Best 6.5x55 bullet for Sika

SakoHunter75

Despite reading a fair few heated debates here and elsewhere on the merits (or otherwise) of the 6.5x55 Swede as a deer calibre, I ended up getting one, as the exact rifle I was looking for came up in that calibre, and I wanted a light-recoiling cal with a bit more oomph than .243.

Without wanting to stir up another such discussion, the sense I got was that the main problem with the 6.5x55 may be that, as a fairly heavy round relative to a narrow profile (especially 156gr., but also the more commonly used 140gr.), it can have a tendency to pencil straight through the deer and out the other side, resulting in a high proportion of runners.

Some say that this can be avoided by using lighter ammunition that flattens out quickly on impact, dumping its full energy load in the deer, such as Norma 120grain ballistic tipped. I'd be interested to hear the experience and opinions of others here on the best 6.5x55 bullet choice for Sika deer. Not only from those that use or have used the 6.5x55, but also those like ejg (Edi), who are more inclined towards a negative view of the calibre.

Thanks.

SakoHunter75

Sorry mods, just occurred to me this should really have been posted in the hunting forum.

tac foley

I've only used a 6.5x55 once in my life, in Normark, on Elk.

The gun was an old, open-sighted m/38 short rifle, in use since the late 1940s for culling. I shot it across a clearing at about 70m and took the animal 3/4 through the chest, dropping it like a greased anvil.

That was the 156gr Nosler partition bullet. What was left was just under the skin on the opposite side.

It worked for me, just as it had worked for the gun's owner for the previous 42 years or so.

Don't be dissing the 6.5x55 Swedish - it's dropped more big antelope of one kind or another than just about any other calibre in Scandinavia.

tac

SakoHunter75

tac foley wrote: »

Don't be dissing the 6.5x55 Swedish - it's dropped more big antelope of one kind or another than just about any other calibre in Scandinavia.

tac

Thanks Tac, that's certainly one side of the argument, but there seems also to be a significant body of opinion that the 6.5x55 produces more runners than most other calibres. As far as I have been able to understand, this is probably largely to do with bullet choice, and I'm interested in focusing on other people's experience and opinions with respect to that.

gunny123

I think that like the 7x57, the 6.5 swede uses heavy for calibre bullets. Great for larger game like elk, but they might tend to shoot through a smaller animal like sika. This could be all dealt with if we were allowed to reload in Ireland, customising loads for your own individual needs. A chap i was talking to last week was telling me he isn't happy with the performance of the 6.5 he has either, reckons he is getting a lot of runners, and is changing it for a .270 win.

SakoHunter75

gunny123 wrote: »

I think that like the 7x57, the 6.5 swede uses heavy for calibre bullets. Great for larger game like elk, but they might tend to shoot through a smaller animal like sika. This could be all dealt with if we were allowed to reload in Ireland, customising loads for your own individual needs. A chap i was talking to last week was telling me he isn't happy with the performance of the 6.5 he has either, reckons he is getting a lot of runners, and is changing it for a .270 win.

Has he experimented with lighter/different factory ammo in the 6.5x55?

gunny123

SakoHunter75 wrote: »

Has he experimented with lighter/different factory ammo in the 6.5x55?

To be honest i didn't ask. He had his mind made up the 6.5 was going and we were more talking about the replacement. Once your faith goes in something i don't think you can really get it back, the element of doubt is always there.

cookimonster

I don't shoot the 6.5 but was asking same questions about the .270 and bullet selection. Here's something to start with -

