Why does the 6.5 Creedmoor Crowd claim the 143 ELD-X as the Bullet that Beats the .270 Winchester?

Newtosavage said:

Yea, but that doesn't fit the manly-man narrative. A life committed to doing things the hard way, and enjoying self-abuse from time to time is the only way you can measure a man.

Click to expand...

You can also measure a man by his boot size and the length of his Duck Dynasty beard, with similar accuracy. Sporting size 11 loafers and a close cropped beard, I've shamefully resigned myself to a life of .22lrs, 6.5 Creedmoors and the like .

Garandimal said:

28" Bbl's are nice on the paper range.

But a PITA in the woods and thickets.

A 22" hunting Bbl will net you ~ 2600 fps.

24.3" Bbl.
​

GR

Click to expand...

Alaskan Ironworker said:

I respect your “new cartridge” which has already existed for a hundred years, but it is not and wont ever be a .270. Only my opinion...

Click to expand...

That anemic .270 can’t hold a candle to a 7mm Remington Ultra Magnum, so I can’t fathom why anyone would ever want to own a .270win when the vastly superior 7mm RUM is on the market.

Who wants dibs on the next rung? Contender hints might be 338-378, 338 Norma, 338 Lapua, but let’s see some creativity...

Can’t get any more lame than these sour grapes threads where guys trot out data on data to no actual point.

Varminterror said:

That anemic .270 can’t hold a candle to a 7mm Remington Ultra Magnum, so I can’t fathom why anyone would ever want to own a .270win when the vastly superior 7mm RUM is on the market.

Who wants dibs on the next rung? Contender hints might be 338-378, 338 Norma, 338 Lapua, but let’s see some creativity...

Can’t get any more lame than these sour grapes threads where guys trot out data on data to no actual point.

Click to expand...

Let me know when we get close to the 50 BMG and I'll be ready to chime in.

Abrams tank... 120mm main gun.

I don’t even know why I’m participating in this stupidity. I like both of them. I own both of them. I shoot both of them. The 6.5 is not better than a 270, nor is a 270 better than a the 6.5. They just are what they are and I don’t care how you want to compare them, and that goes quadruple for the 6.5x55 and 260. The existence of one doesn’t make the other less useful.

The existence of one doesn’t make the other less useful.

Click to expand...

True, but enthusiasm for one makes those who have the other feel insecure about their choice. Probably just need a safe space for a little while so they can recover from seeing the snowflake's enthusiasm over their 6.5 CM.

my point is-was that when hunting the difference in recoil is not a factor for me, if shooting many shots from a bench recoil may enter into it. but my bench rifles are heavy and recoil less than my hunting light weight rifles. the 6mm cm is fast moving up in the long range game with less recoil than the 6.5 cm, so the 6.5 cm will lose some of its appeal to the recoil shy crowd.

Is the 6mm Creedmoor also getting popular for hunting? Is it also praised for helk? Asking a question here, not questioning a choice.

eastbank said:

my point is-was that when hunting the difference in recoil is not a factor for me, if shooting many shots from a bench recoil may enter into it. but my bench rifles are heavy and recoil less than my hunting light weight rifles. the 6mm cm is fast moving up in the long range game with less recoil than the 6.5 cm, so the 6.5 cm will lose some of its appeal to the recoil shy crowd.

Click to expand...

It's not the recoil of the shots taken while hunting that can be a problem, it's the recoil of all the shots taken beforehand. I like to shoot my hunting rifles, both for enjoyment and to become good with them. I have a little over 800 rds through my 6.5 Kimber in the last 3 years, probably about that through my .30-06 in the longer timeframe I've owned it, and several hundred each through my last two .270s. I can shoot cartridges like that quite a bit without getting flinchy or uncomfortable, but much more powerful and I don't practice near as much and consequently am not as good with those rifles. When I'm out hunting, i'd much rather have a moderately powerful rifle I've put several hundred rounds through in my hands, than a big boomer that I'm wary of. Some folks can have it both ways, and I'm happy for them.

Varminterror said:

Can’t get any more lame than these sour grapes threads where guys trot out data on data to no actual point.

Click to expand...

