Author Topic: Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?  (Read 2496 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline firstshot

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 241
  • Gender: Male
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« on: September 02, 2004, 05:19:24 PM »
I've got a M96 I've customized with a 22" barrel, synthetic stock,  & a nice 2lb adjustable trigger.  It's accurate, very light recoil, a pleasure to shoot and deadly on deer.

I've just gotten back into reloading (currently for my BAR 30-06) and have been thinking about getting "modern" 6.5x55 so as to take better advantage of reloading.

Are ther any advantages (if any) to be gained by being able to reload for a "modern" 6.5x55 vs my old reliable M96?

If so, what gun make would you recommend?  Sako, Remington, Browning, Tikka........?

firstshot
Life is too short to hunt with an ugly gun !!

Offline onesonek

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
  • Gender: Male
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2004, 02:22:45 AM »
The only advantage you will gain (realistically), is range. And not alot at that.  ? is, do you need it?
Dave

Offline Mikey

  • GBO Supporter
  • Moderators
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8734
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #2 on: September 03, 2004, 03:11:25 AM »
firstshot:  you have a M96 and I have a M38.  Would I want a more modern rifle to handle (slightly) hotter loads - nope, wouldn't bother.  There is very little on the North American Continent the 6.5 Swede can't handle and handle well, short of large dangerous game, with the loads it was designated for.  It will handle whitetail, boar, up to medium bear, moose and elk.  There is just something about that 6.5mm pill at its modest velocities that really makes it work.  It is one of those 'darlings' of the european shooting society and they shoot some really large critters with it.  HTH.  Mikey.

Offline huntsman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #3 on: September 03, 2004, 04:32:57 AM »
The velocity gain you might achieve with a modern rifle will never have a material impact in any hunting situation I can imagine. Even if you gained 200 fps in muzzle velocity, the terminal performance at ranges under 500 yards would be almost indistinguishable, except that at close range you would probably need premium bullets to ensure bullet integrity. The trajectory would gain you less holdover at long distances, but you would still be holding over quite a bit, so the difference is academic. It's still a matter of knowing how your load will perform and knowing exactly how to aim at long distances to hit your target. The long, high SD 140 and 160 grain bullets will put down even large game at velocities down into the 1600 fps range. Your current rifle will push those bullets well above that velocity far beyond any sane shooting range. Plus you will be giving up some of that "sweet shooting" quality (mild recoil) you like in your current rifle to gain the extra velocity you don't really need. Not a good trade off no matter how you look at it, IMO. 8)
There is no more humbling experience for man than to be fully immersed in nature's artistry.

Offline dawei

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 427
  • Gender: Male
    • My Brothers Rest Here
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2004, 05:12:52 AM »
Quote from: Mikey
firstshot:  you have a M96 and I have a M38.  Would I want a more modern rifle to handle (slightly) hotter loads - nope, wouldn't bother.  There is very little on the North American Continent the 6.5 Swede can't handle and handle well, short of large dangerous game, with the loads it was designated for.  It will handle whitetail, boar, up to medium bear, moose and elk.  There is just something about that 6.5mm pill at its modest velocities that really makes it work.  It is one of those 'darlings' of the european shooting society and they shoot some really large critters with it.  HTH.  Mikey.


How does the 6.5 Swede compare to the 260 Remington?

Offline Buckfever

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 665
New Tikka T3, 6.5-55
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2004, 07:53:46 AM »
I didn't have a 6.5-55 so I opted for a new one.  I have shot Hornady 140gr ammunition and the gun is a tack driver.  If your gun shoots standard factory ammunition and it is safe, and special to you I would stay with what you have.  Don't get me wrong I absolutely love my 6.5-55 T3 Hunter but if we both shoot the same ammo I am sure the deer won't know the difference.  There is something to be said for what you shoot and I fully understand that.  Computers don't last for 3 years and these older Swedish Mausers, sometimes 100years old, still more than hold their own.  I think that is very cool!!!!!!!!!!!!

Buckfever

Offline huntsman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #6 on: September 03, 2004, 09:39:22 AM »
dawei:

The .260 Rem has about 10% less case capacity than the 6.5x55 SE and comes in more models of modern rifle manufacture. An elk, moose, bear, or deer isn't going to care squat about either one of those facts when it hits the ground from a .264 bullet fired from either cartridge.
There is no more humbling experience for man than to be fully immersed in nature's artistry.

