Interesting, I find that with 156gr Deerheads the 6.5se is more than enough for anything in the UK, foxes to big Red stags and Sika. I also have a .308 and there isn’t a noticeable difference at POI.
6.5CM V's .270Win
- Thread starter North Stalker
- Start date
Interesting, I find that with 156gr Deerheads the 6.5se is more than enough for anything in the UK, foxes to big Red stags and Sika. I also have a .308 and there isn’t a noticeable difference at POI.
200yds? Those of us that shoot deer routinely at double that distance and more would suggest that power is nice to have, but shot placement is far, far more important. And therein lies the challenge for the individual shooter, to work out (a) how much power he can handle whilst guaranteeing accuracy, and (b) where best to shoot the animal so that it collapses very quickly.
Sadly in far too many cases in my experience, power has a proportional relationship to accuracy, one goes up whilst the other goes down! And again in far too many cases guys tend to aim for the biggest part of the deer and pay far too little attention to anatomy.
For UK and New Zealand shooting, a 300lb deer is a big deer. And big deer deserve respect. However, that respect must not be paid in purely power terms, the shooter must be able to handle his rifle and understand how to kill the animal cleanly. There is a tangible terminal performance deficit if a powerful bullet is placed into the rear lungs, when compared to a less powerful bullet placed in front of the heart in the hilar zone. One will cause the animal to run, the other is considerably less likely to run and instead collapse on the spot.
The ideal performance window for the average guy chest shooting deer in the 200-400yd+ range with a regular centrefire, is a bullet weight of 130-170gr and a muzzle velocity of 2,700-3,000fps. If you are working within those parameters give or take, you know deer anatomy and you’re a half decent shot, the big deer is dead in short order. You can go lighter and precision shoot for CNS, or heavier and faster for longer range clout, but I reckon the vast majority of all the deer shot anywhere in the world in the last 12 months will have been with rifles that fit those parameters.
Bigger is never automatically better.
Sadly in far too many cases in my experience, power has a proportional relationship to accuracy, one goes up whilst the other goes down! And again in far too many cases guys tend to aim for the biggest part of the deer and pay far too little attention to anatomy.
For UK and New Zealand shooting, a 300lb deer is a big deer. And big deer deserve respect. However, that respect must not be paid in purely power terms, the shooter must be able to handle his rifle and understand how to kill the animal cleanly. There is a tangible terminal performance deficit if a powerful bullet is placed into the rear lungs, when compared to a less powerful bullet placed in front of the heart in the hilar zone. One will cause the animal to run, the other is considerably less likely to run and instead collapse on the spot.
The ideal performance window for the average guy chest shooting deer in the 200-400yd+ range with a regular centrefire, is a bullet weight of 130-170gr and a muzzle velocity of 2,700-3,000fps. If you are working within those parameters give or take, you know deer anatomy and you’re a half decent shot, the big deer is dead in short order. You can go lighter and precision shoot for CNS, or heavier and faster for longer range clout, but I reckon the vast majority of all the deer shot anywhere in the world in the last 12 months will have been with rifles that fit those parameters.
Bigger is never automatically better.
Odders
Well-Known Member
The 6.5x55 has terminal energy in plenty, especially with the 150-180gr bullets used in the Nordic states. It's favoured for taking European elk FFS!
Not sure if that is true. I think the 6.5x55 is seen marginal for the Elk by most. Only those that have no other rifle is it seen as ok. (or in Sweden). Vithavouhri had a lovely article in one of their reloading manuals about shooting Elk in Finnland never even mentioning the 6.5x55 but more down the lines of 7.62x54 being marginal and rather using a 9.3x62 for the job. A little common sense.... Anyone who tells me a Swede (or 6.5 CM) is right for an Elk is in my book a fool and I would not take any advise from them again.
Just because the hunter is not able to handle recoil of a proper rifle one should not let animals suffer. Just because many are not capable of building a stronger recoiling rifle that will still shoot well.
My take is if your can't handle a rifle that suits the game.... don't go after that game, go rabbit shooting instead.
edi
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
You're right, the Swede will handle anything in the UK with ease and you don't need the 156 gr bullets either, I've tried them a few times but found them just too loopy for my liking, never got one back though, all perfect pass throughs.
I've used the 140 gr stuff in both calibers for a good while, does a good job too, still using it in the 270 and plan to carry on using it until someone tells me I can't but last season I moved to 120 gr copper in the 6.5, again, so far so good, only got one back.
On neck shots there's nothing to choose between the calibers but for chest hits the 270 is way ahead on effect, at least that's been my experience with the ammo I use.
As for 270 vs 308 vs 6.5, I think I'll leave that particular discussion for a long cold wet night in front of the fire, complete with passionately held and diametrically opposed views,at least 2 mates and a half decent whiskey. Should pass an hour or two
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure it's favoured, there's a lot of discussion re banning it for the bigger stuff. It got to be the minimum legal requirement using the 156 gr bullet for boar, elk and I think bear because there were thousands of them out there.
