This is more of an exercise for no reason, because money is super tight right now.  But I feel like one day I really want to get a bolt gun with scope and maybe a medium profiled or sporter barrel.  Nothing overly heavy.   Been wanting to do this for years, we'll see if it ever happens.  I'm actually going to start selling some guns I never shoot (I think) but bills might gobble up anything I gain.  If not.....  I would really like a bolt gun.

At this point I really like the idea of the 5.56/.223 ones.  Since price of ammo is always  going to be an issue for me.  But if I ever get back to deer hunting, a bigger caliber would be good.  And my range goes out to 600 and is windy.  And I feel like there are better choices for long range than 5.56.  I have a .308 M1A and that is fine.  But I'd like something with a little less kick and more performance than a 5.56.


Seems to me, at this point, 300 BO and 6.5 creedmore are winners.  I'm not sure if I consider .300 BO QUITE an intermediate round.  But at the same time, it probably is.    Then there is always 6.5 grendel and even 7.62 x 39.....   Probably 300 BO and 7.62 x 39 are not the best choices for shooting 600, but.......  for closer range hunting they would be good.  

I'm not sure if there are really any others to consider.  But even these ones, seems like could fall off the face of the earth in time.  No way of really knowing.  I really really liked the idea of 6.8 rem SPC for a bolt gun.  For target and hunting, but it doesn't seem like it's done as well......  And then the 2 different chambers debacle sort of makes me skeptical......  

Is 6.5 here to stay and are ammo prices good?  I saw a bunch on the shelves at wally world a couple months back and I was kind of surprised.  I think I saw quite a bit of .300 BO too.  

What say you guys?

300 BO and 6.5 Creedmore are two totally different rounds.  6.5 Creedmore is what you want for medium to longer shots.  300 BO is a short range keep it quiet round.  Take some time and study ballistics, it will give you the knowledge to make good decisions.

7.62x39mm

I would stick with 5.56..
But im not a fan of odd calibers in general like 6.5 or 6.8...

there are more 6.5 grendel choices coming out all the time
more companies making barrels, full guns ect

it looks to be gaining in popularity

it fits your description fairly well

there is cheap plinking ammo out there, and more expensive rounds.

steel case Grendel is available in bulk

I know I know, i understand all that.   I understand it was a stretch to lump them all together.  I thought I kind of explained that in my post.  Main point being something bigger than a 5.56.  Plus, if you go supersonic with the 300, I would think you could get a little bit of distance out of it.  But maybe it's worse than 5.56 at longer range.......  Admittedly I'm not an expert on that round.  Sorry about that.  I realize the supersonic loads are shorter, lighter .30 cals that aren't really meant for longer distance.

Plus if you go with a bolt gun in 300 BO with a longer barrel, you get a jump in velocity.  Not sure how much though.  I'm googling now and a lot of data are on short barrels.....

Yeah, it seems like it would come down to 6.5 grendel or 6.5.  Seems like there are more choices in bolt guns in 6.5.  In fact, does anyone even make a 6.5 grendel bolt gun?   I'll have to look that up.

Howa does

For combat shooting and deer hunting, shots beyond 200 or 300 yards are not going to be realistic unless you have a rangefinder, a good view of the target, and a good rest.  

For combat shooting, .223/5.56 is the best.  You get low cost, availability, light weight, low recoil, flat shooting, fragmentation, etc.  Also service rifle shooters do as well with them at 500 or 600 yards as others shooting M14's, even with the wind.  

This might sound boring, but for deer hunting just do what everyone else does.  You can just use any generic bolt action rifle.  You don't need a semi-auto, even if you need to make a follow-up shot.  Pick up something for $400, put a $300 Leupold on it, and you're good.  Since it's just for hunting you won't need to stockpile ammo.  You could have a rifle that's lighter than an M1A, is easier to scope, don't have to worry about it getting beat up, and flatter shooting if you get it in something like a .243.  

And CZ

I'm into the 6.8 with both feet. The ammo SAAMI differences are a non-issue if you get a good barrel. I have no problem getting it in bulk online. My only two AR's are in this caliber and although I havent used it hunting yet I have little doubt it'll perform.
From the bench it always puts a nice smile on my face.
I don't reload but I do gather the brass and save it for a friend that does.
Regarding the alternatives available out there if I were to do it all over, I'd still go 6.8, call me stubborn.

