Is the 6.5 Creedmoor too "light" for 1,000+ yard hunting?

Classic bowfishn

Litehiker said:

Bowfishn, this is exactly the opposite of what I've read about suppressor effect on POI. Usually POI is lower with a can, meaning less velocity. So what is true or is it dependent on the design of the can?

I like it that you are loading with HBN coated bullets. That stuff is almost magical and such a tiny bit goes a long way in a tumbler of 100 bullets. Barrels run cooler with HBN and cooler barrels last longer.

Eric B.

Click to expand...

Velocity with a can is generally a few fps higher but not a huge amount depending on barrel length, shorter barrels will show a greater increase than longer one with a can attached, the reason there's typically a percieved drop in poi is because you've added a weight to the muzzle of the rifle which in turn pulls the end of the barrel down, not by much but enough to cause a shift in poi. Barrels, no matter the length or contour do flex, even super short heavy contours.

johnhhernan said:

Everyone speaks of ethically killing an animal but what about archery. The average arrow is 388 grains at 298 fps which equates to 77 lbs of KE. 400 grains at 294 FPS= 77 lbs of KE. 415 Grains at 290 FPS=78 KE. Why is this acceptable? Im asking im not being a smart ***! It doesnt make sense to me. I dont know if those numbers are accurate I took them from an archery web site and one guy said that is how he would set up his equipment for elk. So whats the difference the 6.5 140 gn bullet at 2990 fps has more energy at 1880 yards than arrow. Now would I try to kill an elk with less than 1200 lbs for elk and 900 for deer antelope! No I would not.

Click to expand...

Well the problem with the "Energy" argument is that it doesn't necessarily take into account the terminal ballistics of the bullet. A broadhead tipped arrow can kill effectively at only 77lbs of energy because of the massive wound channel it can create with the razor blades it uses to slice through arteries and flesh. A bullet that is performing how it is designed will do more or less the same thing if it mushrooms properly (thus expanding its surface area and creating a larger wound tract.) For comparison sake, a 338 Lapua Mag with ball ammo might still have over 3000lbs of energy at 500 yards... but it would still be illegal to use in States that require soft tipped bullets or hollow point type bullets that are meant to expand upon impact. Also consider that there are many handgun hunters shooting deer out to 100 yards with 357 magnum pistols, but with only a 130-150 grain bullet and 1500-1700 fps at the muzzle, the max energy imparted is going to be under 800lbs... so to say that it is unethical to hunt deer with anything imparting less than 1000lbs of energy is going to rattle a few cages (consider that by the time it reaches 100 yards at a deer sized target, that 150 gr 357 bullet might only be imparting 500lbs of energy).

Instead of Energy, a much better calculation to perform would be to find out the expansion range for the bullet you plan to use, and compare that with the KPS scale. For example, take the Hornady ELD-X bullets (143 gr for the 6.5CM) that were engineered to still expand with as little as 1600 fps of velocity at the target. For a 6.5CM 143gr, assuming 6000 ft in elevation at 40 degree f ambient temp, a BC of .625, muzzle velocity of just 2700 (we have seen higher velocities from handholds), sectional density of .293, cross sectional area of .0547, that gives a muzzle energy of 2315, and 1000 yard velocity of 1600 fps and 1000 yard energy of 862 foot pounds. According to the Killing Power Score (KPS, which is the energy at target multiplied by sectional density multiplied by cross sectional area) the 143 gr 6.5CM bullet at 1000 yards still has a score of 13.8. According to some, a KPS score of 10 is the minimum for deer sized game.

So, according to this math, at 1000 yards, the 143 gr ELDX still has:
1. more energy than a 357 Magnum at point blank range, and more energy than a 44mag at 100 yards.
2. more than adequate KPS score (consider that the 7.62x39 at 100 yards only has a KPS score of about 15)
3. enough velocity for the bullet to perform as designed (mushroom to size, with significant mass retention).

So, my question for all is... assuming you could actually HIT the target at that range, why wouldnt 6.5CM be an ethical and effective cartridge for deer sized game at 1000 yards??

On arrows v.s. bullets it's well known that broad heads kill by hemmorage where bullets more often kill by shock to internal organs as well as hemorrhage.

Big game archers are taught to wait at least 15 minutes before trying to follow a blood trail to give the big game time to lay down, stiffen up and bleed out. Many feel 30 minutes is a better time window for tracking.

Eric B.

Litehiker said:

On arrows v.s. bullets it's well known that broad heads kill by hemmorage where bullets more often kill by shock to internal organs as well as hemorrhage.

Big game archers are taught to wait at least 15 minutes before trying to follow a blood trail to give the big game time to lay down, stiffen up and bleed out. Many feel 30 minutes is a better time window for tracking.

Eric B.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that is not to say that the objective of an ethical harvest with a bow is to have as swift of an expiration as possible. Ive taken two elk with a bow that died within 50 yards of being shot. It wasn't the "shock" of the arrow that killed them, it was the massive and quick bloodloss.

