6.5 Creedmor more popular than .300 Blackout?

[eastbank]

we here are just about all shooters, hunters or target. the difference as i see it is both have different requirments, where a regular hunter may be satisfied with 1.5-2" groups at 100 yards and be shooting at mostly under 300 yards, a hunter who takes to long range hunting and the long range target shooter requires better groups and that takes time and better bullets and equipment to get there. just about any caliber in a rifle that will throw a decent weight bullet at 2800-3000fps will do the regular hunter to the 300 yard mark, but the long range hunter-target shooter will need a much more accuret rifle. and you don,t have to be super bright to see that and getting into a pissing match helps no one at all. eastbank.

 

[Zoogster]

I think 6.5CM is a fine cartridge if you want to maximize accuracy in an AR-10, and have an AR that is accurate enough (most were just a few years ago, but the push towards cheaper in the last year means you can't take that for granted anymore) that you are measuring tiny groups at over 500 yards and plan to regularly shoot most of your rounds through that firearm at such distances.

For competition that makes more sense.

For the typical shooter it may not, because it comes with other trade offs.
Including much lower barrel life. You on average get less than half the barrel life of a .308 from thick heavy barrel and sometimes closer to a 1/3 and for a couple inches of accuracy at distances the average person does not shoot often, that may not make sense.
Shooting at a decent pace the barrel wear accelerates even more from the additional heat.
Barrel profile also plays a role, and a lighter thinner barrel will heat up faster and start accelerating wear more than a thick heavy profile like many competition shooters use.
Well many people like lighter weight handy AR-10s, and a thinner barrel profile is exactly what the non competition shooter will typically have.


If you build a highly accurate .308 you can shoot 2-3x as many rounds before that precision accuracy drops off and it is time to be looking for a new barrel.

Then you have ammunition availability. You can buy .308 everywhere, and get brass everywhere, and it is a NATO cartridge available around the world and used extensively in our own military.
And that is without including the loss of energy at short and medium ranges, a .308 puts more power on target at the ranges many will be shooting.

The 6.5 is better at what it does, but what it does may not be better than what .308 does for most of the market.

 

[CoalTrain49]

The 6.5 is better at what it does, but what it does may not be better than what .308 does for most of the market.

I have to agree with that.

If you're shooting 500> you probably should be using a 6 or a 6.5 mm something.

For the average shooter 500> just isn't something they will spend a lot of money on because the cost of ammo and rifle easily doubles from the start. You also have to have a facility to do that which most of us don't.

A few months ago two guys had their new Ruger precision rifles at our range. They were set up on the 200 yd steel targets and every time they rung the 18'' steel they got really excited. I'll let you draw your own conclusions there.

The reason that all of the new precision rifle mfg's offer them in .308 is because that is still the most common medium-long range cartridge and the one most shooters are likely to want. That could change and likely will over time. Everything evolves over time just like the 308 replaced the 06. I honestly don't think anything will change much though until the military gets behind a new cartridge.

 

[Llama Bob]

Including much lower barrel life.

No, the difference in accurate barrel life is very small. Besides, differences in barrel life generally make up only a small part of shooting costs.

Also, 6.5CM (or 6CM) is generally cheaper to shoot ACCURATELY than .308.

 

[CoalTrain49]

No, the difference in accurate barrel life is very small. Besides, differences in barrel life generally make up only a small part of shooting costs.

I think that is totally dependent on how much you shoot. I purchased a new bolt rifle 6 months ago and easily have 500 rds thru it already. I think I'm at the lower end of the scale of rounds down range for target shooters. A friend of mine shoots that much in 3 months. At a rate of 1K/year a Creedmoor barrel will be history in 2 years. There is a downside whether or not you want to admit it. Spread the $400 cost of barrel replacement over 4 years or 2 years, or just don't shoot it that often, your choice.

 

[CraigC]

I'm always confused when folks bring up cost in these discussions as if that argument favors the .308. I shoot a decent amount of .308 and 6.5 CM, and honestly .308 is almost always more expensive for me to load, this is especially true of the pricey extra heavy bullets you have to use in the .308 to make it buck wind like a relatively standard 6.5 load. For me, the cases cost the same, primers are the same and the amount of powder used is pretty much the same with the CM using a tiny bit less. Decent bullets are by far the largest cost, and at least around here, within brands and types of bullets, heavier pretty much always equals more expensive. Sure you could buy cheap trash .308 and run it through your precision rifle, but what's the point? If I'm pulling the trigger on either my 6.5 or my .308, there will be a decent bullet on top of a carefully prepared load in the chamber.

Internet protocol would call for comparing match grade loads in the cartridge you're deriding to cheap ball ammo in the one you're espousing.

The 6.5 is better at what it does, but what it does may not be better than what .308 does for most of the market.

All depends on the individual's needs and wants.

A few months ago two guys had their new Ruger precision rifles at our range. They were set up on the 200 yd steel targets and every time they rung the 18'' steel they got really excited. I'll let you draw your own conclusions there.

