6.5 creedmore?

[Kooch]

The 270 is an orphan sized bullet. The 270 was written about by Jack O'Conner ALLOT back in the day of western big game hunting in the '50's.....and America fell in love with the cartridge and rifles (Winchester) of his writing in the magazines. The 280 has lots of great 7mm bullets available and will outperform in almost every situation....but it had some bad decisions made on naming the cartrige originally (7MM Express got confused with 7MM Magnum??) and Remington really screwed up the introduction at that time. It never caught hold like it should have......and that is a shame. It performs within 100 fps of a 7mm Mag with much less recoil and better barrel longevity.

Many things just get botched up along the way in life. Oh well.....you can't save 'em all.

My M70 Ultralight in .270 Win is boringly effective. From Elk with a 150 grain partition to deer with a 130 grain SST, it just works for my hunting. I could to ALL my big game hunting with this rifle if I wasn't so fickle.

 

[Kooch]

My M70 Ultralight in .270 Win is boringly effective. From Elk with a 150 grain partition to deer with a 130 grain SST, it just works for my hunting. I could to ALL my big game hunting with this rifle if I wasn't so fickle.

I assume the 6.5 Creedmoor would be equally effective for my hunting. But I’d have to turn in my Fudd card if I used it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Foggy47]

My M70 Ultralight in .270 Win is boringly effective. From Elk with a 150 grain partition to deer with a 130 grain SST, it just works for my hunting. I could to ALL my big game hunting with this rifle if I wasn't so fickle.

Agreed.....and I know we are splitting hairs here. I've never owned a 270 but I am sure it's a fine Cartridge. I've killed allot of whitetales, Bears, and a few elk with my 280 Rem in a Remington Mountain Rifle. I'm sure O'conner killed more with his 270. Nothing "wrong" with either gun or cartridge. All I'm saying is the 280 Rem will do everything the 270 will do, and more....with better accuracy, better bullet choices, and more down-range punch. Fact! Touche'. (grin). (though you may not be able to find factory ammo at this point in time....sad)

 

[Kooch]

Agreed.....and I know we are splitting hairs here. I've never owned a 270 but I am sure it's a fine Cartridge. I've killed allot of whitetales, Bears, and a few elk with my 280 Rem in a Remington Mountain Rifle. I'm sure O'conner killed more with his 270. Nothing "wrong" with either gun or cartridge. All I'm saying is the 280 Rem will do everything the 270 will do, and more....with better accuracy, better bullet choices, and more down-range punch. Fact! Touche'. (grin). (though you may not be able to find factory ammo at this point in time....sad)

The trigger puller is infinitely more important than the minuscule difference in the two cartridges.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

On paper a 280 outperforms 270 win. Shoulder is slightly farther forward so it’s a bigger case too. But there’s nothing in North America a 270 win doesn’t work for, and lighter bullets equal less recoil and a 270 is on the high end of manageable for most people already.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I think the 280 was too redundant compared to the 270. To become that popular.

The 270 may perhaps be the cartridge we all are seeking…..but we must reinvent the wheel.

is there a 270 caliber out there in a 308 Winchester parent case?

There’s 264 and 284 bore cartridges in necked down 308s. Both of which have better bullet options than .277 bores so it wouldn’t make much sense to do one in 277 in my opinion.

 

[Angus 1895]

Kinda why the 280 didn’t overtake the 270.

very similar

 

[Foggy47]

Kinda why the 280 didn’t overtake the 270.

very similar

YEAH.....well, we can talk bullchmidt, or we can talk facts. Not really a good comparison of performance here. Whatever.

 

[Jordan Selsor]

The old manufacturing saw goes: Tolerances cost money.

Back in the day......when I was developing cartridge headspace comparators and bullet seating depth tools.....I studied several reference books on SAMMI specifications for chambers and cartridges. LOL....seems strange to spend many hours pouring over dimensions......but that is how I came to understand the 5 most common datum circles used for headspace....and typical freebore, etc. Was quite a revealing time for me.....and I was able to apply that data into some neat tools I developed back then. I have not looked at those drawings in many years now.....but I assume they are similar today.

Anyway......I also did some comparisons on the variations from cartridges to chambers and more. The more I looked....the more I saw the merit of a few (like the 280 Remington) which had not marginalized the dimensions by allowing too many large (and small) bullets to be used in the "free space" of the intended firearms....compared to how a round like the 30-06 has to make room for bullets from 110 grain to 220 grains within those chambers. Where the 280 only had bullets up to 175(?) grains IIRC.....and the chambers were about .002 smaller in OD at the neck and body.....(if my memory serves). The 280 was one of but a few big game chambering that were spared the rather "loose" SAMMI tolerances that so many other rounds employ. It's odd to me that the 280 was not more highly prized as a big game gun. I own a Rem Mountain Rifle in 280Rem.....and love that gun. Tighter tolerances improve accuracy.....IMO.