Offline Buffalogun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #7 on: September 03, 2004, 04:48:16 PM »
firstshot,

I have a M70 Win. Featherweight and a 1915 M96/38 Carl Gustaf Swedish Mauser chambered to the 6.5x55. Just happens that my Featherweight is throated long, as is the Carl Gustaf. My Featherweight likes bullets seated about .005 off the rifling and this is not possible with most 120g bullets.

The shortest bullet I have used in the M70 is the Hornady 129g and it shoots very accurately. Even this bullet is seated quite shallow in the case.
However, I think most other modern rifles might be throated a little shorter, so you might gain a little advantage there, if you want to shoot the shorter bullets. But, maybe your custom barreled M96 is throated short, already?

For most deer hunting the flatter trajectory and little extra horsepower won't be needed. I think it is the best cartridge for deer!

As for the .260 Rem., it would allow you to have similar performance in a short-actioned rifle. That may or may not mean much to you.

Buffalogun 8)
Don't worry about the mule..........just load the wagon!

Offline dawei

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 427
  • Gender: Male
    • My Brothers Rest Here
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #8 on: September 03, 2004, 06:24:20 PM »
Quote from: huntsman
dawei:

The .260 Rem has about 10% less case capacity than the 6.5x55 SE and comes in more models of modern rifle manufacture. An elk, moose, bear, or deer isn't going to care squat about either one of those facts when it hits the ground from a .264 bullet fired from either cartridge.


Thanks huntsman. Kind of puts the new "wonder cartridges" in perspective doesn't it? Every year at deer camp someone has a new hotshot; ie: 260 Rem, 25WSM, Rem SAUM, etc. Me; I just keep filling the freezer with my 30/30.

Offline firstshot

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 241
  • Gender: Male
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #9 on: September 03, 2004, 06:40:04 PM »
Thanks to all for your comments!!!!  Just about what I expected.  It would be "nice" to have a new 6.5x55....but as most of you mentioned, there really wouldn't be that much to gain over my current M96.

How many of you reload for your 6.5x55?  Only thing I've ever shot in mine are factory 140Grn Remington CorLokts from Wal-Mart.  There sure is a lot more bullet variety out there if you reload.

How many of you guys reload for your 6.5x55?  What kind of bullets / powders do you use.  What kind of velocities are you getting, VS. barrel length?

My load manuals say the "loads are intended for use in NEW firearms".  How far UNDER the max loads do I need to stay to be safe with my M96?

firstshot
Life is too short to hunt with an ugly gun !!

Offline huntsman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #10 on: September 03, 2004, 06:56:43 PM »
Yep, I'm more convinced with each passing year that what gun one hunts with has 99% to do with what makes the hunter feel good in his or her head and about 1% to do with what the gun is or isn't actually capable of doing. Heck, a .223 loaded with a partition or similarly tough expanding bullet will take down an elk if you've used your gun enough to know exactly what it will and will not do. And if you just love the thrill of getting knocked out of your stand and wearing a sore shoulder for a couple of days you will thoroughly enjoy varmint hunting with a .45-70 or .444 Marlin or other such light cannon.

As you are likely aware, seeing you still tote a good ol' 30-30, velocity, trajectory, and energy are all highly overrated when it comes to making kills on game. Conversely, weapon fit and familiarity, understanding and staying within your own limits, and the ability to consistently put a bullet where you aim in the field are sorely overlooked and unheralded qualities, but they bring home more venison than all other factors combined.
There is no more humbling experience for man than to be fully immersed in nature's artistry.

Offline Buffalogun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #11 on: September 04, 2004, 05:28:29 PM »
firstshot,

I could quote my loads, but mine are made up for my "modern" rifle.
They would probably be a little too warm for the M96. However, several manuals list loads for "all rifles" and then some for "modern" rifles.

I like Ken Waters' Pet Loads and the Lyman 47th and the Speer 12th and the...!

Buffalogun 8)
Don't worry about the mule..........just load the wagon!

