Not hundreds but into double figures and also some reds but enough for me to make an informed opinion on the calibre my mate has had his for approximate 6 years and been all over the country and never had any major runners......
How big is 6.5x55??
- Thread starter charlieg43
- Start date
Not hundreds but into double figures and also some reds but enough for me to make an informed opinion on the calibre my mate has had his for approximate 6 years and been all over the country and never had any major runners......
Thar
Well-Known Member
In terms of muzzle energy it sits above a 243 and below every other commonly used other deer stalking calibre ie 7-08, 308, 270. 30-06.
Anecdotally a friend of mine that I have known for 25 years gave up using his short barrel 6.5X55 on reds stags because of too many runners, although looking back I think he was using too heavy a bullet and not driving it fast enough. My other friend has a comment that” 6.5X55 is his GWP favoured calibre as it knows it will get a few runners to track when somebody turns up with one.”
On the other hand others swear by them, such as Muir, John Robinson, my own opinion and it is just that is most the gents that swear by them in the UK seem to be using 120gns.
The use of the 6.5X55 on moose must be taken in the general context of when the law was made many decades ago. The rifle almost all Scandinavian hunters carried at the time was an ex-military surplus 6.5X55, this was the national service arm it would have been politically unacceptable to specify any other calibre as the minimum. Back then the concerns of animal welfare were not the same as today and in fairness the type of hunting with dogs isn’t the same as how we stalk in the UK. If the USA was setting min’ cal at that time it would have been a 30-06, in Germany 8X57, UK 303. In the UK a 243 is the minimum legal calibre for big rutting red and Sika stags, but most stalkers reach for something bigger.
A lot is often made of the sectional density and ballistic coefficient of the 6.5mm bullets, but none of this is particularly relevant in UK stalking,to give you an idea 130gn 270 and 120gn 6.5 bullets will have almost identical SD and BC. A 308 which has the poorest BC and SD will still put a bullet through a Red stag’s rib cage, with the size of UK game big SD is not needed. At normal stalking ranges velocity will play a bigger part in how flat shooting a calibre is over BC.
If I had to use a 6.5X55 for the rest of my stalking days I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it, perfectly adequate calibre if loaded with a suitable bullet but you could say that about any calibre, me I would follow most the over guys that seem to be happy and run it on 120gns.
I hope that gives a bit of balanced to the post.
ATB
Tahr
Anecdotally a friend of mine that I have known for 25 years gave up using his short barrel 6.5X55 on reds stags because of too many runners, although looking back I think he was using too heavy a bullet and not driving it fast enough. My other friend has a comment that” 6.5X55 is his GWP favoured calibre as it knows it will get a few runners to track when somebody turns up with one.”
On the other hand others swear by them, such as Muir, John Robinson, my own opinion and it is just that is most the gents that swear by them in the UK seem to be using 120gns.
The use of the 6.5X55 on moose must be taken in the general context of when the law was made many decades ago. The rifle almost all Scandinavian hunters carried at the time was an ex-military surplus 6.5X55, this was the national service arm it would have been politically unacceptable to specify any other calibre as the minimum. Back then the concerns of animal welfare were not the same as today and in fairness the type of hunting with dogs isn’t the same as how we stalk in the UK. If the USA was setting min’ cal at that time it would have been a 30-06, in Germany 8X57, UK 303. In the UK a 243 is the minimum legal calibre for big rutting red and Sika stags, but most stalkers reach for something bigger.
A lot is often made of the sectional density and ballistic coefficient of the 6.5mm bullets, but none of this is particularly relevant in UK stalking,to give you an idea 130gn 270 and 120gn 6.5 bullets will have almost identical SD and BC. A 308 which has the poorest BC and SD will still put a bullet through a Red stag’s rib cage, with the size of UK game big SD is not needed. At normal stalking ranges velocity will play a bigger part in how flat shooting a calibre is over BC.
If I had to use a 6.5X55 for the rest of my stalking days I wouldn’t lose any sleep over it, perfectly adequate calibre if loaded with a suitable bullet but you could say that about any calibre, me I would follow most the over guys that seem to be happy and run it on 120gns.
I hope that gives a bit of balanced to the post.
ATB
Tahr
Last edited:
A very well balanced post and as you say with the correct bullet choice it is a very capable calibre I use Barnes ttsx 120gn travelling at around 2800-3000fps it's stopped everything me and my mate have thrown at it but one needs to put time into matching the correct load and it is a good calibre for uk deer IMHO ......
