Opinions on the 6.5 Rem . mag

[Arkie-06]

Does anyone out there shoot this particular rifle.It seems to be a potent deer slayer from what I have been able to read about it ,but it seems not to be very populer.Maybe it's a rifle to get just because you want one?

[7magWoodsman]

The 6.5 Rem. Mag. was introduced by Remington in 1966 and is a definate deer stopper but unless you handload look elsewhere ammo is sometimes hard(impossible) to find...maybe the 6mm Rem. or the 260 Rem. which although neither is quite as "hot" as the 6.5 mag are still great flat shooting cartridges...If you just want a reason to get a mid sized magnum go with the 7mm Rem. Mag. it might not be as hot as some of the new mags but with 42 years under its belt and ammo available all over the world it is a good choice as long as you can handle roughly 20ft lbs of recoil...

[Big Paulie]

Dear 7 Mag,

   Your answer is totally on the money.  There is no reason to get a 6.5 Mag, even if you really want one.  It is a failed and obsolete cartridge, that was a total failure from the beginning and remains one to this day.  Recoil and muzzle blast were very bad, and it burned up barrels.  From the time they were first brought out, everyone realized you just didn't need one.

  For purposes of hunting on the lighter side of the 7 Mag, I think that the new 25 WSSM, or the 260 Remington would fill any need.  If a magnum is really desired, then the .257  Weatherby Magnum is a tremendous round, and was one Roy Weatherby's favorites.

   As far as being a deer slayer, the 6.5 Remington Mag does not drop them any harder or cleaner than a .308 Winchester, the .270, the .280, the 7 mag, the 6.5 Swede, or any of a group of 20 other rounds.  You can only kill a deer so dead.

    Just my opinions.
 Big Paulie

[Arkie-06]

Dear 7 Mag,

   Your answer is totally on the money.  There is no reason to get a 6.5 Mag, even if you really want one.  It is a failed and obsolete cartridge, that was a total failure from the beginning and remains one to this day.  Recoil and muzzle blast were very bad, and it burned up barrels.  From the time they were first brought out, everyone realized you just didn't need one.

  For purposes of hunting on the lighter side of the 7 Mag, I think that the new 25 WSSM, or the 260 Remington would fill any need.  If a magnum is really desired, then the .257  Weatherby Magnum is a tremendous round, and was one Roy Weatherby's favorites.

   As far as being a deer slayer, the 6.5 Remington Mag does not drop them any harder or cleaner than a .308 Winchester, the .270, the .280, the 7 mag, the 6.5 Swede, or any of a group of 20 other rounds.  You can only kill a deer so dead.

    Just my opinions.
 Big Paulie[/quote         ...................................      No I certainly don't need one, but the cartridge has some appeal to me, namely shooting 6.5 projectiles FAST, plus it would give me a chance to dabble in something other than  a 30-06.

[Lawdog]

Arkie-06,

There is nothing wrong with the 6.5 Remington Magnum or it's big brother the .350 Remington Magnum.  The problem is Remington chambered these two fine cartridges in the wrong rifle.  Both the 6.5 and .350 need a longer barrel to get the most out of these cartridges.  I wouldn't mind having them in rifles having 24" barrels.  Lawdog
 

[Arkie-06]

Lawdog, I agree with you on the barrel length for "the old short magnums" a 24 inch barrel would be best. I see Ruger chamberes the 350 Rem. mag with the 24 inch barrel, maybe they will offer the 6.5 next, I believe that would be a dandy rifle.I still can't believe they put 22 inch barrels on all of the new short magnums, oh well. I would think with all of the 6.5 shooters that it would be more popular than it is, and after hearing of the effiiancy of the .264  bullets and the speed of the  6.5 Rem. mag it would be a great seller. If Ruger chambers any rifles for it and if Remington chambers it   in the Model 700 it could  make a comeback. Take Care.

[Big Paulie]

Dear Arkie,

My apologies for such a strong comment.  I can now see why you would be interested in the 6.5 magnum, because nothing comes close for pushing the 6.5 at high speed.  The 30-06 is a fine round, but it is so good that it can get boring.  Starting new projects, like yours, is what keeps this sport fun.

As others have mentioned, finding factory ammo is almost impossible, so you might want to check first and be sure you can buy 300 or so of new  brass.

Best regards, Big Paulie

[Arkie-06]

Big Paulie, no need to apoligize  for the strong opinion. I have had an "itch " for a new rifle for some time now, but with the slew of new cartidges  out there decideing can be sorta tough! Anyhoo the 6.5 Remmy kinda intriged me as  a fast and efficiant number built on a short action, that would shoot as flat as a 270. Have never seen one or shot one, but from what I have been able to gleen from reading ballistic tables is that it betters or equals the 6.5-284 cartridge  and can be had over the counter, even from the shorter barrel  of the 673 guide rifle.And yes the 25WSSM  is also a  a very intreasting round that has  a lot going for it. I might just simplify things  and get a Tikka Hunter in 30-06  and hunt with it this year , hear they are a great rifle.  Take Care  and best regards. Arkie.

[onesonek]

Ditto Lawdogs comment, they are about 30yrs ahead of their time. If Remington had chambered them in a light weight short action 24"barreled mountain rifle, their success would be much different. And it (6.5) aint any harder on barrels than say the 25-06.

[Big Paulie]

Remington has a long history of bringing out great new cartridges, in the wrong style rifles and at the wrong times!   It is almost as if they are trying to make them fail.

[oso45-70]

If Remington would have brought these two rifles out in some thing like the 722 I for one would have bought one or both. To me the 660 was a clumsy, ugly ill fitting mistake. In my opinion Remington has shot its self in the foot more than any other gun mfg. I hate that because i like the feel of most of the fifles they came out with.......Joe............

[still_learning]

I was totally expecting heavy recoil and "dumb blonde" type performance from the rifle.  What I got was felt recoil similar to the 6.5x55.  In terms of accuracy, I got the expected 2.5 to 3 inch groups with factory loads.  I found, however, that it is not a difficult round to handload and have worked up several bullet weights that will shoot under MOA.  I now think the rifle and cartridge combination were under rated.  One thing did live up to the reputation, however.  Muzzle blast!  One things for sure, it draws a crowd at the range.

[dkhnt]

Guys -

Everyone is missing the best of the bunch, the .280 Remington.  When looking at a ballistics table it out performs the .270 Win. and the .30-06 hands down at all distances but it is more impressive in the retained velocity and energy at 200 yards and beyond.  It doesn't start off as fast as the .270 but it retains more velocity further down range.  Look at the ballistics, I think that you'll be surprised at what you've overlooked simply because it isn't as popular as the others, although there are a lot of them sold.

[oso45-70]

dkhnt,
I must say A-Men to the 280 Rem. I have shot about every rifle that you can think of and when i got my 280 i knew it was the end of the medium bore rifle search. I still have safes full of other calibers but for deer and elk i take my 280 and feel as though i have more than enough to do the job and do it well. Good luck.........Joe..............