In Sweden the minimum bulletin weight for moose/ elk is 156 gr, which is why Sako load bullets in that weight in .270.
The boring old 30/06 with 180 gr bullets seems to be top choice among the older crowd ( the ones that turn up wearing overalls liberally daubed with farm yard muck and a road workers hi vis jacket ) generally chambered in a ratty old Husqevarna or Tikka, the younger guys all have Blasers with bright orange plastic stocks and in a truly awesome variety of calibers they'll also be wearing pristine Harkilla everything, including jocks.
Most 6.5x55, unless they have 24-26" barrels don't make the energy limit required with 139 grain bullets. With bullets over 155 grains the limit drops to 2200 k/j and the Swede is legal, even with shorter barrels. Most over here agree that the swede works on elk, just not always optimately.
You’re being far too black and white Edi. You’ve got a real chip on yer shoulder about the Swede and the old soft shooting ammo with crap bullets you fellas used to get in Ireland, and I think it clouds your judgement. Yes it was crap ammo and I totally get it, but honestly mate you’re barking up the wrong tree. I know a couple of professional Swede shooters here, I’ll tell them they are fools, see what they say! One of them is the fella whose pictures I’ve posted on here before, he controls the Eastern Bay of Plenty sambar herd in the commercial forestry blocks, that’s his job, 40 odd years in professional deer control, and he uses a 6.5x55. And those mature sambar stags are freakin’ enormous, much heavier than reds and there’s no suffering involved, or foolishness. He used to use Sierra bullets I think but now its ELD-X at 2,850 ft./s. Take a look again at the gralloch photos - utter devastation, right where it matters.
There’s bugger all power difference between a modern .308 150gr and a 6.5 143gr, in home loaded form they both run give or take at the same velocity. At 100yds no elk, sambar or anything else is going to know the difference. There’s no need to get onto the whole bigger bullet, bigger hole thing again, or anyone else about the high SD of the 6.5. It’s all about where the bullet strikes and it’s trajectory through the animal, that’s all.
Elk are just big heavy deer, no kevlar or carbon fibre, they are not immune to mid weight bullets hitting them at typical hunting rifle impact speeds. They are no different to any ungulate, careful shooting with a mid-power rifle and they’re down in short order. Interesting what our resident Norwegian says about the attitude towards the Swede there eh. I wonder what the muzzle energy of Brian’s sambar busting ELD-X is.
Suggesting a large cervid shooter is a fool for using a 6.5 wouldn’t win you many beers at the bar down here mate, 6.5s in many different forms are used for all the big animals and have been for decades. 90% of the 6.5 shooters I know directly and indirectly are hand loading their cartridges to extract hard hitting power matched with excellent penetration. What’s not to like??? Time to move on from that argument I think.
I know and fully respect your preference for .30 cals, but it simply isn’t the be all and end all of shooting large deer.
While we’re arguing, have a hunt for the photo of the heavy as red stag I posted a few days ago, shot with the baby 6.5 from 200m+, the Grendel.
Having consulted this for my dissertation research, I believe page 4 has the information you might need.
https://www.face.eu/sites/default/files/norway_en.pdf
I have both 6.5CM, & 6.5x47, and used to have a 270.
The CM is home loaded with 143gn ELD-X running circa 2875fps, and is very accurate. It's a Tikka Tictac, ok for long distance, but heavy to carry around.
The 270 was home loaded with 130gn BT, 61gn of 4831sc, at circa 2950fps. Good accurate rifle, did it's job.
However, I got a bug for a 6.5x47, and the 270 went. Best choice I'd made in a long time. Extremely accurate with Sierra 130gn, and 129gn ABLR, which it throws at 3015fps, with just 43gn of RS60.
It's very efficient, accurate, and a dream to shoot.
I'm sure the 6.5x55 will be similar, as will the CM, running the 129gn. I just think the 270 is well past it's sell buy date. Good, but well surpassed.
The CM is home loaded with 143gn ELD-X running circa 2875fps, and is very accurate. It's a Tikka Tictac, ok for long distance, but heavy to carry around.
The 270 was home loaded with 130gn BT, 61gn of 4831sc, at circa 2950fps. Good accurate rifle, did it's job.
However, I got a bug for a 6.5x47, and the 270 went. Best choice I'd made in a long time. Extremely accurate with Sierra 130gn, and 129gn ABLR, which it throws at 3015fps, with just 43gn of RS60.
It's very efficient, accurate, and a dream to shoot.
I'm sure the 6.5x55 will be similar, as will the CM, running the 129gn. I just think the 270 is well past it's sell buy date. Good, but well surpassed.
I shoot a 270, 6.5-284 and a 6.5x47. They will all do the job. I would say the 6.5-284 is the best out of the lot but it's not a fair comparison because the 270 is factory rifle using factory ammo. The x47 is factory rifle using home loads.