I like the 6.5 family for deer type game.

Out of a bolt gun (or semi auto for that matter) the 6.5 Grendel is the most range you can get with an intermediate round.

For a .308 sized cartridge, obviously the .308 is a good choice as are the 6.5 creedmoor, 7mm 08 and 260 Remington.

Yeah, I guess the 6.5 creedmore isn't an intermediate round but the 6.5 grendel is........  Technically speaking.  

I was doing some digging and 300 BO definitely is cheaper and has more options than most.  But then you have to ask yourself if you go 300 BO, why not 7.62 x 39 and you have the option to go real cheap....  And the ballistics aren't THAT much different.  But you have a lot more choices in bullet with the 300 BO.  

But neither of them would shoot as well as the Grendel, distance wise.  So I guess I have to decide if it's a 600 yard gun I'm after or shorter range hunting.  

Yeah, .243 is a good choice for a hunting round that can go long range.  But the ammo is more expensive than some of the other ones.

It would be nice if 6.8 was more popular.  To me it was like the ultimate round in theory.  I'm not sure why it ISN'T more popular.

I wouldn't discount the 6.8 as not being popular, fans just don't parrot it about as much as it's main rival. Here's a good article pointing out similarities and differences between the two 6.5 Grendel vs 6.8 SPC: A Different Perspective

Personally I prefer the smaller case rim diameter, less metal taken from the bolt face recess rim, I like the less sharp shoulder angle too and I'm not sure about mag capacity.

If Wolf produced some cheap plinking ammo for 6.8 I think it'd be an even better competitor, but I understand that as they probably have piles and piles of 7.62x39 cases laying around it is a lot cheaper to resize the case mouth of an existing case than make a bunch of 6.8 cases from scratch.

Personally, I'm keeping an eye on this latest newcomer The 6.5×40 Cartridge: Longer Reach for the M4 & M16

Reloading solves a lot of problems concerning commercially available ammo and it makes shooting a lot cheaper too. With all the new niche calibers coming out, I'm looking harder and harder at getting back into it.

270

If virtually universal availability and longevity is a concern .243 hands down.

Wow, never even heard of the 6.5 x 40.  Definitely more along the lines of obscure at this point.

Yeah for SHTF I'm going 5.56mm since it's the lightest ammo to carry, it's the most available rifle caliber, low recoil, very good ballistics with the more expensive 77 grain ammo. You can also reach out pretty far with the 77 grain stuff. 

I think 6.8mm would have been sweet, but the military figured out it was easier to just use better 5.56mm ammo, like the 77 grain stuff, and it was almost as good as 6.8mm. And you know the government always goes with the cheapest option. Buying tons of new 6.8mm rifles and parts and mags and ammo would be very expensive. So much cheaper just to stick with 5.56mm and spend a little more on the ammo. 

There's a lot of 6.5mm Grendal fan boys, and I agree it's a great round. It's almost as good as the 6.8mm for close range, and it has much longer range accuracy compared to 6.8mm. Of course good luck finding either 6.5mm or 6.8mm in the SHTF scenario. Of course both are good options for home defense or hunting. If we could make these rounds more popular that would be great. If only the military would move to one of these calibers instead of sticking with 5.56mm right. 

308 hands down,

I don't really consider 308 and intermediate cartridge.  But probably people that shoot 300 WM, 338 Lapua and 50 cal would.....

for a hunting rifle you cant go wrong with a .243, .270 or 30-06.

.223 is a bit small for a lot of places. .308 is a good choice being that you already have a .308. If you want to stick with a military round get a .308.

savage 110 in .270 wouldnt be a bad choice.

My thing with anything above a .243 / 6.5 Creedmore is they're just not any fun to shoot in any quantity.  If I had a bolt gun that weighed 8 pounds loaded with scope, I don't think I would want to shoot more than 10 rounds in a range session.  If that.   The more intermediate rounds are going to be more fun for me to shoot.   And for any of my kids if they ever want to try it out.  I have tried the managed recoil in .30-06, because I have a 03A3 and now I also have a sporterized mauser, and they didn't group very well.  It was the 125 grain remington.  I'm not even sure they make that one any longer.  

