• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

You Could Say I Am a Sniper Now ...

With all the smart ass trash talk here I really wonder if there is anyone here who actually tried a good modern ultralight (under 6lbs) hunting rifle, like that savage 110 k2 - chambered in 308 and then in 6.5cm side by side.

They are selling best in an 6.5cm for a reason, that’s all. Even if reason eludes you - it does not mean there isn’t one.
Such people care more about the effects on their shoulders than they do about the game... Those people are either ignorant or unethical hunters. 6.5 on elk, moose, bear, etc. is not pretty. It's barely sufficient for mature WhiteTail at midwest ranges.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
 
Actually, you can compare them...
Oh, and the video version for those who need visual cues.

View: https://youtu.be/EnUoyvIv5yQ

You can compare it to .50BMG and 9mm ... you can compare them to anything. So?
 
Yea, you're right... When it comes to things like chamber pressures, barrel life, down range energy.... the 6.5 doesn't hold a candle to the .30 cals. There simply is no comparison. I mean hell, if you really wanted to go full vaginal sniper, you could at least argue for the 6.5 PRC.... But Creedmore.... That's a cute little rifle you got there. Does your non-binary adolescent they/them kid enjoy shooting it?



The exact same thing could be said about the 6.5 Creedmore. It's for man bun wearing, straight-edge, gender studies majors afraid of the .270.
When I went 6.5, I kept barrel life in mind. If I wanted barrel life, I would have gone 308. I don't mind dropping a few hundred every once in a while. There were several other factors more important to me than barrel life, and the 6.5 was far superior.

I considered the .270 instead of the 6.5cm and almost went with the .270, recoil wasn't considered (I shoot 458 win Mag, I don't care about recoil). I went with the 6.5cm because it uses less powder and still has great perfomance. The good powders are a huge pain in the a** to find today, so anything that has great performance and uses less powder, is good.

If you want to post funny stuff here, that is fine.

But if you are going to argue like a 3 year old, go to some other thread.

You have to understand, it is not all about trying to prove who is a tough guy and can handle recoil.
 
Last edited:
…. But Creedmore.... That's a cute little rifle you got there. Does your non-binary adolescent they/them kid enjoy shooting it?



The exact same thing could be said about the 6.5 Creedmore. It's for man bun wearing, straight-edge, gender studies majors afraid of the .270.

Yeah…. Those latte drinking twinks 😉

6A8058EF-25B3-4188-B689-1FD76BD92682.jpeg
 
When I went 6.5, I kept barrel life in mind. If I wanted barrel life, I would have gone 308. I don't mind dropping a few hundred every once in a while. There were several other things more important to me than barrel life, and the 6.5 was far superior.

I considered the .270 instead of the 6.5cm and almost went with the .270, recoil wasn't considered (I shoot 458 win Mag, I don't care about recoil). I went with the 6.5cm because it uses less powder and still has great perfomance. The good powders are a huge pain in the a** to find today, so anything that has great performance and uses less powder, is good. If someone developed a cartridge today that performs just as good as the 6.5cm with half the powder, I would buy it.

If you want to post funny stuff here, that is fine.

But if you are going to argue like a 3 year old, go to some other thread.
Barrel life really isn’t terrible with 6.5 CM

22-250 or 22 CM, sure. But for 6.5, meh. Especially with chrome lined or nitrided barrels.
 
Barrel life really isn’t terrible with 6.5 CM

22-250 or 22 CM, sure. But for 6.5, meh. Especially with chrome lined or nitrided barrels.
Even if you change barrels after 3K rounds.

Unless you are a serious competitor, getting to those 3K will take time.

For the people only using it for the occasional plinking and hunting, they won't need to change barrels for years, even after 3K or so rounds, the barrel will still perform fine for hunting.

I bet most here dont even have 3K rounds though their AR15.

And barrels are not that expensive. I literally spent more on ONE DIE and ONE PRESS to use only with that ONE DIE than what a new barrel will cost. It is all part of the game and I understood that from day 1.
 
