Best rifle calibers for deer and elk hunting

[No_Regerts]

In my humble opinion quality hunting ammo is way more important than caliber. I hunt with a 308 because I also do a ton of target shooting and reloading and everything is common and cheap for the capability you get out of them. I also shot m24s and m110s my last stint in the military so I'm admittedly a little 308 bias.

6.5 creedmoor is the best caliber you can get for the Pacific Northwest in my opinion, less recoil better ballistics than a 308. Guys will tell you more exotic, long action, or magnum calibers are needed. That's just gonna break the bank and make you not want to shoot it for fun. In my opinion they're not needed. Use quality ammo loaded with bullets built for hunting and don't take any shots you shouldn't and you will be glad you went with the 6.5

Fast twist 6.5s have been around since the 1890s. There's nothing special about them. The same reason this country is going to hell is the same reason why 6.5s are in vogue all of the sudden. What once was good and virtuous is now evil. What once was evil is now widely excepted, like neck beards, face tattoos and girls with shaved heads.

The 6.5 Swede, 264 Win Mag, 6.5 Rem Mag, and the 260 were commercial failures when the world was right. Now? We have people singing the praises of the 6.5 Manbun. Since when was a Prius cooler than a Chevelle SS?

I've used 24s, 25s, 27s, 28s, 30s, 32s, 33s, and 45s. The 26 is conspicuously absent for a reason.

 

[Nosferatu]

The 6.5 Swede, 264 Win Mag, 6.5 Rem Mag, and the 260 were commercial failures when the world was right. Now? We have people singing the praises of the 6.5 Manbun. Since when was a Prius cooler than a Chevelle SS?

Most of those barrels were 1:10 or even 1:11 twist. They were considered barrel burners at the time.

What you are getting with the new 6.5 is a 1:8 barrel, allowing you to use longer, heavier bullets. Not to mention bullet manufacturers making proper length bullets for the caliber, something that wasn't happening in "the day".

 

[Zechariah]

Fast twist 6.5s have been around since the 1890s. There's nothing special about them. The same reason this country is going to hell is the same reason why 6.5s are in vogue all of the sudden. What once was good and virtuous is now evil. What once was evil is now widely excepted, like neck beards, face tattoos and girls with shaved heads.

The 6.5 Swede, 264 Win Mag, 6.5 Rem Mag, and the 260 were commercial failures when the world was right. Now? We have people singing the praises of the 6.5 Manbun. Since when was a Prius cooler than a Chevelle SS?

I've used 24s, 25s, 27s, 28s, 30s, 32s, 33s, and 45s. The 26 is conspicuously absent for a reason.

It isn't going away but I hate it for the same reasons. It's ok but 270, 30-06 is just as heavy and ammo is just as cheap. If there is such a thing as cheap ammo anymore.

 

[No_Regerts]

Most of those barrels were 1:10 or even 1:11 twist. They were considered barrel burners at the time.

What you are getting with the new 6.5 is a 1:8 barrel, allowing you to use longer, heavier bullets. Not to mention bullet manufacturers making proper length bullets for the caliber, something that wasn't happening in "the day".

So you gotta sling golf pencils that eat up case capacity? Nah. Especially with those thin skinned target bullets. Find a bullet that will break both shoulders on an elk and that case won't push it fast enough to get it to expand. Besides, if I need to use a short action cartridge, I'd rather sling the plethora of .284 bullets out of a 7mm-08 case.

 

[pharmseller]

What does the 6.5 CM do that the 7mm-08 doesn't?

Look at Nosler's website. According to their data the 7mm-08 provides significantly better velocity (even after adjusting for barrel length differences) with comparable bullet weights. In addition, the 7mm-08 also allows for heavier bullets, something lacking in the 6.5 CM.

If you want to mention ballistic coefficients, be prepared to answer questions about relevance.



P

 

[Bobbygun]

The same reason this country is going to hell is the same reason why 6.5s are in vogue all of the sudden. What once was good and virtuous is now evil. What once was evil is now widely excepted, like neck beards, face tattoos and girls with shaved heads.

Geez Gerts, you sound like an old curmudgeon. In fact, you sound like... ME. From reading another thread, I'm pretty sure you're a quite a bit younger than me too. Keep up the good work!

 

[Bobbygun]

What does the 6.5 CM do that the 7mm-08 doesn't?

You're kidding, right? Is this a rhetorical question? If it's not, the answer is as plain as the nose on your face. The 6.5 CM is much more efficient in separating those that are always chasing the latest and greatest fad, from their hard earned cash. If only the 7mm-08 had the kind of marketing department the Creedmore has...

Oops. Now I'm starting to sound like No_Regerts.