'6.5mm caliber (.264" diameter) bullets of less than 100 grains are usually varmint bullets. 100 grain bullets are often designed for the smallest species of "big game," such as European chamois and the smallest African antelope. The 120-130 grain bullets are usually a good choice for medium size CXP2 game, such as pronghorn antelope, most deer species, wild sheep and goats. The 140 grain bullets are the all-around bullets, suitable for all CXP2 and the smaller species of CXP3 game, while the heavy 156-160 grain bullets are usually intended for CXP3 game on the order of elk and Scandinavian moose.' - Cuckhawks
http://www.chuckhawks.com/hunting_bullet_guide1.htm

gunny123 hit on a train of thaught in ref to 'heavy for calibre' bullet selection and something to read more about. I think that a lot of grain weight and bullet selection can be based on game type and shooting situations. Up until now I've being using .243 SP but have mainly being neck shooting (not a boast, I am careful with my shots). I have lost one animal that I know I positively put down with a neck shot and I know that on one other I would have lost it if I wasn't as close to the animal as I was because on further examination the neck shot hadn't connected with any bone and passed neatly through only knocking it off its feet and stunning it long enough for me to finish it. At the end of last season I saw a large doe poleaxed with a SP 243 neck shot at 50 ish yards only to get up a minute later and run off. Compare that to a 170 yrd chest shoot on a large Co Meath red hind which dropped dead on the spot or 220 yrd Sika hind dead on the spot chest shot with 30-06 SP. The point of these examples is that I'm beginning to think that very fast bullets shot at close range that don't hit dense material will not expand enough to either to kill or anchor. They either need to hit bone etc or bleed off energy to cause sufficient expansion. I think the lack of expansion on the 6.5 causing narrow wound channels is one criticism that you'll come across.

Edit: sorry meant to add- then you have to weigh off a bullet that loses too much energy and loses its ability to expand at longer range.

SakoHunter75

cookimonster wrote: »

The point of these examples is that I'm beginning to think that very fast bullets shot at close range that don't hit dense material will not expand enough to either to kill or anchor. They either need to hit bone etc or bleed off energy to cause sufficient expansion. I think the lack of expansion on the 6.5 causing narrow wound channels is one criticism that you'll come across.

I thought that lighter/faster bullets generally expand more than heavier/slower ones, whatever they hit?

SakoHunter75

Here's an interesting article on the subject of bullet weight/frontal area ratio, or 'sectional density', and its effect on penetration:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/sd.htm

SD is important because it has a significant effect on penetration. Other things being equal (like impact velocity, bullet design and expansion, etc.) the higher the SD number, the better the bullet's penetration. In other words, a skinny bullet of a given weight tends to penetrate better than a fat bullet of the same weight, because it concentrates the same force on a smaller area of the target. For example, if other factors are equal, a 150 grain .270 bullet will penetrate better than a 150 grain .35 caliber bullet.


Penetration is important because the bullet must get well inside an animal to disrupt the functioning of its vital organs. A bullet that fails to penetrate the fur, skin, muscle and bone necessary to reach the vital organs is very unlikely to bring an animal down.

But the point I'm raising here for discussion is that the 6.5x55's reputation for runners is possibly mainly due to over-penetration as a result of the wrong, i.e. too heavy, bullets being used, rather than any inherent problem with the calibre itself (?).

yubabill1

Mate I know swears by remington core lokt for the 6.5x55.

Sika are a lot lighter than other deer, but I trust his judgement.

Don't underestimate the 6.5x55 - it's hugely underrated. Massively superior to 7.62x51.

cookimonster

SakoHunter75 wrote: »

I thought that lighter/faster bullets generally expand more than heavier/slower ones, whatever they hit?

I believe your right, but I'll swap you another article -

http://www.chuckhawks.com/bullets_beginners.htm

- that talks about lighter bullets or even ideal bullets, selected appropriately for game, at high velocity blowing up before reaching vitals like a frangable round.
From reading this I think there is still a chance that soft tissue may not cause expansion on SP bullets as described in the article are generally designed to pass through hide, tissue, rib cage and organs at average ranges 150- 175 yrd.
When I asked here about ammo selection for my .270 and mentioned my dislike of Ballistic Tips, they where recommended to me for their accuracy. But I still have a worry that on close in shots they could do a tremendous amount of damage and although the .270 will mainly be used in open country where BT ammo shines I still would like a single round that will comfortably do both forest and hill. I have exclusive experience with SP ammo so for now will stick with that.
If it where me I'd go for the heavier round but not 'heavy for calibre' which should cater for both close in work and realistic longer stuff in and around 250 yards

cookimonster

yubabill1 wrote: »

Mate I know swears by remington core lokt.....

