6.5x55 for all deer

[25 Sharps]

Sharps, the 6.5CM vs 6.5x55 Battle seems to hit you hard. I think Hornady did a great job with the 6.5 CM as well as the PRC range as they did no go overboard in power, even weaker than similar cartridges already in the market. Goal was to achieve an accurate cartridge not the most powerful. Even so the market decided for the weaker 6.5CM cartridge and ran away from the swede/260 etc. Rightly so, they understood the difference. My only gripe is when people start promoting to load to higher than spec pressures. The only reason you want to do that is to achieve higher speeds.... why not buy a rifle/cartridge that achieves what you want within the SAAMI/CIP spec?
edi

As posted above, because you already have the rifle and you want to make the most of it! I bought a 6.5x55 specifically because of its capabilities in a modern action. My 6.5 is also very accurate, every bit as good as the 2 creedmoors I’ve owned.

The debate doesn’t hit me hard, I just don’t see the difference between the cartridges and I’ve owned both for around a decade now, whereas you clearly see the 6.5x55 as inferior. The Nosler data shows they are very comparable.

The fact is in a modern action the 6.5x55 can cope with higher pressures than the cartridge was originally designed for.

You came out with the argument it was limited by weak brass, which is nonsense!

45-70 ruger #1 loads operate at nearly double the pressure of the original black powder, or modern trapdoor equivalents, in the same brass. The difference is the strength of the action, no different with the swede.

You still haven’t answered the question on the brass being the limiting factor for .270 vs .280 either, probably because you know it’s nonsense.

 

[remmy243]

I’ve used the 6.5x55 on all six species
running homloaded 130 grn tmk doing around 2860fps
Is has killed them all
Shot sika stags out to very long ranges no problem
Now running 114gtn yew trees
Getting used to them but so far so good on roe and sika
Home load and Push them on a bit and you will have no problems with it
Killing

 

[ejg]

As posted above, because you already have the rifle and you want to make the most of it! I bought a 6.5x55 specifically because of its capabilities in a modern action. My 6.5 is also very accurate, every bit as good as the 2 creedmoors I’ve owned.

The debate doesn’t hit me hard, I just don’t see the difference between the cartridges and I’ve owned both for around a decade now, whereas you clearly see the 6.5x55 as inferior. The Nosler data shows they are very comparable.

The fact is in a modern action the 6.5x55 can cope with higher pressures than the cartridge was originally designed for.

You came out with the argument it was limited by weak brass, which is nonsense!

45-70 ruger #1 loads operate at nearly double the pressure of the original black powder, or modern trapdoor equivalents, in the same brass. The difference is the strength of the action, no different with the swede.

You still haven’t answered the question on the brass being the limiting factor for .270 vs .280 either, probably because you know it’s nonsense.

Every cartridge is designed to work in a certain pressure range, the case must seal off at the lower end of the pressure range meaning must be flexible enough and also manage the max pressure. It is a pressure vessel. The 6.5x55 Swede is designed to take a max of 3800bar the 6.5 Creedmoor a max of 4350 bar. 3800 vs 4350..... On top of the theory of wall sections and design a new cartridge must undergo very lengthy tests before the final design is released. I presume you did all this with your findings of 270 vs 280 or the pressure increase you suggest for the 6.5x55. Why don't you send your Data collection to the CIP guys for them to correct all their data.
Don't mix up limitations of action strength and limitations of a cartridge case. Big difference.
edi

 

[tackb]

Every cartridge is designed to work in a certain pressure range, the case must seal off at the lower end of the pressure range meaning must be flexible enough and also manage the max pressure. It is a pressure vessel. The 6.5x55 Swede is designed to take a max of 3800bar the 6.5 Creedmoor a max of 4350 bar. 3800 vs 4350..... On top of the theory of wall sections and design a new cartridge must undergo very lengthy tests before the final design is released. I presume you did all this with your findings of 270 vs 280 or the pressure increase you suggest for the 6.5x55. Why don't you send your Data collection to the CIP guys for them to correct all their data.
Don't mix up limitations of action strength and limitations of a cartridge case. Big difference.
edi

i get the feeling you may be wasting your time bringing common sense to this

 

