6.5 Creedmoor VS 6.5-284

Discussion in 'Main Message Board' started by ozzy454, Sep 18, 2010.

  1. ozzy454

    ozzy454

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3
    I am new here and looking at the creedmoor and 6.5-284. Any and all thoughts or info re what is best, or works best.....or is there even a best? Thank you...ozzy
     
  2. nhm16

    nhm16 Site $$ Contributor

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2009
    Messages:
    504
    What are you going to use the gun for? The Creedmore is more comparable to the .260 Rem. and the 6.5x47 Lapua than the 6.5x284. The Creedmore seems to be especially suited for semi-autos.

    Here's a good article on the three: http://demigodllc.com/articles/6.5-shootout-260-6.5x47-6.5-creedmoor/
     
  3. ozzy454

    ozzy454

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3
    I am looking for a long range deer, antelope, sheep, hunting rifle mainly. Thank you for the referenced article!
     
  4. watercam

    watercam Site $$ Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    6.5/284 will give you superior velocity by 200 fps or so. Useful barrel life for me has been around 900-1000 rounds so far. Still shooting .5 moa or so but has opened up a bit after 800 rounds. 6.5 Creedmore/Lapua/etc. should last quite a bit longer. For a hunting rig you may not ever see the round count that High Power competitors see.
     
  5. ozzy454

    ozzy454

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3
    Ok, very good point. I appreciate the info, thank you.
     
  6. jonbearman

    jonbearman I live in new york state,how unfortunate ! Site $$ Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    Messages:
    7,918
    The 6.5 creedmore is very gentle on barrels but for long shots on sheep the 6.5x284 would be ok.Most hunters go with the magnums because of downrange terminal ballistis.The .300 wsm is good all around and you can use it in a short action and have a very handy light hunting rifle. If you dont like the heavy recoil then have a gunsmith install a jp enterprise muzzle brake because they work.They are ugly to most because they are patterned after a tank brake,however they reduce felt recoil alot making the .300wsm a kitten.This way you will have a powerful,handy,accurategun with all the power to humanely dispatch game with one shot kills. The 6.5x284 is a wonderful accurate cartridge but with a .30 caliber you can hunt anything on the continent.
     
  7. cfvickers

    cfvickers

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    64
    Downrange ballistics on the 6.5-284 will be great with a 140 grain bullet and you will get longer barrel life than the BR shooters that tend to stand up and say it is hard on them. BR shooters, as I have said in other posts, fire longer strings of shots with far less cool down time between strings. As the barrels heat up every shot fired does exponentially more damage than the last. Ifyou hold it to 3 shot strings and allow a full cool down between 3 shot strings, your barrel life will be extended a great deal over 900-1000 rounds. Data manuals are written generally 8-10% below max with the 6.5-284 according to Walt Berger, and you can expect to achieve far more velocity than the manuals would suggest. There is a lot of data out there for this cartridge if you look for it that will better show it's capability. In a manual it is comparable to a 6.5x55 or a .260 but in reality it is closer to a 264 WM than it is to a 260 rem, or a creedmore. You can easily achieve 3100 FPS with a 140 gr. bullet without getting pressure signs, and I have seen 3200 with mine, with beginning pressure signs (primers starting to crater). You CAN get well beyond 3200 but your brass life will be thoroughly cut down. A 140 grain projectile with over a .550 BC launched at 3100 FPS will have only about 15 ft-lbs less energy than a 180 .308 launched at 3000 fps. They seem pretty close, and if you want to get into real terminal ballistics the 140 6.5 bullet will have a slightly higher sectional density indicating that it SHOULD penetrate slightly better especially considering impact velocity will be higher with the 6.5. .30s are cool and I like them, but science and experience says that they are no more capable at any range (1000 yards and under) than the 6.5 with less than a 200 grain bullet. Also the 180 .308 bullet will have fallen well below optimum impact velocity for just about any bullet made by the time it gets to 800 yards., it may not open up. And with a 6.5 you can hunt anything but brown bears and I wouldn't hunt that with a .30 either. Their is nothing you can do with a .30 that you cannot do just as well and with better efficiency with a 6.5. You can hunt anything from prairie dogs to bull moose with a 6.5-284 and they are well proven. A 300wsm will not make any animal fall down any quicker.
    A 6.5-284 is powerful, accurate, and handy, and can humanely dispatch game just as quickly as any 300. I have killed deer with a .300 win mag as with my 6.5s and I have had more deer run after being hit with a 190-200 grain 30 than with a 130-140 6.5. I have only witnessed one deer of probably 15-20 take more than two steps after being hit with any of my 6.5s. 4 of 6 have run a good distance after being hit with the .300 wm. bigger doesn't always mean better.
    JonBearman, I didn't write this as any sort of insult or to attempt to undermine your opinion, I simply want to offer an opposite opinion that I have researched and is based on facts as I know them along with my own experience and that of others.
     