I can usually hit an 18" target at 200yds with a Single Six, who cares? It does the sport absolutely no good to look down our noses at shooters who are less skilled or experienced.

From what I can tell, it's the folks who deride the 6.5 who use the most exaggerated examples in the barrel life argument.

 

[Llama Bob]

I think that is totally dependent on how much you shoot. I purchased a new bolt rifle 6 months ago and easily have 500 rds thru it already. I think I'm at the lower end of the scale of rounds down range for target shooters. A friend of mine shoots that much in 3 months. At a rate of 1K/year a Creedmoor barrel will be history in 2 years. There is a downside whether or not you want to admit it. Spread the $400 cost of barrel replacement over 4 years or 2 years, or just don't shoot it that often, your choice.

Here's the real math: a .308 is good for 2000-2500 rounds generally. A 6.5CM is good for 1800-2200. So if we take the middle value for each, and assume barrels cost $600 installed, then our per-shot cost for barrel replacement is 26.66 cents for the .308 and 30 cents for the 6.5CM. The difference is 3.3 cents per shot. That's more than made up for by the bullet cost difference.

6.5CM really is slightly cheaper than .308 to shoot accurately, with everything taken into account. 6CM is about the same as 6.5CM or maybe a couple cents cheaper. If you can afford to shoot any one of them, you can afford to shoot the rest.

 

[CraigC]

And the barrel on the Ruger Precision Rifle is user-replaceable. Which also gives you the opportunity to upgrade to a better, shorter, longer, lighter or heavier tube.

 

[Llama Bob]

A few months ago two guys had their new Ruger precision rifles at our range. They were set up on the 200 yd steel targets and every time they rung the 18'' steel they got really excited. I'll let you draw your own conclusions there.

It sounds to me like they're not very good shots, but they're working on it. And having fun doing it.

 

[Llama Bob]

And the barrel on the Ruger Precision Rifle is user-replaceable. Which also gives you the opportunity to upgrade to a better, shorter, longer, lighter or heavier tube.

This is a feature that's going to be BIG in the next 10 years. I've got it on my LMT gas guns, and when I got a hair to try 6CM in a mid-length platform, I just bought a new tube, swapped them in about 5 min (headspace was known-good), and was shooting the same day. Turns out the 6CM is a GREAT gas gun cartridge, but I never would have found out if I'd had to buy an upper or do serious work to install it. If I want to swap back, it's another 5min and setting the scope back to the old zero.

 

[CoalTrain49]

It sounds to me like they're not very good shots, but they're working on it. And having fun doing it.

I guess that's one way to look at it.

Buying a Corvette to sit in rush hour traffic might be another.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Here's the real math: a .308 is good for 2000-2500 rounds generally. A 6.5CM is good for 1800-2200. So if we take the middle value for each, and assume barrels cost $600 installed, then our per-shot cost for barrel replacement is 26.66 cents for the .308 and 30 cents for the 6.5CM. The difference is 3.3 cents per shot. That's more than made up for by the bullet cost difference.

6.5CM really is slightly cheaper than .308 to shoot accurately, with everything taken into account. 6CM is about the same as 6.5CM or maybe a couple cents cheaper. If you can afford to shoot any one of them, you can afford to shoot the rest.

That's some pretty fuzzy math you got going on there.

Most people report 4-5K with their 308 barrels.

Must be one of those alternate facts I hear so much about these days.

 

[Llama Bob]

Most people report 4-5K with their 308 barrels.

At that level of accuracy loss, the equivalent would be 3000-3500 for the 6.5CM.

It's easy to get confused, because .308 shooters tend to be much less picky about their barrels than 6.5mm and 6mm shooters. But there really isn't THAT much difference.

 

[CoalTrain49]

At that level of accuracy loss, the equivalent would be 3000-3500 for the 6.5CM.

It's easy to get confused, because .308 shooters tend to be much less picky about their barrels than 6.5mm and 6mm shooters. But there really isn't THAT much difference.

The Army must be confused then. Here is the story of the M24 sniper rifle (7.62 NATO).

The actual rifle requirements for accuracy were .35 MOA from a machine rest and according to Major John Mende (ret.) this accuracy had to be maintained to 10,000 rounds. He stated, “Interesting side note was there was a 10,000 round requirement for the barrel to maintain the original accuracy. In fact after some 10,000 round tests we discovered the accuracy improved. A few barrels were tested past 20,000 and accuracy never went below the original accuracy requirement.” I would have to say that is very impressive! The US Army barrel life states 5000 rounds and that sounds like they are being conservative.

http://www.snipercentral.com/u-s-army-m24-sws/

 

[Llama Bob]

The actual rifle requirements for accuracy were .35 MOA from a machine rest and according to Major John Mende (ret.) this accuracy had to be maintained to 10,000 rounds.

