6.5x55 for all deer

[JH83]

Sounds like you're putting it in the wrong place. Where you aiming? Furthest I've had a roe run was a few yards and im amazed it ran that far. That was with the eldm and the sst is worse

I used to use those and they generated runners-some really bad. Chronographed them and they were well off the stated velocity. This was through a 26” custom barrel. After this I went down the reloading route as they were apparently the fastest factory offering and still poor.

 

[Ratel]

Spot on Mike. I’ve still got a .243 and .308 but the former doesn’t do non-toxic in the right weight and latter is a bit punchy for me now. So 6.5C and a bun is the favoured option now

Winchester do an extreme point non toxic 95gr 243 round. I'm growing a bun but I still won't touch a 6.5 CM, seen them run too far with chest shot.

 

[Muir]

No chambering kills like one used by a person who knows how to use it well. -Muir

 

[Norfolk Deer Search]

No chambering kills like one used by a person who knows how to use it well. -Muir

Wise words

 

[Scotty99]

I would go for the 30-ought-6 as well. Use the 6.5 for Muntjac and Roe and the ought-6 for fallow, sika and reds. I used to have the same two barrels for my Mauser M03 and felt I had all the bases covered in all circumstances. Plus you can use the ought-6 for boar and if you ever get the chance plains game in Africa.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

I used to use those and they generated runners-some really bad. Chronographed them and they were well off the stated velocity. This was through a 26” custom barrel. After this I went down the reloading route as they were apparently the fastest factory offering and still poor.

If I've misread it my bad, I was under the impression they were reloads!

 

[hendrix's rifle]

Winchester do an extreme point non toxic 95gr 243 round. I'm growing a bun but I still won't touch a 6.5 CM, seen them run too far with chest shot.

Ironically the most deer ive had run was with my 7 rem mag. The 6.5cm dropped everything with authority up to decent red hinds. Bullet choice for your application and work everything else around that. The amax in the rem mag was the incorrect bullet for my application so I subsequently spent a lot of time on my knees in sitka finding deer

 

[owenlee]

Sounds like you're putting it in the wrong place. Where you aiming? Furthest I've had a roe run was a few yards and im amazed it ran that far. That was with the eldm and the sst is worse

I can assure you, it’s not going in the wrong place!!

 

[KimE]

6.5 x 55mm is the traditional Scandinavian moose calibre.

A big bull moose can weigh over 1,800 lbs.

A big Exmoor red stag might weigh 400 lbs.

l think you’ll be OK.

maximus otter

A big bull moose in Sweden are 300-350kg carcass weight (~60% of live weight). The biggest I shot with a 6,5*55 were a 220kg cow moose, one shot dead after 20-30m.

 

[KimE]

I wouldnt label the `06 as large.

If your main quarry are roedeer it is large.

 

[John Gryphon]

A big bull moose in Sweden are 300-350kg carcass weight (~60% of live weight). The biggest I shot with a 6,5*55 were a 220kg cow moose, one shot dead after 20-30m.

My own bull hanging wasn't weighed but old timer Swedes suggested a 1200 lbs live weight. The 6.5 did it.
The more I study those hams the bigger it is lol.

 

[hendrix's rifle]

My own bull hanging wasn't weighed but old timer Swedes suggested a 1200 lbs live weight. The 6.5 did it.
The more I study those hams the bigger it is lol.

View attachment 448388

Bet you had a monster steak off that

 

[enfieldspares]

I have said this before and I will say it again.

All these 6.5x55, 7x57, .30/06, .303, 8x57 are former military cartridges from the early 20th Century. All were the result of much work in realising that something with a bullet of a minimum weight of 10 grams (154 grains) and 6.5mm (.264") would kill men heavily clad in greatcoats, webbing and leather harness at ranges out to 1,000 yards using fully jacketed bullets.

And by the timeline of the epoque they came about in to inflict fatal harm on horses if the shot was delivered to the right spot. Be those cavalry horses or heavy horses drawing guns and limbers. Have little or no doubt that they will kill any and all deer out to a quarter mile with expanding bullets if you place the shot right.

