Have a few questions about 6.5x55 chambering, load data.

[koger]

Ok here goes. Let me first say, I am a long time 6.5 Swede shooter and lover. I have built a bunch of them over the past 30 years, on Mausers and Savages mostly. I am thinking of building another one for F Class shooting, for myself , and have heard a little about the 6.5x55SE. Is this just hotter load data, or is their a slight difference in the chamber/throats? All feedback appreciated.

 

[David Milisock]

Ok here goes. Let me first say, I am a long time 6.5 Swede shooter and lover. I have built a bunch of them over the past 30 years, on Mausers and Savages mostly. I am thinking of building another one for F Class shooting, for myself , and have heard a little about the 6.5x55SE. Is this just hotter load data, or is their a slight difference in the chamber/throats? All feedback appreciated.

I believe the SE is simply the European CIP designation. 55,110 PSI instead of 51,000 PSI. All Swedish Mauser actions are proofed at 65,992 PSI.

 

[Laurie]

I believe the SE is simply the European CIP designation. 55,110 PSI instead of 51,000 PSI. All Swedish Mauser actions are proofed at 65,992 PSI.

That's correct.

There is also the 6.5X55mm SKAN set of case and chamber specs. This arose out of the Nordic countries adopting marginally different but within tolerances figures from the original early 1890s drawings. This became an issue at the back end of the last century in Nordic international comps where everybody shoots the host nation's standard ball spec ammunition issued on the range. There were instances of cases being a little too tight / slack in the chamber in somebody else's version of min-CIP chamber size and headspace settings. So, alongside the development and introduction of the Sig-Sauer 200 STR (Scandinavian Target Rifle) as the standard model for these competitions a new common set of specs and tolerances was adopted for both chambers and cartridge cases. Pressure-wise, the SE's 55,100 psi MAP stayed unchanged.

 

[koger]

Thanks for the replies. I noticed in the big stuff, forum, 7mm and up, there was 3 page discussion on the 6.5x55 and someone stated that when built in a modern action, that the data begins, where standard data ends. Anybody know where to get this data at.?

 

[David Milisock]

The 6.5 x 55 and the associated Swedish rifle are an excellent combination. I've decided to take mine and spin the old military barrel off and install an air guaged barrel with the throat cut for 140 graing projectiles.

 

[Fast14riot]

The Ackley improved version is a nice upgrade. Not so much for velocity, but brass life is far better. If I didnt shoot a 260AI now, I would seriously consider it.

 

[Kurz]

The history of the 6.5x55mm Swedish Mauser is interesting. It was developed jointly in 1891 by Sweden and Norway and adopted as the official military cartridge of those nations in 1894. The Norwegians used it in the Krag-Jorgensen rifle and the Madsen machinegun.

The Swedes used Mausers, including the Models 94, 96, 35, and 31, as well as the Ah m/42 semiautomatic rifle. Ammunition from both countries was initially identical, but Sweden later changed the case dimensions slightly and loaded it to a higher pressure for use in their Mauser rifles.


This situation persisted until 1990, when Denmark, Norway, and Sweden standardized specifications, and the cartridge was officially renamed the "6.5x55 SCAN." (This is not to be confused with the "6.5x55 SKAN," an obscure cartridge with a very slightly longer case; it won't chamber in standard 6.5x55 rifles.) The European C.I.P. designation is "6,5x55 SE," while in the U.S., just about everyone calls it the 6.5x55 Swede.

https://www.shootingtimes.com/editorial/a-metric-marvel-6-5x55-swedish-mauser/99183

 

[David Milisock]

The Ackley improved version is a nice upgrade. Not so much for velocity, but brass life is far better. If I didnt shoot a 260AI now, I would seriously consider it.

The case capacity of the 6.5 x 55 is such that it requires a long barrel to use it properly. With that said in a long barreled stable platform it's got plenty of reach, if I didn't use a 6.5 x 55 I'd use a custom 260 Remington with a long action and a minimum of 24" barrel.

 

[Hohn]

A big part of the appeal to me of the 6.5 creed initially was that it nearly duplicated standard loadings of the 6.5x55 Swede, at least in load data I found. This to me was an assurance of sufficiency as a hunting caliber.

I suspect that if 6.5creed hunters would try the 156-160gr class bullets at moderate speeds, they would be impressed.

If you are "merely as good" as the Swede, you lack almost nothing.

I'm aware that variants of 6.5x55 can substantially improve on baseline commercial-action 6.5x55 specs. (which are substantially above the vintage military action specs)

JMO

 

[Hohn]

The case capacity of the 6.5 x 55 is such that it requires a long barrel to use it properly. With that said in a long barreled stable platform it's got plenty of reach, if I didn't use a 6.5 x 55 I'd use a custom 260 Remington with a long action and a minimum of 24" barrel.