[Tim.243]

i get the feeling you may be wasting your time bringing common sense to this

Yes you are spot on, I liken it to keep filling a 232Bar cylinder to 300Bar stating "well it has a TP of 348"

 

[25 Sharps]

Every cartridge is designed to work in a certain pressure range, the case must seal off at the lower end of the pressure range meaning must be flexible enough and also manage the max pressure. It is a pressure vessel. The 6.5x55 Swede is designed to take a max of 3800bar the 6.5 Creedmoor a max of 4350 bar. 3800 vs 4350..... On top of the theory of wall sections and design a new cartridge must undergo very lengthy tests before the final design is released. I presume you did all this with your findings of 270 vs 280 or the pressure increase you suggest for the 6.5x55. Why don't you send your Data collection to the CIP guys for them to correct all their data.
Don't mix up limitations of action strength and limitations of a cartridge case. Big difference.
edi

What findings with .270 and .280?

Your argument suggests if .280 ammunition is loaded in .270 brass it can be loaded to the higher maximum pressure of the .270, as the brass has been designed and tested for the higher pressure, the only difference in the .280 being the shoulder bumped forward 15 thou. Do you agree with that or is it not the case? (Excuse the pun)

And how does it work with 45-70? Brass designed and tested for circa 24,000 PSI being ok for loads in excess of 40,000 PSI?

 

[Tim.243]

What findings with .270 and .280?

Your argument suggests if .280 ammunition is loaded in .270 brass it can be loaded to the higher maximum pressure of the .270, as the brass has been designed and tested for the higher pressure, the only difference in the .280 being the shoulder bumped forward 15 thou. Do you agree with that or is it not the case? (Excuse the pun)

And how does it work with 45-70? Brass designed and tested for circa 24,000 PSI being ok for loads in excess of 40,000 PSI?

 

[tackb]

And how does it work with 45-70? Brass designed and tested for circa 24,000 PSI being ok for loads in excess of 40,000 PSI?

ok fine i'll bite !

the original 45/70 cases were very different to what we have now being drawn copper and thinner hence why if you've ever tried to load black powder into a 45/70 in a modern case you will struggle to get the required 70grs of the original loading in , so will you maybe accept that case design is relevant ?

if thats not enough evidence how about the sig fury round ? it runs at 80000psi and do you know why ? The case !!!

so why don't you try getting some original cases and loading them to ruger number 1 levels and see how you get on ?

 

[25 Sharps]

I mean, @Laurie knows a thing about reloading and internal ballistics so I’m going to go with him on this.

A reply to @ejg from another thread where he was arguing exactly the same thing about pressure limits of brass….

“Every cartridge case is designed to only take a certain pressure range.”

Not so. This applies to some designs of case, but not others. For instance the European CIP MAP for the 6.5mm Grendel is >8,000 psi higher than that of the US SAAMI value. The American setting is geared entirely to the use of the cartridge in the AR-15 where the 0.441" dia. case-head has arguably pushed the rifle's bolt design and dimensions too far. Likewise the new 6mm ARC is rated at 52,000 psi for the same reason but is based on the very strong Grendel case. These are among many examples of where it is the firearm that determines a pressure ceiling not the case construction and potential strength when better supported.

I've never seen a pressure test to destruction of the 6.5X55 case, but over many years have seen the better made examples by Norma and Lapua serially loaded to pressures in the high 50,000s, I'm sure hitting 60,000 on occasions in modern actions without issues. Case-life in such heavy loads is normally dependent on case-head expansion expanding the primer pocket and is very much in line with that of higher rated cartridges such as 30--06, 308 Win etc from the same makers. That is a single firing of a getting on for unsafe load will see a new case junked, but with stiff but acceptable loads expansion is reduced to levels that allow several firings before brass has to be retired.

My own (match) use of the cartridge saw me adopt a load with 140gn LRBT Berger and Viht N165 (a powder which I consider one of the best for this application) that QuickLOAD calculated as mid to high 50,000s psi, but actually turned out very close to Viht's SKAN maximum for this combination when the company upgraded its 6.5X55 data-set. My MVs would be regarded as being on the low side by many US users however, especially for those who shoot 6.5X55 based wildcats / improved cartridges such as the 'BJI' and must run some serious pressures on Lapua brass.

