I’ve always been more of a shooter than a hunter. The 6.5 creedmoor is a nice round. I’ve been more partial to the 6.5x55 since I like Milsurps. The creedmoor just seems to shoot well pretty easily. Any way a couple of guys have been shooting heavier bullets at least for the creedmoor like the 143 eld-x. They are complaining and wanting to go back to heavier calibers. I was thinking that a slightly lighter bonded or copper bullet would be better. I have loaded up some ablr and regular 129-130 accubonds for them to try accuracy wise. Is this a valid thought for hunting. Figured more speed with a bonded bullets or copper/gilding metal would have much more impact while still holding together. The 130’s would still have a sectional density higher than a 170 30 caliber so penetration wouldn’t be bad and if can expand while holding together that a plus. Any way can any hunters on here chime in. I realize this is probably a minefield but it seems to make sense at least to me.
6.5 creedmoor hunting bullets weight choice
- Thread starter sphingta
- Start date
My first ask is "what are you hunting? " I shoot the 143gs eldx in my 260rem and never needed a second shot on any deer, they are also very accurate. Now if you are looking to go after something bigger like elk, then yes you should go for a heavier cartridge.
Now I will admit I am going to start loading my 260 with lighter bullets in the 125-130gr range but for deer and predators, I've now have different rifles for anything bigger.
Now I will admit I am going to start loading my 260 with lighter bullets in the 125-130gr range but for deer and predators, I've now have different rifles for anything bigger.
- Thread starter
- #3
It would just be for whitetail or hogs. I just heard complaints at stuff running much more than they were used to. I use my creedmoor for target shooting not hunting but I like to reload. The creedmoor to me is a 22-250 x6.5 improved. Never going to be a barn burner. I just thought a slightly lighter bullet at higher velocity would give more expansion and a little better results especially since they were shooting 16 and 18” barrels. Nephew and friend wanted short barrels which kinda kills the velocity. Guess I should have mentioned that.
Thebear_78
Handloader
- Sep 30, 2004
- 3,110
- 949
I would use a 124gr hammer hunter. I use that bullet in my 6.5 PRC and it has performed very well. A lighter mono metal bullet will pick up some speed and still penetrate very well.
- Nov 4, 2004
- 25,713
- 10,092
I load my wife's 6.5 CM with the 129 ABLR. It gives .5 MOA accuracy and excellent performance on WT deer. IMHO, it's the perfect bullet for deer hunting.
JD338
JD338
- Thread starter
- #6
I have pretty much stuck to the 140 gr bullets in my 6.5x55 rifles over the years and have taken whitetail, stones sheep, caribou, moose and elk, at distances ranging from 85 to 370 yards. These have worked very well, although on elk the distance should be limited to 200 yards on unwary animals with broadside shots only. I have done more handloading and shooting with the 6.5x55 than any other centerfire cartridge over the years, and am now on my 5th rifle in this cartridge. It is one of my favourites! Fun to shoot and hunt with, accurate, and mild on the shoulder.
I have used the 143 gr ELD-X in the 6.5 Creedmoor on a moose at 15 yards, and the animal expired within 5 yards of where it took the bullet. I never did find the bullet in the thoracic cavity, but it did not penetrate past the vital organs. While it working on game for many people, I prefer a bullet that isn't quite so frangible, and the bonded bullets provide this for me. And bonded bullets are generally easier to easily find accurate loads for than the mono metal bullets.
Since then I have used the Federal 130gr Terminal Ascent ammunition successfully on red stag, fallow buck, arapawa rams and caribou at distances ranging from 40 to 296 yards. Each animal expired quickly to one shot, that fully penetrated the animal, with fallow buck jumping and coming to rest 15 yards downslope of where it took the shot. Between my wife and I, we have 3 rifles in this chambering. My first was one of the first Ruger Hawkeyes to come into Canada after the cartridge was introduced. Today, I have a LH Browning X Bolt All Weather and a Winchester Model 1885 High Wall. I am really liking the Creedmoor! Another that is fun to shoot and hunt with, accurate and easy on the shoulder. My wife liked using it my Browning so much, she sold her 7mm-08 and got herself a LH Browning X Bolt Hunter in 6.5 CM.
Due to case capacities, I will stick to the 140's in the Swede and the 130s in the Creedmoor. I just like the balance of each, in this respect. But this is just my preference. I still want to develop a good load for the Creedmoor with the 130 gr AccuBond, my favourite bullet over the past 25+ years. I am rather impressed with the performance of the Terminal Ascent bullet so far, and am using it in several other cartridges/calibers as well.