There's not a lot of choices when it comes to that.  300 BO would be like a 30-06 LITE....  LOL.    Same with 7.62x39 I suppose.  Not sure how felt recoil is on a 6.5 creedmore though. It might be pushing it for me too.......  But I'm assuming it's got less felt recoil than a .308.   But you could have a lighter bolt action rifle all loaded up, and not really worry about the recoil being a factor.  

Having said that, the M1A is a pretty fun gun to shoot.  I can't shoot it all day long, but I can shoot a good amount before it gets to me.  Especially with a scope on.   But it's HEAVY.  I don't want to roam around the woods with it.  


I think my main motivation is I just have a thing for bolt guns.  And I'd love to have a go to hunting bolt gun, that I can scope and have it not beat me up while being lighter.  And still have pretty good range.  Might be a pipe dream.  The .243 might fit the ticket but it's more expensive than maybe the others.  Although I looked and did see a few cheaper type loadings on midway.

Sounds like you want a CZ527 in 6.5 G although 7.62x39 will be cheaper to feed.

I've been trying to build a two or three rifle battery for the lower 48 and keep thinking a .308 model 70 featherweight compact redone for Randy Cain's practical rifle course and a .300 win mag model 70 extreme would probably handle everything I would ever want to hunt in CONUS.

I do wonder if I could replace the .308 with a 7.63x39 CZ (I'd go with a CZ for the long range too if I did) as it would be handier, more fun to shoot, and much cheaper to take to 500 round rifle classes...

Ultimately I just think the .308 offers much more in a hunting round.

And 300 BO has a lot more choices in a hunting round.   But then you lose the super cheap......  

I wonder if in the end, a .223 / 5.56 isn't "good enough".  Now with the Barnes bullets if you really want a bullet to perform well, but you pay for it.

Seems to me I'd go for either the 5.56/.223 or the 7.62/.308.  Common calibers, plenty of ammo...

A friend gave me a handful of .243 rounds. I should buy a rifle to go with them?

I have thought about a .223 "trainer" for a .308 practical rifle. Cheap, low recoil, flat enough for a class shooting to 400 yards (compared to the 7.62x39). .223 also allows me to build on a Model 70 compact. As for hunting there is no question it will cover deer if you do your part, the biggest problem there are the states that don't allow .22 center fire for deer.

Only marginally cheaper. I think Wolf 6.5 is down around 22 cents right now.

Go to Hornady's website.  They have 5 6.8 loads as compared to 2 for 6.5 Grendel.  Federal has 4 6.8 and 4 6.5.  Remington has 3 6.8 loads and no 6.5 Grendel.  Winchester has neither.  

6.8 is arguably more popular than 6.5 Grendel

You can get steel cased plinking ammo for the Grendel.

True, OP there is your answer, 6.5 Grendel CZ 527.

Do you have a 6.8?  How do you like it if so?

I feel that new howa in 6.5G would be the best fit for what your looking for (recoil, ability on small game, ect...)

However if taking on a new cartridge is out of the bill then there is a good argument for a properly twisted 5.56 with a generous throat. that can make all the difference especially if built on a standard sized action so you can creep into the 2.45"+ cartridge length. doing this with the 70+ gr bullets breathes new life into the small cartridge. it should still shoot surplus/bulk ammo decently and you could build a handy little 18-20" rifle with DBM.

Now if you handload or were willing to consider it a properly twisted and throated 6x45 really opens some doors. with the new bonded bullets you can hunt with confidence at reasonable distances and with the 6mm's staring to thrive in the PRS circuit new super high bc bullets are coming out all the time. a 6x45 throated and spun for 90-105 class match bullets can be a honest 1000 yard gun for target shooting. loading is as simple as necking up .223 brass and loading with a 6mm pill. with this cartridge barrel length is your friend. properly setup the 6x45 can come close to matching the infamous 6br in ballistics. if you ran an improved case it brings it that much closer but that requires fireforming.

Being a fellow broke ass,(father of 5 young children) I view things differently. yes building a custom rifle costs more (initially) and reloading can get out of control in a hurry (I'd hate to think how much I've invested into it!) but dependent on how you are, reloading can become a hobby in it's own. in the end I feel the custom route has saved me money as I have a few guns that are very well rounded.

