6.5 Berger 156grn

88man

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
858
Location
Pa
Anyone shoot this bullet yet? Does the 1-8 stabilize it??
 

midwesthunter

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 7, 2015
Messages
393
Location
Northern IN
Unfortunately they are very marginal over the 140's. A slight wind and energy advantage, you need a lot of HP to get full use of this bullet. I tested these when they first announced in my 6.5 WSM, see data below.

1566246636251.png
 

sbhooper

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
3,858
Location
North Platte, Nebraska
I think that there is a point of diminishing returns on this long bullet thing. I shoot the 147s and I think that they are about the limit in a Creed. I personally believe that the standard 6.5s (Creed, .260 etc) really shine with the 130-140-grain bullets, but that is just my opinion.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2019
Messages
37
Location
Eastern Tennessee
I know this thread is nearly dead but I will put in my $.02. if you look into Applied Ballistics length versus BC vs speed graphing for the 6.5 mm Boat tail type bullets, you will note the most "efficient" bullet weight vs BC vs speed is actually the 143 grain.

The 143 gets the most "bang for the buck" and is why some companies specifically make their hunting rounds in this weight. Now like a .308 and .223, you can push up and down in weight of bullets for other applications and it works just fine downrange. But if you are looking for the most efficient and best flying bullet for a certain caliber, the folks at AB have already done the work and you just have to find what works best for your rifle.

Some shoot 140's, 143's, 147's, or the 150 series better. It all depends on what the rifle was chambered for and how hot you load the round.
 

ImBillT

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
877
Anyone shoot this bullet yet? Does the 1-8 stabilize it??
It stabilized great in my 8.5” twist Sunday morning. It shot the best I’ve had that particular gun shooting, which isn’t saying much because I just haven’t gotten to shoot very well. I think my wildcat was just running too much velocity to shoot all that well. The 156gr has slowed it down enough to make it look good. It definitely shows promise now. Time will tell. I didn’t have time to set up the chronograph, but suspect it’s in the 3050-3150fps range.

That twist recommendation is for getting full BC in just about any circumstances. At my home range and 60 degrees, according to Berger’s twist calculator, I’m losing 1% of BC. At 7000ft and 0 degrees, I’m back to full BC. That’s all with an 8.5” twist.
 
Last edited:

brockel

Well-known member
Joined
May 13, 2016
Messages
1,058
Location
Baker,MT
They thump steel noticeably harder at 750 yards compared to the 140 Bergers. The ballistics coefficient is holding true out to that distance for me. Hoping to test one out on an antelope this weekend if we don’t get to much snow
 

mtmuley

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
5,323
Location
montana
Interesting. Got a bunch of Hammers in various cartridges headed for North of Shelby. Snow happens up there on a sunny day. mtmuley
 

ImBillT

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
877
They thump steel noticeably harder at 750 yards compared to the 140 Bergers. The ballistics coefficient is holding true out to that distance for me. Hoping to test one out on an antelope this weekend if we don’t get to much snow
I figure it should thump an elk harder. With any luck I’ll know between the 19th and 23rd.
 

PrairieHunter

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2018
Messages
1,058
Location
Laramie, WY
The downside of the short action 6.5's is not enough powder to push a big heavy long bullet like that to it's full potential. Kinda like driving V-6 mustang. It looks good but missing something under the hood. It's ok on the car as that power costs money/mileage and for a high school girl who drives it she will never know the difference, but on the gun the V-6 mustang (6.5 creed) is a choice you make.

Is it really that much heavier/harder on the wrist to cycle a long action like a man?
 

BuzzH

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
11,138
Location
Laramie, WY
The downside of the short action 6.5's is not enough powder to push a big heavy long bullet like that to it's full potential. Kinda like driving V-6 mustang. It looks good but missing something under the hood. It's ok on the car as that power costs money/mileage and for a high school girl who drives it she will never know the difference, but on the gun the V-6 mustang (6.5 creed) is a choice you make.

Is it really that much heavier/harder on the wrist to cycle a long action like a man?
I used to think short action rifles were unnecessary and the weight savings insignificant. I also used to think the answer to every rifle woe was faster velocity.

Now, having shot a short action of some sort for 39 years...and also shooting the magnums for a long time, I find myself gravitating more and more to short action rounds.

I much prefer shooting lower recoiling rifles, they’re just more fun to shoot. They’re easier on the budget, easier on the shoulder, easier on brass and barrels too.

From what I’ve seen, barely a nickels worth of difference between say how a 7-08 kills elk compared to a 7 rm.

I have no problem shooting magnums well, love my 7 rm and 338. Still have a soft spot for the 300 win as well.

But implying that you’re not a man unless you shoot a long action rifle tends to prove that you just like to shoot your mouth more than rifles. The short action rounds from 243 through 308 are mean rounds that kill the crap out of big game....efficient and effective.
 