However, in a discussion about the viability (or lack of viability) of the 6.5 Creedmoor as a long range hunting cartridge, I am not sold on the idea that many suggest that to be able to ethically harvest an Elk you need a bullet hitting with at least 1500 foot pounds of energy, or 1000ftlbs for deer... My point above is merely that such a calculation is overly simplistic and does not account for a number of other even more important factors that should be weighed when determining what bullet or cartridge is suitable for harvesting big game. When there are plenty of short range weapons including a variety of pistol calibers that are well regarded as ethical hunting tools for big game, but which have less than 1000 ft pounds of energy at even modest ranges... then there has to be a better way to evaluate whether a particular cartridge is viable to ethically hunt at a particular range.

Bowfishn said:

He has seen them shot with 243 win through 375 H&H and the bears were no more impressed with the 375 H&H than they were with the 243 Win.

Click to expand...

This is hard to believe unless this guy is routinely getting eye shots and spine shots. At any rate, for large game (i.e. elk), and assuming proper bullet placement - which is the most important factor - I would say an absolute bare minimum 1,000 ft lbs. I would ideally shoot for a minimum of 1,200-1,500 ft lbs to ensure an ethical kill. With that said, energy is useful to consider but only part of the equation - considering energy together with bullet impact velocity, expected bullet expansion at impact (which may or may not be desired, depending on the target), and bullet diameter provides a more complete picture.

Comparing the killed power of a bow to a rifle reminds me of someone bringing a knife to a gunfight.

Just kidding fellas...kinda

Back to the post, the 6.5 Creed is to light for 1000 yard shots on game period!

Always be over prepared, then just go with the flow.
In other words, why handicap yourself with doubt?
So many better choices for 1000 yard hunting.
But... there is hardly any better choice for 1000 yard steel/target.

LONG RANGE 7MAG said:

Back to the post, the 6.5 Creed is to light for 1000 yard shots on game period!

Click to expand...

Bullet weight aint what its all about...just partially..

For every 1 hunter out there who can confidently kill a muley at a 1000 with a creed there are now 300 hunters out there who will wound the same one at 1000 with a 300 RUM.

The stampede is on!! Everyone now wants to be a 'long range hunter' for obvious reasons.

Long range hunting isnt about the bullet energy as much as it is about a skill you cant shortcut by buying expensive kit. How many people have I spoken to who believe their $2500 range finder computer enables them to shoot at animals at 1000. MOST.


Example: If you have a 300 RUM 200gr AB 3150 fps and shoot at a critter at 1000 and dont notice a 6mph breeze down at 700 yds then your bullet will hit A FOOT AND A HALF off aim. Thats the vital area of most hooved animals. Add to that using non bench rest shooting form, some excitement and you have a wounded animal as much as a flat out miss. For most a 1000 yd clean kill shot would be pure shite arse luck.

As far as I am concerned, anyone who wants to shoot at a trophy animal at 1000 should try high desert long range coyote hunting first. And see how many bang flops they get out of 20 shots..!!

The Davidson brothers make it look easy because they dont film their misses!

Tesoro,
I don't think he meant bullet weight, I think he meant the ballistics at that range aren't ideal (external and terminal...because external helps define terminal).
I always say this- I try to think worst case scenario.
The 6.5 Creedmore is no doubt a good medium range cartridge on game and decent at LR target. Do people kill elk at LR with it, sure they do. I hear it all the time that elk aren't hard to kill, and I'm no expert, but I have witnessed elk take an exorbitant amount of lead and energy and not flinch on more than one occasion. So I will flip the script and say this, how many people do you think shoot and wound elk at long range with mediocre cartridges not even knowing they hit it, and then not even cross that canyon or valley and check for a hit? Probably the same amount of guys you speak of with their fancy-high dollar range finder. Yes people will read the internet and watch tv shows and think the latest and greatest gadgetry will basically make the shot for them, but that's the problem I have with the Creedmore. No fault lies with the cartridge itself, it's with the mantra that follows it. And that mantra is the same what you speak of.
And I do agree with you that guys will just pop rounds off out of ignorance at game at extended range, but they've done that as long as I've been around and always will.

The 6.5 creedmoor is not a 1000 yard HUNTING cartridge. I would limit myself to 700 yards or under with that cartridge. There's a reason they make magnums.......... 6.5 creed is a very good medium game cartridge as we've taken alot of game with it. It's just not meant to shoot critters that far. Now for steel and target, there's hardly a better short action cartridge that would be classified as "better" out to 1000 yards.

Bullet performance is key no matter the cartridge. last fall I took 4 deer one at 200yds, one at 350, one at 670 and one way out at 980yds with a 6.5x47 Lapua. The bullet I shot was the 140 amax. muzzle velocity was right under 2800. I am uploading a picture of the liver of the doe I shot at 980yds with the 140 amax out of the 6.5x47 lapua. The wind was only from 3 to 3.5mph and that was enough to need 2 minutes of wind hold at that distance. Even with the 2 minute adjustment the wind between me and the deer moved my bullet from the heart/ lungs back into the liver. My only point is that with the right bullet the 6.5 creedmoor is capable of killing out to 1000yds. (or 20 yds shy of 1000). Do I recommend it? No. Had the gust of wind that pushed my bullet into the liver been any stronger I would have gut shot this deer. However, given perfect conditions, a very accurate rifle with an experienced shooter these small cartridges will amaze you.