You’re talking about it on a forum.
6.5 Creedmoor vs .270
- Thread starter greenghost
- Start date
Facts:
-They will both do the job well
-The 6.5 has significantly less recoil, therefore you (everyone) are more likely to shoot it better
-Both have ammo available everywhere
-the 6.5 has better BC and therefore wind resistance for a given weight
-Both available in just about any rifle
-significantly wider selection of ammo for the 6.5, but the 270 isnt hurting for options
I would go with the 6.5 personally and I really like both.
-They will both do the job well
-The 6.5 has significantly less recoil, therefore you (everyone) are more likely to shoot it better
-Both have ammo available everywhere
-the 6.5 has better BC and therefore wind resistance for a given weight
-Both available in just about any rifle
-significantly wider selection of ammo for the 6.5, but the 270 isnt hurting for options
I would go with the 6.5 personally and I really like both.
My plan if I stayed with the 270 would be to get a carbon six or X caliber 1:8 twist and throw it in a chassis.
But I’ve heard great stuff about 6.5 and would broadly get an sig cross.
What’s your opinion between the two rounds?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
V2Pnutrition
WKR
I was in a similar boat- had the .270 (Savage Axis) and had filled a few tags with it. I ended up with a suppressed 6.5CM and haven't touched the .270 since. More than happy to chat differences/similarities with you if you're interested and it would help.
Bottom line for me came down to this: I could keep "putting lipstick on a pig" (as a friend put it) with trigger upgrades, barrel hacks, and upgrades (Savage Axis) or get a more "modern cartridge" (his words, not mine) that already had what I wanted. I picked up a Tikka 6.5 compact (factory 20" barrel, factory 1:8 twist, etc.). It's been as close to what I wanted out-of-the box as you can get (I did throw vertical grip and cheek rest on the factory stock). I have found it to be as effective as my .270- if not more so (a la lighter recoiling round means I simply shoot it better...the suppression is definitely an added part of that as the .270 was. never suppressed).
MarkOrtiz
WKR
270 is a great round, but I wouldn't put a bunch of money into it. I have a 270 win and my wife and I have used it to take a majority of our game with it. I like it, and will probably upgrade the stock, but that is about it. I would not rebarrel to it or pay the money to have it threaded. Newer rounds do the same thing with less recoil and wind drift is the biggest factor for me here in NV. I would go 6/.25 creedmoor or 6.5 prc personally.
This is really great info. Thank you. I think this is the option I am leaning. I feel like it will be better overall. I know that the main differences are recoil and BC. Anything else you noticed overall?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
replying to your signature
I have a M70 in 270 WCF that has been used to take virtually every medium and big game on this continent. Bought new by my great-grandfather in '42. Great rifle, great cartridge.
ikesnipecity
FNG
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2023
- Messages
- 26
skip both and get a 25-06.
That same argument can be said about 80% of the cartridges out there if not more! I guess we should just get rid of all of them except for your short list!
Pretty sure that you can ask any major manufacturer rifles/ammo and the 270 is one of their product lines. Maybe you should send them a letter and explain why they should just do away with the “obsolete” cartridge.
V2Pnutrition
WKR
I think those are two pretty convincing points to camp on- even if all other things were equal (for me anyway). A bullet with less drift at distance and my ability to put it right where I want it is all I could ask for.
With that said, the Tikka action is exactly what you'd expect it to be and that's light years above my Axis. As other have said, ammunition availability and selection is much greater, too (on the 6.5 vs .270).
This very well could've just been my gun, but the .270 refused to shoot anything over 130 grains with any kind of consistency (I hand load 130 grain Bergers and they fly great). The 6.5 has taken anything I throw at it. The bullet out of the 6.5 is actually heavier (140 gr and 143 gr) than the one I shoot out of the .270 (primarily have stuck to 140 gr ELD-M's). Both have been capable of taking elk and mule deer at shot distances of ~400-450 yards or so.