  8. Josh11

    Josh11 Site $$ Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    506
    I have never shot a deer or anything big for that matter with a rifle, but shot placement is key imo. With that being said, all rounds listed would be great for hunting. If i were to go with a hunting round and had a short action already, I would do 260. Also if I didnt shoot 1000 rounds in 3 or 4 years, I would go 6.5x284. But here is something else, what about just the .284 win? You get a bigger bullet and speed also with better barrel life. Everytime I watch hunting on versus, they use a mag round. such as 270 wsm or 300 wsm.
     
  9. RonAKA

    RonAKA

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,160
    I would go with the 6.5-284. Great cartridge. I've got .264WM's and you really do not need all that extra powder capacity. The 6.5-284 can produce almost the same velocities with 10 grains less powder and barrel burning heat. The BC's of the 6.5mm bullets are better than the larger calibers and produce better down range terminal energy. Great long range target and hunting cartridge. You can get Lapua and Norma brass for it.
     
  10. 15Tango

    15Tango

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2009
    Messages:
    607
    I'm not trying to take everything away from .30 calibers as such have mentioned but good luck getting a .30 caliber in the same sectional density and ballistic coefficient as a 6.5 AND up to the same speed. To match the BC of a .264" 140 VLD you've got to run up into the 220 grain class for a .30 and you're not getting that up to 3100 FPS without a large cartridge and triple the recoil.

    I've got a 6.5 Creedmoor and with Lapua brass I ran 140 Amax and 140 VLDs up to 3130FPS with R17 but it was hard getting single digit SD, that speed wasn't attainable with the Hornady brass. You can get 6.5-284 speeds out of it if you wish but you need to run the right brass. I suspect Norma 6XC brass would also do well in that role.

    The Creedmoor is silly easy to reload for and get single digit ES doing normal case prep and using the right powder primer combination. I'm currently running H4350 and Wolf primers and downtuned my loads back down to 2900 FPS with a 140 and I'm getting better numbers and accuracy.

    The 6.5-284 is great but the Creedmoor [can] match the performance of it albeit while hard on brass but it also does it in a short action with much better barrel life of 3-4000 rounds give or take.

    Wayne
     
  11. cfvickers

    cfvickers

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    64
    Creedmore brass is considerably cheaper. I have noticed that.
     
  12. mikecr

    mikecr

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,392
    I love to hear a basis for any of this...
    Wouldn't it seem that anything done with one cartridge can be done moreso with a larger version of it? That's pretty much been my experience..
    And who has proven that running EXTREME pressures, with very HOT powders, provides for longer barrel life?
     
  13. 15Tango

    15Tango

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2009
    Messages:
    607
    I'm sure you could run 140s up past 3100 with a 6.5-284 if you want to go on the basis of overrunning cartridges past book on extreme pressures you're already doing that with the 6.5-284 with a 140 at 3100 as well. The fastest velocity Hodgdon data has is 2895 FPS while the 6.5 CM and .260 Rem. both have listed velocities of 2800. The 6.5-284 enjoys only a 100 FPS advantage over the 6.5CM or .260, I mention the .260 because it provides nearly identical ballistics as the 6.5 CM. Truth is you can get a 140 class to 3100 FPS with the 6.5 CM or .260 Rem. from my experience and that of the people I know running the .260 Rem.

