Lots of folks are raving about the 6.5 Creedmore and I want in, too. I will be building a budget rig with either the T/C Compass or Ruger American and Vortex. 98% of my shooting will 100 yards out to 300 so a high end rig is not called for yet.
My problem is this:
I want to sight in at 25 yards to get on paper (and save ammo) with a goal of being dead on at 250 yards. Once on at 250, I will tweak until I find a load that works well at that distance.
If I like what I find, I may look at a higher end rig for longer distance shooting and sell the cheap rig.
So... Whats my 25 yard sight setting for 250?
I see lots of people are zeroing high at hundred but I cant find anything for 25 yard sight in.
Thanks in advance!

Depends greatly on the optic height over bore, bullet weight, muzzle velocity, and BC.

Shooting at such a short range will make it difficult to be certain of achieving an exact 250 yard zero. I would look at the JBM ballistics solver site with the data you have for your particular situation. But just as a very rough guide, with my rifle and the Hornady 140 grain ELD load and a 250 yard zero, my solver says I’ll hit about 0.14 inch low at 25 yards if I adjust to “standard” atmospheric conditions. At that distance, though, it’s even important to measure the sight height above the bore line very carefully, not to mention all the other variables.

Another thing to consider is that if you have a good scope that will track consistently, zeroing at 100 yards and then adjusting from there for different shooting ranges has some definite advantages. It took me a long time to understand why that is, but I am a believer now.

IMO the primary reason for a 250 yard zero is hunting. However, I recommend a 200 yard zero for hunting, assuming one doesn't want to dial elevation or use reticle hold overs/unders for relatively close animals of reasonable size.

For target applications, a 100 yard zero makes much more sense.

But back to 250 yard zero. With my gun and load, .3" low at 25 yards puts me on at 250 yards, given roughly your altitude. But out to only 250 yards, most reasonable loads with reasonably efficient bullets will perform about the same. Your scope over bore height is really more important when trying to use 25 yard impacts to predict 250 yard impacts. My scope over bore height is 1.8", which is fairly normal for bolt action rifles with fairly large scopes and without a forward rail. Note that your ideal impact location at 25 yards could vary by up to 1/2". Also note that any variation at 25 yards will be close to 10 times that much at 250 yards.

In the event you go with a 100 yard zero, my rifle produce an impact that's .9" low at 25 yards.

FWIW, it' spelled Creedmoor.

Thanks Guys! My scope (A similar setup as I plan to build) is 1.5 inches over the bore with a 32mm scope. I will be going with a 40mm scope so I expect the height to be 1.8 or so.

6.5 is inherently accurate and I can understand why you "want in" but where it really shines is in medium and long range, 600+ yards

I can understand the frustration in not being able to find zero-ing data but it's still a very young cartridge. The 5.56/.223 got a crash introduction because the military ... the 6.5 doesn't have that yet ... in fact there is nothing even standard in the AR10 design yet.

I think most people ... and understand I'm being generic here, would shoot a 223 out to 500-600 yards for the cost savings alone ... almost everything about the 6.5 is 2x the price of 223. Unless you're hunting and 223 isn't legal to hunt with (as in Kansas) I don't see a point ... but it's your money, me being able to see your point isn't any of my business.

Again, I'm not trying to be rude but for what sounds like you're trying to accomplish, the 223 is more than adequate for and there is decades of data available for it.

I guess if cost be damned, you can blaze the path!

^^^^^ All good points. I have a Ruger M77 in .223 that I been using for years. The 6.5 build would be to provide an avenue for longer distance shooting once I dip my feet into it and learn first hand more about the cartridge and its performance. The $$$ I save on the build will used for ammo.
My local range has a long distance match I may try out and I dont want to make too big an ass of myself.

Have you considered stepping up to the Ruger Precision? If you are thinking about doing a LR match the American may not be competitive ... I saw a 6.5 precision on GunBroker for $959 buy it now
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/815364424, I know the price is twice as much as the American, but it’s also much more gun ... and they seem to be holding there value well (much better than a used American when you decide you need a better rig. There isn’t much you can do to the American to make it shoot better without being in reach of the Precision anyway. So if you decide it’s not your thing you can get out of it with out much (if any loss) ... again, that’s just how my mind works, just like I’ll shoot from the bench, all bagged up to see what I can squeeze from the gun, then shoot from the line to see how far I have to go.

