NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
17/08/04 02:39 AM
6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

Has anyone had any experience with either of these cartridges?

Is the 6.5x65mm superseding the 6.5x68mm cartridge as it seems to be chambered in more modern rifles and the 68mm seems to be missing more and more?



Safarischorsch
(.275 member)
18/08/04 05:09 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

That is correct. Allthough the 6,5x68 is stronger the 6,5x65 RWS is the newer, modern cartridge. The 6,5x68 has a problem. Sometimes there are difficulties with heavier bullets that do not shoot accurately. The new 6,5x65 does and is still powerfull.

DPhillips
(.375 member)
19/08/04 06:06 AM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

In reply to:

The 6,5x68 has a problem. Sometimes there are difficulties with heavier bullets that do not shoot accurately.




That would not seem to be a problem of the cartridge, but more of a rifle problem. Maybe not throated correctly for the heavier bullets, or the rate of twist being wrong. I don't understand how it would be a cartridge problem unless the velocity with heavier bullets was so low that the bullet became unstable at normal ranges, which doesn't seem to be the case in this instance.

Can you explain?


Safarischorsch
(.275 member)
19/08/04 05:08 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

Well the Problem ist that nearly all 6,5x68 rifles are not throated correctly for the heavier bullets! So you have to use the light bullets.

NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
19/08/04 08:57 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

The .264 Win Mag is ballistically the same cartridge.

Yet I believe it was often loaded with a 140 gr projectile.

The 6.5x68 is often shown loaded with a 93 gr SP or the 127 gr KS (RWS).

So it would be interesting to compare the twist rates and throat dimensions of both.



AdamTayler
(.375 member)
12/12/04 04:08 AM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

How does the 6.5-284 compare to these cartidges?

luv2safari
(.400 member)
12/12/04 02:28 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

...sounds like twist rate...Maybe the 6.5x68 was designed with velocity as the prime reason for the round, thus lighter bullets and less pitch.

NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
04/01/05 09:14 AM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

6.5x68 vs 6.5x68R

A question. Thef irst of these rounds is rimless while the second is rimmed. One for bolt actions and one for breakopen single shots.

Are they loaded to the same velocity levels?

The reason for my question is I have an attraction to get an affordable takedown rifle in 6.5x68 and 8x68S. A single shot rifle with 2 barrels may be a possibility. But if the 6.5x68R is downloaded I would not be interested as the ultra-velocity is what I am looking for.

I also find it interesting that gunmakers chamber the rimless 8x68S but chamber a 6.5x68R instead of a 6.5x68 rimless (???).



Safarischorsch
(.275 member)
12/01/05 06:07 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

Well the 6,5x68R is a little bit slower than the non rimmed 6,5x68 but it is not very much. The 6,5x68R is just about 15m/s
slower... A damned hell of a rimmed cartridge! But as i told you before have a look at the correct twist!


gunbug
(.275 member)
17/01/05 08:47 AM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

i have an 8x68S. i have never used an 6.5x68 but my RWS book shows its not great like the 8x68. seems like a lot of powder burned for vel.by the way where do you get brass i have friends bring it from germany because i can only get loaded rounds here DAN

NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
17/01/05 01:26 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

In reply to:

Well the 6,5x68R is a little bit slower than the non rimmed 6,5x68 but it is not very much. The 6,5x68R is just about 15m/s
slower... A damned hell of a rimmed cartridge! But as i told you before have a look at the correct twist!




I recently revisited the references books and yes they did list the too cartridges together. Somehow I got into my mind that the rimmed version was slower.

As for twist, if the rifling twist is correct for 90 gr to 140 gr projectiles that is fine. I do not want to shoot 160 gr projectiles in this hot-shot.



shatter
(.224 member)
17/01/05 06:26 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

>Has anyone had any experience with either of these cartridges?
So to say, yes.

My wife shoots the 6.5x65R in a Blaser K95. She uses the 8 Gramm RWS KS laboration. We shot eight does (German Rehwild, up to 20 kilo weight) with it, all stone dead on impact. She also got two wild pigs at about 40 kilos each, both fell at once. An about 80 kilo boar was shot right onto the shoulder, and we never saw him again. Found nearly nothing (hair/bone/...) on the site.

The 6.5x68 seems to produce large hematomes on the game body, while the 6.5x65R with the KS bullet doesn't.

If I remember correctly, the -68 is not available with a rim (flanged?) - at least I never heard of one or saw one.

Joachim


shatter
(.224 member)
17/01/05 06:50 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

btw: diskussion about the 6.5x65R (in German) Wild-und-Hund Forum.

j.


AussieMike
(.300 member)
18/01/05 11:06 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

The 264 win Mag is ballistically the same and I've had good results with Barnes X Bullets in 40gn and 100gn. It is a good general purpose rifle as the 100gn Barnes explode rabbits and are very accurate and the 140gn X should be adequate for anything I'm likely to strike south of Katherine. Ive shot two chital stags, and 30+ goats with the 100gn X and am yet to recover a projectile. I get a genuine 3500fps with the 100gn.

The recoil is surprisngly light, I shoot off a bipod with a loose grip, like a proper varmint rifle.

I'm looking for a 6.5x68 barrel for my mauser 66 to replace the 270 barrel, although the difference in performance will be minimal.

mike


shatter
(.224 member)
18/01/05 11:37 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

Mr Henneberger produces new barrels für the M66.