ImBillT

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
877
While I don’t think manliness actually factors in, I do think that the advantages of a short action over a long action are a little over blown. There are bullet weights and bore diameters that are probably better served by a little more powder capacity, and if that’s the direction that you wanna go, I don’t think you should get too wound up about sticking to a short action. Last time I checked, German Salazar completely tore up NRA High Power using a 30-06 to drive relatively modest BC bullets at little more than .308 Win velocities. Guess those long actions just suck.
 

BuzzH

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
11,138
Location
Laramie, WY
While I don’t think manliness actually factors in, I do think that the advantages of a short action over a long action are a little over blown. There are bullet weights and bore diameters that are probably better served by a little more powder capacity, and if that’s the direction that you wanna go, I don’t think you should get too wound up about sticking to a short action. Last time I checked, German Salazar completely tore up NRA High Power using a 30-06 to drive relatively modest BC bullets at little more than .308 Win velocities. Guess those long actions just suck.
Punching shoulders interests me a lot more than punching paper.

To each their own.
 

ImBillT

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2018
Messages
877
Punching shoulders interests me a lot more than punching paper.

To each their own.
So because German wasn’t a hunter he’s not a valid data point?

If a man can shoot 460 shots at 1000yds and only 11 fall outside of the 20” ten ring, and that comes from a long action, sling supported, with iron sights, then you can’t convince me that a long action isn’t good enough to hunt with just because none of those bullet hit an elk. No I’m not saying that’s the same as shooting an elk at 1000yds(not advocating it either) At a match you have wind flags, and typically 2-5 sighters before you start shooting for record. The point, is that the only meaningful differences between a L/A and a S/A are weight and bolt throw, and both are differences are minimal.

There valid reasons to go one way or the other in action length, but the short action crowd contains a lot of folks that will tell you that a short action is the only way to go. I own mostly short actions, but I disagree.
 
Last edited:

PrairieHunter

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2018
Messages
1,058
Location
Laramie, WY
I used to think short action rifles were unnecessary and the weight savings insignificant. I also used to think the answer to every rifle woe was faster velocity.

Now, having shot a short action of some sort for 39 years...and also shooting the magnums for a long time, I find myself gravitating more and more to short action rounds.

I much prefer shooting lower recoiling rifles, they’re just more fun to shoot. They’re easier on the budget, easier on the shoulder, easier on brass and barrels too.

From what I’ve seen, barely a nickels worth of difference between say how a 7-08 kills elk compared to a 7 rm.

I have no problem shooting magnums well, love my 7 rm and 338. Still have a soft spot for the 300 win as well.

But implying that you’re not a man unless you shoot a long action rifle tends to prove that you just like to shoot your mouth more than rifles. The short action rounds from 243 through 308 are mean rounds that kill the crap out of big game....efficient and effective.
Dude, I was clearly kidding.

But thanks for once again showing your true colors. Trying to take a joking conversation to personal chatter seems to be your reaction when I post. You are trying way to hard. But by all means carry on. LOL

Did you enjoy the bait? You sure swallowed it hook line and sinker. LAffin
 

sbhooper

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
3,858
Location
North Platte, Nebraska
The downside of the short action 6.5's is not enough powder to push a big heavy long bullet like that to it's full potential. Kinda like driving V-6 mustang. It looks good but missing something under the hood. It's ok on the car as that power costs money/mileage and for a high school girl who drives it she will never know the difference, but on the gun the V-6 mustang (6.5 creed) is a choice you make.

Is it really that much heavier/harder on the wrist to cycle a long action like a man?
Interesting twist, but not all accurate. You should look at all of the elk and other big game, that the low-powered, short-action rounds have killed at extended ranges. It pretty well shoots a hole in the power theory. Most game is not killed at ridiculous ranges, anyway. If you are going out specifically to shoot stuff at 750 yards, then you have totally lost the essence of what hunting is about.

I have always liked my 7 mags and have killed lots of game with them, but the short actions do everything that I need easily, with lower recoil and without burning nearly as much powder (if you do lots of shooting, you notice the difference in cost). If you think that you are going hunting expressly for the purpose in killing stuff in the next county, then you are probably correct, in that the magnums will give you an edge. Both have their place, but neither is the do-all, end-all and the choice is ultimately personal.
 

BuzzH

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 9, 2001
Messages
11,138
Location
Laramie, WY
So because German wasn’t a hunter he’s not a valid data point?

If a man can shoot 460 shots at 1000yds and only 11 fall outside of the 20” ten ring, and that comes from a long action, sling supported, with iron sights, then you can’t convince me that a long action isn’t good enough to hunt with just because none of those bullet hit an elk. No I’m not saying that’s the same as shooting an elk at 1000yds(not advocating it either) At a match you have wind flags, and typically 2-5 sighters before you start shooting for record. The point, is that the only meaningful differences between a L/A and a S/A are weight and bolt throw, and both are differences are minimal.

There valid reasons to go one way or the other in action length, but the short action crowd contains a lot of folks that will tell you that a short action is the only way to go. I own mostly short actions, but I disagree.
I disagree. Weight matters when you’re lugging a rifle further than from the front seat of a car to a bench.
 
Top