Last edited:
Yeah…. Those latte drinking twinks 😉

View attachment 759414
that photo - i could never understand why they use this position at all, bending forward like this - you cannot hit anything well holding that pose.
snipers would shoot prone. if you`re by the window - you would find something to sit on. but to bend forward like this and bounce in your waist looks pretty stupid. and if shooting standing up, you would usually find something to lean at, to press your left shoulder into, to stop movement.
 
When I went 6.5, I kept barrel life in mind
jut give it time, and you will collect all the rest in the lineup. it took me about of 1 season to play with 6.5cm in bergara lrp2 - then it was an urge for more.
i am still not 100% sold on going long action - kinda want to, but, i know i will not enjoy it too much to shoot it more than 1-2 times a summer.

next for you will be something in 6mm - a dasher, or BR or ARC, just give it time. :)
 
That is what bothers the .40 fan bois. It was literally a cartridge designed for weak people.
Sounds like a 10mm fan boi. Just to set the record straight:
  • 40S&W fits in the same guns and dimensions as a 9mm, 10mm does not. It is MUCH easier to go between 9 and 40. this is why 10mm sucks
  • S&W 40 started from a wildcat created in the 70s. Incidentally, the same wildcard 10mm was created from. In other words, two calibers were created but only one became wildly popular compared to the other.
  • Speaking of popularity, the only reason 10mm is still around is because there is gobs of equipment to load 40, factory or in private hands. In other words, 10mm is a parasite, existing purely on popularity of 40.
  • In all the test FBI and others have done, the candidates were 9,40, and 45. 10mm was never included. Why? 'cause NOBODY wants to shoot that crap for a living!
 
Such people care more about the effects on their shoulders than they do about the game... Those people are either ignorant or unethical hunters. 6.5 on elk, moose, bear, etc. is not pretty. It's barely sufficient for mature WhiteTail at midwest ranges.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
6.5 is perfectly fine for deer
 
There were several other factors more important to me than barrel life, and the 6.5 was far superior.
You are forgetting another upside to a barrel with a long but finite life: you have an opportunity to improve your barrel. Maybe you want to play with chambering and get something that will let you run those awesome BC 156gr Berger EOLs. Maybe you want to try CF barrel.
 
You are forgetting another upside to a barrel with a long but finite life: you have an opportunity to improve your barrel. Maybe you want to play with chambering and get something that will let you run those awesome BC 156gr Berger EOLs. Maybe you want to try CF barrel.
Great point.

But I didn't touch on that because a barrel can be upgraded on any gun. Anyone thinking of getting a gun in a certain caliber based on long barrel life is probably not thinking about ever touching that barrel.
 
Great point.

But I didn't touch on that because a barrel can be upgraded on any gun. Anyone thinking of getting a gun in a certain caliber based on long barrel life is probably not thinking about ever touching that barrel.
Sure but at what cost? Replacing the Barrel in a Remington 700 is a far different story than replacing a carbon Barrel on a Springfield 2020 Waypoint.

Quality rifles will have quality barrels, and they're not cheap. They cost more than some of the cheaper rifles.

Admittedly, not a huge concern unless you shoot quite a bit. But still, not an insignificant expense.
 
I will need a good scope. Not sure what yet. Looking at Swampfox, but need to do a lot of reading, not sold on those yet.

Won't be a competition rifle, but I don't want some cheap junk.
I was considering a swamp Fox scope for a build I’m working on, and watched a lot of reviews on them. They seem to be very good quality for their price point.

And they do have a good price point. Just expensive enough that you are actually getting a good piece of glass.

I picked something else but it was really just a reticle preference.
 
Sure but at what cost? Replacing the Barrel in a Remington 700 is a far different story than replacing a carbon Barrel on a Springfield 2020 Waypoint.

Quality rifles will have quality barrels, and they're not cheap. They cost more than some of the cheaper rifles.