All of that said: I'll never sell the .270 as I fell in love with the writings of Jack O'Connor after receiving it (my first rifle). So there's some nostalgia and feels there, too.
You can't choose wrong. It's a case of pros, cons, and which caliber stacks the most in one column and least in the other.
Southern Lights
WKR
A long action 270 holds additional rounds vs. short action fat cartridge magnums. Also usually feeds better.
I like my 6.5CM, but the velocity is about 500fps slower than the 270 which definitely I see on impact. Still both work fine putting animals down. The one thing I like on the 270 velocity difference is that if an animal is moving off a bit I don't feel like I need to re-range constantly. Also if I am estimating a distance because the LRF is not giving me a good read, the 270 gives a smaller elevation window error.
I like my 6.5CM, but the velocity is about 500fps slower than the 270 which definitely I see on impact. Still both work fine putting animals down. The one thing I like on the 270 velocity difference is that if an animal is moving off a bit I don't feel like I need to re-range constantly. Also if I am estimating a distance because the LRF is not giving me a good read, the 270 gives a smaller elevation window error.
So when 6.5 Creed came out, the 270 stopped killing animals?
It doesn’t refute the point. Manufacturers make all sorts of garbage due to demand, but the demand can be real while still being wrong if reviewed objectively.
What a ridiculous fallacy. This is like saying we can't call the Model T Ford obsolete because the F150 exists, just because you can still drive a Model T. You and Cdnance would benefit from reading the definition of obsolete:
"Outmoded in design, style, or construction."
All sorts of stuff that is obsolete is widely used still, largely because it's what someone already has. Choosing obsolescence in lieu of superior options should be scrutinized. But if someone is going to come to a FORUM to have the ludicrous polarization of 6.5 PRC versus 270 Winchester that has been asked, then nobody should be clutching their pearls at the resulting conversation that one of those choices is an obsolete round, and both are a silly choice regardless for the OP's first deer gun. Again using the metaphor of the old truck versus new, if the OP had asked "Model T or 2020 F150 for first vehicle and I need it to tow a 10,000 lb trailer", it would be more clear to you.
OK, following your line of thought.
A 6.5 is a little bit better percentage-wise at most things compared to a 270.
In contrast, an F-150 is somewhere between ALOT better and in a completely different universe at virtually everything compared to the Model T.
One is is an example of complete obsolescence, one is an incremental improvement by most metrics.
I don't entirely disagree; it's just that the majority of small arms cartridges are distinguished by nuances that if you chose to, could argue they're almost all effectively the same thing.
So in that case,
either
every cartridge that is an improvement over an existing cartridge has made the old one/s obsolete, in which case there are maybe a couple dozen worthwhile cartridges today
or
nothing is obsolete because they are all incremental improvements.
I suppose theres some subjectivity to that answer. But if its still extremely effective at the given task. In my book, its not obsolete.
Edit:
One that could come close to putting some cartridges out to pasture IF it takes off commercially is 7BC(and whatever may come after) because it promises some truly significant improvements. But ALOT of things have to go right for that to happen.
Southern Lights
WKR
If I posted two targets at 100 yards: One of my 6.5x55 and one of my 6.5CM, there isn't a single person reading this thread that could tell me which shot which. At long range I still can't tell the difference. They shoot exactly the same with same bullets.
The 6.5x55 is 131 years old. Is it obsolete or is it just that cartridge design has just shown marginal improvements over these older designs?
It's fun to go on about modern cartridge design, but often it's just a rehash of what has been done already in various forms. Sharper shoulders? Yes. Small fat cases? Yes. 1:8 twist barrels? Yep.
Marginal improvements, but nothing Earth shaking. I like my 6.5CM and the factory ammo is really good vs. the hodge podge of 270 quality you can buy. Some of the 270 ammo is really good though like Hornady Precision Hunter. Easily match grade in my rifle.