    The 6.5CM, .260 Rem. and 6.5-284 can and do run the same group of powders, typically H4350, R17, H4831 - the medium, medium slow and slow powders so the argument that the 6.5-284 is using a somehow colder powder is false. The amount of powder burned to bore diameter ratio is a larger factor in bore life, take the .308 Win. VS the .243 Win. - they're the same cartridge just a different bore diameter - which has better barrel life?

    Does the 6.5-284 have a slight speed advantage over the Creedmoor? Yes, albeit small. Does the Creedmoor offer longer barrel life in a short action with less recoil and is it more economical as far as cost of brass, barrels and powder consumption? Yes.

    Wayne
     
  14. mikecr

    mikecr

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,392
    Great debate, but I think you're wrong here(and I knew you'd go here).

    The creedmore is very close to the 6.5x47L H20 capacity..
    6.5x47L= 51gr
    .260 =55gr
    6.5x284 Norma = 66gr
    It is pure delusional to believe these smaller capacity cartridges can 'nearly match' 6.5x284 potential velocities with the same weight bullets.. NO WAY
    And if you run 70kpsi with a mighty mouse, the same could be done with the 6.5x284,, again tromping you.
    If accuracy is achieved at some node to barrel length formula on one, it can be done with another. In fact, those downloading their 6.5x284s for ~2950 nodes may simply be using the wrong barrel lengths to move their nodes upward.

    In a 6.5x284, 140vld just touching lands, 28" barrel, I could get ~3170fps using ~56gr Norma MRP at 102% fill and a rational 60kpsi.
    I don't have a RL17 file, but all equal and H4350 drops it to 3055fps, and H4831 to 3033fps(not the best powder choices for this cartridge).

    Without changing anything but capacity and running 'what-ifs' in QL I get for highest 60kpsi 102%fill velocities:
    .260 = 2967fps, 46gr ADI-2209
    6.5x47L = 2910fps, 43.4gr ADI-2209
    H4350 & H4831 are both rediculously wrong for theses cartridges as well..

    In order to reach the easy 6.5x284 3170fps with your mighty mouse, you'd need to vibra-pack in 43.5gr RL15 for 94kpsi!!!!!!
    And settle with a barrel life of ONE...

    I shoot a 6.5WSSM IMP which basically matches a 260AI in capacity(57gr). I can get 140s singin sweet, but would never pretend to match 6.5x284 potential. That's pure silly.
     
  15. mikecr

    mikecr

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,392
    In a general sense this holds up, I agree.
    However, a significant qualifier according to Ken Howell, is pressure, and timing. And there is no doubt in my mind that I could burn out a 223 in one sitting.
    I anxiously await competitive barrel life results(not dreams) for the mighty mouses.
    Until then I've started a 6PPC barrel life thread at BRC to see what a non-barrel burner does at the pressures you're implying for Creedmore performance.
    They didn't always run such high pressures, and to begin 3600rnds was common from a 6ppc. Let's see how it goes today, just for fun:
    http://benchrest.com/showthread.php?71525-Barrel-life-of-6PPC&p=596027#post596027
     
  16. 15Tango

    15Tango

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2009
    Messages:
    607
    Mike,

    It may behoove those of us who try to behave professionally and discuss things in a polite way to try and not be so condescending.

    Case capacity isn't everything, if it was folks like Robert Whitley wouldn't be able to get 3000 FPS out of 105 out of the 6MM AR T40 with its small 38 grains of water capacity when the .243 Win. does about the same velocity with its 54~ grains of H2O capacity.

    QL should be taken with a grain of salt, it's paper and theory and is no subsititute for real testing. R15 is a horrible match for the 6.5CM from my testing, H4350 is the fastest I've ran that gave good performance. If you don't think that H4350/R17 is a good powder for the cartridge (a cartridge you don't own and haven't ever loaded or tested for yourself) is a bad choice you'll have to inform David Emary and Dennis DeMille that they made the wrong choice when loading the 6.5 CM directly from Hornady with H4350.

    The 6.5 CM has 53 for water capacity, right between the 6.5 Lapua and .260. If you think that only 100 FPS is a huge increase than I guess that subject is relative. 2800 book for the Creedmoor VS 2900 book for the 6.5-284 is 100 FPS, that's 3.4% faster - to me that's pretty close.