Admittedly, not a huge concern unless you shoot quite a bit. But still, not an insignificant expense.
Let me put it this way ...

This is like a race car driver complaining tires need to be replaced. The expense is part of the sport, if you don't like it, don't get in the sport.

You clearly hate "short" (whatever short means to you) barrel life. Therefore you probably won't shoot 6.5, that is fine. Stick with 308, 223 and move on.

I value a lot of other things far more than replacing a barrel, therefore I am fine with the cost. Be it $300, $400, $600 ... Barrels, just like everything, can be cheap or expensive AF.

Example, I read these guys make great barrels. I could go steel for $429 or Carbon Fiber for $929.


I spent more than $400 on just one die + an Arbor press.
 
Last edited:
Let me put it this way ...

This is like a race car driver complaining tires need to be replaced. The expense is part of the sport, if you don't like it, don't get in the sport.

You clearly hate "short" (whatever short means to you) barrel life. Therefore you probably won't shoot 6.5, that is fine. Stick with 308, 223 and move on.

I value a lot of other things far more than replacing a barrel, therefore I am fine with the cost. Be it $300, $400, $600 ... Barrels, just like everything, can be cheap or expensive AF.
If you compare barrel to factory ammo cost, its not much, even with reloading
 
that photo - i could never understand why they use this position at all, bending forward like this - you cannot hit anything well holding that pose.
snipers would shoot prone. if you`re by the window - you would find something to sit on. but to bend forward like this and bounce in your waist looks pretty stupid. and if shooting standing up, you would usually find something to lean at, to press your left shoulder into, to stop movement.
It’s a stable position. Spread your legs and lean forward into the barricade/cover. Drive into it and load up, not just resting on. It’s actually very stable.

Edit: also prone or setup on a tripod are nice to haves for planned setups. And you’d never setup in a window whenever possible. But this position is for hasty shooting positions, while shooting and moving. There are lots of times a sniper element needs to engage combatants while maneuvering.
 
Last edited:
Such people care more about the effects on their shoulders than they do about the game... Those people are either ignorant or unethical hunters. 6.5 on elk, moose, bear, etc. is not pretty. It's barely sufficient for mature WhiteTail at midwest ranges.

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
The 6.5 CM shoots very similar bullet weights and velocities as 6.5 Swede. … Correct me if I’m wrong, but 6.5 Swede has a pretty good track record against bigger game like caribou and moose. Far from the “not pretty” category.

I’ve also seen longish hunting range (400+ yards) 6.5 CM kills against elk. If you’re hitting a vital zone with a good expanding hunting bullet, it doesn’t make a big difference if you’re using a 140gr 6.5 or a 168gr 7.62. They’ll both penetrate far enough and expand enough. Hell, there are plenty of people using 130gr 7.62 TTSX.

But if you want to say 6.5 is unethical for certain game, then 308 and original power 30-06 is also unethical. Then sure, go with modern pressure 30-06 or some magnums to feel a little more comfortable with the harvesting.
 
The 6.5 CM shoots very similar bullet weights and velocities as 6.5 Swede. … Correct me if I’m wrong, but 6.5 Swede has a pretty good track record against bigger game like caribou and moose. Far from the “not pretty” category.

I’ve also seen longish hunting range (400+ yards) 6.5 CM kills against elk. If you’re hitting a vital zone with a good expanding hunting bullet, it doesn’t make a big difference if you’re using a 140gr 6.5 or a 168gr 7.62. They’ll both penetrate far enough and expand enough. Hell, there are plenty of people using 130gr 7.62 TTSX.

But if you want to say 6.5 is unethical for certain game, then 308 and original power 30-06 is also unethical. Then sure, go with modern pressure 30-06 or some magnums to feel a little more comfortable with the harvesting.
Eh... I guess the roughly 400 ft/pounds in energy advantage the 308 has over the 6.5 means nothing then. Thanks for clarifying.
 
Back
Top Bottom