 

[CIBKais]

There are a lot of guys on here poo pooing the 6.5 comparing it to older rounds of similar caliber. It is not. There is a reason the army has been talking about going to it in several of their rifles, and a lot of law enforcement already have. The round has become common place and isn't going anywhere.

There's also a lot of folks talking about penetration that honestly are going off of old adages. Penetration is a combination of sectional density and what the round does when it is upset by the medium it's hitting. With expanding rounds the slower the round is moving the further it will penetrate because it's deforming less and later in the medium. Obviously there is a minimum required velocity to penetrate anything but if you cruise the long range hunting forums you will never reach that with the capability of most guns. The heavier a round is the more mass there is when it hits meaning more inertia to push further. Heavier bullets have slightly less velocity and better sectional density.

The 6.5 creed was designed around the above paragraph and that's why the folks that need that kind of performance are going to it. The guy that questioned its ability to punch through and elks shoulder obviously hasn't seen one perform or done any reading on them. You can tell there's a lot of hate for them on here (man bun comments) but that's coming from people who are seriously uneducated about the round, terminal ballistics, and wounding mechanisms. I'm guessing these are coming from folks that have been shooting since the 70s and are stuck in the 70s train of thought.

 

[pharmseller]

There are a lot of guys on here poo pooing the 6.5 comparing it to older rounds of similar caliber. It is not. There is a reason the army has been talking about going to it in several of their rifles, and a lot of law enforcement already have. The round has become common place and isn't going anywhere.

There's also a lot of folks talking about penetration that honestly are going off of old adages. Penetration is a combination of sectional density and what the round does when it is upset by the medium it's hitting. With expanding rounds the slower the round is moving the further it will penetrate because it's deforming less and later in the medium. Obviously there is a minimum required velocity to penetrate anything but if you cruise the long range hunting forums you will never reach that with the capability of most guns. The heavier a round is the more mass there is when it hits meaning more inertia to push further. Heavier bullets have slightly less velocity and better sectional density.

The 6.5 creed was designed around the above paragraph and that's why the folks that need that kind of performance are going to it. The guy that questioned its ability to punch through and elks shoulder obviously hasn't seen one perform or done any reading on them. You can tell there's a lot of hate for them on here (man bun comments) but that's coming from people who are seriously uneducated about the round, terminal ballistics, and wounding mechanisms. I'm guessing these are coming from folks that have been shooting since the 70s and are stuck in the 70s train of thought.

 

[No_Regerts]

There are a lot of guys on here poo pooing the 6.5 comparing it to older rounds of similar caliber. It is not. There is a reason the army has been talking about going to it in several of their rifles, and a lot of law enforcement already have. The round has become common place and isn't going anywhere.

There's also a lot of folks talking about penetration that honestly are going off of old adages. Penetration is a combination of sectional density and what the round does when it is upset by the medium it's hitting. With expanding rounds the slower the round is moving the further it will penetrate because it's deforming less and later in the medium. Obviously there is a minimum required velocity to penetrate anything but if you cruise the long range hunting forums you will never reach that with the capability of most guns. The heavier a round is the more mass there is when it hits meaning more inertia to push further. Heavier bullets have slightly less velocity and better sectional density.

The 6.5 creed was designed around the above paragraph and that's why the folks that need that kind of performance are going to it. The guy that questioned its ability to punch through and elks shoulder obviously hasn't seen one perform or done any reading on them. You can tell there's a lot of hate for them on here (man bun comments) but that's coming from people who are seriously uneducated about the round, terminal ballistics, and wounding mechanisms. I'm guessing these are coming from folks that have been shooting since the 70s and are stuck in the 70s train of thought.

Totally educated about all things 6.5. If you choose a bullet that is a decent hunting bullet, not a target bullet, the 6.5 Creedtard lacks the case capacity to drive the bullet at a useful velocity to make it terminally SUPERIOR. All the crap about ballistic efficiency means nothing to someone who needs to kill or anchor an animal quickly.

Will it work? Yes, with less margin of error. Is the cartridge ballistically efficient? Yes. Is it magic? NO! It does NOTHING that other cartridge/bullet combinations haven't done for over 100 years.

Why are government agencies buying it? Because singing praises of anything means getting new crap on the taxpayer dime. Besides, most firearms procurement people in LE are idiots when it comes to guns, as are most LEOs. I know, I are one, and every day on the range isn't a job, it's an adventure.

 

[Bobbygun]

There are a lot of guys on here poo pooing the 6.5 comparing it to older rounds of similar caliber. It is not. There is a reason the army has been talking about going to it in several of their rifles, and a lot of law enforcement already have. The round has become common place and isn't going anywhere.