The 130 gr bullet has a sectional density of .266, while the 140 gr bullet has .287. This gives the 140 gr bullet an advantage in penetration capacity. But as seen on a red stag taken at 296 yards, the 130 gr TA bullet completely penetrated the 450 lb animals with a double lung shot, and it expired before I could take a second shot, falling within 5 yards of where it took the shot. The 450 lb caribou dropped from the double-lung shot at 40 yards.
As a comparison between the 130 and 140 gr bullets in the 6.5 CM, you will find in factory ammunition, a difference of 150 fps in velocity between the 2 bullet weights. This translates into the following when using energy figures of 2000 ft. lbs of energy for elk, 1500 ft. lbs of energy for moose, and 1000 ft. lbs of energy for deer, with bonded bullets (with mono bullets most use 1500 ft. lbs of energy for elk today - I still prefer the 2000 ft. lbs of energy for elk, but again my own personal preference and experience having taken over 20 elk to date):
- Federal Terminal Ascent 130 gr: 2800 fps w/ 2263 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle, 2629 fps @ 100 yards w/ 1955 ft. lbs of energy, 2305 fps @ 300 yards w/ 1533 ft. lbs of energy, and 2005 fps @ 500 yards w/ 1160 ft. lbs of energy with a drop of 43.1" from a 200 yard zeros
- Nosler AccuBond 140 gr: 2650 fps w/ 2183 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle, 2477 fps @ 100 yards w/ 1907 ft. lbs of energy, 2150 fps @ 300 yards w/ 1437 ft. lbs of energy, and 2030 fps @ 500 yards w/ 1308 ft. lbs of energy with a drop of 44.4" from a 200 yard zero.
I agree in that for elk, a more potent cartridge is the better option. And the average Canadian moose is nowhere near as large as the Alaska/Yukon variety, and is not so tenacious of life as elk are, so are not as difficult to kill with a double lung shot from a cartridge such as the Swede or Creedmoor. (After all, 100,000 moose are taken in the Scandinavian countries each year with the Swede, although they typically use the 156 gr bullets known for their penetration.) My PH in Africa last year has a 6.5 CM in camp that his son, and many of his clients, have used on a wide variety of plains game over the years, up to and including kudu, a 600-700 pound animal. He ensures that they only take quality shot opportunities at game out to about 300 yards. (Of the 7 animals we took the ranges were from 77 (warthog) to 235 yards (kudu)).
Kept to use within reasonable expectations, the Creedmoor will work well on medium sized game with 130-140 gr bullets.
While these are not extensive examples of the performance of the 6.5 Swede and CM, I hope it helps build an illustration of the capacities of these two cartridges on a variety of game, and helps you and your friends in their quest for a load that will suit their needs.
I have used the 143 gr ELD-X in the 6.5 Creedmoor on a moose at 15 yards, and the animal expired within 5 yards of where it took the bullet. I never did find the bullet in the thoracic cavity, but it did not penetrate past the vital organs. While it working on game for many people, I prefer a bullet that isn't quite so frangible, and the bonded bullets provide this for me. And bonded bullets are generally easier to easily find accurate loads for than the mono metal bullets.
Since then I have used the Federal 130gr Terminal Ascent ammunition successfully on red stag, fallow buck, arapawa rams and caribou at distances ranging from 40 to 296 yards. Each animal expired quickly to one shot, that fully penetrated the animal, with fallow buck jumping and coming to rest 15 yards downslope of where it took the shot. Between my wife and I, we have 3 rifles in this chambering. My first was one of the first Ruger Hawkeyes to come into Canada after the cartridge was introduced. Today, I have a LH Browning X Bolt All Weather and a Winchester Model 1885 High Wall. I am really liking the Creedmoor! Another that is fun to shoot and hunt with, accurate and easy on the shoulder. My wife liked using it my Browning so much, she sold her 7mm-08 and got herself a LH Browning X Bolt Hunter in 6.5 CM.
Due to case capacities, I will stick to the 140's in the Swede and the 130s in the Creedmoor. I just like the balance of each, in this respect. But this is just my preference. I still want to develop a good load for the Creedmoor with the 130 gr AccuBond, my favourite bullet over the past 25+ years. I am rather impressed with the performance of the Terminal Ascent bullet so far, and am using it in several other cartridges/calibers as well.