Garandimal said:

6.5 CM 143ELD-X 2600fps 22"Bbl. (Factory = 2640 - (2)20/in = 2600) (42 gr. RL-19)

Wt= 143 [ Recoil - 8.0 lb Rifle = 13.4 ] [ Recoil - 7.0 lb Rifle = 15.3 ]
SD= 0.293
BC= 0.625
MV= 2600
SH= 1.5
ZR= 224/23 [ MPBR(6") - 264 yds ]

Range Velocity Energy Trajectory Come Up (MOA) Come Up (MILS) Wind Drift Wind Drift (MOA) Wind Drift (MILS)

0 2600 2146.0 -1.5 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 (2600 Max. expansion)

25 2565 2088.0 0.1 -0.3 -0.1 0 0 0
50 2530 2032.0 1.3 -2.5 -0.7 0 0 0 <- (2K/2K) Elk Round
75 2495 1976.0 2.2 -2.8 -0.8 0 0 0
100 2460 1922.0 2.8 -2.7 -0.8 1 1 0

125 2426 1869.0 3.0 -2.3 -0.7 1 1 0
150 2392 1817.0 2.8 -1.8 -0.5 1 1 0 (2400 Good expansion)
175 2359 1766.0 2.2 -1.2 -0.4 2 1 0
200 2325 1717.0 1.3 -0.6 -0.2 2 1 0

225 2292 1668.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 1 0
250 2259 1621.0 -1.8 0.7 0.2 4 1 0
MPBR(6") - 264 yds
275 2227 1574.0 -4.0 1.4 0.4 5 2 0
300 2194 1529.0 -6.6 2.1 0.6 5 2 0 (2200 Fair expansion)

325 2162 1484.0 -9.7 2.8 0.8 6 2 0
350 2130 1441.0 -13.2 3.6 1.1 8 2 1
375 2099 1398.0 -17.3 4.4 1.3 9 2 1
400 2067 1357.0 -21.8 5.2 1.5 10 2 1

425 2036 1317.0 -26.8 6.0 1.8 11 2 1
450 2006 1277.0 -32.3 6.9 2.0 13 3 1
475 1975 1239.0 -38.4 7.7 2.2 14 3 1
500 1945 1201.0 -45.1 8.6 2.5 16 3 1 (>1800 Min. expansion)


270 WIN 150NP 2800fps 22"Bbl. (Factory = 2850 - (2)25/in = 2800) (55 gr. IMR 4831)

Wt= 150 [ Recoil - 8.5 lb Rifle = 18.0 ] [ Recoil - 8.0 lb Rifle = 19.2 ]
SD= 0.279
BC= 0.465
MV= 2800
SH= 1.5
ZR= 235/25 [ MPBR(6") - 277 yds ] [ 3.1@100 ~ 250 yd zero]

Range Velocity Energy Trajectory Come Up (MOA) Come Up (MILS) Wind Drift Wind Drift (MOA) Wind Drift (MILS)

0 2800 2611.0 -1.5 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

25 2750 2519.0 0.3 -1.0 -0.3 0 0 0
50 2701 2430.0 1.7 -3.3 -1.0 0 0 0
75 2653 2344.0 2.9 -3.7 -1.1 0 0 0
100 2605 2260.0 3.8 -3.6 -1.0 1 1 0 (2600 Max. expansion)

125 2558 2179.0 4.3 -3.3 -1.0 1 1 0
150 2511 2099.0 4.5 -2.9 -0.8 2 1 0
175 2464 2023.0 4.4 -2.4 -0.7 2 1 0 <- (2K/2K) Elk Round
200 2418 1948.0 3.9 -1.9 -0.5 3 1 0 (2400 Good expansion)

225 2373 1875.0 3.1 -1.3 -0.4 4 2 0
250 2328 1805.0 1.8 -0.7 -0.2 5 2 0
275 2283 1737.0 0.2 -0.1 0.0 6 2 1
MPBR(6") - 277 yds
300 2239 1670.0 -1.9 0.6 0.2 7 2 1

325 2196 1606.0 -4.4 1.3 0.4 8 2 1 (2200 Fair expansion)
350 2153 1543.0 -7.4 2.0 0.6 9 2 1
375 2110 1483.0 -10.8 2.7 0.8 11 3 1
400 2068 1424.0 -14.7 3.5 1.0 12 3 1

425 2026 1368.0 -19.1 4.3 1.2 14 3 1
450 1985 1313.0 -24.0 5.1 1.5 16 3 1
475 1945 1259.0 -29.5 5.9 1.7 18 4 1
500 1904 1208.0 -35.6 6.8 2.0 20 4 1 (>1800 Min. expansion)




GR

Click to expand...

Snicker...