    I hope this debate is helping Ozzy in regard to making some sort of cartridge choice if nothing else.

    Wayne
     
  17. camac

    camac Site $$ Contributor

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    498
    Something to add to the discussion guys. Those of you who shoot 284's and 6.5 * 284's (also 6*284 etc) and have tried to push them to higher loads will have seen some brass flow issues at the head. This comes from a few design characteristics of the case. It is a fat shell pushing back on a small case head. On a surface area basis you have 0.5008 diameter shell pushing back (0.197 square inches) compared to 0.470 diameter (0.173) onto same diameter and same spec shell head. This is over 13% increase in force back on bolt head for the same given pressure. Add to the fact that the 284 is a steep taper design, if you have a polished chamber there is increased force backwards on bolt and head as well.
    The 6.5* 284 should not be pushed to same pressures as the smaller diameter cases.....

    I will start another thread on this particular topic as it is relevant for all 284 case derivatives and widely overlooked.
     
  18. cfvickers

    cfvickers

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    64
    Thanks Camac, I read your thread with a lot of interest. I have seen everything you mention. I still believe it is a give and take. If one is a target shooter there is no need for much over 3000 FPS and you can achieve that easily without undue pressure. With good cases and high pressure your case life is cut by roughly 1/3-1/2 as long as you keep it reasonable. Also with the 6.5-284 the pressure can come on suddenly, for anyone loading a 6.5-284 when you get a cratered primer, stop. That is your absolute max. Add .5 grain and more times than not you will blow a primer, I have encountered this with both lapua and hornady cases and two 6.5-284 chambered rifles. If you have a flattened primer from my experience you have just ruined your case. If I have any case head expansion it will barely hold a primer. There are drawbacks but I see it as the price you pay for the velocity you are looking for. keep your pressures reasonable, then case life and performance can still coexist. If you want 264 win mag velocities, you can have them at a cost. If you are just going to hunt with it, case life won't be such an issue as you may not go through the life of 100 lapua or Hornady cases in a life time. I push mine a lot of times but I know the consequences.

    Another note. People keep trying to compare H4350 to RL17 because they are close on the burn rate chart. Someone stated "with all else being equal" well, it ain't. they are two entirely different powders. I don't know exactly how it works but although the start to finish burn rate is close, it doesn't immediately peak the way 4350 will, and this is where the extra velocity comes from. I have run velocity tests with both, and you cannot reach anywhere near the same velocities with 4350 that you can with RL17. My start load is about where the top load for 4350 is. So to compare two powders from different manufacturers especially one which is new and pretty much the first major technological advancement in powders in a long time and the other that has been around for 30+ years because they are close in burn rate, it's apples and oranges. Go pick up a pound of each and burn through them with any caliber, and without knowing the caliber, I cannot say which will be better, but I promise, having done it myself, you will see a difference.
     
  19. 15Tango

    15Tango

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2009
    Messages:
    607
    I can certainly attest to H4350 and R17 being different animals. It's easy to get insane velocities with R17 but I found I couldn't get single digit ES so I've gone back to using H4350. I'm only getting 2900 with a 140 now but ES is worlds better than what I could get with R17.

    Wayne
     
  20. cfvickers

    cfvickers

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    64
    I have seen where several people have said they weren't getting single digit ES with 17 and that is odd to me. I tried H4350 and my ES numbers were all over the place but I have a couple of very good loads with the RL17 with 2 or less fps ES. I think it is worth a try for anyone with a 6.5-284. But like every powder, it isn't going to be right for every rifle/chamber. I have also seen as many that got the same results I have as not though. All in what your rifle likes. I know of one guy getting 150 fps less with the same charge weights as me, but his ES and SD numbers are almost exactly the same, and the most accurate loads also match. You never know, just gotta try everything and see what your gun likes best. The only constants with this cartridge are H4831SC and either CCIBR2 or Fed. GM210M primers. I have also found that Fed 215 primers get good results with about every caliber as well but you may have to reduce your charge weights.
     

Share This Page