From my personal experience a bolt gun can actually save you lots of money. I still practice with my carbine(s) from time to time but the real fun for me has been my bolt gun and shooting steel at distance. I can spend a few hours shooting 40-50 rounds and have a great time. vs a few drills for the same quantity of ammo or shooting 3-5 times as much ammo in the same few hours. in the end I think you'll find the rifle being the cheapest part of the equation. if your serious about a bolt gun and want optics that's where it's going to hurt! but in my experience that's money well spent and what I'd build around. If you can't see yourself spending at least $300-500 on glass then I'd shelve the idea until you can. buying cheap scopes will spoil the experience you could have with the right gear.

Since glass is the expensive component I have personally built myself two bolt rigs, but I have 5 barrels and 3 bolt faces. I can change from a 300wm in a standard hunting stock with a 3-9x40 to my .260 in a heavy DBM stock with a 6-24x50 in about 10-15min.

that being said you could buy your .223, buy nice glass, mod it out and if/when you decide to hunt again you could (dependent on what you bought) re-barrel it to something more suitable for game hunting down the road and swap back and forth as needed.

Well, you've hit on something I was going to say earlier but didn't.   I'm totally with you on it.  Part of the draw of a bolt gun is to slow down and not just burn through ammo.  An AR is just so easy to pull that trigger fast.  And that's a good thing for a defensive / combat gun.  Well, only if you are at least somewhat accurate chucking those rounds so quickly.  Not really sure I am, but either way it likes to sling lead.  I do shoot some precision AR's but even then I might pick it up and then shoot about 10 rounds faster than probably should be.  

So yeah, part of me wants to do exactly what you are talking about.  Slow down and enjoy each shot more.  And I could do that with a .223 / 5.56 bolt gun too.  

And yes, I really need to handload, but there again, I need some capitol to buy more stuff.  I was starting to get set up to do that years ago and then I got lyme disease and time and money and energy went out the window.    I bought a dillon tumbler.  And I had saved my brass for a long time.  I got rid a bunch of it but now I'm back to a pretty big stash of fired brass again.  

Now, when you say spend money on "good glass"  are you meaning quality?  Target turrets?  Etc?  I mean i have a Leupy 3x9 that lives on my M1A right now but has been on other guns.  And man I like that scope.  I don't see a problem with clarity or quality and my M1A makes very good groups while it's got that on top of it.  

I however doesn't have any sort of BDC reticle or target turrets, which I wish it did.  I do think the reticle thickness is range-finding.  Meaning I think it's 18" from thickness to thickness on 9x at 100 yards?  Or something like that.  I have to read up on that again and I lost the sheet for that scope a long time ago.  It is click adjustable though.  I thought about buying those old stony point caps for it.

yes quality glass as it ability to maintain zero, repeatability, tracking, clarity, ect.... yes you can save money getting a quality optic like the leupold with minimal features for less money but you get minimal features, which may work for you. then there's the opposite end of the spectrum where you have scopes that have every bell an whistle on them and yes there $150-200 but hows the clarity, repeatability, durability? see where I'm going...

when you mentioned 600 yards as a requisite, those features (ie. adjustable turrets or at least a reticle that references) is in my opinion almost a must. trying to guestimate your hold overs and wind holds with a duplex reticle is more a game of guessing, yes you can track your misses and "walk them in" but that takes the precision out of precision shooting. knowing your dope so well that you can tag your target with a range finder, dial it in and make those first round hits is in my opinion the addicting part of the sport. and at 600 yards especially with .223 its going to take some time to learn the wind. that's not something you can buy. being behind the gun and getting trigger time is the only way to learn. and trust me it's a huge learning curve! still working at it myself.

Gotcha.  I was making sure I understood what you meant by "good glass".   Yeah, the VX-2 3x9 is plenty clear.  But yeah, no knobs.  Boooooooo.....    Like I said, they do have clickable adjustments.  My 2-7 VX1 doesn't even have that.  But I wouldn't necessarily have a problem adjusting them with a screwdriver or penny at the range.  Not as nice as ones that are meant for hand adjustment obviously.  

My leupold scopes do seem to maintain zero pretty well though.  

But you know.....  You know how Hathcock did it.  With his 8x....  He zero'd at 600 and knew his dope.    I know I know, I'm not going to be as good as him.  