I don't know what "proper" use consists of, nor how long is a long barrel. But I don't know how the capacity differs from similar cases about which isn't asserted.

I suspect it has more to do with being low pressure than having a certain capacity.

 

[David Milisock]

What I coin as proper use is a barrel of sufficient length to make use of the case capacity. If I was building an Eastern hunting rifle I'd go 260 Remington with a 24" tube, building a Western hunting rifle I'd go 6.5 x 55 with a 28" tube.

You can certainly build a short barreled 6.5 x 55 but in my experiance with high pressure loads you get plenty of muzzle flash and blast, I tried it.

I find the 26 caliber projectiles interesting, you can achieve high sectional density and ballistic coefficient loads with relatively light projectiles, 129 and 140 grains, some in the 150 grain range for match work helping with recoil management.

However to achieve European Max and (for the lack of a better term) EM +P (non SAAMI or CIP pressures) and therefore velocities your powder burn rates are slower, near the slowest and therefore require a longer barrel to burn more of the powder in the barrel.

Therefore with pressures being equal, the 6.5 x 55 with a case capacity of 57.9 grains of water is a better choice for longer range rifles then the 260 Remington with a case capacity of 53.5 grains of water. Especially for hunting where retained energy at range comes into play. Both the 6.5 x 55 and 260 Remington stay supersonic past 1,000 yards I believe.

Using the 6.5 x 55 in a well made new modern bolt action is a great state of the art experiance, of course that's just my opinion. My experiance has me leaning toward that there are only 2 viable 6.5 MM cartridges, the King is the 6.5 x 55 and the Queen is the 260 Remington.

 

[Evan]

My experiance has me leaning toward that there are only 2 viable 6.5 MM cartridges, the King is the 6.5 x 55 and the Queen is the 260 Remington.

Is the 6.5x47 the next-in-line royal that they locked in a tower to try and stop a challenge to their rule? Is the 6.5 Creedmoor the bourgeoisie new-money riff-raff that the old-blood condescend to but keep around for the money they bring to the table? This little monarchical scenario is ripe for further elaboration! How does the 6.5 Grendel fit in to this incestuous royal yarn?

 

[David Milisock]

Is the 6.5x47 the next-in-line royal that they locked in a tower to try and stop a challenge to their rule? Is the 6.5 Creedmoor the bourgeoisie new-money riff-raff that the old-blood condescend to but keep around for the money they bring to the table? This little monarchical scenario is ripe for further elaboration! How does the 6.5 Grendel fit in to this incestuous royal yarn?

Fun cartridges to play with and a marketing guys wet dream but hardly revolutionary with nothing new for field work. IMO the 6.5 Grendel is only useful as a hunting alternative for the AR platform, certainly not a combat alternative unless you mean a speciality use only. Then again the 260 can play just as well with the AR. The Creedmore does nothing the Swede won't and the 6.5 x 47 begs the question, why?

There's no incest with the 6.5 x 55 is it's own case and the 260 is a kissing cousin to the 308. Short or medium action for the 260 and medium or long for the Swede all thev6.5 you need.

Now I build for field work, bench shooting is not my thing, I prefer the additional variables, like golfing on old Scottish greens.

 

[Hohn]

What I coin as proper use is a barrel of sufficient length to make use of the case capacity. If I was building an Eastern hunting rifle I'd go 260 Remington with a 24" tube, building a Western hunting rifle I'd go 6.5 x 55 with a 28" tube.

You can certainly build a short barreled 6.5 x 55 but in my experiance with high pressure loads you get plenty of muzzle flash and blast, I tried it.

I find the 26 caliber projectiles interesting, you can achieve high sectional density and ballistic coefficient loads with relatively light projectiles, 129 and 140 grains, some in the 150 grain range for match work helping with recoil management.

However to achieve European Max and (for the lack of a better term) EM +P (non SAAMI or CIP pressures) and therefore velocities your powder burn rates are slower, near the slowest and therefore require a longer barrel to burn more of the powder in the barrel.

Therefore with pressures being equal, the 6.5 x 55 with a case capacity of 57.9 grains of water is a better choice for longer range rifles then the 260 Remington with a case capacity of 53.5 grains of water. Especially for hunting where retained energy at range comes into play. Both the 6.5 x 55 and 260 Remington stay supersonic past 1,000 yards I believe.

Using the 6.5 x 55 in a well made new modern bolt action is a great state of the art experience, of course that's just my opinion. My experience has me leaning toward that there are only 2 viable 6.5 MM cartridges, the King is the 6.5 x 55 and the Queen is the 260 Remington.

