6.5x55 Swede or .280 remington

[id_danman]

Looking for some input on any experiences with either caliber. Looking to get a mountain rifle in one of these calibers. I reload exclusively and will probably designate the rifle for deer-sized game and cow elk. Rifle will have a 24" barrel. What kind of velocity can expect with a 140 gr bullet from the 6.5? Seems like most of the info I see is for longer barrels. Thanks

[rancilio]

id, below should give you some info about the 6.5mm. A 24in barrel is plenty long in my opinion. I am shooting a 20in 6.5x55 Encore and a 21in mauser, both quite nice guns. I grew up with both the Swede and .280 rem. I always took the swede and gave my dad the .280. I liked the low recoil and short barrel of the swede. I haven't shot the .280 in years.

 

http://www.eabco.com/6.5_mm_cartridges.html

 

A Quick Comparison of Popular 6.5mm Rifle Cartridges

- by Eben Brown (E. Arthur Brown Co. Inc)
The current popularity of 6.5mm cartridges in the USA has been a long time in coming. I won't go into my opinions on why it took so long to catch on... The important thing is that it finally HAS caught on and we're now so fortunate to have a wide selection of 6.5mm cartridges to choose from!
6.5mm Grendel - Developed by Alexander Arms for the AR15 and Military M4 family of rifles. The Grendel fits the dimensional and functional requirements of these rifles while delivering better lethality and downrange performance. There are now similar cartridges from other rifle companies. We chamber for the Les Baer "264 LBC-AR". Designed for velocities of 2400-2500 fps with 123 gr bullets, it shoots the 140 gr at about 2000 fps (for comparison purposes).
6.5mm BRM - Developed by E. Arthur Brown Company, Inc to give "Big Game Performance to Small Framed Rifles"... Namely our Model 97D Rifle, TC Contender, and TC Encore. Velocities of 2400-2500 fps with 140 gr bullets puts it just under the original 6.5x55 Swede performance.
6.5mm x 47 Lapua - Developed by Lapua specifically for long range bench rest shooting competitions. Case capa-city, body taper, shoulder angle, and small rifle primer are all features requested by top international shooters. You can expect velocities of 2500-2600+ with 140 gr bullets.
6.5mm Creedmoor - Developed by Hornady and Creed-moor Sports, the 6.5mm Creedmoor is designed for effic-iency and function. Its shape reaches high velocities while maintaining standard 308 win pressures and its overall length fits well with 308 win length magazines. You can expect velocities of 2600-2700+ fps with 140 gr bullets. 260 Remington - Developed by Remington to compete with the 6.5mmx55 Swedish Mauser that was (finally) gaining popularity in 1996. By necking down the 7mm-08 Remington to 6.5mm (.264 cal), the 260 Remington was created. It fit the same short action bolt actions that fit 308 win, 243 win, 7-08 rem, etc. You can expect velocities of 2600-2700 fps with 140 gr bullets in the 260 Remington.
6.5mm x 55 Swedish Mauser - The cartridge that started the 6.5mm craze in the USA. Developed by the Mauser corporation back in 1896 (I think), it is famous for having mild recoil, deadly lethality on even the biggest game animals, and superb accuracy potential. Original ballistics were in the 2500 fps range with 140 gr bullets. Nowadays handloaders get 2600-2700+ fps.
6.5mm-284 Norma comes from necking the .284 Win-chester down to .264 caliber. Norma standardized it for commercial ammo sales. The 6.5mm-284 is used extensively for NRA High Power competition at 1,000 yd ranges. Velocities run 3000-3100+ with 140 gr bullets.
264 Winchester Magnum - Developed by Winchester back in 1959, the 264 Win Mag never really caught on and may have delayed the ultimate acceptance of 6.5mm cartridges by US shooters (in my opinion). It missed the whole point and original advantage of 6.5mms. The Original 6.5mm Advantage - The special needs of long range competition have skewed things a little but, the original advantage was in how deadly the 6.5mms are on even the biggest game animals, how little recoil they produce, and how easy they are to shoot well.

[STOMP442]

Since you reload both calibers will work really well for what you want to do but I would go with the sweed for the simple fact that it is at its best with the heavy 140 bullets. The 280 Remington has great bullet choices but really lacks the case capacity to push the 168-180 grain bullets at a velocity where they would offer better ballistics than the high BC 6.5 bullets. Now since you do reload if you stepped up to the 280 Ackley you would have the performance very similar the 7mm mag and the velocity needed to maximize the potential of the heaver 7mm bullets. Just my opinion. Also why the swede and not one of the more hot rod 6.5 chamberings?

[308Nut]

The 6.5 will kick you less, the 280 will hit game harder. It's up to you which one is more important to YOU. One will be more important to the next guy and vice versa. This is about you.

