I am in need of a rifle for my 11 year old son. I have narrowed it down to the 260 Rem or the 6.5 x 55. I could use a little help. First, is the 6.5 a long action rifle (CZ)? Second, can the 6.5 be loaded in a modern action to equal the vel. and performance of the 260 Rem?

I got my 13 y.o. a Win.70 Featherweight 6.5x55 3 years ago. I got him one because that's what I started with. It can be loaded to velocities greater than the 260 rem without exceeding reasonable parameters(case has greater volume). Most loadins in the U.S. are tamed down due to the many 100year old military mausers out there. The european loadings are considerably hotter (no liability problems there). My son loves his gun. It, like many others is capable of sub MOA accuracy with any decent hand loads. I liked the gun so much, I had one built for myself on a Sako AV action. This is a sweet caliber. It'll kill most any north american game and most plains game in Africa.

Geronimo

Good old Minnesota, home until I moved to Oregon 10 yrs ago!

I own and shoot both. Not the CZ, both calibers.

I have 3 different 260s, two Ruger 77s and one Remington VLS.

I own 3 different 6.5 x 55s, one Ruger 77, one Winchester featherweight long action that was rebareled to 6.5 x 55, and a 1919 Swedish Mauser sniper rifle.

In a long action the 6.5 x 55 can actually be loaded to have better velocity than the 260. Seat the bullet out farther and a little more case capacity. Instead of using Remington 260 brass, I neck down Winchester 7/08 and 308 brass, and it has a little more capacity than the 260 brass and equals the capacity of the 6.5 x 55 brass ( Winchester brand). 308 Remington brass necked down also has a little more capacity than the 260 Remington brass.

Something tho to keep in mind, is that most 6.5 bullets are design to open up at low velocity and that they are so aerodynamic, you don't really gain that must in flatter trajectory by pushing the limits on it.

If you are looking for a load for your 11 yr old son to shoot, try loading a 100 grain SP in either cartridge. I have taken my last 3 deer with this combo, in both rifle calibers. One with a 260 and 100 grain Nosler BT at 300 yds, 1 with a 260 and a 100 grain partition at 300 yds, and 1 with a Ruger 6.5 x 55 with a 100 grain hornady SP at 100 yds, with a neck shot.

Muzzle velocity on all three loads was at 3350 fps at the muzzle and zeroed 2.5 inches high at 100 yds. Each time the scope was set on 4 power ( leupold 3 x 9). Each deer dropped instantly and each time the recoil was low enough that I never lost sight picture of the deer going down in the scope sight!

Analogy of which bullet to use?

The ballistic tip did too much damage inside even at 300 yds, we lost 10 to 15 pounds of blood shot meat ( which is a lot when the deer on weight 90 pounds to begin with)

The partition was used next time because of the poor experiences with the ballistic tip.... performed perfectly, completely exited.

The 100 grain Hornady SP.. Perfect, in and out.
Accurate as the ballistic tip is.

My pick of the three? The Hornady, price, accuracy as good as the ballistic tip and the performance on deer as good as the Partition.

I have hunted deer in Minnesota so I am familiar with their size there, versus here. However my biggest buck I took north of Hibbing, field cleaned at 265 lbs. I took it with a 444 Marlin at 100 yds. Lung shot it still made in 50 yds before it went down.

The 100 grain bullet in a 6.5 mm would have done as good of a job and I think would have dropped it instantly, from, the results I have seen using it on game here in Oregon., and once hunting in Montana.

The 100 grain more than does the job, the recoil is plenty light even when the velocity is at 3350s fps, and it only gets more capable as you move up in bullet weigh. I have killed two deer with 140 grain loads at 2900 fps in the 6.5 by 55. The 100 grainers all three times gave me quicker kills...

One can waste their time trying to figure that out, or ignore statistics, and use what worked best... I use the 100 grainers on deer.