I can't remember if I said this earlier in this thread.  The only time I shot at 600 was with my 03A3.  And that has adjustable rear sights.  They work.  Makes it nice.  But 40 rounds and my eyes were starting to water and become fatigued.  But at least i was on the big ole NRA bullseye.

CZ does as well.  OP the 6.5 creed is a good choice for deer and bear even if pressed as a elk gun.  Its not really a intermediate round.  But if one of your priorities is cheap ammo then the 6.5 c isn't a great choice.  Ammo isn't bad I have seen it as low as 18 bucks a box + shipping(if you buy bulk the shipping is only a buck or 2 a box)  so you are looking at around 1 dollar a shot.  With the 6.5 grendel you can wolf steel case for around 25 cents a round.  So 4 times cheaper.  The 308 can also be found for around 40 cents for steel case and 50 cents a round in brass.  If you reload the grendel will still be the cheapest followed by the 308(brass and bullets are cheapest but it uses 15 to 20 grains more powder).  I have shot he howa 6.5 and its a nice accurate gun.  I have shot the cz 7.62x39 and it is also really nice.  I liked the cz a little better for fit and finish but the howa's shoot just as well and are a couple hundred less.

The whole 6.5's smoking the 308 only comes into play at ranges that are really pushing the limits of being ethical with any of the mentioned cartridges.  At 400 yards the 308 has 2 inches more drop and a 100 ft lbs more energy.  So going by that the 308 with a larger initial diameter is actually a little better 400 yards and in.  Now get out to 600 yards and the story really starts changing but I am not using either if I am shooting at anything at 600 yards bigger than a whitetail and I don't think more than %1 can ethically take game past 400 yards.

You can find the leupold mark ar's in 3x9x40 for 225 range they are very similar in quality to the vx2 series.  You can also get the CDS in the vx2's for 250 range.  Either one would work for 600 yards if your just trying to bang a gong if your going for real precision you will likely need more power.

That is nice how you can get grendel so cheap.  I wonder if it has any degree of accuracy to it.......

Its probably as accurate as most cheap(crap) ammo.  My AR shoots it into 3" groups at 100 yards for 5 rounds.  If you shoot 3 round groups it will at times do 1.5" but there will be others around 3".  Its decent you would have no time ringing a gong at 300 yards with it.  If you want to shoot tight groups then its not going to work for you but then again what cheap ammo is going to shoot tight groups even the 5.56 surplus stuff is really a 2 to 3 inch for 5 rounds.

For your choice it really comes down to what you want.  For hunting anything larger than deer or longer range deer/proghorn hunting the 6.5 creedmore or 308 are better than the grendel, x39,300 blk and 6.8 spc.  But you will pay a lot more for the 6.5 creedmor(1 dollar a round)  and the 308 is going to have significant more recoil(really the 6.5 with 140's isn't that much better than the 308 with 150's)  But if you are going to be hunting deer out to 300 or 400(starting to push it) the grendel will work and also has cheap plinking ammo available.  Recoil is very light, although a good deal more than the 5.56.  The 5.56 has a lot of things going for it and it will take deer with good ammo and shot selection but your really pushing its limits past 150 yards or so, plus it really is marginal the ttsx loads will penetrate but hit a bit back and they will go a ways.  the faster expanding bullets will kill quicker but don't hit the shoulder.

6.8 spec II
you can shoot any 6.8 ammo even the hotter loads.

WINNER!

I was shooting 480 yards recently with no problem

Did you bother to read the op' s original post.  He wants a bolt action.  Are there any current bolt action 6.8s in production.  If so are they available at reasonable prices

6.5 Grendel has no disadvantages over 6.8, so that's my vote.

I am tired of 308, and it's the answer you are looking for.  308/7.62 ammo is heavy, mags are bulky, don't fit into STANAG pouches, recoil is questionable, then there is the expense. I think it's a miracle they took a round based on 7.62x39 and made it outperform 308 at 1000 meters. With less cost and less recoil. Remarkable and very impressive.

At a loss to understand the post ? Intermediate round in a bolt gun to me is .243, - .308, etc.
You need to define exactly what your expectations are. If you are looking for same caliber as you can have in AR pattern rifle then you are limited. 6.5 or 6.8 are realy the only choices and finding a bolt gun may be a challenge.