 

The 162 Amax is a phenomenal performer on deer size critters and has a higher BC than the 6.5 Berger 140. This can also be fired a little faster. A bit less drift, a bit more energy but also....you guessed it, a bit more shoulder thump. The 140 grain variety in the 284 caliber have lower sectional densities and BCs so if you're sticking to 140s, the 6.5 could be a better choice.

 

The 284 168 grain bullets can be shot every bit as fast in the 280 as the 140s in the 6.5 swede and with a bit more ease. IMO, a little more lead goes a long way on elk. If you throw elk in the mix, this could be a plus. That said, a 6.5 140grain partition or ACCUBOND works well on bigger game. My hunting buddy has used the 140 partitions on moose, black bears and cow elk with excellent results with his 6.5 swede. We used a 140 ACCUBOND on his dall ram this year with my 6.5x284 and we were both very pleased with the results. Destroyed lungs, a dime size exit hole and no copper or lead fragments and a VERY quick clean kill. I usually use 140 VLDs for sheep but I carry ACCUBONDs for bears. He didn't have time to swap bullets so he chambered an ACCUBOND.

 

Let us know what you decide.

 

M

[STOMP442]

The hornady 162 Amax has a published b.c. of .625 but an actual litz tested b.c. of only .599 not higher than the 6.5mm berger. The 280 Remington pushing a 162-168 at 2700 has about 100 ft lbs more energy at 1000 yards and nearly identical wind drift numbers within 2" as the swede pushing a 140 at 2700. The 280 remington requires about 8 more grains of powder to do so and generates a modest increase in recoil. What it really boils down to is which caliber are you able to reload the easiest as either one is performing at essentially the same level.

[308Nut]

Litz changes his mind on BCs like we change underwear. The first time he tested it he said it was higher than the published value. Kind of like the first time he tested the 338 300 grain.

 

Anyway, the 162 still kicks a$$ no matter what magnifying glass you put it under. They expand at much lower velocity too for the long range enthusiasts and of course, makes a bigger hole. Comparing the 168 VLD versus the 140 VLD (6.5) is a 200'# difference at a grand. This could still be desirable when elk are targeted. But yes, all things considered, they're very close in performance.

[briant_az]

I have a mountain rifle chambered in 280 that shoots really good. I shoot the 168gr bergers but I cant remember the velocity off the top of my head. I will say that its not as fast as I wish it was but its only a 22" barrel.

[STOMP442]

Litz changes his mind on BCs like we change underwear. The first time he tested it he said it was higher than the published value. Kind of like the first time he tested the 338 300 grain.

 

Anyway, the 162 still kicks a$$ no matter what magnifying glass you put it under. They expand at much lower velocity too for the long range enthusiasts and of course, makes a bigger hole. Comparing the 168 VLD versus the 140 VLD (6.5) is a 200'# difference at a grand. This could still be desirable when elk are targeted. But yes, all things considered, they're very close in performance.

 

 

As you and I both know the B.C. of a bullet can change due to atmospheric conditions, temp and the elevation at which it was tested. The B.C. of a bullet tested last week at one range will not match the B.C. of the same bullet tested next week at a different range. But it will be close and as long as the testing procedures are consistent which I belive they are in Litz case we can get a pretty clear picture of what the actual b.c. of the bullet is. That being said I have two sources where Litz has tested the 162 Amax in 7mm, one in the Winter 2012 Issue of The Varmint Hunter Magazine and the other Being his applied ballisitics book. Both Sources show the actual B.C. being well bellow the published .625.

 

According to my balistics calculator in standard atmospheric conditions the 168 is only producing 139 ft lbs more energy at 1000 yards. Which in my mind doesn't warrant the extra recoil or 8 grains of powder usage. As far as bullet holes go I dont think there is a game animal on the planet that would notice the .02" difference in bullet diameter.

[308Nut]

In not going to get into a pissing match over 139 pounds or 200 pounds...readers here can look up velocity potentials, BCs, etc...and run numbers.

 

As far as whether or not the added recoil is worth it or not, well that's up to the original poster to decide. Nether of our opinions on that matter here.

[sjvcon]

Take the .280 to the next level if you are reloading your own (or even not, as Nosler loads them) and go with the .280AI.

[id_danman]

Thanks for all the replies, I'm going to go with the 6.5x55. I figure with a 5.5 lb gun, the lighter recoil will be a benefit. It'll also be a good rifle for my kids to use as they get older. I already have a 300 weatherby and 30-06 if I want to reach out further or shoot something bigger than deer or cows. Also decided on a rifle...it'll be a Forbes model 24B, stainless.