Andy, firstly yes I have used the 6.5 hunting.
The majority of hunters do not or are not allowed to handload, my point, if a cartridge with factory ammo isn't great...why not choose a different cartridge. Problem we had was that for a while our market was flooded with 155gr Lapua mega Elk/Moose ammo, often the only ammo apart from target ammo available forthe swede. This patially lead to the bad repution. The lapua mega's factory data is 2560fps out of a 29" barrel meaning maybe 2400 or less out of a 22" hunting rifle. BC of that round nose is not that great either meaning the bullet will not have much reason to expand at a 200yd shot. Might be able to dump what energy it has left in a very large animal but will leave less energy in a side on heart shot fallow or sika calf than say a 223 with a proper bullet. I would have much more faith in a 2800fps 308 fmj, and yes we used 308 fmj in South Africa many years ago as the standard for smaller game.Of course the 6.5 will perform better with a proper bullet in the 120 -140gr and maybe handloaded over the recomended pressure limit if one is allowed to do so but why the trouble if more suitable cartridges can be chosen. The shelves in our gunrooms are filled with 6.5's which won't sell as many hunters have moved on to other calibres.
edi
Last edited:
j0e_bl0ggs
Well-Known Member
Get hold of this...
Cartridges of the World: A Complete and Illustrated Reference for Over 1500 Cartridges Cartridges of the World: Amazon.co.uk: Frank C. Barnes, Stan Skinner: Books
You will not regret it!
Edi: After reading your post I remember that we had this discussion a couple of years back. No handloading and the proliferation of 156 grain ammo. I will admit, the 156 would be my last choice for small deer. As we have all discussed in the past, the 6.5x55 is one of those cartridges whose internal ballistics were developed for guns of a different era. (ala 45-70) Recently, loading data has reflected that. VV's site has loads that are not for use in the Model 1896 Swedes. Another set of data (I can't recall where) also has the same warning with pressures in the 52-54K range. This changes the face of the 6.5x55, making it look more like the 260 Remington.
In your particular circumstance, perhaps the 6.5x55 cartridge isn't suitable, but that still doesn't mean that it is bad. It just isn't right for you. The 243 that gets used heavily elsewhere for deer is just short of worthless where I live; more of a coyote rifle in many people's opinion, but I'll pull up short of criticizing it's effectiveness in other hands in other places.~Muir
Claret_Dabbler
Well-Known Member
Interesting discussion, and reasonably rational.
Thar and Muir are of course correct. Bullet selection and careful handloading can turn the 6.5x55 into a very versatile beast.
You will hear a lot of criticism in Ireland of the 6.5 being ineffective at putting Sika down, no doubt with some basis when 156gr bullets are lumbering along. Handloading is in theory illegal here, but every bugger is at it as far as I can see.
I shoot 120gr BT's from the 260rem at 2875 or so (perfectly achieveable in the Swede), they are very effective, to be honest, I can see no difference in effectiveness between this load and a 130gr bullet from a 270. If anything the 125gr Partition is too destructive on meat. When I go back to Suffolk for Muntjac in February I will be loading 140gr bullets to reduce carcass damage.
I don't shoot huge numbers of deer, but I reckon I have shot about 30 Sika with the 260 since I got it. I have not had anything that looks like a runner, may 5-10 yards max. But I do usually take a shoulder out if possible....
Thar and Muir are of course correct. Bullet selection and careful handloading can turn the 6.5x55 into a very versatile beast.
You will hear a lot of criticism in Ireland of the 6.5 being ineffective at putting Sika down, no doubt with some basis when 156gr bullets are lumbering along. Handloading is in theory illegal here, but every bugger is at it as far as I can see.
I shoot 120gr BT's from the 260rem at 2875 or so (perfectly achieveable in the Swede), they are very effective, to be honest, I can see no difference in effectiveness between this load and a 130gr bullet from a 270. If anything the 125gr Partition is too destructive on meat. When I go back to Suffolk for Muntjac in February I will be loading 140gr bullets to reduce carcass damage.
I don't shoot huge numbers of deer, but I reckon I have shot about 30 Sika with the 260 since I got it. I have not had anything that looks like a runner, may 5-10 yards max. But I do usually take a shoulder out if possible....
