6.5 creed vs 30-06

[robtattoo]

As to your deer dropping to the shot with a broadhead, as an experienced bowhunter myself all i can say is that you must've spine shot a helluva lot of deer. Having bowhunted myself for around 20 years, being a former PBS member & having literally all my friends be bowhunters, the only critters I've ever personally witnessed, or heard of first hand dropping at the shot, were spine shot. Most have run at minimum 30yds, the larger percentage far further, simply because that's how arrows work. There isn't the sudden blood pressure drop or deflation of the lungs like you get with a bullet. It's a slower process altogether & the 'bang flop' just doesn't happen as it does with a good bullet, from a suitable rifle. I've seen deer simply not react to being hit with a good COC broadhead & carry on feeding for 20 or 30 seconds, I've seen them tuck, buck, rear, backflip, roll & go through all sorts of acrobatics before setting off at a dead sprint, but the only time I've seen them drop, they had their spine severe or shattered & were very alive, but paralyzed.

 

[robtattoo]

This thread inspired me to load up some 178 grain ELD-X over 58.5 grains Ramshot Hunter for my dad’s 30-06.

View attachment 529500View attachment 529501

Dangit,I nearly came to the range this afternoon too!

 

[Laramie]

Ok, this is the crux of the disagreement it seems. Can we agree that something is only “real” when it can be measured, repeated and validated consistently? If so, please explain how and what “shock” is, how it is measured; and exactly how, when two wounds created are identical in the exact same spot- one applies “shock”?

Trying to keep an open mind...

In my opinion, what I have seen has been measured, repeated, and validated many times over a 30+ years. I will openly admit that I have not tried, nor condoned, intentionally using some of the smaller calibers combined with the bullets you are discussing. I do have a couple recent experiences with 6.5s vs 30 cals but in the spirit of this discussion, will chalk up what I saw to possible history bias based on what I expected to see.

Questions-
Are the elk you have witnessed recently been primarily cows or bulls? General region of the country?

Were there any quartering shots on big bulls taken where the bullet had to either pass through the paunch to reach the vitals or go through the point of the shoulder? If so, what were your observations?

What was your motivation for using and encouraging these small calibers on elk?

 

[cuttingedge]

I didn't though, did I.
I simply pointed out your oxymoron & equated it to another oxymoron. I neither belittled, nor made fun of you in any way.

But you're a better man than me, so I'm possibly wrong.

We finally agree on something!

 

[Coopsdaddy]

Just get both is my fix.My only two big game calibers.

 

[BarCO]

Trying to keep an open mind...

In my opinion, what I have seen has been measured, repeated, and validated many times over a 30+ years. I will openly admit that I have not tried, nor condoned, intentionally using some of the smaller calibers combined with the bullets you are discussing. I do have a couple recent experiences with 6.5s vs 30 cals but in the spirit of this discussion, will chalk up what I saw to possible history bias based on what I expected to see.

Questions-
Are the elk you have witnessed recently been primarily cows or bulls? General region of the country?

Were there any quartering shots on big bulls taken where the bullet had to either pass through the paunch to reach the vitals or go through the point of the shoulder? If so, what were your observations?

What was your motivation for using and encouraging these small calibers on elk?

The motivation is they kill just as efficiently and people are more accurate.

 

[Laramie]

The motivation is they kill just as efficiently and people are more accurate.

My response was meant for Form but I'll entertain.

The above statement is In your opinion.

That still doesn't answer my question though. What was the motivation for trying initially? And through that trial and error process of trying to find the minimum that would "kill just as efficiently", were any animals lost or wounded? I'm guessing you weren't pioneering this trend so I don't expect an answer I just wonder why...

More accurate is a pretty broad statement that takes for granted way too many variables. Easier to handle, lower recoil, etc. should really take that place in the argument imo. Remember, recoil happens after a bullet has exited the barrel so it has zero bearing on the accuracy of the rifle.

 

[waldo9190]

My response was meant for Form but I'll entertain.

The above statement is In your opinion.

That still doesn't answer my question though. What was the motivation for trying initially? And through that trial and error process of trying to find the minimum that would "kill just as efficiently", were any animals lost or wounded? I'm guessing you weren't pioneering this trend so I don't expect an answer I just wonder why...

