6.5 Creedmoor/260 for Deer, Elk, and whatever else.....

[Castle Rock]

I’m not worried about the scapula. That’s pretty thin and there are videos of cup and core blowing right through that and expanding after.

I’m more interested in quartering to shots that have to go through this bone.

View attachment 907672

High velocity bullets shatter bones easily

Thinking about running the 100 grain Partition started at 3200 fps from my 260 Remington. Because I have them mostly and the doubtful possibility of getting a shot pats 300 yards. Also thinking abut using the 120 gr. Ballistic tip.

I used the 100 grain ballistic tip in my 260AI as my main hunting rifle for over a decade with complete success

 

[FredH]

High velocity bullets shatter bones easily

I used the 100 grain ballistic tip in my 260AI as my main hunting rifle for over a decade with complete success

Any especially long shots? Say out past 400 yards? They do fall off in speed and wind deflection. Big fan of Ballistic Tips and Partitions. Some fragmentation with a good balance of penetration.

 

[gerry35]

My Grandson is pretty scrawny and they don't kick much, loud though.

I used enough Varget to get 3000 fps, it was pretty mild. With earplugs and muffs your load should be good for him. If you have H 4895 that could be another option.

 

[Castle Rock]

Any especially long shots? Say out past 400 yards?

No, that was before rangefinders were around

 

[FredH]

No, that was before rangefinders were around

The kid isn't going to shoot past 200 yards, I might push it to 350. Just usually not necessary.

 

[Castle Rock]

The main reason for using it was because it shot flat as a laser beam to 300

 

[FredH]

The main reason for using it was because it shot flat as a laser beam to 300

What powder were you using?

 

[Castle Rock]

4350

 

[FredH]

4350

Have plenty of I4350. And a pound of Reloder 19. Thought I would burn that up just of be rid of the container.

 

[MuleyBuck]

Last year, my wife and I shot antelope and deer with 140 Accubonds and 140 Federal Powershoks. The Powershok was an impressive hole at 220 yards but the antelope ran about 60 yards before tipping over. Both bucks with the Accubond took less than 10 steps and tipped over with fist sized wound channels at about 120 and 160 yards each.

This year, I’m leaning towards 147 ELD-M or 100 ELD-VT. Which one should I use/test and why? Leaning more towards the 100 ELD-VT. What could I expect to see out of both bullets?

 

[Harvey_NW]

This year, I’m leaning towards 147 ELD-M or 100 ELD-VT. Which one should I use/test and why? Leaning more towards the 100 ELD-VT. What could I expect to see out of both bullets?

I would encourage the 147 ELD-M over the VT. The 147 is destructive enough but will also penetrate, the VT is designed to detonate and lacks penetration. Not saying it won't work because it will, but from a less than optimal shot angle or meat damage perspective I would stick to the 147.

 

[Jhconnected]

I wouldn’t see a reason to go with the VT over the M. The M is already pretty frangible.

 

[Castle Rock]

A better option than either is the 130

 

[The Guide]

A better option than either is the 130

Which 130 and why? When I did ballistic calculator profiles for the 120 ELDM, 130 TMK, 140 ELDM, 143 ELDX, and 147 ELDM with either box velocities or predicted handloaded book loads, the 147 kept it's velocity to a longer range with less drop past 500 yards. My experience on game with the 147 has been excellent on deer and antelope from 100 to 600 yards. Not sure why they don't load the 130 ELDM in the 6.5CM since they load it in the 260.

In all reality, antelope are thin skinned, fine boned, narrow chested animals that often don't take as much damage to the nearside of the wound channel since with out a shallow neck length, you are into the offside lung before fragmentation occurs.

Jay

 

[Castle Rock]

Time of flight and midrange trajectory are more important to me in a general hunting gun than extreme range performance, 130 ELDM or 123 scenar

 

[The Guide]

Time of flight and midrange trajectory are more important to me in a general hunting gun than extreme range performance, 130 ELDM or 123 scenar

In 2 of my rifles, 147 ELDM in a 6.5CM and 130 ELDM in a 260 both with 24" barrels, the time of flight at 300 yards (mid range) is 0.01 seconds different and the trajectory is 0.3" different with a 100 yard zero. As we know, you can handload to make ammo do what you want or need but there really isn't as much difference at sub 400 yard ranges.

Jay

 

[jjohnsonElknewbie]

I'd never taken a close look at the 147 vs the 130 ELDM ballistically. I assumed the superior G1 of the 147 would rule the day. However, according to Gordon's sim, at 3100 MV vs 3300 MV in a 6.5 WSM, the 130's speed gives it the drop advantage and almost makes up for the 147 windage advantage. At 500 its essentially a tie in windage and at 800 the 147 only has a .2 mil advantage.

147 @ 3100

500

2,534

0.54

-2.0

0.8

800

2,227

0.92

-4.2

1.3

130 @ 3300

500

2,569

0.52

-1.8

0.9

800

2,182

0.90

-3.9

1.5

The powder is also essentially a wash at 71 grains of N560 vs 70 grains of N565, and according to Bison the recoil is also a tie.

I have N565 and 147 on hand for my load dev, and although the 130 has slightly better drop and time on target, I don't think its significant enough to change direction. The higher MV may also decrease barrel life faster on an already short lifespan.

EDIT: One significant advantage the 130 may have will be the ability to maintain faster MV in a shorter barrel without sacrificing downrange performance. This I will keep in mind if I decide to go the short route. Upon quick review the same 71 grain load should theoretically still deliver 3,000+MV in an 18" barrel. However, the burn rate is 93% and H4350 (sub 90% fill rate) and Accurate 4350 (92% fill) deliver 3,000 MV with 100% burn.

 

[atmat]

Time of flight and midrange trajectory are more important to me in a general hunting gun than extreme range performance, 130 ELDM or 123 scenar

You are not going to see any difference in time of flight, and very minimal trajectory difference, and midrange distances.

 

[packgoatguy]

Small sample size... but my son shot his bear this spring with a 147eldm. Full pass through with small exit. The bear died, but seemed to take longer than the others we have taken with 140eld which have not exited, but have been fairly swift deaths.

 

[Jhconnected]

I'd never taken a close look at the 147 vs the 130 ELDM ballistically. I assumed the superior G1 of the 147 would rule the day. However, according to Gordon's sim, at 3100 MV vs 3300 MV in a 6.5 WSM, the 130's speed gives it the drop advantage and almost makes up for the 147 windage advantage. At 500 its essentially a tie in windage and at 800 the 147 only has a .2 mil advantage.

147 @ 3100

500

2,534

0.54

-2.0

0.8

800

2,227

0.92

-4.2

1.3

130 @ 3300

500

2,569

0.52

-1.8

0.9

800

2,182

0.90

-3.9

1.5

The powder is also essentially a wash at 71 grains of N560 vs 70 grains of N565, and according to Bison the recoil is also a tie.

I have N565 and 147 on hand for my load dev, and although the 130 has slightly better drop and time on target, I don't think its significant enough to change direction. The higher MV may also decrease barrel life faster on an already short lifespan.

EDIT: One significant advantage the 130 may have will be the ability to maintain faster MV in a shorter barrel without sacrificing downrange performance. This I will keep in mind if I decide to go the short route. Upon quick review the same 71 grain load should theoretically still deliver 3,000+MV in an 18" barrel. However, the burn rate is 93% and H4350 (sub 90% fill rate) and Accurate 4350 (92% fill) deliver 3,000 MV with 100% burn.

The 147 has such a high BC it makes up for its weight difference. Based on these numbers I’d go 147.