 

[25 Sharps]

ok fine i'll bite !

the original 45/70 cases were very different to what we have now being drawn copper and thinner hence why if you've ever tried to load black powder into a 45/70 in a modern case you will struggle to get the required 70grs of the original loading in , so will you maybe accept that case design is relevant ?

if thats not enough evidence how about the sig fury round ? it runs at 80000psi and do you know why ? The case !!!

so why don't you try getting some original cases and loading them to ruger number 1 levels and see how you get on ?

Sounds fair and reasoned.

Wikipedia lists the original max pressure as 19000 PSI, CIP pressure as 32000, so presumably this is what modern brass is designed and tested for. So how is there published data out there for 40000+ PSI if the modern brass is only designed for 32000?

.338 lap mage is the same, designed for higher pressure.

So can I use .270 brass in a .280 and run it at higher pressure?

 

[tackb]

Sounds fair and reasoned.

Wikipedia lists the original max pressure as 19000 PSI, CIP pressure as 32000, so presumably this is what modern brass is designed and tested for. So how is there published data out there for 40000+ PSI if the modern brass is only designed for 32000?

.338 lap mage is the same, designed for higher pressure.

So can I use .270 brass in a .280 and run it at higher pressure?

you can do whatever you want you're a grown up , try asking wiki

 

[25 Sharps]

you can do whatever you want you're a grown up , try asking wiki

It’s more hypothetical because if the brass is tested for higher pressure, by Edi’s argument it should be sound.

I do load .280 in .270 brass but that’s more to do with the fact that once fired Norma is about £30/100 and readily available, .280 brass not so much.

I don’t need to load it to sully pressures and kill the brass, I can send a 120 bullet at 3300 fps well inside the 60000 psi limit, that’s plenty for me.

 

[West5575]

The 30-06 was designed to fire a 150 gr bullet at 2700 fps.

I can’t see manufacturers making brass cases that are somehow weaker just because it’s a x55 and not a creedmoor.

That said I in general agree with the idea that there is no reason to hot load a 6.5x55 or 7x57 they do very well within their specs and are more enjoyable (for me) to shoot. A 140 gr 6.5 at 2700 fps is perfect for deer at my hunting ranges. In the US I have to hand load to get that performance and use the CIP specs rather than the SAAMI ones here. I’d be shocked if the US companies even get close to saami max to be honest. I don’t think it has anything to do with the integrity of modern cases though.

If I want to shoot something over 3000 fps I’ll use my 270, but it’s less comfortable and not usually needed for me. Even the 270 is downloaded now. I think it’s to sell more PRCs and the like. Watch in ten years the PRCs will magically slow down and they will roll out the super duper prc or some such.

 

[Mungo]

Watch in ten years the PRCs will magically slow down and they will roll out the super duper prc or some such.

PRC has already slowed down.

Current factory loads are at least 100fps slower than they were when it first came out.

 

[Scipio]

PRC has already slowed down.

Current factory loads are at least 100fps slower than they were when it first came out.

Good reason to reload, then

Another thing to perhaps consider, in the 6.5x55s favor is that it is well suited for (vs lead) longer non lead bullets with its typical long throats and pretty fast twist barrels, and that when going the typical 10-20 grn in bullet weight vs lead ammo, your 6.5x55 case capacity cartridges are , potentially, slinging out deer suited bullets at speeds that used to belong to the 280, 7x64, 25-06 and 270 class of cartridges.

Not that one has to chase speed, just for the sake of it, but it is a possibility that is real, and thus worth noting.
A 100 grn non lead solid can within cip pressures be loaded to MVs of 3100-3200 fps, i believe.

 

[owenlee]

I’ve used the 6.5x55 on all six species
running homloaded 130 grn tmk doing around 2860fps
Is has killed them all
Shot sika stags out to very long ranges no problem
Now running 114gtn yew trees
Getting used to them but so far so good on roe and sika
Home load and Push them on a bit and you will have no problems with it
Killing

Could of have your load data for the tmk 130gr please

 

[Overlay]

6.5 good for anything in this country, you can get some heavy ammunition if you want but 140 grn will knock em down 100%

 

[Border]

 

[dggowdy]

It will do the job fine. Choose the rite bullet weight and good shot placement.

 

[John Gryphon]

Perhaps a look at this little beast might sway a few away from the CM and `55.

.277 Fury - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org