The 130 gr bullet has a sectional density of .266, while the 140 gr bullet has .287. This gives the 140 gr bullet an advantage in penetration capacity. But as seen on a red stag taken at 296 yards, the 130 gr TA bullet completely penetrated the 450 lb animals with a double lung shot, and it expired before I could take a second shot, falling within 5 yards of where it took the shot. The 450 lb caribou dropped from the double-lung shot at 40 yards.
As a comparison between the 130 and 140 gr bullets in the 6.5 CM, you will find in factory ammunition, a difference of 150 fps in velocity between the 2 bullet weights. This translates into the following when using energy figures of 2000 ft. lbs of energy for elk, 1500 ft. lbs of energy for moose, and 1000 ft. lbs of energy for deer, with bonded bullets (with mono bullets most use 1500 ft. lbs of energy for elk today - I still prefer the 2000 ft. lbs of energy for elk, but again my own personal preference and experience having taken over 20 elk to date):
- Federal Terminal Ascent 130 gr: 2800 fps w/ 2263 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle, 2629 fps @ 100 yards w/ 1955 ft. lbs of energy, 2305 fps @ 300 yards w/ 1533 ft. lbs of energy, and 2005 fps @ 500 yards w/ 1160 ft. lbs of energy with a drop of 43.1" from a 200 yard zeros
- Nosler AccuBond 140 gr: 2650 fps w/ 2183 ft. lbs of energy at the muzzle, 2477 fps @ 100 yards w/ 1907 ft. lbs of energy, 2150 fps @ 300 yards w/ 1437 ft. lbs of energy, and 2030 fps @ 500 yards w/ 1308 ft. lbs of energy with a drop of 44.4" from a 200 yard zero.
I agree in that for elk, a more potent cartridge is the better option. And the average Canadian moose is nowhere near as large as the Alaska/Yukon variety, and is not so tenacious of life as elk are, so are not as difficult to kill with a double lung shot from a cartridge such as the Swede or Creedmoor. (After all, 100,000 moose are taken in the Scandinavian countries each year with the Swede, although they typically use the 156 gr bullets known for their penetration.) My PH in Africa last year has a 6.5 CM in camp that his son, and many of his clients, have used on a wide variety of plains game over the years, up to and including kudu, a 600-700 pound animal. He ensures that they only take quality shot opportunities at game out to about 300 yards. (Of the 7 animals we took the ranges were from 77 (warthog) to 235 yards (kudu)).
Kept to use within reasonable expectations, the Creedmoor will work well on medium sized game with 130-140 gr bullets.
While these are not extensive examples of the performance of the 6.5 Swede and CM, I hope it helps build an illustration of the capacities of these two cartridges on a variety of game, and helps you and your friends in their quest for a load that will suit their needs.
RL338
Handloader
- Mar 23, 2017
- 3,621
- 6,070
A 143gr Eld-x with good shot placement is plenty for deer.
- Thread starter
- #9
I can’t argue that. I’m Just trying to find people’s experience. Like I said I’m not much of a hunter but two people I’m familiar with said they didn’t like the results they got. Trying to find a solution through other. People’s experiences. I think the rounds or just to slow through short barrels. Smaller diameter with not much speed seems like it could be better with more speed without much sacrifice in weight. Pretty sure a that a rnfp 405 gr. 45 at 1300 fps isn’t moving too fast but will take an awful lot down fast. I personally think both relied on bigger rounds being more forgiving and less about shot placement but wasn’t there to see the shots. Just wanted to get opinions on having something a little faster and lighter.
Yes, there is a trend to shorter barrels for those who can use a suppressor...and it will definitely affect velocity. A 20" barrel can lose 25+ fps/inch, and reduce the retained energy for penetration and expansion characteristics. For reliable expansion, one wants 1800-1900 fps at the animal.
I also find that many new hunters have unrealistic expectations and think that if an animal isn't DRT and runs that the bullet has failed. This just isn't true or realistic.
Many heart shot animals will run about a 100 yards on that death run, when the shock to the heart kicks in that adrenal gland that kicks their flight response into high gear. Double lung shot animals will also typically run, but there isn't the same death run as seen on a heart shot animal, and the recovery distances are typically about half the distance, or less. With less oxygen making it to the vitals and muscles, they expire even quicker.
I also believe that many who only see the kill shot on a tv hunting show, where the animals may have been taken with a popular frangible bullet that does extensive tissue and nerve damage, go down immediately due to the spinal shot, has given the general public with little or no hunting experience a false impression of the realities of how animals react to the gunshot. And many are animals taken at long distances with cartridges that are less powerful than those many experienced hunters are used to using, and this adds to the unrealistic impressions. Yes, the animals were taken, and many died quickly, but due to those longer distances, the animals were unwary, and not full of adrenaline like a rut crazed bull or buck, or already on full alert...and this does make a difference.