I'll take a 140 grain bullet for on game performance on elk and feel it is just as competent as any 180 grainer in a 30/06 and up is any day. I hunt Elk with a 250 grain load in a 338/06, but I also hunt elk with a 6.5 x 55 and a 7 x 57. Unfortunately no Elk candidates have presented themselves when I have had the 6.5 x 55 in my hands,( or the 7 x57) but I have never felt undergunned with either of them! should the opportunity arise, which I know it will someday.

Good luck on your choice and we all wish the little guy luck on his first deer hunt, with either rifle.

cheers
seafire

quote:

I have hunted deer in Minnesota so I am familiar with their size there, versus here. However my biggest buck I took north of Hibbing, field cleaned at 265 lbs. I took it with a 444 Marlin at 100 yds. Lung shot it still made in 50 yds before it went down.

The 100 grain bullet in a 6.5 mm would have done as good of a job and I think would have dropped it instantly, from, the results I have seen using it on game here in Oregon., and once hunting in Montana.

I don't agree with this conclusion when comparing a large bullet to a small high velocity bullet at woods ranges on big deer. Sure it can be done on easy shots but if the hunting is hard the high velocity small bullet is a poor choice.

Do you handload? If so I'd buy a .270win download a 130gr bullet to 2600fps for him to use now. Then as he grows and learns to manage recoil you can increase the velocity, and recoil, of the 270. My wife is 5'4" and a 130 pounds she hates recoil but we started her 7.75 pound 270 out at 2600fps, with a recoil level of about 14 pounds, and now she shoots 150gr bullets at 2750fps. With this load she has taken warthog, blessbok, gemsbok, springbok.....you get the idea.
Get a 270 and be done with it. As he grows it'll grow right along with him. This is from a guy who has owned three 6.5x55s. Who has loaded and shot a bunch of 6.5 rounds. I don't own a one now but I do own a 270. It is the better mouse trap.

quote:

Originally posted by mark65x55:
Get a 270 and be done with it. As he grows it'll grow right along with him. This is from a guy who has owned three 6.5x55s. Who has loaded and shot a bunch of 6.5 rounds. I don't own a one now but I do own a 270. It is the better mouse trap.

Gee,Mark, you've just retired the 6.5X55 to extinction. Now using your analogy we probably should make the choice between a .270, .280, .284, .308, 30-06 and on and on (better mouse traps).

Now if the options are 6.5x55 or .260; the Swede when handloaded is a superior performer.

Oh ya. Nice photos Mark. Where did you hit that young lion? roger

They are for all intent & purpose, the same round. It will come down to the rifle you want. I would get a .260 in a M7 or M700mtn. Shorten the stock for him & have at it. When he gets older he can still hunt w/ it, fine caliber for deer & antelope & makes a good varminter w/ 85-95gr bullets. A better choice to me than the .243 as a dual purpose round. Later you can restock to fit him or you. Nothing wrong w/ going the .270 route, just not for me.

Bartsche,

I've taken my share of game with a 6.5. The big deer and the antelope in my photos were taken with a winchester featherweight in 6.5x55. The deer with a 125gr nosler and the antelope with a 129gr Hornady SST. I've also owned a custom 6.5x55 and a ruger 6.5. Plus I handload, own a chronograph and have a friend who owns a chronograph. With both the ruger and winchester to get 2700fps out of the 129gr SST I had to load powder charges 2gr over book max! That was measured on my chronograph and my friends. If you own a chronograph then you know what you measure and whats in most loading manuals aren't the same. If you don't own a chronograph, get one. It'll open your eyes. Anyway, based on my experince the 270 is a better mouse trap. With the 270 I can get 3000fps out a 130 grain bullet without any problem and without loading above book max charges. Also the recoil is only a few pounds more that the 6.5 129gr bullet at 2700fps. Believe me when your looking at an antelope 300 yards away you want that extra 300fps. When I got back from the antelope hunt I sold my last 6.5, bought a 270 and don't plan to own another one. If I was betting I'd say in 5 years or less Steve will be selling the 6.5/260 to get his son something bigger.

