Anyone hear anything about the 6.5 creedmore plus peak?
GunsAmerica is saying that there is only 1 Creedmoor that this won’t be safe in, a CVA single shot. If this is true, the 6.5 Creedmoor just became a fully legit Bull Elk Gun with the numbers being reported. WOW!!!
Should be good for the sig cross 18” barrel if it will group.
2 Likes
Haven’t watched any of the videos or information yet, but I’m really surprised they didn’t stick with the Backcountry naming convention.
Just read Ben’s post from Federal. You can shoot it in your normal 6.5 CM rifle?? Wild.
Update: I gotta give Federal props, I was fully expecting a new Backcountry cartridge that I think would have flopped because it wouldn’t have gotten support from industry, but I think this is going to have some serious wheels on it. Im picturing the 308 next.
5 Likes
Just got the email, Hornady is going to need to counter punch, as Federal just threw down the gloves on the 6.5 prc.
Won’t be the 308, the reason - according to Federal- that they can does this for the 6.5CM is because it’s a modern cartridge and the chance of this ammo going into a 50 year old gun is slim to none.
The best bets will be cartridges that are from this century. My hope is for the 30WSM. Make it have 300 PRC + numbers. But the 6.5, ammo will sell out all the time as everyone has a 6.5 Creed.
1 Like
The only groups I’ve seen so far have been pretty bad. That’s my hang up with all the high pressure stuff. It just doesn’t seem to shoot very well. But jury is still out.
I would absolutely LOVE to turn my 20” 6.5 creed into a PRC by only changing the load. So I’m anxious to try it.
2 Likes
I’m building a custom 7 bc rifle and once it’s done can’t wait to show you guys the results
1 Like
The investment to see if it’s good is a box of ammo. Worth every penny.
Interesting watch didn’t see the difference there really claiming, I’m sure that 6.5 creedmoor + is $50 + dollars a box, and I can get the same performance still out of my 6.5 prc for $35 a box
Hmm that’s disappointing to hear. It would have been a great cartridge to run with but I can see their point. Even if Federal labels the ammunition clearly, someone sees “.308 Winchester” on the box and assumes all .308 ammo is interchangeable, loads it into their 50 year old rifle that was designed around traditional .308 pressure levels and you’ve got a liability nightmare.
I’m going to be Mr negative. The 6.5 Creedmoor +Peak’s main “point” is velocity: same external 6.5 CM dimensions, but Federal loads it to 80,000 psi using Peak Alloy cases, claiming up to ~300 fps faster than standard 6.5 CM.
That makes sense if someone wants more reach/energy from an existing 6.5 CM rifle without moving to 6.5 PRC. But the tradeoff is likely throat/barrel wear, because pressure and velocity are way up. This has yet to be discussed. Maybe this where a PROOF’s PXT barrels become relevant: PXT is marketed as reducing rifling lead angle/engraving force and improving barrel life/consistency under higher-pressure loads.
300 fps by itself doesn’t magically make a 6.5 mm bullet behave like a larger-caliber elk bullet. For bigger animals, I’d still rather step to 6.5 PRC / 7 PRC / 7mm Mag, 300 win mag etc. than a Creedmoor that appears to have some of the same issues as a 7PRC. Unless I specifically wanted to keep the same rifle. I will concede it extends the effective range envelope of the same bullet while keeping the same rifle and magazine. Also agree that someone is going to be stupid. Kind of surprised that this got past the attorneys. Just my opinion.
1 Like
From the GunsAmerica video, he claims that Federal said that the Peak ammo will not increase the wear on the barrel, but we’ll see. That was my first though too, that barrel wear would increase. Ultimately for me, this is non issue.
One you second point, if a 6.5 PRC is an Elk gun because it carries the requisite energy to kill the elk in ethical hunting range (350 yard and in), then a 6.5 CM will do the same. The projectiles are the same. I have spoken to people who have taken elk with a 243 because the shot was less than 100 yards (not advocating that, only to make a point). Energy > Terminal expansion.
Respectfully, I don’t think your argument against changes my mind about it.
With wear the one that happens first is the the throat erosions from powder charge, with the peak alloy it allows you to get high psi with less powder which allows for the longer barrel life cause of less throat erosions
2 Likes
The Elk debate of small vs large cartridges continues to be frustrating because both sides do make good points.
On one hand, assuming your typical bull elk is 18-24” wide, I think it’s fair to say that you’re not going through 18+ inches of meat. That’s a but shot and I can’t think of any legitimate reason you would ever take that shot and ruin that much meat. A realistic anatomy of the broadside shot on elk is probably:
Hide+muscle: 1-3”
Rib or scapula (maybe): 1”
And then your into the vitals…most of which is likely to be 8-12” air filled lung space.
A quartering-to shot is probably the hardest angle from a penetration perspective, but doesn’t add a lot more:
Hide+muscle: 2-4”
Scapula (maybe): 1”
And then your into the vitals…most of which is likely to be 8-12” air filled lung space.
So when I see the argument for using smaller cartridges to kill elk…in conjunction with the anatomy of elk above, that makes sense to me. There are also benefits to the shooter in the form of most people shooting less recoil better.
But!
Physics is physics. Bigger bullet will penetrate farther and should reliably handle shoulder + angle + bone combinations better.
While I feel like penetration gets all the attention in the small vs large debate, the real issue here to me is how consistently the bullet reached the correct place after encountering bone/scapula at imperfect angles under variable impact conditions.
But!
If we assume a smaller cartridge can kill an antelope with no problem, even if it hits a rib, why would that not also apply to elk? Elk ribs and scapula, in particular, are thin. So are the large cartridge theoretical advantages actually applicable?
Anyways…this is the hamster wheel my brain is running on currently…
1 Like
I know it’s just one example, but by 15 year old killed an elk with 6.5 PRC this past fall no problem at 200 yards.
Regarding what this will mean for the 6.5 PRC, couldn’t they just use the same technology on it as well? Maybe a 6.5 PRC+?
Very interesting, as I was heavily considering a 6mm creed, 6.5 creed, and a 308. 6.5 with the new ammo is looking really good. But man if they made it in 308…you’re talking one gun for everything hunting. I’m much more into archery than rifles, but still love shooting a gun. Couple rifle guy vs having a massive collection. But need to make my decision soon to get well acquainted with it. As they just opened what cartridge I can use for hunting in the area.
Check this out! I know we discussed it being a legal nightmare and not being available for older cartridges, but holy crap! 3100 fps out of a 14.5” barrel for a 5.56???
Just for fun I used ChatGPT to speculate what a 308 +Peak would do compared to a 300 WM. Prompt was identical rifles setup.
Midpoints for 150g Partition
Barrel .308 +Peak 300 WM
16" 2,825 fps 3,075 fps
18" 2,925 fps 3,175 fps
20" 3,000 fps 3,250 fps
Midpoints for 178g ELD-X
Barrel .308 +Peak .300 WM
16" 2,600 fps 2,875 fps
18" 2,700 fps 2,975 fps
20" 2,790 fps 3,050 fps
If they can get the risk tolerance and accuracy where it needs to be, this would be game changing.
1 Like
if that happened and it will shoot accurately, man 308 might be the ticket for ALOT of hunting and shooting. Im looking to get a rifle for mostly. Looking at 6 creed, 6.5 creed, 308, 30-06, and 7prc.