If they are typically hunting deer and hogs, both of which aren't as big, or have as heavy of bone, than the 130-140 gr bullets will work just fine. They will also work on antelope, sheep, goats, caribou, small to medium exotics, and a wide variety of plains game in Africa. The good old 250 Savage has proven very effective on deer and hogs at reasonable distances in the hands of many, for many decades, and is pushing a 100 gr bullet at 2820 fps, with about 500 ft. lbs less energy. But it (6.5CM) cannot be compared fairly to the effectiveness of a 270 Win or bigger.
If they also want to hunt larger game, and at longer distances (over 300 yards), then yes a larger and/or more powerful cartridge will provide that extra punch that the 6.5 CM just doesn't have. If they still want the 6.5, they should move up to the 6.5 PRC, 6.5x284 Norma, 6.5 RPM to get performance more on par to the 270 Win.
I also find that many new hunters have unrealistic expectations and think that if an animal isn't DRT and runs that the bullet has failed. This just isn't true or realistic.
Many heart shot animals will run about a 100 yards on that death run, when the shock to the heart kicks in that adrenal gland that kicks their flight response into high gear. Double lung shot animals will also typically run, but there isn't the same death run as seen on a heart shot animal, and the recovery distances are typically about half the distance, or less. With less oxygen making it to the vitals and muscles, they expire even quicker.
I also believe that many who only see the kill shot on a tv hunting show, where the animals may have been taken with a popular frangible bullet that does extensive tissue and nerve damage, go down immediately due to the spinal shot, has given the general public with little or no hunting experience a false impression of the realities of how animals react to the gunshot. And many are animals taken at long distances with cartridges that are less powerful than those many experienced hunters are used to using, and this adds to the unrealistic impressions. Yes, the animals were taken, and many died quickly, but due to those longer distances, the animals were unwary, and not full of adrenaline like a rut crazed bull or buck, or already on full alert...and this does make a difference.
If they are typically hunting deer and hogs, both of which aren't as big, or have as heavy of bone, than the 130-140 gr bullets will work just fine. They will also work on antelope, sheep, goats, caribou, small to medium exotics, and a wide variety of plains game in Africa. The good old 250 Savage has proven very effective on deer and hogs at reasonable distances in the hands of many, for many decades, and is pushing a 100 gr bullet at 2820 fps, with about 500 ft. lbs less energy. But it (6.5CM) cannot be compared fairly to the effectiveness of a 270 Win or bigger.
If they also want to hunt larger game, and at longer distances (over 300 yards), then yes a larger and/or more powerful cartridge will provide that extra punch that the 6.5 CM just doesn't have. If they still want the 6.5, they should move up to the 6.5 PRC, 6.5x284 Norma, 6.5 RPM to get performance more on par to the 270 Win.
Wolfshead
Beginner
- Feb 5, 2022
- 189
- 484
I agree with Blkram, a lot of people have unrealistic expectations of bullets and how they perform.
Maybe they don’t really understand?
One thing to remember is that all of the animals you’ve mentioned are hunted quite often with a bow and arrow.
Whitetail deer are a curious thing. I shot the Buck in my avatar with a 300 grain .50 cal muzzleloader at 167 yards.
The bullet shattered the front right leg just below the shoulder, tore the heart in half, with about 1/3 if it disintegrated and he ran another almost 200 yards into a swamp before he died.
I personally am a fan of the Accubonds. They are accurate, all the ones I’ve recovered have approximately 65% of the bullet remaining and I’ve never found one from a broadside shot on deer.
I love the 150s in my 30-06, and my .308 win., which is (kinda?) on the light side for these calibers, from what I see others shoot.
I would recommend them with no problem!
Maybe they don’t really understand?
One thing to remember is that all of the animals you’ve mentioned are hunted quite often with a bow and arrow.
Whitetail deer are a curious thing. I shot the Buck in my avatar with a 300 grain .50 cal muzzleloader at 167 yards.
The bullet shattered the front right leg just below the shoulder, tore the heart in half, with about 1/3 if it disintegrated and he ran another almost 200 yards into a swamp before he died.
I personally am a fan of the Accubonds. They are accurate, all the ones I’ve recovered have approximately 65% of the bullet remaining and I’ve never found one from a broadside shot on deer.
I love the 150s in my 30-06, and my .308 win., which is (kinda?) on the light side for these calibers, from what I see others shoot.
I would recommend them with no problem!
- Thread starter
- #12
