The 6.5 Arisaka is something I knew nothing about until Venturino took the subject in hand.  Fairly potent round it seems, 140 grains at 2500 foot seconds. Pretty close to the Creedmore. I think there are still some sporterized Arisakas in the woods but the few I’ve seen on show tables and consignment racks have been 7.7s. 

My very limited experience with the ,264 class has been with the 6.5 Swede in a Ruger 77 and the obsolete 6.5 Remington in a Model 600 Magnum. I still have the Swede and think its recoil is not perceptively different than a .243 in rifles of equal weight. The Remington was more vigorous because it produced 270 ballistics in a 5.75 pound carbine, although a love tap compared to its brother, the .350. (A 35 Whelen-equivalent in less than 6 pounds. I still have one of those and its recoil energy and velocity are attention-getting.)

The limitation of the Remington was the .308 length of the action dictated the length of the case, and any bullet longer than 120-130 grains intruded into the powder space significantly. The more generally useful 140 grain bullet was impractical.  

This Ruger (an African version of the 77 Hawkeye) has a 24″  1:10 barrel and a 30/06 length action so 150-160 grain bullets are practical, provided the heaviest are roundnosed. I’m not sure whether the Model 70 Featherweight Swede used the same rate of twist. The Swede has to have the long action.  

The 6.5 Creedmore is designed for a short action and 140 grain bullets, probably the sweet spot for medium game, but I believe the Scandinavians commonly use heavier bullets for their Moose from 1:8 barrels. 

Chuck, I personally wouldn’t have a clue about animals bigger than hogs and Texas Whitetails. If you say the Creedmore is laying Elk low, I’ll accept it as fact. My nephew killed a 400 pound boar hog with a 270 WCF 150 grain Winchester Power Point that sailed through the offside gristle plate, from a muzzle velocity of likely no more than 2650-2700 fs.  So a 140 grain 26 caliber bullet at a similar, moderate velocity should be at least that potent. 

In the past, when I’ve been asked by younger fathers how a first centerfire deer rifle should be chambered, I’ve recommended the 250-3000 Savage, if they could find one. Not now, of course. Lately, since I’ve seen and handled the Ruger Americans — a whole lot of value for the bucks — I suggest one of those in 7mm/08 or the 6.5 Creedmore. To be fair, I haven’t seen Winchester’s new (to me) XPR in the flesh but I’m hoping it can compete.  

Chuck said
A long time friend of mine used a 300 Win Mag most of his life but switched to the 6.5 Creedmoor a handful of years ago. He got tired of hammering his shoulder.  I will have to look but he sent me a picture of an elk he shot.  My 256 Newton is a 6.5 (264) built in 1916. If I use a flat base bullet it will stabilize the 140 gr. bullets.  My 6.5 Creedmoor will stabilize 147 gr. bullets.  My new barrel has a 1:7.7 twist for the heavier 150 to 153 grain bullets.

  

Chuck,

You’ve got a Newton? Wow!  That is terrific. Talk about a cartridge before its time!  I will never believe Winchester would have put out the .270 in Newton’s absence, although I’ve seen the arguments to the contrary.  My understanding is Newton’s rifles depended on getting barrels from Germany and WWI more or less bankrupted him. Like a lot of lawyers, he wasn’t much of a businessman.  Yours must be one of the last. Put up a pic, please, when you have time. 

Thanks

P.S. You know the Scandinavians must be laughing at us for just now figuring out a long, skinny bullet at moderate velocities will hang on that velocity for a long distance and still penetrate and expand well. Since what, 1898?  While we’ve been burning out barrels with cups full of powder and damaging our rotator cuffs to get the same result with stubbier projectiles.  I’ve got a “Deluxe” (FN Mauser, pre-Mark V) 1956 Weatherby in .300 WM in my reference collection but seldom shoot it because the first shot pegs my fun meter into the red zone. Recoil tolerance does, in fact, diminish with age. 

That one (your Newton) is a beauty. Looks like it was made to Best Grade standards. I haven’t seen one that nice looking  except for a restored one illustrated on the jacket of one of O’Connor’s books in my [ sadly still boxed] library. 

Do you know who designed Newton’s stocks?  I love a well-wrought schnabel forearm with the right taper. 

A good library can beat a lot of experts. Obviously you’ve got an excellent library so don’t be shy! 

Having spent a certain amount of time fishing in the expert pool, I’ve learned several things about them:

1.  They are frequently wrong but never in doubt. 

2.   Anybody more than 40 miles from home is an expert. 

3.  An alarming number of them are anybody’s dog who wants to hunt. 

4.  There are more than a couple of experts I’ve dealt with I wouldn’t trust for the time of day if they were holding a crate full of alarm clocks. 

The real experts among us are amateurs — those who do it for love rather than money. I’ve seen the word used to demean someone’s supposed lack of knowledge– “He’s just an amateur” — but it’s really the other way round.  

The true experts are those who gained and maintain their breadth, depth, and currency of expertise because of their continuing fascination with the field. They may go on to do it professionally but they would do it for free in any event. Those phone numbers are always worth having. 

Our WACA dues are the cheapest tuition money I’ve ever spent. For the quantity and quality of light shined on my ignorance, it’s actually ridiculous.  

Tim,  Good idea.  The only jewelers left around here work for the big chain stores. I doubt they would be interested in helping. However, since the metro area is a regional distribution center for all things legal and otherwise, there are likely jeweler supply houses that might sell in small quantities.

As you can see, the carbine will definitely need a new blade front. The factory rear is an excellent recreation of an original folding ladder that I wish I could use and do not wish to remove. The bridge of the receiver sight has to be raised just to see over it, at which point the front blade is still invisible. 

I have to rethink this installation and reconsider D/T the .405. I would have no hesitation removing its open rear sight.  If I did that, I might just have a repro red pad put on. The plain blue steel buttplate is not the checkered shotgun plate with widow’s peak; nothing to write home about.

A suddenly coherent observation: it’s too easy to start worrying about “keeping it original” and depriving yourself of a fun project when — after all — the gun itself is not “factory original” in any meaningful sense. In fact, one great benefit of the new Winchesters is they make great project guns without ruining pieces of history. All gain, no pain. 

Stand by.