6.5 CM Accubonds or ELD-X
- Thread starter the blur
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
ncwg2boatguy
Well-Known Member
Sound advise.
Sounds like you have the same affliction that I have...The challenge of a small bore cartridge on a large animal. I've shot everything from prairie dogs to Cow Elk with a
25-284 no sweat... IMO, the 6.5 CM might be a bit under gunned for a MOOSE. I would hate to spend that kind of money & effort to wound one and have it get away. And if this is your fist Moose hunt, and someone hasn't already told you. Those sob's when wounded head right for the nearest water. It aint no fun getting one out of the drink. my.02 cents.
Best of luck
PowellSixO
Well-Known Member
Wrong caliber all together for a moose. If you have the money for a moose hunt, you have the money to buy the right caliber for the hunt. This is EXACTLY why people hate the Creedmoor so much. People trying to use it for something it wasn't intended for.
MagTen
Well-Known Member
Barnes TTSX
ncwg2boatguy
Well-Known Member
Creedmoor is a flat shooting high BC bullet monster that has long legs. With that being said Its fantastic for Deer sized game. Even Mule deer. Inside 250yds it would probably get the job done too on a moose but thats alot of mass. 7 Mag or heavy 30 would be better suited. Even an .06 180-200gr
I use both! The ELD is great for deer and antelope but the ABLR in 142gr is excellent!
Agreed. If the Creed is your only rifle, please use some Hammer Hunters, Barnes Xs, or 140 A-Frames. They'll work.
If you have a 30-06 or bigger, take it along with some stout bullets.
I know the 6.5 Creedmoor is a capable little cartridge but it's a little cartridge. Fun to shoot and acceptable for use on big game if it's all the shooter has or can handle but, again, it's a little cartridge that's been overhyped.
I watched a guy shoot a brown Bear on youtoob the other day with a 26 Nosler. He killed the bear, flattened it in one shot. I still felt like it was a stunt. A stunt in which the bear was going the pay the price.
Sorry if anyone is offended by this. We all make choices based on our experiences and work with what we have.
If you have a 30-06 or bigger, take it along with some stout bullets.
I know the 6.5 Creedmoor is a capable little cartridge but it's a little cartridge. Fun to shoot and acceptable for use on big game if it's all the shooter has or can handle but, again, it's a little cartridge that's been overhyped.
I watched a guy shoot a brown Bear on youtoob the other day with a 26 Nosler. He killed the bear, flattened it in one shot. I still felt like it was a stunt. A stunt in which the bear was going the pay the price.
Sorry if anyone is offended by this. We all make choices based on our experiences and work with what we have.
Wachsmann
Well-Known Member
A lot of European's has shot moose with 6.5 calibers. I would step up to a 160 grain bullet or go wit a barns bullet. Its hard to beat barns for toughness. If your stuck on the 140's then use the accubond and not the long range AB. I would also limit my shots to 300 yards so you have plenty of energy to expand the bullet and it penetrates. Keep shooting till the animal is down or the mag is empty. If your an excellent shot with you creed then one in the neck spine and the animal will go down. If not shoot behind the shoulder for lungs and heart. It still may go a little distance but it will go down. Our animals do not wear suits of armor but they do have a really strong will to survive. I seen a moose get dropped with a 140 Berger at 450ish yards. 2 shots. first one he locked up and the 2nd put the moose on his ***. Bullet penetrated through the rib cage and lungs but not through the animal. It was stuck in the off side ribs. It was done with a 6.5x284 Norma. Short answer AB, and keep shooting till its down or your empty.
While I personally consider any 6.5 a tad on the light side for moose, I have shot mature elk with a 6.5 x 55 Swede loaded with Nosler 140 gr. partitions @ 2800 fps with good results. I have also used 120 gr. Barnes TTSX loaded @ 3000 fps with the same results. Both bullets will penetrate into and disrupt the vital organs as long as no major bones are hit. I have also shot large mule deer with the 140 gr. Trophy Bonded loaded to 2800 with very good results. I believe that any of these bullets will get the job done with careful shot placement. Good luck in your hunt!
ncwg2boatguy
Well-Known Member
Yeah jerry I hit a deer at 200 with ELD-X from 6 CM and it punched through behind left shoulder blew through lungs and cut top off heart and destroyed right shoulder. They expand violently. So i have SGK for inside100-200 yds for deer in my area. A little to much velocity and expansion with ELD-X.
djm670
Well-Known Member
A reprint on some swedish moose hunting data from 2007. I suspect a lot of you have previously seen this. It should be noted that most swedish factory 6.5 x55 140 grain ammo is only loaded to 2550/2600 fps - less than the 140 grain 6.5 creedmoor.
