Quote:
Originally Posted by urban rednek
There is an historical reason why the 6.5's were never well received by North American shooters or manufacturers: the 6.5x50SR Arisaka and the 6.5 Carcano were used against the Allies during the war, while the 6.5x55 Swede garnered a reputation as a poor hunting caliber in North America due to the lack of quality ammunition for the first few decades of its' introduction; turns out that shooting big game with military hardball doesn't work so well.
While the 6.5 is a fine caliber with impressive numbers, it has been resurrected with clever marketing designed to sell the latest "new & shiny" to people who just have to have the newest and shiniest.
Your posts remind me of the magazine articles written by people selling the latest new & shiny throughout the 60's, 70's, 80's, and 90's. Hence the skepticism by members who have BTDT multiple times over the years.
Carry on.
|
If you think the Creedmoor is nothing more than a new shiny then it’s obvious you read too many memes and not enough technical information behind the design.
The ability to shoot heavy for caliber projectiles, rifles spec’d for proper throat and twist, and a 30 degree shoulder are all part of which sets its design aside from most other cartridges. Once you understand the purpose behind the design you’ll understand there is more to the Creedmoor than just a marketing scheme. Subtle differences that give it a slight advantage over other cartridges in its class make it a good choice when buying a new rifle in my opinion.
Suggesting it’s nothing more than a shiny marketing scheme to sell an old product just tells me you haven’t researched its design. There sure seems to be a lot of resentment, especially from the older guys against the Creedmoor. It’s touted as a better design because it is a better design, but that’s nothing to get offended by.
I’m a big Parker Ackley fan, that probably explains my initial interest in the Creedmoor. I see value in slight advantages, others don’t and that’s fine by me.