It's crazy how threatened OP feels by a rifle caliber.

Anyway, this is the 30-06 vs 308 debate all over again, only it's their necked down buddies. After much wailing and gnashing of teeth, people kind of figured out that the two were equivalent for any kind of real world hunting and they always get recommended in the same breath. I'm not seeing much of a difference here.

Oh hell. GR posted in bold now. He's really serious.

this is the 30-06 vs 308 debate all over again, only it's their necked down buddies.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

Eastbank - you're absolutely right about not feeling the recoil on hunting shots. I never do and never expect to.

But here's the thing... I shoot my hunting rifles a LOT. Why? Because I am anal about load development and becoming so familiar with my hunting rifles that even in the heat of the moment, I know I can put the bullet where it counts. It's much more important to me to shoot well on live game, than on paper. MUCH. Because I feel I owe it to the animal. And because I hunt on my feet, often in rough terrain and sometimes at altitudes over 10K feet, my hunting rifles are 7 lbs. or less. I'm not sure how many rounds you've put through an '06 in a sub-7 lb. rifle (that's including scope and loaded magazine) but I've put a few hundred through rifles that light, and I can tell you that even with the best recoil pads, after a while it gets damn old. Because I don't want to ever develop a flinch, I look for modern, more efficient hunting rounds than the 100+ year old military rounds that have had their day in the sun (and then some). Believe it or not, with modern powders and bullets and scopes, cartridges like the 7mm-08 and 6.5 CM deliver more killing power with less recoil than ever before. And because I shoot my hunting rifles a lot, calibers like those appeal to me.

If I feel the need to be manly, I have other outlets to do that. But they aren't rifle related.

Garandimal said:

(and the site lacks a content quote function)
GR

Click to expand...

Actually, no, it doesn't.

Frostbite said:

Is the 6mm Creedmoor also getting popular for hunting?

Click to expand...

I’m sure some guys are using it for elk hunting as well, just as guys have used .243win for the same, but it sure worked fine for me on a big Kansas whitetail this winter.

Let me end this argument right here and now

.308


(Lock the thread)

Nature Boy said:

Let me end this argument right here and now

.308 ...

Click to expand...

Bwahahaha! cute.


No.


Clearly, Aught Six. And since we are not backward men, Thirty Aught Six...

Nature Boy said:

Let me end this argument right here and now

.308


(Lock the thread)

Click to expand...

Three-Oh-...*yawn-zzzzzzzzzzzzz

The fast twist and efficient shoulder do more for the 6.5CM than extra case capacity ever did for the .270, at least when talking about larger animals. It's really not even close. There is no equivalent for the .264 160gr Weldcore in .277 that will stabilize in a 1:10" twist barrel. The 150gr and 160gr partitions are lacking in both sectional density and weight retention, and the 150gr A-Frame while it retains weight fine has the usual A-Frame problems and can't be driven very fast. The A-Frame is however probably the best elk bullet in .270 and .270 WSM, but rarely used. The 150gr .277 Weldcore is kind of close, but can't match the sectional density, weight, or BC of the .264 version.

It's nice to see the .270 taking the brunt of losing out to the Creedmoor. It was a remarkably poorly thought out cartridge from day one, and deserves to lose.

Psst! (Hey). Them old guys asleep yet?
(Six and a half PRC.)
(It's like a Two Seventy. With bullets that don't suck...)

Shhh...

Oh, No! They got up to pee and heard me!(kinda)

Grab your detachable box magazines and run before they start reminiscing of buck horn sights and Chuck Connors!

and how many can shoot their rifles out to 500 yards in field conditions to get humain kills on big game animals? 140-6.5cm at 2800fps at 500 yards1934 fps-1162 fpe,, .140-.270 at 2800 fps at 500 yards 1937 fps-1166 fpe. from a 100 zero the drop at 500 yards is 53.7 for the 6.5 and 53.6 for the .270, and the 140 gr .270 can be driven at 3000 fps safely and that puts it at 2099 fps and 1370 fpe at 500 yards with a drop of 45.4 . according to hornadys reloading book, add a pound to you .270 rifle and recoil will be close for both rifles. a foot note, a .260-7mm08-308 can be loaded to give pretty much the same results at 500 yards. use what you can shoot the best with, new or old cartiges.

It's "humane" and you might be surprised how many young guys - even a few with man buns - could shoot circles around the old pharts in field conditions.

Why all the chest thumping? You need a hug?