negated by inline seating the bullet.

IMHO only it's marketing and this one will probably survive longer than many of ten years ago crop of NEW cartridges most of which are now gone, simply because it'll work in an AR and thus others have hopped on the band wagon to sell more rifles.

RWT



t

 

[kmoore]

It is a answer to a question I brought up. "Wind drift". A big factor, by all means not the only factor in long range shooting a target but, a big factor. When match shooting the type that the 6.5 was designed for. Wind Drift is a big deal, speed (faster then the speed of sound at target) not so much bullet weight, not so much caliber and drop. Some would include recoil. I am talking about a full match rifle shooting paper targets not a hunting rifle in this information.

 

[ndcowboy]

The BC (Ballistic Coefficient) of 6.5 Hornady ELD-X bullets in 143 grains is .625! If you are trying to reach out there a long ways, that is an important number.

I have a 6.5 Creedmoor in a Thompson-Center Compass and I have a .243 in a Ruger Hawkeye. The Hawkeye is a better rifle, but once I get past about 450 yards, the 6.5 just shoots truer, even with the crappy T/C trigger.

 

[ndcowboy]

How does that tell you anything??? How do "comparing" the two using different bullets of different weights and different speeds??

If you are going to compare the 6.5 Creedmore then use the same information and the other 6.5s. I own one rifle in 6.5 Creedmore a #1 "V". It will NOT shoot anu bullet other than light for caliber as fast as my #1S in 264 Win Mag. It might be "better" bore balanced but if reasonable recoil, high velocity and impact on big game I'll stick to my 264 Min Mag.

There is nothing WRONG with the Creedmore BUT it's sole advantage is it can be fired in an AR. Not being a BLACK rifle guy it simply has no particular use in MY battery.

When comparing the newest, great, fastes etc most people fail to add/subtract the 150 fps+ tha can be documented just between a "fast" barrel and a "slow" barrel using with everything equal other than the actual bore of the barrel.

As for the longer neck, ok fine but how and if you can actually use all of it is dictated by OAL based on the magazine and the throat in an individual rifle. Throated long the the bullet will have to be seated out. So length has more to do with grip as opposed to actual placement in the chamber. Any issue can/is negated by inline seating the bullet.

IMHO only it's marketing and this one will probably survive longer than many of ten years ago crop of NEW cartridges most of which are now gone, simply because it'll work in an AR and thus others have hopped on the band wagon to sell more rifles.

RWT



t

If you are comparing a .264 Win Mag to a 6.5 Creedmoor, you can't discount the recoil difference.

A 140 grain bullet @3200 fps out of a .264 is over 19 ft/pounds of recoil.
A 140 grain bullet @2850 fps out of a 6.5 is about 13 ft/pounds of recoil.
Both of these are calculated out of an 8.5 pound rifle. That is a significant amount of difference if you are shooting multiple rounds.

 

[DixonCreekDrifter]

Second Question. Had been watching the Ruger Scout rifle for over a year and when I saw one in 6.5 Creedmoor I checked the bank balance and put the money on the counter. I had a 300 short magnum in a Browning rifle and never liked anything about it except the short action, so the Creedmoor was the opportunity to have a hunting rifle in 6.5 and a short action. Working up the 6.5 was not a problem as I had on hand several bullets and powder selections as I had built a 6.5 06 on a Mauser action and a Shilden barrel. That rifle is a bench queen and still needs a scope that pushes the ability of the rifle. Set the Ruger scout rifle up with a 2x scope in the scout position and started working up loads. The scout is easier to shoot than the 6.5 06 and has been much easier to hand load for. I knew the ability of the bullets and realized the scope was limiting the ability of the Ruger. With a 2016 deer hunt coming up, I swapped the 2X for a Burris variable 1.5-7, zeroed the new optics with 142 grain bullets and went hunting. At about 200 yards the west Texas deer dropped at a solid hit and we have enjoyed venison this spring and summer. Changes I have made to the rifle before the hunt were replacing the military flash hider with a STD (Simple Threaded Device) flash suppressor to protect the threads, changing the lightweight digital stock with a Ruger laminated stock, purchasing and using a 5 round mag and adding a basic sling. I could have purchased any Ruger rifle in the 6.5 Crdm, but the scout just looked like fun. As for the 2x scope, it sets on a S&W 22 rimfire auto pistol and is a hoot to shoot.

Looking for an extended magazine release for the scout, anyone have one or know of one being made?