6.5 Swedish already has a reputation for good accuracy

So I am curious, just how much more accurate would match loads in that caliber be? Would the limit of accuracy be dictated by the open sights? I am also curious why match ammo is lighter than the standard ball load.

 

 

This entry was posted in ammunition, rifle and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to 6.5 Swedish already has a reputation for good accuracy

  1. Ritchie says:

    A formal rifle match may involve upwards of 100 rounds fired, hopefully with unflinching concentration on each one.

  2. Bob McPeak says:

    When we bought our house, 20 years ago, I wanted a wall hanger for the den. I wanted something that looked rustic, and didn’t really care what shape it was in. One of our local shops had a Husqvarna M38 in stock, in 6.5 Swedish. I bought all the ammo he had, though I never really planned on shooting it. The gun looked really rough, though it was in mechanically good shape. I made a wall mount for it, and hung it above the fireplace, where it remained for 12 years. Then, one day, I decided to take it out to the range and see what it would do. 5 shots in one ragged hole at 75 yards with iron sights was way better than I expected, from the rifle OR me. After that, I cleaned it up, oiled it up and put it in the safe. I was very pleased with the accuracy of this “cheap” wall hanger.

  3. Thomas Kokay says:

    Felt recoil is reduced, this lowers the chance of anticipating recoil (flinching) also lower ballistic coefficient increases relative accuracy at distance.

  4. We use 6.5x55mm as our primary game getting rifles. Low recoil, plenty of punch with 140g bullets even for an elk, laser beam accurate. Seeing guys shoot 300wm at elk makes me laugh.

  5. Rabbit says:

    6.5×55 in 140 grain loads has such superior s/d and b/c that not much else can touch it. The trajectory is so similar to .270Winchester that there’s no real difference. The 120 gr rounds are good for coyote and deer around here, and I’ve made 400 yard accurate shots on both with it. 140 grain is enough for elk and moose in the US if you know where to aim. It also doesn’t wreck your shoulder like belted magnums. My favorite 6.5 is my M94, sporterized to a scout carbine. It’ll lay them into a single ragged hole at 250 yards and the 140s will pass right through an 18 inch pine tree at that distance while expanding.

  6. PawPaw says:

    “I am also curious why match ammo is lighter than the standard ball load.”

    When I start working up a match load, I generally reduce the powder charge by 5%. You’d be surprised how many times that works out just fine. None of my accuracy loads are anywhere near max.

  7. LarryArnold says:

    I am also curious why match ammo is lighter than the standard ball load.

    At the target they just have to punch a hole. You don’t have to kill paper.

  8. Rob says:

    I’m guessing match ammo has less lead in it due to cavity at the tip. And also, as Larry states, you don’t have to kill anything with it, so making it heavier only pays off if you’re also increasing the BC.

  9. AM says:

    The pressure requirements for the M96 action are one good reason to use a lighter match bullet in the 120~123gr range. Even “light” as they, the 123gr SMK has a higher published BC than the 308 175 SMK.

    But due to the pressure limitations of small ring Mauser actions, launching a 120gr bullet FAST is a better ballistic option than launching a 139~142gr match bullet in terms of ballistics. A 120gr AMax at 2,800 fps will have less drop (but more wind correction) than a 140 AMax at 2,500 fps out to 1000 yards.

    The high BC of the 120~123gr match bullet range has caused a lot of competitors to stop using the 140′s and go 120gr pure for “cross the course” loads, as the windage difference at 1k is only 1.4 minutes, but the drop difference is 3 minutes and time of flight is slightly faster for the lighter round.

    With a modern rifle with higher pressure rating, the 6.5×55 can push the 140gr pills fast enough to make them an obviously better option. For hunting, the heavier bullets will always give superior penetration at reasonable ranges simply because of the higher sectional density.

  10. Gewehr98 says:

    Oleg, you could do much worse than have a target rifle in 6.5×55 Swedish Mauser. The light recoil and high BC of that round are a blessing. I used the ballistics of the 6.5×55 to create my own 6.5-06 Interdiction Rifle. I run 123gr Lapua Scenars at just a hair over 3200fps. The rifle is famous for centerpunching a golf ball at a verified 500m cold bore during an invitational sniper match in May of 1999.

    What’s also phenomenal is the accuracy of the 6.5×55 round in the original M96 Swedish Mauser rifles. It even does well in my AG-42B Ljungman, and someday I’m going to get a Tikka M595 Master Sporter chambered in 6.5×55 to sit next to the one I already have in .308.

    The 6.5×55 was so good that Remington tried to duplicate it in a short action, hence the .260 Remington.

    If you haven’t figured it out already, I’m a big fan of the .264″ bore for long-range work…

  11. Don M says:

    One cause of inaccuracy is the difference in times that the aft edge of the bullet leaves different parts of the crown. think of it as plucking the bullet in a random direction. When the bullet is boat tailed, that plucking force is reduced, as the gases don’t have to turn as much, and the plucking force occurs when the crown of the bullet is not as far from the bullet’s center of mass, and so has a reduced effect. There are many other sources of inaccuracy, but that is one that favors the boat tail, which tends to be a bit lighter than a flat base bullet of the same length.

Comments are closed.