I have started to use RWS DK 9.1G/140gr factory ammo in 6.5x55 - with 3444J (2540ft/lb) at 870m/s (2854fps) at 0m, 2705J (1995ft/lb) and 771m/s (2530fps) at 100m (mfg figures) which work for me...
http://rws-munition.de/en/hunting/products/rws-centerfire-rifle-cartridges/Product/show/twin-core-bullet/65-x-55.html
http://rws-munition.de/en/hunting/products/rws-centerfire-rifle-cartridges/Product/show/twin-core-bullet/65-x-55.html
For the OP, you may find the following website of some use in comparing calibres, muzzle energies and the like:
http://riflesintheuk.com/cartridges.htm
HTH
E t R
http://riflesintheuk.com/cartridges.htm
HTH
E t R
I've been using a 6.5x55 for the last two years and have dropped a fair few deer with it, mainly Roe but also Fallow & Sika, all were shot using 140 grain Winchesters.
Out of them all only one, a Roe buck, dropped dead on the spot. The rest all managed to run but none made more than 50 meters. I'm thinking of going down to 120 or even 100 grain to see if that improves things.
Out of them all only one, a Roe buck, dropped dead on the spot. The rest all managed to run but none made more than 50 meters. I'm thinking of going down to 120 or even 100 grain to see if that improves things.
charlieg43
Well-Known Member
Cheers Eric the Red, nice bits and bobs on there! The other site someone posted seemeda little far for UK stalking, talking about "normal shots" of over 300 yards. I know you will on the hills in Scotland, but for me that kinda range wouldnt be found near me
The interesting thing about RWS data for 6.5x55mm is the test-barrel length of 740mm or, in English, a remarkable 29".
From my 21" barrel, the 140gr DK loads clocked an average of 2550fps: which is not to say that they bounce of deer - they certainly don't - but they just as certainly weren't going at 2854fps, and the trajectory for the hill was subsequently not all it might have been.
Thats what you have to look at when looking at the figures how many people hunt with a 29' barrel on a swede not many so the figures are not a true representation of the load are they....
Quite - even fewer than have a 29" barrel, I'd imagine!
Tamus
Well-Known Member
FWIW - I had the use of a Magneto Speed Chrono the other day - on my 24" barrel they were coming out at 2600fps/791m/s...
I agree. You're shooting in the dark without one. If you have one, and are lucky to have a shooting buddy with one, you can set up dual chronographs say 50M apart and take the figures you get and do the math for an actual ballistic coefficient. Take that number, along with the average velocity figures, and plug them into a simple ballistics program and you will really have something. It's amazing how some manufacturer supplied BC's just don't apply to your specific locale and shooting conditions. You will find that even the simplest, free on line program will generate some very accurate figures for the average hunting distances with out fussing about bullet forms, etc. I do this with every new bullet/load combo I shoot.~Muir
jthyttin
Well-Known Member
Better to first set them as close together as you can (even overlapping, depending on chronograph design) to find out the difference in readings. As to the actual measurement setup, I'd get them as far apart as possible, at least 100 yards/meters. Also get the readings for at least 10 rounds. Even then you should do the math for the extreme measurements to find out the magnitude of potential inaccuracy. If you're striving for best accuracy, remember to factor in altitude, humidity, temperature etc.
Agreed on the environmentals. This is one of the main reasons to calculate a genuine BC. These things you suggest are all things I do already but I'm just tossing out the idea to people who don't have a chronograph already without burying them in technicalities. Showing the potential added benefits of owning and using a chronograph beyond just velocity. One single shot fired across a chrono doesn't tell you much but it's better than no shot fired across a chrono. Whether ten shots or three, 50M or 100M, any data is more enlightening than no data. The more rounds fired, the more refined and accurate the results, and shooters can carry that to whatever degree they wish. I have three Chrony's that stay within 15 fps of each other in like conditions. That is close enough as outdoor (natural) light can induce that much error and more if you aren't careful. As to spacing of the chronos. Yes. 100 m is better but 50m is less likely to catch a bullet from a nervous shooter!
I am lucky that I have access to a ballistic lab and pressure gun with acoustic soundboards when I want to base-line evaluate ammo. Still, I do my field run with dual chronos because the lab isn't at my altitude, in -10F cold, and at plains humidity. It all changes in the field.~Muir
I am lucky that I have access to a ballistic lab and pressure gun with acoustic soundboards when I want to base-line evaluate ammo. Still, I do my field run with dual chronos because the lab isn't at my altitude, in -10F cold, and at plains humidity. It all changes in the field.~Muir
Similar threads