More accurate is a pretty broad statement that takes for granted way too many variables. Easier to handle, lower recoil, etc. should really take that place in the argument imo. Remember, recoil happens after a bullet has exited the barrel so it has zero bearing on the accuracy of the rifle.

Except that recoil is one of the biggest factors why people develop poor shooting habits. Give me a T3X in 223 and one in 300 WSM and I can probably tell you which one the vast majority of people will shoot more accurately at common hunting distances.

That said, if one can shoot that large caliber magnum effectively, then all the power to you.

 

[Formidilosus]

Questions-
Are the elk you have witnessed recently been primarily cows or bulls? General region of the country?

Both. ID, MT, WY.

The bull versus cow thing is another that belief that most have, that has not shown to be the case at all. Bulls have not been any harder to kill, or moved farther after hits, or took more hits than cows. Actually the opposite. The cows on average have moved farther and taken more shots before falling than the bulls. This is most likely due to the cows being in large herds and trying to stay with the herd.

Were there any quartering shots on big bulls taken where the bullet had to either pass through the paunch to reach the vitals or go through the point of the shoulder? If so, what were your observations?

Lots. The 223, 6mm, and 6.5 threads are filled with pictures from me of broken “shoulders”. The shoulder thing is another oft mentioned “issue” that has no bearing in reality. The scapula is as thin as standard cardboard; you can see your hand through it held up to the sky and a Havalon blade can be stabbed through it without breaking. How do people believe that a piece of brittle cardboard is going to stop a bullet?


This is the “shoulder” of a bull moose. It is far larger than any elk scapula.






That moose was killed with a 223/77gr TMK. The only part that is thicker than cardboard is the scapula ridge, and that ok, it went through that and both lungs just fine-





As for going through the guts on a quartering away shot- no. There are no bullets that can guarantee not getting caught in a full stomach and then failing to penetrate to the chest cavity. I’ve caught 30cal and 338 bonded and mono bullets in deer getting caught by a stomach full of grass. If I were to take a shot where the bullet can’t be put into the lungs first- I put it in the back of the neck, or shoot the pelvis/hips at the spine breaking the animal down knowing that an immediate follow-up shot will be required.

This is an follow-up shot when the elk turned after the first hit-



402 yards, raking, that is the exit after going through stomach and the femur. There is nothing in the front half of an animal that harder on bullets than a femur. It also is from a 223 and 77gr TMK.

What was your motivation for using and encouraging these small calibers on elk?

The only thing I am encouraging is for people to shoot more. What I’m trying to do is provide information that isn’t based in fallacies, myths, or dogma. Due to several reasons I have killed and seen a lot (a lot) of game killed- in the thousands.
Due to an education in terminal ballistics and a data driven thought process I tracked what happens when those animals were shot. I was brought up where a 7mm Rem Mag was at the low end of acceptable for deer, and really a good deer rifle was a 300 win mag or better. Except for two with a 30-06, the first 120-130 deer I killed were with a 300 win mag or a 300 RUM. Then others started hunting too, and I killed and watched a lot die to 308’s, 243’s, etc.
What became evident very quickly when shooting that many animals was that bullets mattered, caliber didn’t, and poor shots almost never happened with the 243.

When I went back and compiled the results of the first 100 animals with the 243/95gr NBT combo against last 100 animals with the 300WM using the most destructive bullet available, the 243 had no guts shots or wounds, and only 4 deer out of those 100 moved after the hit. It “killed” better than the 300 wm.
Moving a few years forward people were asking why I didn’t hunt with an AR15- my response was because “223 is marginal”. To which I got challenged on because we knew exactly what 223 with good bullets did to 200lb mammals. So, I shot a deer with a 62gr Gold Dot. It died suddenly. So I did it again. And again it died suddenly. This continued with bonded and mono 223’s, NBT’s, V-max’s, and some with HPBT match bullets for a few years. Then, the 77gr TMK was developed- and that changed the whole show. The Gold Dot and Fusions, etc are good bullet and they kill well, however the 77gr TMK is 223 maximized.