CARTRIDGE: MOOSE TAKEN: # CARTRIDGES TO DOWN: METERS TO DOWN
6.5 x 55....1,717.........1.5....................41M
270 Win.........7.........1.4....................64M
7mm Rem M......75.........1.4....................47M
308 Win.......943.........1.7....................38M
3006........1,938.........1.5....................4 3M
300 Win M......25.........1.9....................24M
338 Win M.....111.........1.5....................31M
358 Nor M.....192.........1.2....................36M
9.3 x 62......306.........1.4....................36M
9.3 x 64........5.........1.6....................50M
9.3 x 74R.......7.........1.2....................32M
375 H&H M.....265.........1.4....................30M
416 Taylor.....17.........1.3....................27M
458 Win M......18.........1.3....................18M
460 Wby M.......3.........1.3....................70M
I am sorry that the posted data does not line up all nice and neat like it did when I posted it. What, if any, conclusions can be drawn from this information? I believe there are several things that stand out.
The first is how little difference there really is in the effectiveness of all the cartridges listed. Where is the big bore advantage so often toted for the 30 caliber we have been promised by so many as compared to the lesser bores? Surprisingly the lowly 308 did better than its big brother the 3006 did, and even the much speedier 7mm Remington Magnum had much longer travel distances than the 308 did. Many here and else where have argued against using the 270 on moose as being totally inadequate, and yet the 460 WBY shot moose traveled 70 meters as compared with the 270's 64 meters before they went down. The mild 6.5 x 55 (or 260 Remington for that matter) shot moose only traveled 41 meters on average. We don't see any real large caliber advantage until we get up to the 416 Taylor, which again is another low velocity round relatively speaking.
The second thing that stands out is the fact that moose traveled farther on average than when struck with high velocity rounds than they did when struck with the slower velocity rounds. The 458 Winchester magnum is the slowest velocity round on the above chart, and yet it recorded the second lowest number of rounds required to take moose and it clocked the shortest travel distances traveled, only 18 meters. The 460 WBY would be shooting the same bullet weights much faster, and the moose hit with those bullets traveled almost 4 times as far as the 458 Win hit moose did. Where is the high velocity advantage so often touted other than for flat trajectory and less flight time?
The higher recoiling rounds also contributed to longer travel distances traveled before the moose gave up the effort, probably because of poorer shot placement that comes as a result of more recoil.
The 338 Winchester Magnum and the 358 Norma Magnums were essentially a wash in spite of what the 35 fans maintain. The Norma required .3 less rounds to put down its moose, but the 338 shot moose traveled 5 less meters on average. The 300 Winchester Magnum required more rounds to put its moose down than any of the other cartridges listed, but they traveled less meters than the 308 and 3006 shot moose did. The 308 shot moose traveled 5 less meters than the 3006 shot moose traveled on average. So where is the 3006's advantage commonly touted by many American hunters?
The 9.3s present an interesting contrast as well, but for different reasons. The 9.3 x 62 has about a necked-up 3006 case capacity. The 9.3 x 64 is closer to 300 Winchester magnum class cartridges in case capacity. The 9.3 x 74 R is about the longest case there is around other than the 50 BMG. It is used in double rifles, drilling and combination guns. Hence the "R" indicating that it is a rimmed case. Out of necessity the 74 R case is loaded to lower chamber pressure levels because it is used in break action firearms, so its velocities are at least 100 fps behind those of the 9.3 x 62. The bullets made for 9.3 firearms are made to perform at the 9.3 x 74's velocity levels. That's why the 9.3 x 62 and x 64 shot moose traveled 4 and 8 meters respectively farther on average than the 9.3 x 74R shoot moose did. This is another case where less velocity actually helped on the bigger animals. Penetration actually is degraded because of over expansion at 9.3 x 64 case velocities. Apparently there really is something to the Hang Time Theory of lower velocity rounds being more effective killers on the bigger big animals...Rusty.