No doubt the Swede in a modern rifle is a treat to shoot.

The problem with crowning any cartridge a "king" based on your personal risk tolerance for pushing pressure is that is says nothing about the merits of the cartridge, but rather it says only how much risk you want to take. A similarly adventurous .260 shooter could push a 140 to 3000fps in 28". Does that make the 260 better? I've elsewhere linked a video of a 6.5 creedmoor pushing a 140gr bullet to >2800 in a 22" barrel. Does that make the creedmoor superior? NO. Because it only shows how far someone will push a round.

So your first premise of "with pressures being equal" is invalid. By design, the pressures are not equal. You are exceeding pressure for the 6.5x55, putting the thumb on the scale.

And 4gr more powder capacity isn't significant when--as you said yourself- burn rates are "slower, near the slowest."

Hodgdon data illustrates this point.

Hodgdon shows only two loads for the 6.5x55 capable of pushing 140gr over 2700fps in a standard barrel. One powder is the new StaBall 6.5, the other is IMR4831, not exactly a slow powder. The 4831 max charge is 46.3gr.

The next slowest Hodgdon power is H4831 (per their chart), giving a max MV of 2586-- a substantial drop-- at 47.0gr

Continuing down the burn rate chart, we get to IMR 4955: 46.3gr, 2684fps.

7828SSC: 48.2gr, 2678fps
IMR7977: 49.1gr, 2646fps.-- This charge is compressed, so there's no point in going slower on powder.

What the evidence says is pretty clear: The loss of burn speed (pressure) more than offsets the extra few grains of powder you can fit in the case. Even at 51.5gr of H1000, you STILL haven't increased the MV above what just 46.3gr of IMR4831 gave you. Again, you can't make up in charge weight what you lose in pressure. There's just not enough case there.


By contrast, the 260 will push a 140 to 2730fps with 50.5 grains of H1000. A grain less of the same powder and yet more speed.

There's no royalty here. Just flavors of excellence.

 

[JSH]

There is a cutoff on barrel lengths. I think they may be shorter than most think, there are just to many folks running rifle cartridges in 14-17” barrels with stellar results.
I prefer the 308 family length myself.
I have friends and associates that run the 06 through the belted mag case size with excellent results.

The old adage about having to use pistol or fast powders in short barrels doesn’t hold water. Majority of those I know have great success with the same in both rifle and pistol. I won’t even go to efficiency side, when looking for performance.

 

[wbm]

Have built a lot of 6.5x55's in the last decade or so. Think I will do another.

One powder is the new StaBall 6.5

Winchester 6.5 StaBall is now my go-to powder for 140gr bullets in 6.5CM. Course the "haters" have already started on the powder, no surprise, but it works for me.

 

[Evan]

Don't need super slow powders or long barrels in the Swede. IMR4064 or 4350 will give exceptional results: performance and accuracy in any length barrel. For a hunting rifle, I'd go 20 or 22 inches. Feels better to carry and point and I'll never miss the maybe 100fps I'm giving up over an unwieldy 26-28" barrel.

 

[David Milisock]

No doubt the Swede in a modern rifle is a treat to shoot.

The problem with crowning any cartridge a "king" based on your personal risk tolerance for pushing pressure is that is says nothing about the merits of the cartridge, but rather it says only how much risk you want to take. A similarly adventurous .260 shooter could push a 140 to 3000fps in 28". Does that make the 260 better? I've elsewhere linked a video of a 6.5 creedmoor pushing a 140gr bullet to >2800 in a 22" barrel. Does that make the creedmoor superior? NO. Because it only shows how far someone will push a round.

So your first premise of "with pressures being equal" is invalid. By design, the pressures are not equal. You are exceeding pressure for the 6.5x55, putting the thumb on the scale.

And 4gr more powder capacity isn't significant when--as you said yourself- burn rates are "slower, near the slowest."

Hodgdon data illustrates this point.

Hodgdon shows only two loads for the 6.5x55 capable of pushing 140gr over 2700fps in a standard barrel. One powder is the new StaBall 6.5, the other is IMR4831, not exactly a slow powder. The 4831 max charge is 46.3gr.

The next slowest Hodgdon power is H4831 (per their chart), giving a max MV of 2586-- a substantial drop-- at 47.0gr

Continuing down the burn rate chart, we get to IMR 4955: 46.3gr, 2684fps.

7828SSC: 48.2gr, 2678fps
IMR7977: 49.1gr, 2646fps.-- This charge is compressed, so there's no point in going slower on powder.