Enough said? The formula be that the Swedes, the Spanish, the Americans, the British or the Germans varies only in detail. In the broad picture it's anything of a baseline of 154 grains of .264" diameter at 2,400fps works and as long as your are there as a minimum for each input you are getting something that works.

Factor in expanding sporting bullets and you've only but increased how well it works.

 

[Mungo]

I have said this before and I will say it again.

All these 6.5x55, 7x57, .30/06, .303, 8x57 are former military cartridges from the early 20th Century. All were the result of much work in realising that something with a bullet of a minimum weight of 10 grams (154 grains) and 6.5mm (.264") would kill men heavily clad in greatcoats, webbing and leather harness at ranges out to 1,000 yards using fully jacketed bullets.

And by the timeline of the epoque they came about in to inflict fatal harm on horses if the shot was delivered to the right spot. Be those cavalry horses or heavy horses drawing guns and limbers. Have little or no doubt that they will kill any and all deer out to a quarter mile with expanding bullets if you place the shot right.

Enough said? The formula be that the Swedes, the Spanish, the Americans, the British or the Germans varies only in detail. In the broad picture it's anything of a baseline of 154 grains of .264" diameter at 2,400fps works and as long as your are there as a minimum for each input you are getting something that works.

Factor in expanding sporting bullets and you've only but increased how well it works.

As true as all this is, I think a key difference is that with military objectives, you don’t mind if it takes a minute or two for the target to die (in fact, this might be preferable given the disruption they might cause while doing so).

With a hunting round, you really prefer the target to drop on the spot.

I think this is where the feeling that the non-magnum 6.5s are a bit marginal comes from: they are beautifully accurate, easy to shoot, and will kill. But things have a tendency to wander off a bit before falling over.

I shoot a Creedmoor, and love it. But I’m not under any illusions: it is not as emphatic a killer as things like a .270 (or a magnum 6.5). I keep distances moderate, and think twice before shooting sika deer in re stock 10 minutes before last light!

 

[Cris]

As true as all this is, I think a key difference is that with military objectives, you don’t mind if it takes a minute or two for the target to die (in fact, this might be preferable given the disruption they might cause while doing so).

With a hunting round, you really prefer the target to drop on the spot.

I think this is where the feeling that the non-magnum 6.5s are a bit marginal comes from: they are beautifully accurate, easy to shoot, and will kill. But things have a tendency to wander off a bit before falling over.

I shoot a Creedmoor, and love it. But I’m not under any illusions: it is not as emphatic a killer as things like a .270 (or a magnum 6.5). I keep distances moderate, and think twice before shooting sika deer in re stock 10 minutes before last light!

Unless you are going to be 100% sure of a head or neck shot 10 minutes before dark on the edge of any cover, you run the rusk of a runner no matter what caliber. To that end would anyone think of doing just that, and there is never the 100% certainty is there?

 

[Mungo]

Unless you are going to be 100% sure of a head or neck shot 10 minutes before dark on the edge of any cover, you run the rusk of a runner no matter what caliber. To that end would anyone think of doing just that, and there is never the 100% certainty is there?

True.

But the probability of runners, and the distance they run, is substantially higher with slower rounds.

I have data on this and it’s very clear.

 

[Ratel]

True.

But the probability of runners, and the distance they run, is substantially higher with slower rounds.

I have data on this and it’s very clear.

A 45/70 is a slower round and affects the distance they run, not substantially a very long distance.

 

[John Gryphon]

By using a more powerful round and breaking two shoulders the hunter wont have runners.

 

[tackb]

I shoot a Creedmoor, and love it. But I’m not under any illusions: it is not as emphatic a killer as things like a .270 (or a magnum 6.5). I keep distances moderate, and think twice before shooting sika deer in re stock 10 minutes before last light!

factory loads , 270 130gr sst 3060 fps , 6.5 creed 129 sst 2950 fps , due to the better creed BC the difference is even less at 200m

i cant imagine that the difference is that marked unless coloured by bias ?

 

[John Gryphon]

factory loads , 270 130gr sst 3060 fps , 6.5 creed 129 sst 2950 fps , due to the better creed BC the difference is even less at 200m

i cant imagine that the difference is that marked unless coloured by bias ?

What are the foot pounds on those two loads?