That has not been the experience of most shooters. That said, if it turns out to be true I won't complain since I have both Rock Creek (original OEM for the M24) and Remington 5R (current supplier for the M24) barrels. Unfortunately I see no reason to expect them to last any longer (or less long) than other barrels of similar material. There is nothing magic about Mike's rifling machine.

That said, the numbers I provided are consistent with general competition experience. For someone who's pretending to know so much about competition rifles, you keep knowing nothing about them. I would say that's "interesting" but perhaps a better commentary is "internet".

 

[Llama Bob]

I completely applaud the all American .308 and am not discrediting it or trying to convert anyone, but I do think the 6.5 cartridges have a place in hunting the larger sized game.

Absolutely. It's quite likely more moose have been taken with 6.5mm than any other caliber.

 

[eastbank]

and more white tail have likely been taken with the 30-30 in north america and more moose have been likely taken in canada with the 303 british. and the locations have had more to do with what rifle calibers are used. not much of a point there. eastbank.

 

[Llama Bob]

and more white tail have likely been taken with the 30-30 in north america and more moose have been likely taken in canada with the 303 british. and the locations have had more to do with what rifle calibers are used. not much of a point there. eastbank.

Of course it's location dependent. The point is that heavy 6.5mm is very suitable for game of that size. There's been PLENTY of experience at this point, and it works great.

 

[eastbank]

i agree that 6.5 caliber bullets will kill moose with no problems as any regular calibers will when they are hit right. i shot deer with 160gr round nose hornady 6.5 bullets out of my .260 remington at 2600 fps, and it was hell for going thru them and i would not feel under gunned using it on moose at reasonable ranges. if you are in sweden the 6.5x55 would have been the military round and as such would have been surplused to the public at good prices, as the same thing in the US with the 3006 and the same in canada with the 303 british. as a matter of fact the .303 british round has killed probley more species of animals world wide than any other and it still is being used in africa today. last june i shot several .303 rifles at a range in south africa eastbank.

 

[CraigC]

Buying a Corvette to sit in rush hour traffic might be another.

Is that somehow an indictment against the Vette? Does it make them a victim of marketing? Or did they just spend THEIR money on whatever the hell they wanted?

A) Very few people use their vehicles to their utmost potential. Fewer still even care to, ever. I'm giving serious thought to trading up my Charger R/T to get an SRT or Hellcat. Do i consider it a waste of money if I never go 200mph? Absolutely not.

B) It is not the only reason to purchase a vehicle. Do you think I have to pull 16,000lbs to enjoy my Ram 2500? Uh, no.

C) Who cares? Why does it matter why people buy anything, be it guns or cars? It's none of your business anyway.

 

[lawboy]

I see things a little differently. I own three 300BLK firearms; AAC/Remington Micro 7, 8.5-inch AR15 pistol, 16-inch AR15 carbine. I don't own a 6.5 Creedmore, yet. For me, the 300BLK is a modern 30-30. Similar performance (not identical) envelope as far as power, accuracy and realistic engagement distances, but in a cartridge designed around modern firearms, ie. semi-autos and micro bolt actions, and designed to use spitzer bullets rather than roundnose bullets that are needed for a tubular magazine. the 300BLK is cheap on power and bullets because for supersonic loads it works best with lightweight bullets and for subsonic it works well with heavy lead bullets, both of which are cheaper than mid- to heavy-weight jacketed or monolithic bullets. In addition, brass is free as you can pick up LC 5.56 brass at ranges round here by the hundreds for free in a matter of minutes. I also like it because of the mild report and recoil, and because it is extremely handy for practicing field position shooting at a reasonable (not cheap) cost, using a rifle set up like a more powerful hunting rifle. I can easily shoot 100-150 rounds offhand with my Micro 7 in a day without physical or financial discomfort, but would not do that with a 30-06 or similar using full-power ammunition. I could, but why beat up on the shoulder and wallet?
So, the 6.5 Creedmore has more power and a broader operating envelope when engagement distances are concerned. But to me, that is not the entire story. Note that I did mention "operating" or suppressor use with the 300BLK. I do neither.

 

[CoalTrain49]

That said, the numbers I provided are consistent with general competition experience. For someone who's pretending to know so much about competition rifles, you keep knowing nothing about them. I would say that's "interesting" but perhaps a better commentary is "internet".

If you have posted on the internet, you are the internet.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

I think most of you boys forgot this is supposed to be about the .300 Blackout....

 

[LoonWulf]

We already argued about that one lol

 

[Davek1977]

"A few months ago two guys had their new Ruger precision rifles at our range. They were set up on the 200 yd steel targets and every time they rung the 18'' steel they got really excited. I'll let you draw your own conclusions there."


and what on earth does a sample size of two shooters at one range have to do with ANYTHING being discussed here? You can't assume those two shooters were remotely "typical" shooters, or that most people wold be using their precision rifles to hit 18 in gongs at 200 yards. Two foolish folks at a range means just that....there were two novice or poor shooters shooting a RPR one day. SO? how does that quantify into being a useful observation in a discussion debating the merits of the 6.5 and/or .308 cartridge?