The main advantage the newer cartridges give is they spec out far tighter tolerances than older versions which is largely where the accuracy difference likely originates. The newer rifles are built to a far more consistent standard and the ammo is match spec off the shelf which is a huge benefit. If you buy any 6.5CM ammo off the shelf it's likely going to shoot where 270 ammo is all over the show. Again, some is extremely good though and easily matches what my 6.5CM is doing.
The 6.5x55 is 131 years old. Is it obsolete or is it just that cartridge design has just shown marginal improvements over these older designs?
It's fun to go on about modern cartridge design, but often it's just a rehash of what has been done already in various forms. Sharper shoulders? Yes. Small fat cases? Yes. 1:8 twist barrels? Yep.
Marginal improvements, but nothing Earth shaking. I like my 6.5CM and the factory ammo is really good vs. the hodge podge of 270 quality you can buy. Some of the 270 ammo is really good though like Hornady Precision Hunter. Easily match grade in my rifle.
The main advantage the newer cartridges give is they spec out far tighter tolerances than older versions which is largely where the accuracy difference likely originates. The newer rifles are built to a far more consistent standard and the ammo is match spec off the shelf which is a huge benefit. If you buy any 6.5CM ammo off the shelf it's likely going to shoot where 270 ammo is all over the show. Again, some is extremely good though and easily matches what my 6.5CM is doing.
Hondo64d
WKR
I’m assuming you’re looking at going with a factory rifle, in which case the .270 would be limited to a 1:10 twist rate. As much as I love the .270, I can’t really see any significant advantage to it over the 6.5 Creedmoor, and with you already having an ‘06, I’d go with the 6.5 Creedmoor. With both loaded with their highest BC bullets, the .270 will be a little flatter and the range for a 2000fps impact velocity will be a little farther, but it will recoil a bit more. The CM will do a little better in the wind and recoil a bit less, but won’t catch the .270 in impact velocity until about 800 yards. CM will have better factory ammo options.
John
When you run the best BC hunting bullets the 6.5 prc vs the 270 it has 2-2.5in less drift at 500 yards. The 270 and 6.5 cm are about the same and if you prefer mono bullets or tougher bullets like the barnes, TA, etc the 270 is actually significantly better. If you compare an eldx 6.5 load to a 130 corelokt 270 load of course it will look better but there are many .5+ 270 bullets that work in 1-10. So a couple inches at 500 yards wind drift hardly makes a 270 obsolete and kind of sad when that is “progress” after 100 years. The main advantage of the 6.5 cm over the 270 for hunting is recoil. That it is it.
People get suckered with the marketing that there are big differences but there are not. These small differences add up in final scores when things average out across many shots in a competition but meaningless on a cold bore shot for hunting. This is why all the guys with heavy prs rifles shooting light cartridges with high BC bullets fail all the youtube one shot hunting challenges so miserably
Lou
People get suckered with the marketing that there are big differences but there are not. These small differences add up in final scores when things average out across many shots in a competition but meaningless on a cold bore shot for hunting. This is why all the guys with heavy prs rifles shooting light cartridges with high BC bullets fail all the youtube one shot hunting challenges so miserably
Lou
This is nonsense. By that definition, every new model year truck would make the previous year “obsolete”.
Yeah the 270 is an old school cartridge, but it is still being produced, used, and effective every day! It is far from obsolete, or useless.
Maybe they don’t have the flashiest packaging or a cool new name, but it is still very much alive and well.
Similar threads
Featured Video
Latest Articles
- TT#64 Josh Boyd Elk Hunting Strategies for Every Season
- Aaron Davidson of Gunwerks
- TT#63 Dirk Durham’s Art of Elk Calling
- BIG Buck Stories with the Dirty Giants Podcast
- TT#62 Brian Barney Hunting Bulls without Calling
- Hoyt Alpha AX-2 SD Review
- Kuiu Kenai vs Outdoor Vitals Vario Hooded Jacket Review
- Hoyt RX-9 Ultra Review
- Hunting Vampire Bucks & Building an Optics Kit
- Darton Sequel ST2 35 Review