There's also a lot of folks talking about penetration that honestly are going off of old adages. Penetration is a combination of sectional density and what the round does when it is upset by the medium it's hitting. With expanding rounds the slower the round is moving the further it will penetrate because it's deforming less and later in the medium. Obviously there is a minimum required velocity to penetrate anything but if you cruise the long range hunting forums you will never reach that with the capability of most guns. The heavier a round is the more mass there is when it hits meaning more inertia to push further. Heavier bullets have slightly less velocity and better sectional density.

The 6.5 creed was designed around the above paragraph and that's why the folks that need that kind of performance are going to it. The guy that questioned its ability to punch through and elks shoulder obviously hasn't seen one perform or done any reading on them. You can tell there's a lot of hate for them on here (man bun comments) but that's coming from people who are seriously uneducated about the round, terminal ballistics, and wounding mechanisms. I'm guessing these are coming from folks that have been shooting since the 70s and are stuck in the 70s train of thought.

If you're referring to me, I've been shooting since the 60s not the 70s. So there! See there, you were wrong right off the bat.

Seriously, it's not like I'm all that averse to change. Heck, I used to despise bowhunters. Now I am one. When I turned forty I was influenced by a younger co-worker and now do most of my hunting with a bow. (I didn't sell my guns of course.)

I don't dispute what you say, but don't believe most of the folks buying the 6.5 Creed even have the ability to make use of any potential advantages of the cartridge. I believe most buyers are enticed by the slick marketing materials. Who can blame them? Heck, it has even happened to me. If I'm being honest, I've considered the 6.5 Creed and haven't ruled it out. I even tried to win one in a raffle. Do I think having one would give me a perceptible advantage over everything else in my gun safe? Uh, that'd be a "NO". But don't tell my wife that. You know, just in case.

 

[CIBKais]

Totally educated about all things 6.5. If you choose a bullet that is a decent hunting bullet, not a target bullet, the 6.5 Creedtard lacks the case capacity to drive the bullet at a useful velocity to make it terminally SUPERIOR. All the crap about ballistic efficiency means nothing to someone who needs to kill or anchor an animal quickly.

Will it work? Yes, with less margin of error. Is the cartridge ballistically efficient? Yes. Is it magic? NO! It does NOTHING that other cartridge/bullet combinations haven't done for over 100 years.

Why are government agencies buying it? Because singing praises of anything means getting new crap on the taxpayer dime. Besides, most firearms procurement people in LE are idiots when it comes to guns, as are most LEOs. I know, I are one, and every day on the range isn't a job, it's an adventure.

This is exactly the point (the velocity comment) I'm making of people stuck in old ways and not understanding terminal ballistics.

 

[oremike]

The 6.5 caliber has been around for close to 125 years. Of the cartridges of that era 6.5, 303, 7&8mm I prefer the 30.06. What was old is new again. Happens all the time. Oh sure it's marketed as "new, exciting and different" but the reality is it's just an improved 6.5 Swede.

 

[CIBKais]

If you're referring to me, I've been shooting since the 60s not the 70s. So there! See there, you were wrong right off the bat.

Seriously, it's not like I'm all that averse to change. Heck, I used to despise bowhunters. Now I am one. When I turned forty I was influenced by a younger co-worker and now do most of my hunting with a bow. (I didn't sell my guns of course.)

I don't dispute what you say, but don't believe most of the folks buying the 6.5 Creed even have the ability to make use of any potential advantages of the cartridge. I believe most buyers are enticed by the slick marketing materials. Who can blame them? Heck, it has even happened to me. If I'm being honest, I've considered the 6.5 Creed and haven't ruled it out. I even tried to win one in a raffle. Do I think having one would give me a perceptible advantage over everything else in my gun safe? Uh, that'd be a "NO". But don't tell my wife that. You know, just in case.

Thank you for that reasonable response. NWFF has some of the most reasonable and helpful people on it. Not sure why this thread about calibers devolved into neckbeard and man bun comments and no actual tangible explanation of facts as to why someone's opinion is what it is.

Thanks for bringing this back to the world of reality.

 

[CIBKais]

The 6.5 caliber has been around for close to 125 years. Of the cartridges of that era 6.5, 303, 7&8mm I prefer the 30.06. What was old is new again. Happens all the time. Oh sure it's marketed as "new, exciting and different" but the reality is it's just an improved 6.5 Swede.

That's exactly my point. Go to hornadys website and compare their precision hunter loads between 30-06 and 6.5 creed. They are both loaded in the heaviest round hornady offers for the cartridge. The velocity numbers are similar at muzzle and 500 (06 beats it at the muzzle by 50, 6.5 beats it at 500 by 50) but the 6.5 has a significantly better sectional density meaning much better penetration at the medium.

to your point about the 6.5 being around forever. How long has a .30 cal bullet been around? I'm sure you wouldn't want to compare old cartridge designs to new cartridge designs and say they perform the same.