FRANK HENNEBERGER
Bauerngasse 50
97702 Münnerstadt
Germany

Tel: (49) 97 33 - 96 02
Fax: (49) 97 33 - 35 83
mail: mail@henneberger.de

Joachim


NitroXAdministrator
(.700 member)
19/01/05 12:05 AM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

Mike

What is the twist rate of your .264?



**DONOTDELETE**
()
19/01/05 02:19 AM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

Nitro,

I don't know if this info is any good for you since it is on the 264. One needs to remember that while about the case capacity as the 6.5 X 68 standard reamers for each calibre will have different freebore and leade angles.

My best shooting mate has been to Africa 4 times and ha shot about 130 plains animals with a large proportion being wildebeeste zebra and kudu. He shot one Eland. He has used 257 Wby 7mm STW, 300 Wby and 358 STA and all with Barnes X bullets.

Bear with me as I am getting to the 264

He basically found the 3 calibres were much the same except he thought the aninmals did not run as far with the 300. But he he felt to get the 270 or 308 effect on pigs and roos he would have needed a lot bigger. He did not find the 358 did anything special to warrnat the recoil and general trouble of necking down and fireforming 375s.

So he settled on the 257. At the tie he was playing about with qute a few different calibres and tried the 6.5/300 Wby. It did not shoot well and it was just one of those guns that was wrong from the start. So I suggested he get Tobler to knock off some of the barrel and do a 264 because I knew Denis had a JGS reamer for 264.

He now has 3 264s on Rem 700s with Jewell triggers, HS precision stocks. One has a sporter weight barrel, one has a Reminton Varmint contour and the third one had a Heavy Varmint contour. If you are not familiar with bench rest HV is like a straight taper to about 1 inch at the muzzle.

He is going to Africa again and the 264 is the calibre that is going and he will be shooting up to Eland.

As a by the way, when I first met him about 1988 he had a 6.5 X 68 in a Mauser 66 and he also had one on a Krico.

I think the Tobler twist is 1 in 9 but I can ask him tomorrow. Given all three rifles have Jewell triggers and Nightforce scopes that tells you how the rifles shoot other wise they would not have that gear on them.

If I was to go back to the acccuracy thing again which I did for mnay years one change I would make is to have the 264 rather than the 270 in the bench style guns.

Lastly, and I base this on the 6mm/06 and 6mm/284. The 6.5 X 68 actually looks like a big 6mm/06 and I found the 6mm/06 to be better for acccuracy and velocity than the 6mm/284 and as you know the 264 is a parallel sided case as compared to the 264.

His rifles have been very accurate with bullets from the 100 grain ballistic tip through to the Hornady 140 grain A Max.

He was very happy with his original 6.5 X 68s which is what made him try the 6.5/300 Wby.

He is going to get a Dakota in 375 H&H but that is a case of a "just to have" and for that sort of rifle, well as you know the 375 is about it.

One final note. On his last trip to Africa he shot Zebras and Kudus with the 257 Wby using 90 grain and 100 grain Barnes X bullets.

His preference for the 264 over the 257 seems to be mainly the fact that he can shoot 140 grain bullets even though he no intention of using them except when he tried them for accuracy. Just a case of knowing they are there.

So I would think a 6.5 X 68 would be a good thing and if you can believe what a lot of those Europeans say on the forum one in the Sauer 202 would be as accurate as a rilfe of the same weight that we get playing around with Tobler barrels and gluing Rem 700 actions into stocks and etc and etc.

Mike




















DarylS
(.700 member)
12/09/05 04:43 AM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

Most factory 6.5X68's have a 12" twist, OK for short bullets, but not for long ones.
: Most 6.5X68's will out-shoot .264 Win Mag's for velocity, each loaded to max pressures for the brass, as RWS brass is stronger than US brass.
: In a good barrel, a 60gr. capacity case will shoot along with either for top speed, as those large cases are a bit big for the bore size. It takes a lot of "Extra" powder to get another 50 or 100fps from them over some smaller cases.
: In other words, the 6.5X284 will generally be seen to produce near-equal ballistics in a good barrel, if properly throated for the bullets being used.
: A 24" 6.5X68 will get 3,300fps from 120gr. XLC's, but then so will a 62gr. case that is about 22gr. less capacity.
: I cannot see burning 22+gr. more powder to get virtually the same ballistics. In the upper reaches of the 6.5's velocity, 100fps muzzle vel. increase makes NO difference to the game.
: I feel anthing larger than the old '06 case's capacity is too much for that bore size. There are better case shapes in that capacity as well. I'm assuming the 6.5X65 is the 'basic' '06 type case. That should work just fine.
: A .260Rem lengthened .143"(60gr. capacity) will give the same 3,300fps with 120gr. XLC's that the 6.5X68 excells with on our B.C. Moose - my Daughter's rifle did just that.


Balaso
(.224 member)
14/09/05 02:59 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

In http://home.snafu.de/l.moeller/Englisch/6,5x57-vs-6,5x65.htm is a very good info about the 6.5

cheers
Balaso


Gibbs505
(.333 member)
15/09/05 03:24 PM
Re: 6.5x68 vs 6.5x65mm

I will stick to the 6.5x55!!


Contact Us NitroExpress.com

Powered by UBB.threads™ 6.5.5


Home | Ezine | Forums | Links | Contact


Copyright 2003 to 2011 - all rights reserved