Long story, not as long- what has been seen across the board is that everyone regardless of skill level- from world class shooters and extremely experienced hunters, to brand new shooters and first animal, everyone- shoots less recoil and muzzle blast better.
The 223/77gr TMK combo has the highest success rate out to 450’ish yards of any cartridge and bullet combination my group has seen.
We’re averaging 1 out of 100 animals with the 223/77gr TMK combo that is anything other than decisive. That’s on antelope, multiple deer species, bear, elk, and moose from muzzle contact to 803 yards (I’m not recommending anyone with anything shoot 800 yards), and non of those are waiting for “perfect” shot presentations. What is consistently seen from a huge variation in hunters/shooters with recoil above 20ft-lbs (magnums) is 2-3 out of every 10 animals are problems- whether that’s missing or wounding.


On demand success on animals is why I and others use “small” cartridges. I’m not a “fan” of anything except success. 223/6mm/6.5/whatever are not my “favorite”. I get to see quite a few people each year hunt and kill animals and the factors that show to have the largest effect are in order- on demand field shooting ability, rifle system that stays zeroed and works correctly, emotional control, and projectile design. Caliber has shown zero effect on “killing”. When we go hunting I want the animal to die as quickly as possible with the least amount of fuss. In hundreds of animals with them; 22cal, 6mm, and 6.5 does that with the least issues.

 

[ProStaffSteve]

As to your deer dropping to the shot with a broadhead, as an experienced bowhunter myself all i can say is that you must've spine shot a helluva lot of deer. Having bowhunted myself for around 20 years, being a former PBS member & having literally all my friends be bowhunters, the only critters I've ever personally witnessed, or heard of first hand dropping at the shot, were spine shot. Most have run at minimum 30yds, the larger percentage far further, simply because that's how arrows work. There isn't the sudden blood pressure drop or deflation of the lungs like you get with a bullet. It's a slower process altogether & the 'bang flop' just doesn't happen as it does with a good bullet, from a suitable rifle. I've seen deer simply not react to being hit with a good COC broadhead & carry on feeding for 20 or 30 seconds, I've seen them tuck, buck, rear, backflip, roll & go through all sorts of acrobatics before setting off at a dead sprint, but the only time I've seen them drop, they had their spine severe or shattered & were very alive, but paralyzed.

I have killed 3 of 6 deer I’ve taken with spine shots. Always blamed my shotgun for not being sighted well, then I did it again this year with a rifle. Not a pretty sight, shows and media rarely depict the scene but it is not a pretty sight. I opt towards slitting their neck or putting a second bullet in them after this. I look forward to a day where I have land/time/money to become a better shot

 

[BarCO]

My response was meant for Form but I'll entertain.

The above statement is In your opinion.

That still doesn't answer my question though. What was the motivation for trying initially? And through that trial and error process of trying to find the minimum that would "kill just as efficiently", were any animals lost or wounded? I'm guessing you weren't pioneering this trend so I don't expect an answer I just wonder why...

More accurate is a pretty broad statement that takes for granted way too many variables. Easier to handle, lower recoil, etc. should really take that place in the argument imo. Remember, recoil happens after a bullet has exited the barrel so it has zero bearing on the accuracy of the rifle.

I had rotator cuff surgery so shifted and found out the effectiveness on elk didn’t change. The 6.5 was much easier to shoot and practice with.

 

[Nickofthewoods]

I had rotator cuff surgery so shifted and found out the effectiveness on elk didn’t change. The 6.5 was much easier to shoot and practice with.

When was your surgery and how long did it take before you were shooting again? Im assuming your surgery was on your shoulder that you hold your rifle into? I might need right rotator cuff surgery this summer so wondering if it will affect my fall hunting plans.

 

[deserteagle99uzi]

6.5CM for ELR and ease of use. It can easily kill elk and mule deer at long ranges with competent shot placement. If you are going after bigger game than an elk the .30-06 for sure.

 

[Flyrodr]

When was your surgery and how long did it take before you were shooting again? Im assuming your surgery was on your shoulder that you hold your rifle into? I might need right rotator cuff surgery this summer so wondering if it will affect my fall hunting plans.