I’ve stepped up quality of firearms before so I could be competitive and lost money with each step ... Anyway, I’m not trying to be an ass, that would just be my approach.

Don't know about the cartridge but I have a spot you can sight in at 100 yards if you want. Near the end of CR 581 south of Ishpeming. Nothing fancy, just a picnic table in the woods... Drop me an email if you want my phone number.

Thanks, Hvyhawler!
But I belong to Neguanee Rod and Gun so the range is not the problem. I also shoot sometimes at the old Gravel Pit on the Goose Lake access road. But the slobs are dumping a huge amount of garbage there so I would not be surprised to see it closed off. I have bitched to DNR and MCSO for some cameras there, but no interest.

I’d get a tikka t3x superlite or a CTR. And throw an SWFA 6x mil dot scope on it and call it a day.

quote:

Originally posted by newmexican:
And throw an SWFA 6x mil dot scope on it and call it a day.

Assuming the OP wants to exploit the 6.5's accuracy at distances of 100 to 300 yards, a scope with 6x magnification isn't the right tool. If YooperSigs only wants to hit reasonably-sized steel plates, or A/B/C zones in full-sized IPSC targets, then 6x will do that. Essentially he'd be turning a precision rifle into a 3-gun-style carbine.

If YooperSigs truly desires longer range shooting down the road, then he will really be handicapped with 6x magnification.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

quote:

Originally posted by newmexican:
And throw an SWFA 6x mil dot scope on it and call it a day.

Assuming the OP wants to exploit the 6.5's accuracy at distances of 100 to 300 yards, a scope with 6x magnification isn't the right tool. If YooperSigs only wants to hit reasonably-sized steel plates, or A/B/C zones in full-sized IPSC targets, then 6x will do that. Essentially he'd be turning a precision rifle into a 3-gun-style carbine.

If YooperSigs truly desires longer range shooting down the road, then he will really be handicapped with 6x magnification.

I’ve seen a lot of guys do some pretty impressive stuff with those 6x mil quad scopes.

I've seen a crapload of guys do a whole lot better with 12x to 20x optics.

And yes, I even own and shoot LPV optics on AR-15s. The first 16" barrel on my Wilson wore a Leupold 1.5-5x from start to retirement. It produced consistent .9" to 1.25" 5-round groups with quality factory ammo at 100 yards. It produced a couple of .7" groups when the stars aligned.

Barrel #2 (also a 16" Wilson) wears a Vortex 2-10x. It's a consistent .75" to 1.1" gun now, with a few groups of .5".
Barrel #3 (also a 16" Wilson) wears a Nightforce 2.5-10x. It's a consistent .6" to .9" upper, with few groups of .5".

As distances increase beyond 200 yards, accuracy in MOA falls off much faster when using the LPV optics.

When I really want accuracy, I use a 20" Bartlein-barrel AR-15, which wears a 4-16x Nightforce. Consistent .5" to .7" groups at 100 yards, with sub-MOA performance to at least 600 yards.

Assuming the shooting system is up to the task -- increasing magnification and improving glass quality leads to better accuracy.

To get started, I will probably go with the Vortex Diamondback 4x12 40.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
To get started, I will probably go with the Vortex Diamondback 4x12 40.

Vortex's Diamondback line offers decent scopes for the money. I have fondled a few of the models, however I'm not all that familiar with any one particular scope.

I highly recommend that you have an adjustable parallax for any scope with magnification of 10x or more. Fixed parallax is really not the way to go -- even if you think the fixed parallax of 100 yards matches the distance for much of your shooting.

I note this, because some of the Diamondback line has fixed parallax.

Good optics advice! Thanks! And I may go a little more $$$ for a higher end scope, since I could always transfer it to any other rifle I might buy
And the Ruger Hawkeye precision rifle looks pretty tempting.

I got a tikka t3x superlite, replaced the bottom “metal” with one from mountain tactical and mounted a leupold vx5hd 2-10 with DNZ low huntmasters. It makes a pretty awesome, lightweight setup. I think it’s about 7.5lbs and very accurate.