6.5 Creedmoor Finds Favor with Tactical Competitors
While the venerable .308 Winchester is still the chambering of choice for most tactical shooters, a growing number of tac competitors are switching to the 6.5 Creedmoor (as well as other 6.5mm chamberings such as the 6.5×47 Lapua and .260 Remington). Among the 6.5mm options, the 6.5 Creedmoor offers the advantage of high quality, relatively affordable factory ammo.
Can the 6.5 Creedmoor win tactical matches with factory ammo? Absolutely. Team Hornady’s Tony Gimmellie used Hornady 6.5 Creedmoor 120gr Match ammo to win the Oregon Sniper Challenge, held May 22-23, at the Douglas Ridge Rifle Club in Eagle Creek, Oregon. Tony said, “Hornady’s 6.5 Creedmoor ammo delivered ½ MOA accuracy from [my] POF gas piston rifle, allowing me to stay well ahead of the competition.”
To learn more about the 6.5 Creedmoor, along with the other popular 6.5mm cartridges used for tac comps, we recommend three articles by Accurateshooter.com contributor Zak Smith:
- 6.5 Creedmoor — .260 Done Right?
- 6.5mm Shootout: .260 Remington vs. 6.5×47 Lapua vs. 6.5 Creedmoor
- 6.5×47 Lapua Tactical TackDriver
6.5 Creedmoor vs. the .308 Winchester
In the first article above, Zak explains: “Why 6.5 mm instead of .30 caliber? Put simply, they sling the long, slim, high-BC 6.5 mm bullets at respectable velocity. It duplicates or beats the .300 Win Mag’s trajectory with less recoil than a .308 Win. Compared to the 175 Sierra MK fired from a .308 Win, the 6.5 mm will have 27% less wind drift and about 10 MOA less drop at 1000 yards. Despite a 35-grain deficit in bullet mass, the 6.5 Creedmoor will retain 18% more energy and hit the target 260 fps faster.”
6.5mm Cartridges — Comparative Ballistics Performance by Zak Smith
Put in order of ballistic performance, the 6.5 Creedmoor and the .260 Remington are almost neck-and-neck, pushing the same weight bullets at about the same velocities from almost identical case capacities. The 6.5×47 Lapua in factory form lags by 100 to 200 fps due to less powder capacity; however, it has already gained a reputation for having a strong case that puts up with the high pressures some reloaders push in their custom rifles. The .260 Remington’s main problem for the reloader is lack of high-quality and affordable brass and to date there has only been one factory load produced which was appropriate for serious long-range competition for the non-reloader. The 6.5×47 was designed for intermediate-range competition and very accurate ammunition is available from Lapua; however, these factory loads are at a ballistic disadvantage at long range compared to the .260 Remington and the 6.5 Creedmoor.There will always be those who bash new cartridges, claiming that they don’t do anything better than their favorite cartridge. By this logic, we’d all be shooting .30-06. Put simply, the 6.5 Creedmoor is what the .260 Remington should have been. It looks like Hornady has the right mind-set to make its new cartridge a success in the competitive and practical market, unlike Remington who basically let the .260 languish in a few hunting rifles. The 6.5 Creedmoor enjoys additional case capacity over the 6.5×47 Lapua, which allows better ballistics at a lower peak chamber pressure.
Similar Posts:
- NEW 6.5 Creedmoor Cartridge from Hornady
- Hornady Offers Videos on New Products
- Hornady Match Ammo Reviewed by Brownells
- It’s Official — SAAMI Approves Hornady 6.5 PRC and 300 PRC
- 6.5 Creedmoor vs. Other Mid-Sized .264-Caliber Cartridges
Share the post "6.5 Creedmoor Finds Favor with Tactical Competitors"
Tags: 260 Remington, 6.5mm, Creedmoor, Hornady, Tactical, Zak Smith
I think you are starting to see the gradual shift away from the 6.5mm cartridges in favor of the 6mm. This is occurring at the tactical rifle matches in general as seen at the Tactical Bolt Rifle Competition at NorCal (Sacramento) last weekend.
Six of the top 10 were shooting the .243 Win. while 15 of the top 30 were using some form of 6.5mm.
All of this 6.5 stuff is making me feel really good about my old 6.5×55. If Remington bolt faces were just a little larger, and short actions no so de rigueur, the old 6.5 Swede would be a modern leader. It has always had an excellent record in Europe.
The only time I had some regret about getting a rifle in this chambering was when the available Brass (Hornady) wasn’t holding up to what I was putting it through and it was hard to get hold of. I can’t wait to get my hands on the new .22-250 Lapua brass to form 6.5CM from, the quality and availability issues should be gone now.
Wayne
Hornady’s business plan has never been suspect in my opinion. They intend to push the market on ammunition and keep the supply of components controlled and lacking in supply.
Hornady’s attempt to control the market for this cartridge and components will be a failure when Lapua gets enough of the .22-250 in the pipeline. This has been the major drawback to this cartridge. After my first (and only batch of 6.5 CM), I switched to making cases from the .22-250 Remington.
Best.
Anyone remember the 240 NMC? A 22-250 case that was just necked up and fireformed to straighten out the cartridge walls. Use Lapua 22-250 brass and neck up to 6.5 and have a 6.5 NMC, Pretty much a 6.5-22/250 improved with original 28 degree shoulder. Then you don’t need to rely on Hornady for brass…or lapua for that matter.
I would have said,
“a growing number of tac competitors are switching to the .260 Remington (as well as other 6.5mm chamberings such as 6.5×47 Lapua, .260AI, and 6.5 Creedmoor)”
At our matches here in the Rocky Mountain (and NM) region, I see very very few 6.5 Creedmoor rifles, but the majority of rifles chambered in something other than .308 are straight-up .260 Remington– and I recommend the .260 to practical long-range shooters over 6.5×47, 6.5CM, and .260AI.
-z
if the AR platform the 6.5 makes the most sense, if bolt gun I see no reason not to use the 260 rem or 260AI. I really like the AI for bolt guns except you really need a dedicated fireform barrel and hydroforming is too tedious.