Offline kombi1976

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1390
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #12 on: September 04, 2004, 11:01:17 PM »
Firstshot, the European ammo companies pack the Mauser rounds full of powder, use heavier projectiles than US companies & have a lot of faith in those weapons to be able to stand up to the rigours of modern chamber pressures. So long as your action is tight and smooth there's no reason to believe it won't take anything but the very hottest loads. And to be frank I can't see the reason you'd need to subject a 6.5x55 to those sort of pressures when it shoots so well at the regular ones. If you're after a different sort of rifle like the Steyr Mannlicher Classic or Sako Hunter then I could see the reason for this but if you are happy with the way the M96 shootsat the moment you'll only find more satisfaction by reloading. You can tune it to make it more accurate and every bullet company out there makes 6.5mm bullets so you can really experiement.
8)

Cheers & God Bless

.22lr ~ 22 Hornet ~ 25-20 ~ 303/25 ~ 7mm-08 ~ 303 British ~ 310 Cadet ~ 9.3x62 ~ 450/400 NE 3"

Offline MGMorden

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2093
  • Gender: Male
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #13 on: September 07, 2004, 03:32:42 PM »
firstshot: I've also got a customized m96 Swede (barrel cut to 22", drilled for scope mounts, wooden sporter stock, low swing safety, extra power firing pin spring, replacement sporter trigger).  Picture

I have only had it for about 8 months now, so I haven't hunting with it a whole lot (season is in here and I have gotten 1, but I was using my .30-06 at the time).  I've managed to get it down to MOA accuracy at 100 yards though.   I do handload for it.  My current load I'm using is 40.3 grains of Hodgdon H380 under a 140gr Speer Hot-Cor bullet.  The bullet is seated very far out (I'm not next to my loading bench else I'd look up the exact OAL) as my rifle is long throated.  It seems to work very well for me, and I wouldn't feel at all handicapped if a big buck stepped out in front of me and I had the Swede with me.  It's also much more pleasant to shoot at the range compared to my .30-06 (and my 7.5x55 and 7.62x54R milsurps), though I've learned that in the field for a single shot I don't even notice the recoil of the '06.  One thing for sure though is that my m96 costed a lot less than a brand new 6.5x55 would have costed (I bought it already "done up"), and it shoots well.  What more could I want?

BTW, my Speer manual simply states that the max charge for all listed loads should be reduced by 1.0gr for use in military Mauser actions.  I've taken to applying that rule to any 6.5x55 data I see unless it specifically states it's ok for Swede Mausers.

Offline Buckfever

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 665
Nice Sporter
« Reply #14 on: September 07, 2004, 04:34:35 PM »
Mr MGMorden,

What a fine looking firearm.  I couldn't agree with you more , it looks great and probably shoots better than some new rifles.  Also the 6.5-55 I have I had some Nosler Partitions loaded and they were just to bearly touch the lans.  They are very accurate and load and eject perfectly. This bullet sticks out a ways past factory ammo and it sure looks WICKED!  Hey there something special about a slightly different gun or caliber it sets you apart and it is just fun!  I guess tradition is what I think of with older guns.   Buckfever

Offline Buffalogun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #15 on: September 08, 2004, 03:02:22 PM »
MGMorden,

MG, I like your rifle and have been thinking of having a custom rifle made from my 1915 Carl Gustafs(all the #'s don't match). In addition to the rifle, I have also an additional new swedish barrel for the M96.
In looking at your picture, it looks like the barrel still has the step in it. Is this so?
My local gunsmith does very good work and guarantees .50" grouping. I thought I'd have him chamber the new barrel shorter(for 120-140g bullets). He also puts rifles in very nice mannlicher stocks.

Buffalogun 8)
Don't worry about the mule..........just load the wagon!

Offline MGMorden

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2093
  • Gender: Male
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #16 on: September 09, 2004, 05:54:51 AM »
Quote from: Buffalogun
MGMorden,

MG, I like your rifle and have been thinking of having a custom rifle made from my 1915 Carl Gustafs(all the #'s don't match). In addition to the rifle, I have also an additional new swedish barrel for the M96.
In looking at your picture, it looks like the barrel still has the step in it. Is this so?
My local gunsmith does very good work and guarantees .50" grouping. I thought I'd have him chamber the new barrel shorter(for 120-140g bullets). He also puts rifles in very nice mannlicher stocks.


Yes, my barrel still has the step and the rear sight band on it.

BTW, if you wanted to keep the Swede Mauser in original condition (they're getting a bit rarer these days), Turkish Mausers, though large ring/98 actions, are threaded for small-ring barrels.  These run about $65 (worth a lot less than your Swede), and you could have your extra barrel fitted to a cock-on-opening action rather than cock-on-close.  Naturally it's up to you, but I'm just giving you some other options to think about.  Admittedly though there is a nice appeal to having the cartridge chambered in it's "original" action (at least for me), which would sort of make the Turkish action chambered in 6.5x55 a little less "sexy", but that's just opinionated.