Used the Corelokt when I started stalking first, very good and accurate, but I had trouble consistently sourcing them.

QUOTE=yubabill1;102947416]......Sika are a lot lighter than other deer, but I trust his judgement.....[/QUOTE]

They may be the smallest of our deer but pound for pound they are tougher than the other two.

gunny123

When i had a .270 many years ago, i liked shooting the corelokt's out of it because the recoil was relatively soft compared to other brands, but i was constantly hearing that they were rubbish. The thing about the corelokts is they are not loaded up to the max, and in a round like the 6.5 that might be a good thing, that and the fact they are soft points. Personally i don't think you can beat the .308 or .30-06 for ease of ammo availability, knock down power and versatility.

SakoHunter75

yubabill1 wrote: »

Mate I know swears by remington core lokt for the 6.5x55.

Sika are a lot lighter than other deer, but I trust his judgement.

Don't underestimate the 6.5x55 - it's hugely underrated. Massively superior to 7.62x51.

Any idea what weight those Remington core lokt are that he uses?

yubabill1

SakoHunter75 wrote: »

Any idea what weight those Remington core lokt are that he uses?

I'm only guessing, but I think 150gr. He shoots mostly fallow.

SakoHunter75

cookimonster wrote: »

Used the Corelokt when I started stalking first, very good and accurate, but I had trouble consistently sourcing them.

What weight were the Corelokt you were using, cookimonster?

cookimonster

100gr - but remember that's in .243.

For the last three seasons I'm using Federal® Power•Shok® 100gr - good accuracy and knockdown power on all three species.

After I'm finished caressing the new .270 I'm going to start with Winchester Super-X® Power-Point® .270 Winchester 130gr as initial testing shows a good degree of accuracy.

amadablam

SakoHunter75 wrote: »

What weight were the Corelokt you were using, cookimonster?

I shoot 6.5x55 myself but no sika to try them on. I've shot or owned most of the popular cals but prefer the 6.5

However I recently bought a couple of hundred rounds for next season with the possibility of Sika.

Norma 120gr is what I bought and apparently they will take down any sika. I also bought rws 127gr but I haven't tried them. The European loaded rounds seem to be a tad better loaded than their American counterparts. Mainly due to pressures in old rifles I think.

When I shot core lokt, they were in 140 gr I think. You could also try the big, slow, heavy 156 gr norma Alaska if your rifle will shoot them.

Another round that was recommended for being very hard hitting is the 6.5x55 hornady 140gr superformance sst. They are supposed to hit very hard. I had used them in 308 but didn't really like them for that reason.

One thing I will say, I have heard of sika runners from most calibers and its not always a reflection on the caliber or shooter but unfortunately the first thing people blame, is the caliber.

For some reason, in this country, there is little faith in the 6.5x55 for deer and the 270 is always preferred by some and that's not a bad thing either.

SakoHunter75

amadablam wrote: »

Norma 120gr is what I bought and apparently they will take down any sika.

I'd heard these were very good too, but bloody expensive at around 59e/box! For stalking I'm only ever going to be using small quantities though, so no point getting too hung up on price I suppose.

What did you pay for the Norma, do you mind me asking?

amadablam

SakoHunter75 wrote: »

I'd heard these were very good too, but bloody expensive at around 59e/box! For stalking I'm only ever going to be using small quantities though, so no point getting too hung up on price I suppose.

What did you pay for the Norma, do you mind me asking?

They are supposed to be unreal on the Sika.

I bought 100 of each of those and the RWS but I think the norma were around 55 and the RWS were 38 but the whole thing was rounded down a bit each purchase. I'll have a look for the receipts later.