Not the OP, but had rotator cuff surgery on my "gun shoulder". I don't know that there's a simple, single answer. My ortho said the recovery depended largely upon the surgery needed - - - simple tear, multiple tears (I had three complete tears), age, general health and fitness, etc. My doc wasn't a shooter, and was more familiar with activities like swinging a bat or golf club, digging, chopping with an ax, etc. I'm thinking he had me hold off shooting a centerfire for, IIRC, about four months (just not sure). He'll likely err on the side of caution, and I'd certainly listen to him. I do remember my doc saying ("threatening" might be a better description) that I did not want to endure the "rebuild" if I either screwed up the initial repair, or let it go until the tears were so bad they couldn't be fixed normally. He had some auto analogy like comparing a tune-up to a complete engine rebuild.

Edited to add that I like 6.5s. Also, and perhaps I missed the thought in all the previous threads/discussions, but it sure seems like most (lots of, anyway) people are on board with a .223 (with the 77 TMK) killing everything short of (and maybe including) a T. Rex, while some (several?) consider that the 6.5 (w/o a lot of specificity bullet-wise) will hardly kill a whitetail.

 

[Nickofthewoods]

Not the OP, but had rotator cuff surgery on my "gun shoulder". I don't know that there's a simple, single answer. My ortho said the recovery depended largely upon the surgery needed - - - simple tear, multiple tears (I had three complete tears), age, general health and fitness, etc. My doc wasn't a shooter, and was more familiar with activities like swinging a bat or golf club, digging, chopping with an ax, etc. I'm thinking he had me hold off shooting a centerfire for, IIRC, about four months (just not sure). He'll likely err on the side of caution, and I'd certainly listen to him. I do remember my doc saying ("threatening" might be a better description) that I did not want to endure the "rebuild" if I either screwed up the initial repair, or let it go until the tears were so bad they couldn't be fixed normally. He had some auto analogy like comparing a tune-up to a complete engine rebuild.

Thanks for this info! Mine is a likely a minor tear from an incident that happened over 10 years ago so hopefully not a complete rebuild like you say. The 4 months period sounds about right from other surgeries I've had so maybe when I get around to scheduling this I'll try for at least a 6 month cushion before I'll need to shoot.

 

[BarCO]

When was your surgery and how long did it take before you were shooting again? Im assuming your surgery was on your shoulder that you hold your rifle into? I might need right rotator cuff surgery this summer so wondering if it will affect my fall hunting plans.

It was mid June, I hunted mid October, but didn’t practice prior. My father in law checked zero for me, my wife, mother in law were the packers. Dr ws more concerned with me slipping and reach for a branch. You need to be really careful. It was my right shoulder, I shoot right. Did my l ft the following fall but after the season. Rotators are no fun, but feel great now

 

[Treerat-sniper]

This thread inspired me to load up some 178 grain ELD-X over 58.5 grains Ramshot Hunter for my dad’s 30-06.

View attachment 529500View attachment 529501

I'm going to be playing with Hunter powder in my Tikka as soon as it warms up, going to try a few different bullets. I have high hopes for the 178s, they're a lot less expensive than Berger 190 hunters.

 

[pirogue]

This thread inspired me to load up some 178 grain ELD-X over 58.5 grains Ramshot Hunter for my dad’s 30-06.

View attachment 529500View attachment 529501

I’ve seen cheek pads before, but not as thick as the stock they’re sitting on.

 

[General RE LEE]

I'm going to be playing with Hunter powder in my Tikka as soon as it warms up, going to try a few different bullets. I have high hopes for the 178s, they're a lot less expensive than Berger 190 hunters.

Excellent 30-06 powder, especially 165-180s. I use magnum primers.

 

[Rich M]

My response was meant for Form but I'll entertain.

The above statement is In your opinion.

That still doesn't answer my question though. What was the motivation for trying initially? And through that trial and error process of trying to find the minimum that would "kill just as efficiently", were any animals lost or wounded? I'm guessing you weren't pioneering this trend so I don't expect an answer I just wonder why...

More accurate is a pretty broad statement that takes for granted way too many variables. Easier to handle, lower recoil, etc. should really take that place in the argument imo. Remember, recoil happens after a bullet has exited the barrel so it has zero bearing on the accuracy of the rifle.

A heavy recoiling gun will recoil itself off the target. The energy pushing the bullet will move the barrel.