BTW Steve both my winchester 6.5s where long actions. I'm pertty sure the 6.5x55 is too long to fit in a short action.

quote:

Originally posted by bartsche:
Now if the options are 6.5x55 or .260; the Swede when handloaded is a superior performer.roger

Exactly right and probably the main reason the .260 Femington isn't selling all that well. The .260 Remington doesn't offer anything over the old 6.5mm Swede. Lawdog

mark65x55:

quote:

With the 270 I can get 3000fps out a 130 grain bullet without any problem and without loading above book max charges. Also the recoil is only a few pounds more that the 6.5 129gr bullet at 2700fps.

Having owned a .270 continuously since 1972, I bow to no one in my admiration for it. It wouldn't be my first choice for a young shooter, however. Full-power loads would be more recoil than I'd want to inflict, and I would consider four pounds more recoil to be a significant addition - 35% greater - to the 6.5's 11.5 foot pounds. While others have had different experience, I'm sure, I have never had good experience with reducing the powder charge - accuracy falls off too much for me.

I'm also not certain that even 300 feet per second makes much trajectory difference at 300 yards using the cartridges' factory velocities. One inch advantage to the 270? I would hardly notice that off a bench, let alone under field conditions.

Yes, you have to exceed the reloading book to get to 2,800 fps with the 6.5 Swede. It can be done safely with current rifles, but why bother? Six-five's have been taking deer, pigs, elk, and moose for a hundred years. Personally, I think I've been over-rifled with my .270, and have moved to the Swede.

Jaywalker

Come on, really, what will a 6.5x55 do that a 270 won't? But, hey its your rifle, get what YOU want I'm just saying I've owned both the 6.5x55 and the .270win. I've taken game with both but with only room for one in my gun rack I've chosen the 270. BTW for my wifes rifle reduced loads using IMR4064 works great! Also with 47.5grs, I think thats right, of IMR4064 my 270 winchester sporter will shoot 5 SSTs you can cover with a nickle at 100 yards and chronographs 3000fps.

quote:

Personally, I think I've been over-rifled with my .270, and have moved to the Swede.

Jaywalker

Dose that mean you moved down to the Swede?

quote:

Originally posted by mark65x55:
BTW for my wifes rifle reduced loads using IMR4064 works great!

Did your wife have any say so in the selection of the .270 or did you just deside that's what was best for her? I don't think anyone is saying the exterior ballistics performance of the 6.5x55 is better than the .270 it's just that it is plenty adequite to do the job here in the lower 48. If seafire can pop rocks at 730 yards contiuously what more do you need. You might suffer a little in the energy content that far out but than again 700 plus yards is not really the YARD stick we normally use.

Where did you hit that young lion? roger

Where? I shot it in Namibia, the first shot was behind his right shoulder. The second was just a little father back and the third was in his backside as he turned to run. In all he went about 15 feet after the first shot.

Yes she chose the rifle. You see she is left handed and she just HAD to have synthetic stock, so her choices are pretty limited. We browwed a friends A-bolt, I download some ammo, she shoot it and then went and bought her one. Its the only gun she wants.

You guys are all forgetting the most important thing...the 6.5x55 loaded round just look Sooo cool, and the 6.5X55 bullets look even cooler. They look just like bullets should! I don't have a 260Rem, but do have a Rem Classic in 6.5X55. Beautiful rifle, very accurate. I would love to take it hunting sometime...maybe to Africa?
Peter.

mark65x55:

quote:

Dose that mean you moved down to the Swede? Wink Roll Eyes

Well, of course, I think it as "moving up" to the Swede.

Jaywalker

But back to the original question...

Most (maybe "all") 6.5 Swede chamberings are in a company's "long" actions. Its 55 mm case is just enough longer than the standard short rounds - 51 mm for the .308 - that it would restrict the bullet seating in a short magazine's box.

Yes, the 6.5 Swede can equal or better the .260 Rem, but only if you're comfortable exceeding the handloading manual specs, which are designed to prevent 100-year old actions from coming apart.

