1. same here – I’m taking a long range class this weekend – but shooting my .270 using berger 140’s

  1. The 6.5 Creedmoor, even though the ammo is more. I’ll buy a couple tickets regardless. Hope springs eternal, right?

  2. I would suggest 6.5 Creedmoor, the only 6.5’s I have are Swedes, a couple of them however my son who lives in Colorado has a couple of 6.5 Creedmoor’s a heavy Bergara and a lighter Ruger he hauls around hunting mule deer. He took a very large mule deer this past year with the 6.5 at 270 yards and one shot kill, there is something about the combination of all the goodies that make a bullet travel fast, accurate and far that come together with that round.

  3. What a lovely dilemma. I already have .308, but it’s mostly in standard ball ammo, so I’d have to try and afford a quantity of the “good stuff” should fortune favor me (and there’s a double edged viewpoint). 6.5 Creedmoor OTOH has a sterling rep but always seems to be just outside my personal financial comfort zone, and obviously I have no ammo.

    I think I have to throw my “vote” for the latter even so; new gun that I only have to buy ammo for seems compelling to me.

    Put me down for a Vortex scope as well.

  4. Question:
    By the time next year’s Boomershoot draw rolls around, will I be able to afford a 20-round box of 6.5 Creedmoor?

  5. I’d pick the 6.5. Great ballistics and easy to load for. Regardless of the choice you make, though, I’ll buy a couple tickets.

  6. 6.5 Creedmore. Much better LONG RANGE performance than .308, the round tends to stay supersonic out to around 1200 meters….

    And I shoot Hornaday ELD-M

  7. This is a dilemma.

    Do you get what shoots better or what is likely most available if (god forbid) anyone ever has to reach out and touch someone in post apocalyptic conditions. If the world is normal, then 6.5 but if you plan to lift ammo from strange (Abby)normal places, then .308.

    No easy solution, so get whatever is most economical at the moment.

  8. Shooting for accuracy you don’t need volume and I load both 22-250 and 6.5 Swede and I have a lot of brass, primers and powder. A trip to the range might be 20 to 30 rounds checking out new loads which is a whole lot of the fun of roll your own. A set of dies is not very expensive, go through a hundred rounds of store bought and you have most all the brass you will ever need for most of us regular folks. Make sure you get enough primers, put back some powder and take your time paying attention building your own, no distractions and not drinking while doing that.

  9. The accuracy potential of either the .308 or 6.5 is probably beyond the ability level of 95% of all probable shooters. The 6.5’s clear superiority beyond 600 yards is indisputable but how many shooters are capable of shooting past 300 yards with any degree of success? (Note, my club has ranges out to 1000 yards. Those that wish to shoot beyond 300 yards must show ability to hit a 6″ steel disc three times consecutively at 300 yards. Its an insurmountable task for many shooters.)
    The rifles you have offered in the past have been nice good quality sporting rifles primarily designed for hunting, not target shooting. Ammo availability is excellent for the .308 with a wide range of bullet weight, design & cost available. Not so much for the 6.5. (but improving slowly) Reloading bullet selection is better for the .308, but improving for the 6.5.
    Terminal ballistics of the .308 would be slightly better due to heavier bullets of larger diameter at reasonable distances.
    The 6.5 will yield less recoil, similar muzzle blast, similar weight and size, so a small advantage there. Overall, it comes down to shooter ability, skill level, intended purpose and cost. For the average Joe hunter, a .308 will be suitable. For an experienced shooter, the 6.5 would be preferable.

  10. Just to throw a little confusion into the mix, have you considered the .260 Remington?

    1. Unless the recipient / winner is a handloader, that round is fairly well dead, IMHO.
      Its older brother, the 6.5×55 SE, will do everything the .260 can, albeit requiring an 06 length action. The young upstart sibling, the 6.5 CM, will do -almost- everything as well, while fitting in a .308 length.
      Yes, the .260 CAN have the power of the SE while also fitting in the actions suited to the CM.
      But it suffers from both lack of “nostalgia,” being less than a hundred years old, and lack of “new kid syndrome,” being more than 50.
      The SE will still have a dedicated following, precisely because it is old and successful enough to be well established, and it is powerful enough to be the heaviest hitter among the “moderate” .264 cartridges. The CM, due to both its inherent attributes and a remarkably well done PR campaign by Hornady and Ruger, is very well ensconced now with the more “modern” shooting world.
      The .260? Remington failed this round decades ago. Outside of a very small core of dedicated handloaders, it is all but orphaned now, upstaged by both the Old Man and the New Kid.

Comments are closed.