Of course you could specify your own custom reamer dimensions and and make a tight chamber with limited freebore to suit bullets you intend to shoot....if you want to take the next step into improved accuracy. Few of us want to go that

route.....but you can definitely improve onaccuracy by reducing tolerances.

Foggy the 280 has made a significant come back back in resent years in the form of 280 AI. Many of the big manufactures are offering rifles in this round including savage, kimber, nosler etc. I had one built on an old rem 700 action with a proof barrel. Got 162 handloads stacking at 2900fps. Really enjoy the round

 

[Mtyhunter]

All are good rounds, separated by not enough performance to be noticeable. Like Kooch said earlier, it ain't the arrow, it's the indian!

 

[Wind Gypsy]

Kinda why the 280 didn’t overtake the 270.

very similar

I wasn’t around back when but there wasn’t all these laser rangefinders and high bc bullets back then and the ballistic coefficients of .284 bullet options compared to .277 is really where any notable difference lays today. When everything was being loaded with stubby soft point bullets and people are only shooting MPBR at the most, a fast 130 grain bullet is attractive. Flatter at common hunting distances and less recoil. Now days with good range finders, flat can be over rated. Gravity is constant but wind can make everyone look silly so high BC options are more attractive now.

 

[Angus 1895]

The 270 is actually closer to a true 7 mm than a 284 ( 7 mm)………

When I first started thinking center fire ballistic s I thought the 280 was ideal.

i now think a 3006 with a 200 grain pill might Trump it

 

[Wind Gypsy]

The 270 is actually closer to a true 7 mm than a 284 ( 7 mm)………

When I first started thinking center fire ballistic s I thought the 280 was ideal.

i now think a 3006 with a 200 grain pill might Trump it

Need to get to 210+ grains in a .308 cal bullet to equal the BC they get out of the 180 grain .284 bullets these days. Need a magnum .30 cal to push the heavy 30 cal bullets fast enough to compete with a 280 and 175+ 7mm bullets. Terminal may be a bit different story but 7s kill stuff pretty dang dead.

Pics are of a bull elk I shot with a 7 SAUM. First pic to see shot placement with hide on, second with the flank and shoulder removed. I don’t need more terminal damage than that!

 

[Angus 1895]

I never been around a 7 mm 180 grain.

i better look it up thanks!


but I do believe the less constricted or bottle necked a column of powder gets ….the more efficient it becomes.

 

[Wind Gypsy]

I never been around a 7 mm 180 grain.

i better look it up thanks!


but I do believe the less constricted or bottle necked a column of powder gets ….the more efficient it becomes.

Most of the bullets I’m talking about are more long range focused. 7mm 175 eldx, 175 Berger elite hunter, 180 ELDm, 180 Berger vld, etc.

The less overbore the more efficient for sure. It’s finding the balance between performance and efficiency thats where the debate lies!

 

[Foggy47]

About 20+ years back....I owned a Sako rifle chambered in 7MM STW. I was shooting a few brands of bullets weighing about 175 grains. I think my favorite became the Swift Sirocco bonded bullets at that time. The gun was freaky and I never did get satisfied with it.....as it would shoot 4 shots to a tight cluster and then shoot a flyer. Freaky fast...and I loved the ballistics.....but never felt it qualified as a trustworthy rifle. Sure was a pretty gun and had a nice fit to me....and a great trigger....but I grew tired of trying to make it reliable.....and traded for a Kimber Montana in 300 Short Magnum. Was hard to admit defeat with that Sake STW gun.

 

[Angus 1895]

Well I think the trade 4 the 6.5 creedmore is not gonna happen.

Gonna sight my 6.5 x 55 Husky tomorrow.

 

[Jerry-B-WI]

Well I think the trade 4 the 6.5 creedmore is not gonna happen.

Gonna sight my 6.5 x 55 Husky tomorrow.

Is that a sporterized military model?

 

[Peeps]

I’ve shot deer with a 12 ga, 20 ga, 7mm rem mag, 7mm-08, 30-06, and a .270. Hit them in the right spot and they all do the trick, hit them in the wrong spot and you have a wounded deer. My favorite of that group was my TC .270. When my son started hunting with me he took over that gun as his favorite so I picked up a Browning Xbolt 6.5 creedmore. I haven’t shot a deer with it yet but I’m sure it will do the job. My bow gets me almost all of my deer. It is a joy to shoot and is very accurate with factory ammo. My ultimate favorite gun for deer and shooting is my muzzle loader with loose powder.

 

[Angus 1895]

Is that a sporterized military model?

I think it’s a 1650 light weight . Model 98 Mauser.

So no it’s not military

it had a steel frame Bottomn medal so I think it’s older.

the rifle does not take near the level of amount that my husky carbine did.

I have read the chamber / throat variances caused this. I dunno.

i havent chronographed or really worked it up.

it was just a bummer that my reloads from my carbine won’t shoot outta this one.

but with reworked reloads it seems so far to be very accurate.

it’s just dawned on me ……when shooting deer….it’s maybe a race….

if yer bullet gets there first ……u win….

but usually u are the only one entered