Offline Buffalogun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #17 on: September 09, 2004, 02:17:19 PM »
MG,

Thanks for the info on the Turkish Mauser options. I hadn't thought of that, since I already have the M96. I bought my M96 about 10 yrs ago and paid only $80.00 for it. The stock has quite a few dings and scrapes and most of the blueing is gone. The # on the stock doesn't match the rest of the rifle, so the condition "disc" doesn't apply. The front sight is loose. I bought it mainly for the action. I'm thinking I'll have it made up into a nice little 20" barreled carbine and use the 120-140g bullets. I may have the "smith" turn the step out. Or, I may have a custom barrel put on.
I also have a M70 Featherweight in 6.5x55 that is quite accurate and is long-throated and the longer bullets can be shot from it.

Thanks,
Buffalogun 8)
Don't worry about the mule..........just load the wagon!

Offline kombi1976

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1390
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2004, 05:27:29 PM »
There have been a number of references to the throating on various chambers/barrels and the effect this has on the rifle's ability to fire heavier or lighter projectiles. What exactly is this all about?
I know that depending on the rifling twist some barrels won't stabilise heavier bullets.
How does a shorter throat stop you using the longer(?), heavier bullets in a 6.5mm?
Does a long throat prevent the use of the lightest bullets made for 6.5mm?
I don't own any sort of 6.5mm rifle but I'd like to invest in one, probably a Swede or 6.5x54, one day and this interests me.
8)

Cheers & God Bless

.22lr ~ 22 Hornet ~ 25-20 ~ 303/25 ~ 7mm-08 ~ 303 British ~ 310 Cadet ~ 9.3x62 ~ 450/400 NE 3"

Offline Buffalogun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #19 on: September 10, 2004, 04:53:11 PM »
kombi1976,

I'll see if I can put it together.

Imagine an empty case chambered in your rifle, with the breech closed, as if you were going to fire. If you could see inside, you would see a space or gap between the case mouth and the beginning of the rifling.
This gap is the throat. And, this gap stays the same, once the rifle is built.
The rifling will allow a bullet to protrude out of the case only a certain amount. This means that the rifle will accept cartridges that are no longer than the distance from the rifling to the bolt face(maximum C.O.L.)

All of this is pretty much meaningless to the folks who shoot factory loads. But, the handloader can vary the C.O.L as long as he doesn't go beyond the maximum C.O.L. If you go beyond the maximum C.O.L., the bullet is jammed into the rifling and pressures will soar, creating an unsafe situation.

Per rifle, only a certain amount of the bullet is allowed to protrude out of the case because of the maximum C.O.L. Now, within any caliber there are several bullet weights. Some are shorter, some are mid-length and some are longer.  Since the cartridge can't be longer than the maximum C.O.L., the extra length of the longer bullets must protrude down into the case and this extra bullet length takes up space inside the case that could be used for more powder.

Now, back in the late 1800's/early 1900's the world was making the change from long, heavy, slow bullets to shorter, lighter, faster bullets. Some of the rifles that were made during the "long, heavy, slow" period were built with long throats.
The M96 Swede is one of these, along with some others. The original load for the M96 included a 156g RN bullet and in order to get full powder space the rifles were built with long throats so that more of the bullet would be outside the case rather than inside the case. This left more room for powder.

After years of handloading, most handloaders would probably agree that most bullets shoot better when seated less than .010" from the rifling. In a rifle that is long-throated such as the M96, it just isn't possible to seat the shorter bullets this close to the rifling because a certain amount of the bullet must be inside the case in order for the case to hold the bullet securely. This means the shorter bullets must be seated further from the rifling and sometimes this isn't good for accuracy.

This is why I want my custom M96 built with a shorter throat that would enable me to seat 120g bullets at .005 off the rifling. With the current long throat I can't do this. I can still shoot the long 156-160g bullets from the shorter throated rifle, but I will lose some powder space. I have a M70 Featherweight that is also throated long and if I want I can shoot the longer bullets from it.

A long throat doesn't prevent the use of short bullets, but if the short bullets have to make a long jump to the rifling, the accuracy may suffer.

I hope this is clear!

Buffalogun 8)
Don't worry about the mule..........just load the wagon!