For what it's worth my first hunting rifle was a 30-06 that my grandfather used. I love the rifle and am partial to the round because of sentimental reasons, but when people want to bash the creed and then recommend the 30-06 it just doesn't compute to me. Why recommend something with more recoil (the 30-06 isn't a shoulder killer by any means) over something that has less but is very comparable performance wise to someone who I assume does not have a lot of experience on a rifle.

the was recoil the more he is going to want to shoot. The more he shoots the better his shot on an animal will be.

 

[No_Regerts]

This is exactly the point (the velocity comment) I'm making of people stuck in old ways and not understanding terminal ballistics.

I'm talking bullets, the only thing that matters. Bullet construction as it is, requires a velocity threshold for proper expansion along with penetration. Most bullets that are adequately constructed for heavy muscle and bone, don't have the BCs the target bullets have. So, velocity keeps the tougher bullets within the velocity threshold for good performance. This is why I tend to use bigger cases with all-copper bullets or tougher lead cored bullets like A-Frames.

If I'm hunting open plains for pronghorn, deer, or even elk, I'd likely use a high BC bullet and wait for the right shot. But if I'm shooting at something on a canyon rim, even a light framed animal like a mule deer, I'm drilling shoulders with a tougher bullet and more horsepower.

 

[oremike]

That's exactly my point. Go to hornadys website and compare their precision hunter loads between 30-06 and 6.5 creed. They are both loaded in the heaviest round hornady offers for the cartridge. The velocity numbers are similar at muzzle and 500 (06 beats it at the muzzle by 50, 6.5 beats it at 500 by 50) but the 6.5 has a significantly better sectional density meaning much better penetration at the medium.

to your point about the 6.5 being around forever. How long has a .30 cal bullet been around? I'm sure you wouldn't want to compare old cartridge designs to new cartridge designs and say they perform the same.

And yet you do in your first paragraph compare the "old" 30-06 to the "new" 6.5 creed. My big game hunting rifle is a "new" 30 cal called a 300 Win Mag, how does that compaire to the creed? And before you go off on recoil, I shot a box of 20 rounds wearing a tee shirt and the recoil didn't bother me.

 

[Bobbygun]

My big game hunting rifle is a "new" 30 cal called a 300 Win Mag, how does that compaire to the creed? And before you go off on recoil, I shot a box of 20 rounds wearing a tee shirt and the recoil didn't bother me.

What make/model rifle is that? I had a .300 Win Mag in a Remington 700 SPS. I hated it. It crossed my eyes recoil-wise. I think that rifle was just too light. I hunt bears with a .300 Weatherby Mag. It's a Weatherby Vanguard II and the recoil from it doesn't bother me at all. It's pretty hard on bears though.

 

[CIBKais]

I'm talking bullets, the only thing that matters. Bullet construction as it is, requires a velocity threshold for proper expansion along with penetration. Most bullets that are adequately constructed for heavy muscle and bone, don't have the BCs the target bullets have. So, velocity keeps the tougher bullets within the velocity threshold for good performance. This is why I tend to use bigger cases with all-copper bullets.

Terminal ballistics is what happens to the bullet AFTER it has impacted. You didn't realize we are talking about the same thing. Yes there is a velocity threshold. Most manufacturers recommend 1800fps minimum to get reliable expansion. In the post above I talked about the 30-06 and 6.5 creed having close to the same muzzle and 500 yard velocity (06 beats it at the muzzle by 50 creed beats it at 500 by 50). At 500 yards hornady says their 143 eld-x is still traveling at 2030 FPS. Is that too low for you? Because I could go on the opposite end and we could talk about why a 22-250 is not a good deer round and a 223 is. The factor is velocity.

If I could magically adjust my velocity down to exactly what would just poke out the skin on the far side of an animal so that all that energy bled off at maximum penetration and none was wasted coming out the other side I absolutely would.

 

[No_Regerts]

And yet you do in your first paragraph compare the "old" 30-06 to the "new" 6.5 creed. My big game hunting rifle is a "new" 30 cal called a 300 Win Mag, how does that compaire to the creed? And before you go off on recoil, I shot a box of 20 rounds wearing a tee shirt and the recoil didn't bother me.

That's what it all boils down to. No one seems to want to out up with recoil. It's a necessary evil IMO. I often use a 300 with 200gr bullets on deer because I'm not as effected by angles. I can break an off-shoulder on an elk quartering away at longer ranges.