Shorter barrels
.
I bought a 6.5 that had been shortened to 20 inches, with the stock modified to a Mannlicher stock configuration. It is still very accurate within ordinary hunting ranges......(about 300 yards here in Manitoba). Although 300 yards is a LONG shot, I would say, based on about 50 years of hunting from New Brunswick to B.C., that most game animals are shot well under the 200 yard mark.
About 1962 when Remington came out with the 700 action, all the barrels for that initial production were 20 inch barrels. I bought one in .308 Winchester, and still have it. My main hunting rifle for over 20 years in B.C. was a Ruger 18 1/2 inch .308 Mannlicher Carbine, and I shot a LOT of Mule Deer, Whitetails, Elk and Moose with it. I never lost a single animal, and only a few times I had to shoot more than once.
The big advantage is the shortness and handiness of the hunting rifle with a short barrel. There is not a lot of disadvantage to them. I think the pre-occupation with velocity is really more worry than fact. An animal hit in the right place will go down, and it does not matter whether it is a 30-06, a .308, a 30-40, or even a 30-30. Perhaps we get too enamoured with the latest creations that promise us another 100 fps. That 100 fps, over actual hunting conditions, is negligible.
If a 170 grain 30-30 at 2000 fps, out of a 20 inch barrel Winchester 94 will drop a game animal, does anyone really think that a similar animal hit in the same place by a 9.3x57 at 1900+ fps is going to have a 230 to 286 grain bullet bounce off it?
I would not sweat the small things, or pick nits. Obviously the previous owner wanted a short and handy rifle, for HIS hunting conditions. If your hunting conditions are the cedar swamps or the dark timber or bush, you would be well to see a hundred yards.
During the early years of the 1900s, the Mannlicher Carbine in 6.5 MS was considered adequate enought. Bell in Africa used one in 7x57 to cull Elephant herds.
.