I would say in order of priority is the following, shot placement, bullet design and linked to design is bullet speed and therefore terminal effect.
No use having high power if you cant put that power where you want it. I have seen a deer hit in the back foot with a 3006 by a client, the shot didn't kill it but the dog did.
Bullet design. I developed a home load for a 260 that was really accurate. I thought these just couldnt fail. Well they did if it was a rib to rib shot. It was a pencil hole in and out. They were fine if it was head, neck or high shoulder. So i moved away from them
I have used 130 sst in the 270 and these were relly good killers. Almost all deer were bag flops. I am now forced to use copper ammo in this. They do kill but not as good as the sst.
I would say in order of priority is the following, shot placement, bullet design and linked to design is bullet speed and therefore terminal effect.
No use having high power if you cant put that power where you want it. I have seen a deer hit in the back foot with a 3006 by a client, the shot didn't kill it but the dog did.
Bullet design. I developed a home load for a 260 that was really accurate. I thought these just couldnt fail. Well they did if it was a rib to rib shot. It was a pencil hole in and out. They were fine if it was head, neck or high shoulder. So i moved away from them
I have used 130 sst in the 270 and these were relly good killers. Almost all deer were bag flops. I am now forced to use copper ammo in this. They do kill but not as good as the sst.
That's correct.
delta wolf
Well-Known Member
What powder are you using with the cm?
It is an interesting debate.
I am in the fortunate position of shooting deer every week using my 6.5x55 and .308win. This is everything from Muntjac through to very big Fallow and the occasional Red (mainly fallow), from high seats and also on foot/sticks with ranges from 50m to 250m. In all honestly I change my mind about which calibre is the most effective almost weekly and in truth the fact is that both are as good as each other. If I do my bit then they will produce effective kills with either an instant drop (normally from head/neck shots) or short runs from HL shots on Fallow and Reds. I rotate my rifles so that both get regular use and I can genuinely say that there really isn’t any substantive difference at the business end from 150gr SPBT out of a .308 compared to a 156gr Deerhead out of a 6.5x55.
Here is the thing that no one ever seems to accept or give proper weight to and which also applies to all of the pointless threads about calibre X vs calibre Y. The biggest factor in effective kills is the person pulling the trigger. Not just bullet placement or choice of bullet or even range and wind drift. It’s about the hunter having the skills, knowledge and humbleness to be able to stalk to a range that they know is within their capabilities, assessing the conditions and knowing what the impact of the environmental factors could have, understanding angle of entry and exit to hit the right spot on the way through and being humble enough to know when the shot is outside their capability or comfort zone or just knowing it doesn’t feel right and walking away.
Maybe if more of us just got out and learnt our craft and honed our skills in the real world we would be more able to accept that there are many different calibre’s that all do basically the same thing perfectly well.
I am in the fortunate position of shooting deer every week using my 6.5x55 and .308win. This is everything from Muntjac through to very big Fallow and the occasional Red (mainly fallow), from high seats and also on foot/sticks with ranges from 50m to 250m. In all honestly I change my mind about which calibre is the most effective almost weekly and in truth the fact is that both are as good as each other. If I do my bit then they will produce effective kills with either an instant drop (normally from head/neck shots) or short runs from HL shots on Fallow and Reds. I rotate my rifles so that both get regular use and I can genuinely say that there really isn’t any substantive difference at the business end from 150gr SPBT out of a .308 compared to a 156gr Deerhead out of a 6.5x55.
Here is the thing that no one ever seems to accept or give proper weight to and which also applies to all of the pointless threads about calibre X vs calibre Y. The biggest factor in effective kills is the person pulling the trigger. Not just bullet placement or choice of bullet or even range and wind drift. It’s about the hunter having the skills, knowledge and humbleness to be able to stalk to a range that they know is within their capabilities, assessing the conditions and knowing what the impact of the environmental factors could have, understanding angle of entry and exit to hit the right spot on the way through and being humble enough to know when the shot is outside their capability or comfort zone or just knowing it doesn’t feel right and walking away.
Maybe if more of us just got out and learnt our craft and honed our skills in the real world we would be more able to accept that there are many different calibre’s that all do basically the same thing perfectly well.
Last edited:
RS60
I agree with most of what you say, but I think you're missing a massive reason people choose one calibre, or brand of rifle over another.
The vast majority of people on here, are not professionals buying a "tool" to do a job, even though every rifle needs to do this. The purchase is far more emotive, like the difference between a builder, etc' buying a work van, or most people going out to buy a new (to them) car.
I think that’s a really good point and it’s the same in most sports. I used to be a mod on a carp fishing forum and the most emotive and argumentative threads would be about kit...this rod/reel vs that rod/reel etc. Often their would be bailiffs on there saying just learn to be a better angler but it never stopped the insane number of threads about this vs that.
Similar threads