What the evidence says is pretty clear: The loss of burn speed (pressure) more than offsets the extra few grains of powder you can fit in the case. Even at 51.5gr of H1000, you STILL haven't increased the MV above what just 46.3gr of IMR4831 gave you. Again, you can't make up in charge weight what you lose in pressure. There's just not enough case there.


By contrast, the 260 will push a 140 to 2730fps with 50.5 grains of H1000. A grain less of the same powder and yet more speed.

There's no royalty here. Just flavors of excellence.

I call the 6.5 x 55 the King not just because of performance but innovation, 130 years old and it still is a major performer in European sales and 6.5MM performance. Truly a well done is deserved for the designers.

I understand that you think I placing my thumb on the scales but that is what handloading is all about. Intelligent loaders will never take a Mauser 96 past the 55,110 PSI mark as they only proofed at 65,992PSI.

With that said I have a mid sized 700 Remington in 6MM Remington which is a 65,000 PSI case and a standard length 03 Remington in 358 Norma Magnum a 64,000 PSI case. Both rifles have been shot quite a bit the 6MM is on its second barrel.

I can't think of any reason why spinng a 6.5 x 55 barrel onto either of these actions and loading to 60,000 or 62,000 PSI would be unsafe. The actions have been tied to 64,000 and 65,000 PSI cases for decades.

Given the case capacity of the 6.5 x 55 and mounting a 28" or 29" mid weight barrel onto a well made tuned action and applying the increased pressure will make a fine plains stalking rifle. It might take a year or so to work the loads but I'd start with Reloader 22 and move up or down the burn rate and see where it takes me. Of course as with all handload they are always RIFLE SPECIFIC!

McGowen built my 358 with a 28" heavy barrel, it took 2 years but I exceeded 358 STA 250 grain velocities from it in a load that does not flatten primers. Caught an Elk at just over 600 yards, just as I let go he turned his head toward me, hit the near left shoulder and exited out his back right side. He dropped straight down and never moved.

New may be different but it's not always better, in some cases it is better. However the manufacturers and designers need something to do.

 

[David Milisock]

Don't need super slow powders or long barrels in the Swede. IMR4064 or 4350 will give exceptional results: performance and accuracy in any length barrel. For a hunting rifle, I'd go 20 or 22 inches. Feels better to carry and point and I'll never miss the maybe 100fps I'm giving up over an unwieldy 26-28" barrel.

The effect of barrel length on velocity is an interesting study, one I think a 6.5 x55 loader will benefit from, one finds discussions everywhere. One I found interesting was a girls science project with a 308 and 180 grain projectiles. From 26" to 24", 52 FPS loss per inch. From 24" to 22", 4.5 FPS loss per inch. From 22" to 20", 18 FPS loss per inch. From 20" to 18", 11.5 FPS loss per inch and lastly 18" to 16", 51 FPS loss per inch. What a great project for a kid!

While the shortest length lowest velocity subtracted from the longest length and highest velocity divided by the 10 inches does indicate an average of 27.4 FPS per inch loss. Her data seems to indicate a more complex series of events, higher losses per inch at the shortest barrel and the longest barrel lengths. This may indicate different acceleration rates along the pressure curve and may be different for your 6.5 x 55, in my experiance a more severe difference with longer barrels.

In any case a 149 FPS loss of velocity from 26" to 20" in a 308 or as seen another way about 6" or more drop at 500 yards with a 140 grain 6.5mm projectile, is something you need to judge for yourself.

I observe different disciplines and while I have no patience for long range target shooting those who practice the discipline have a good deal to teach us. No bolt action competitor shoots short barrels for long ranges and the barrel manufacturers all make 30" blanks. Are they wrong or is there a reason?

This is America make what ever rifle you want, for me a 400 yard or less rifle is the "Queen" 260 Remington, a short action light rifle with plenty of 6.5 performance, more like old school Swede performance. Longer ranges for me the "King" 6.5 x 55 on a strong action is too much to overlook. Safely and easily one can get 6.5 x 06 + performance from the old 6.5 x 55 CARTRIDGE in a strong bolt rifle.

Fun toys for grownups!

 

[F224]

A few years ago I went to Darryl Hollands long range shooting school. I took a 22.5" semi-weight fluted match barreled Blaser R8 in 6.5x55SE shooting 130gr Berger VLD bullets at 2800fps. It was his bi-annual Texas class and we shot out to 1,000 yards in lot's of wind. The Texan's were shooting 28-30" barreled rifles in a variety of chamberings and were giving me a hard time about "how short my rifle was".

I took top gun at that school in the final shoot off with a 640 yard head shot on a pepper popper and planted the bullet right between the targets eyes in an 18mph wind.

The Sweed will get it done for you every time if you do your part.