CARTRIDGE: MOOSE TAKEN: # CARTRIDGES TO DOWN: METERS TO DOWN
6.5 x 55....1,717.........1.5....................41M
270 Win.........7.........1.4....................64M
7mm Rem M......75.........1.4....................47M
308 Win.......943.........1.7....................38M
3006........1,938.........1.5....................4 3M
300 Win M......25.........1.9....................24M
338 Win M.....111.........1.5....................31M
358 Nor M.....192.........1.2....................36M
9.3 x 62......306.........1.4....................36M
9.3 x 64........5.........1.6....................50M
9.3 x 74R.......7.........1.2....................32M
375 H&H M.....265.........1.4....................30M
416 Taylor.....17.........1.3....................27M
458 Win M......18.........1.3....................18M
460 Wby M.......3.........1.3....................70M
I am sorry that the posted data does not line up all nice and neat like it did when I posted it. What, if any, conclusions can be drawn from this information? I believe there are several things that stand out.
The first is how little difference there really is in the effectiveness of all the cartridges listed. Where is the big bore advantage so often toted for the 30 caliber we have been promised by so many as compared to the lesser bores? Surprisingly the lowly 308 did better than its big brother the 3006 did, and even the much speedier 7mm Remington Magnum had much longer travel distances than the 308 did. Many here and else where have argued against using the 270 on moose as being totally inadequate, and yet the 460 WBY shot moose traveled 70 meters as compared with the 270's 64 meters before they went down. The mild 6.5 x 55 (or 260 Remington for that matter) shot moose only traveled 41 meters on average. We don't see any real large caliber advantage until we get up to the 416 Taylor, which again is another low velocity round relatively speaking.
The second thing that stands out is the fact that moose traveled farther on average than when struck with high velocity rounds than they did when struck with the slower velocity rounds. The 458 Winchester magnum is the slowest velocity round on the above chart, and yet it recorded the second lowest number of rounds required to take moose and it clocked the shortest travel distances traveled, only 18 meters. The 460 WBY would be shooting the same bullet weights much faster, and the moose hit with those bullets traveled almost 4 times as far as the 458 Win hit moose did. Where is the high velocity advantage so often touted other than for flat trajectory and less flight time?
The higher recoiling rounds also contributed to longer travel distances traveled before the moose gave up the effort, probably because of poorer shot placement that comes as a result of more recoil.
The 338 Winchester Magnum and the 358 Norma Magnums were essentially a wash in spite of what the 35 fans maintain. The Norma required .3 less rounds to put down its moose, but the 338 shot moose traveled 5 less meters on average. The 300 Winchester Magnum required more rounds to put its moose down than any of the other cartridges listed, but they traveled less meters than the 308 and 3006 shot moose did. The 308 shot moose traveled 5 less meters than the 3006 shot moose traveled on average. So where is the 3006's advantage commonly touted by many American hunters?
The 9.3s present an interesting contrast as well, but for different reasons. The 9.3 x 62 has about a necked-up 3006 case capacity. The 9.3 x 64 is closer to 300 Winchester magnum class cartridges in case capacity. The 9.3 x 74 R is about the longest case there is around other than the 50 BMG. It is used in double rifles, drilling and combination guns. Hence the "R" indicating that it is a rimmed case. Out of necessity the 74 R case is loaded to lower chamber pressure levels because it is used in break action firearms, so its velocities are at least 100 fps behind those of the 9.3 x 62. The bullets made for 9.3 firearms are made to perform at the 9.3 x 74's velocity levels. That's why the 9.3 x 62 and x 64 shot moose traveled 4 and 8 meters respectively farther on average than the 9.3 x 74R shoot moose did. This is another case where less velocity actually helped on the bigger animals. Penetration actually is degraded because of over expansion at 9.3 x 64 case velocities. Apparently there really is something to the Hang Time Theory of lower velocity rounds being more effective killers on the bigger big animals...Rusty.