Offline kombi1976

  • GBO Supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1390
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #20 on: September 12, 2004, 06:01:50 PM »
Based on that information, would I be best off purchasing a 6.5 Swede made during WWII as it's shorter throat would allow much more scope in terms of bullet weights?
8)

Cheers & God Bless

.22lr ~ 22 Hornet ~ 25-20 ~ 303/25 ~ 7mm-08 ~ 303 British ~ 310 Cadet ~ 9.3x62 ~ 450/400 NE 3"

Offline Buffalogun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #21 on: September 12, 2004, 11:08:07 PM »
kombi1976,

My 1915 "Swede" is a M96/38, which means that it was made as a M96 long rifle with 29" barrel, and then called back to the armory around 1938, when the barrel was shortened to 23.5.

At about the same time, the standard loading was changed from the 156g load to the lighter 139g load. However, I don't know if the rifles were re-chambered to shorter throats or not.

The only way to know for sure would be to measure the throat of the rifle that you intend to purchase.


Buffalogun 8)
Don't worry about the mule..........just load the wagon!

Offline huntsman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 501
Do I need a "Modern" 6.5x55?
« Reply #22 on: September 13, 2004, 03:01:03 AM »
One little note on the throat/COL discussion that I think is pertinent: for the average hunter, this discussion is next to meaningless. I have a long-throated early M96 Swede that will shoot under 1.5 inch groups with just about any bullet weight (85gr up to 160gr) I want to shoot. A little testing with loads to get the right "resonance", for lack of a better term, in my own rifle is all that is needed to get a decently accurate load in a given bullet weight.

Out to 250 yards, the difference in accuracy caused by the "jump" over the long throat is almost imperceptible as far as killing game is concerned. I will not be taking any shots at over 250 yards, so at most I am losing a couple of inches of accuracy at that distance with a long vs. short throat. I can still put my shots in a 6" diameter kill zone all day long. Given those facts, my M96's long throat is not a significant factor at all. If you are a target shooter or are hunting where you will need to take 300 yard and longer shots, then throat measurement might come into play, but for most hunters it is academic.
There is no more humbling experience for man than to be fully immersed in nature's artistry.

Offline ratherbefishin

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 680
Do I need a modern 65x55
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2004, 05:24:06 AM »
about 20 blacktails and  a couple of blackbear from my 6.5 swede[ shooting 139gr factory ammunition] say ''you can't argue with success''These old calibers didn't survive on advertising or magazine articles, they survived for one very simple reason- they do the job they were intended for-accurate, light recoil and very effective on game.The new 260's certainly equal that but are hard pressed to beat that record.And, for the guy looking for a quality hunting rifle who hasn't got unlimited bucks, you can find some very nice ones, gunsmithing already done, restocked and scoped for about $400- and that's hard to beat, too

Offline MGMorden

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2093
  • Gender: Male
Re: Do I need a modern 65x55
« Reply #24 on: September 13, 2004, 06:13:51 AM »
Quote from: ratherbefishin
And, for the guy looking for a quality hunting rifle who hasn't got unlimited bucks, you can find some very nice ones, gunsmithing already done, restocked and scoped for about $400- and that's hard to beat, too


That Swede above I paid $200 for, with all essential gunsmithing done (I did add a high power firing pin spring and a new trigger, but that stuff certainly isn't required, and even then only costed an extra $40).  

And actually, if you're not dead set against modifying a gun, you can sporterize a Mosin-Nagant for VERY cheap.

$60 Mosin Nagant m44 Rifle
$40 ATI Scope mount and Bolt Handle Kit
$60 Synethic Sporter stock

$160 if you can drill the holes yourself (as long as  you have a drill press and are careful this shouldn't be a problem).  Heck if you don't absolutely need a new stock you could get a scopeable rifle for $100.  7.62x54R is gonna recoil a might harder than 6.5x55, but it's totally manageable for a hunting rifle.

Offline DPRinks

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Avid Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Rifles
« Reply #25 on: October 03, 2004, 03:30:35 PM »
I have a Hungarian M44, with factory ammo, 2x scout scope,3" at 25yds, slugged the barrel, measures .304-314, tried 160gr .311 cast gc bullets, improved group to 2" at 25 yds, still sorry, then tried 160gr .314 cast gc at 2100fps, now getting 3/4" groups at 50 yds and am still well below max pressure and velocity, with BHN 24 alloy should be able to get 2500fps at less than 30,000psi.
The 2100fps bullets were fired into a box 18" deep, filled with tightly packed wet newspaper, of 15 shots, all but 2 went through the box, the 2 I recovered were mushroomed to .55-.60 diameter and retained almost 95% of their weight.
This should handle anything up to elk at 200yd or less.
Don
D. Rinks