JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Any rifle you want, as long as it's in 6.5 CM...
- Thread Starter HaveGun
- Start date
- Messages
- 20,322
- Reactions
- 77,048
7.62X63 and call it done! 
Yous guys crack me up, Standard vs Tantric, Glock vs .30/06 and all that man junk getting in the way of a goose scratchin!
Yous guys crack me up, Standard vs Tantric, Glock vs .30/06 and all that man junk getting in the way of a goose scratchin!
- Messages
- 12,944
- Reactions
- 47,235
Glad to see that the thread didn't get too heated, lol.
Like I said, I don't have anything against the 6.5 CM. I just found it odd to see a caliber so completely dominate store shelves.
I grew up working in one of my dad's gun shops in the 80's and it seemed like there was rarely more than a couple of rifles on the shelf in a particular caliber. If you wanted a Model 70, then we had them in everything from .22-250 to .375 with a couple in .30-06, .270, and 7mm. Same with the 700 and M77.
Sure, the .30-06 reigned supreme, and you could find nearly every rifle in one, but it was not like what I saw the other day in which probably 80% of the rifles on the shelf were in one caliber.
I wonder if that's a reflection of our current society and it's increase in polarization, or of people seemingly afraid of being unique or thinking for themselves. Or if the guy in charge of ordering stock has a man bun...
My money would be on a merchandising error, stupid price breaks by distributor or lack of availability from their distributor.
- Messages
- 14,015
- Reactions
- 57,153
7.62X63 and call it done!
YOU TAKE THAT BACK!
- Messages
- 261
- Reactions
- 523
By any measure, the 6.5 is still a "medium" cartridge that was specifically designed for long range target shooting,, and also something that would fit in a short action.
Its "success" at hunting larger game is more a testament to a shooters ability to perfectly place, (if they can, most can't,) a shot then to its power to bring down game.
It's still a little cartridge shooting little bullets, to give little recoil.
But, Americans have this fascination about little bullets at warp speed and the lowest recoil possible.
If someone would've handed Elmer Keith a 6.5 for an Elk hunt, he'd have wacked the barrel over their head and told them where they could put that rifle.
Its "success" at hunting larger game is more a testament to a shooters ability to perfectly place, (if they can, most can't,) a shot then to its power to bring down game.
It's still a little cartridge shooting little bullets, to give little recoil.
But, Americans have this fascination about little bullets at warp speed and the lowest recoil possible.
If someone would've handed Elmer Keith a 6.5 for an Elk hunt, he'd have wacked the barrel over their head and told them where they could put that rifle.
- Messages
- 1,917
- Reactions
- 4,789
- Thread Starter
- #66
My dad was a huge fan of and friends with Elmer Keith and Jack O'Connor and he himself wrote for Field & Stream and was somewhat known in the world of big game hunters. He's been on several African Safaris and has two Grand Slams under his belt.
I have a picture on my desk of him with a nice sheep he took with an Al Biesen Model 70 in .270...
The man knows his rifles and hunting.
I asked him about going with the 6.5 CM or the .308 and he said absolutely the .308 for what I wanted to use it for around here. Of course, he then gave me a Model 70 in .30-06 Ackley Improved for elk that I still haven't shot or worked loads up for.
- Messages
- 18,744
- Reactions
- 45,457
Elmer Keith and Jack O'Connor didn't have the bullet technology that is available today.
I can remember when the .270 was the "it girl" for all medium to very large game hunting. I also remember that it has taken every medium to large game animal on every continent. Including bull hephelumps!! (which I would never hunt, but that's a diff thread)
- Messages
- 12,944
- Reactions
- 47,235
I wouldn't pick a 6.5 CM or a 308 specifically for elk, but at the same time I wouldn't feel like I couldn't hunt elk with either of them. Even then it would be dependent on environment - coastal jungles or open range to decide the "best".
- Messages
- 1,917
- Reactions
- 4,789
- Thread Starter
- #72
The reason for selecting the .308 was an attempt to have two primary rifles that shared a cartridge and hopefully magazines in the event of having to bug out or to just simplify my ammo stockpile.
I had an AR-10 lower and needed an upper to add to it and decided on .308 because I felt it was just a better all around round to concentrate on for reloading and stockpiling, while being better for large game.
I own rifles in four calibers that are sufficient for elk:
.257 Roberts
.30-06
.30-06 Ackley Improved
.35 Whelen
The .30-06 varieties are better for elk than the .308, and the .35 Whelen is awesome in denser timber. But no one makes a compact and light magazine fed rifle in any of those calibers, hence the decision to go with .308.
- Messages
- 12,944
- Reactions
- 47,235
Excellent reasoning. If you don't find what you want locally I'd suggest one of these and have it shipped to your LGS: "Tikka 308" For Sale - Buds Gun Shop or whatever make you like that fits your budget. If they don't stock it they can't sell it.
I'm glad there is a common-sense caliber that is being standardized. That makes more sense than the magnum mania that was going on a couple decades ago. 6.5 CM is just enough superior to .308 that it is useful, especially at long range. I don't have any at the moment but I would if I were buying. BTW I don't think it is marginal for elk; swedes kill their moose with 6.5...
It could be that enough guns were sold in .308 already, that the market for that is drying up. I already have a safe full of .308; do I need another?
BTW I once did an extended comparison using all the information I could scrape up, on which cartridge was best for shooting in wind (I guess the big problem for long range, since we have good rangefinders now), using best available bullets at the time. I came to the conclusion that what the 6.5x284 could do at 1000 yards, the .260 Rem (and therefore the 6.5CM) could do at 900 yards, and the .308 Win could do at 800 yards. That is, they all had roughly similar errors at those distances. If an extra hundred yards does not impress, then might as well go .308. Otherwise, 6.5CM.
It could be that enough guns were sold in .308 already, that the market for that is drying up. I already have a safe full of .308; do I need another?
BTW I once did an extended comparison using all the information I could scrape up, on which cartridge was best for shooting in wind (I guess the big problem for long range, since we have good rangefinders now), using best available bullets at the time. I came to the conclusion that what the 6.5x284 could do at 1000 yards, the .260 Rem (and therefore the 6.5CM) could do at 900 yards, and the .308 Win could do at 800 yards. That is, they all had roughly similar errors at those distances. If an extra hundred yards does not impress, then might as well go .308. Otherwise, 6.5CM.
Last Edited:
- Messages
- 1,917
- Reactions
- 4,789
- Thread Starter
- #75
When every big game animal I've ever shot as been under 300 yards, the superiority of 6.5 at 800 yards elicits little more than a yawn from me. I'll readily admit it is superior to .308 for ringing steel and putting holes in paper at long distance, but for realistic hunting scenarios, I think the .308 is better.
Similar threads