I think there used to be a lad on here using the Norma 120 gr on Sika quite regularly too and swore by them as the best all rounder in 6.5x55 for deer.

SakoHunter75

amadablam wrote: »

They are supposed to be unreal on the Sika.

I bought 100 of each of those and the RWS but I think the norma were around 55 and the RWS were 38 but the whole thing was rounded down a bit each purchase. I'll have a look for the receipts later.

I think there used to be a lad on here using the Norma 120 gr on Sika quite regularly too and swore by them as the best all rounder in 6.5x55 for deer.

Thanks for the replies amadablam, I was inclined towards the Norma 120gr. BTs already, but now I'd say I'll definitely be using them.

amadablam

SakoHunter75 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies amadablam, I was inclined towards the Norma 120gr. BTs already, but now I'd say I'll definitely be using them.

No worries at all.

You could try the 140gr hornady superformance sst too. Similarly priced buy again, very hard hitting so might be another option for you.

I'll let you know what the RWS 127gr are like when I get a chance

SakoHunter75

amadablam wrote: »

I'll let you know what the RWS 127gr are like when I get a chance

Great, I'd be interested to hear how they work out for you.

6.5x55

I have used various 6.5 x55's for the last 12 years for my Deer hunting ,90% of the deer shot were Sika .At the start I used Remington core-loct they were OK ,I changed to federal fusion as my gun dealer stopped stocking Remington. The federal had a habit of penciling straight through the deer which resulted in a lot of following up .I ceased using them because of this . I settled on Hornady super performance 140, grain ballistic tips , (John Lambert ,Camolin ,Co Wexford ) Accurate , Hard Hitting These are super rounds that suit my rifle, but as we all know the bullet has to suit your rifle.

Sika98k

IMG_0096.JPG. Hopefully I have managed to upload a photograph.

On the right are Norma Oryx 156 grain heads recovered from Sika.

On the left are the ragged remains of 120grain Ballistic tips. Go figure.

SakoHunter75

Sika98k wrote: »

IMG_0096.JPG. Hopefully I have managed to upload a photograph.

On the right are Norma Oryx 156 grain heads recovered from Sika.

On the left are the ragged remains of 120grain Ballistic tips. Go figure.

In fairness, the 156 gr have expanded a fair bit. How did they work with Sika, did they just pencil straight through, or were you happy with them? (Or maybe you saw that image on the net?)

Sika98k

SakoHunter75 wrote: »

In fairness, the 156 gr have expanded a fair bit. How did they work with Sika, did they just pencil straight through, or were you happy with them? (Or maybe you saw that image on the net?)

They are bullets I have recovered myself from deer,mainly Sika,that I have shot.
Ballistic tips,imho, break up and separate,the core in many cases separating from the jacket.

People tend to obsess about velocity, flat trajectories. American manufacturers tend to download for old calibres i.e., 6.5x55, 7x57, some Federal ammunition is positively anemic. European ammunition,Norma,RWS, S&B,Hirtenberg are loaded more to their full potential.That's the difference between CIP and SAAMI .
Big,slow,relatively slow bullets are good on game for the table.
Of course no bullet not put in the right place does a satisfactory job. Bullet placement is king.

SakoHunter75

Sika98k wrote: »

They are bullets I have recovered myself from deer,mainly Sika,that I have shot.
Ballistic tips,imho, break up and separate,the core in many cases separating from the jacket.

People tend to obsess about velocity, flat trajectories. American manufacturers tend to download for old calibres i.e., 6.5x55, 7x57, some Federal ammunition is positively anemic. European ammunition,Norma,RWS, S&B,Hirtenberg are loaded more to their full potential.That's the difference between CIP and SAAMI .
Big,slow,relatively slow bullets are good on game for the table.
Of course no bullet not put in the right place does a satisfactory job. Bullet placement is king.

Thanks for the reply.

I'd be curious to hear what others with more experience than me think.