If you're a reloader, the .260 might be a better fit than the Swede - there are no legacy rifles to artificially restrict the loadings as there are in the Swede. On the other hand, if you're not a reloader, the Swede might be a much better choice. The 6.5X55 is well thought of around the world, and it's unlikely that will change. That will ensure you a lifetime of factory cartidges, which is not something you can be assured from with the .260 Remington - Remington has a history of abandoning good cartridges that didn't sell up to their expectations.

Jaywalker

.270 vs. 6.5x55

What difference, if any will 0.013" make in terminal performance?

The 6.5x55 is one of the world's great cartridges. Just get your son a 6.5x55 and don't look back. It'll be plenty gun for anything he'll tackle until he can afford to chase critters that bite.

quote:

Originally posted by Savage99:

quote:

I have hunted deer in Minnesota so I am familiar with their size there, versus here. However my biggest buck I took north of Hibbing, field cleaned at 265 lbs. I took it with a 444 Marlin at 100 yds. Lung shot it still made in 50 yds before it went down.

The 100 grain bullet in a 6.5 mm would have done as good of a job and I think would have dropped it instantly, from, the results I have seen using it on game here in Oregon., and once hunting in Montana.

I don't agree with this conclusion when comparing a large bullet to a small high velocity bullet at woods ranges on big deer. Sure it can be done on easy shots but if the hunting is hard the high velocity small bullet is a poor choice.

Savage,

You know I THOUGHT THE EXACT SAME THING, until I did kill something with a small fast 100 grain bullet in a 6.5 x 55 and 260 Rem. I am not a student of the small bullet, high velocity school usually. I prefer, high sectional density and moderate velocity. However, at least in 6.5 mm, a fast 100 grain bullet has sure made a believer out of me on that one. I guess I'd judge each combo on an individual basis, but a 6.5 mm works!

Cheers
seafire

Mark,

Since no one else asked this IRONIC question. I can appreciate any man's appreciation of one cartridge over another.....

Just explain to me tho the logic in having a handle of Mark65x55.... and then stating it is an inferior round to another cartridge ( 270 or anything else)?

Just a little humor my wife pointed out reading this thread while she is waiting for me to be done on this forum and get going to the store with her.

Cheers
seafire

Simple really. When I signed on four years ago the user name "mark" was taken and at the time the only two rifles I had was 6.5x55s. Selling the 6.5s was pretty easy, changing user names??? Well most boards don't want to do that and after 4 years everyone knows who mark65x55 is. I guess I could change it to mark"X"65x55shooter.

Lawdog, what the .260 does offer over the Swede, is it WILL fit nicely in a true SA/2.80" mag box. The Swede really needs a med. or long action to take advantage of it's extra powder cap. If you squeeze a Swede into a 2.8" SA, you'll use up that extra space pushing the bullet into the case.
Mark, I appreciate your switch to the .270, but would have given you cudos for going to a .280.

Steve, since you're in MN and you didn't say otherwise I'll assume this is a deer rifle... in which case I'd flip a coin. Either will work to perfection on deer. For a younger shooter I do believe the shorter bolt throw is an advantage so I guess the 260 tips the scales. If you were here in MT I'd agree with Mark... the 270 is the bigger, better engine which is fully elk capable yet can be loaded down for mild recoil.

Take some .260 Remington cases, charge them with 43.0 grains of VARGET and Federal 210 Match primers, 100 grain Nosler Balistic Tips, seat them 15/1000's off the lands and shoot any deer family member in the lower 48 with them!!! if you do your part as fr as shot placement, he will be DRT...."dead right there"!!! And so will a bunch of them african critters!!! Without the shooter being punished by "overkill on both ends"!!! For a kid or a slight built person, the 260 is a fine peice of machinery!!!! For the well built it is even finer!!!! Just ask my daughter Sarah(Miss GHD)!! She's 3/3 on good bucks!!! First one was 271 yards(8 points, 17", second was 8 points 18", 197 yards and her third was "Daddy called this one in" 12 points 18", 27 yards!!! She has yet to see a deer take a step after the hammer falls!!!! Must have been some of that teaching about shot placement took hold!!! GHD

I'm for the .260 myself due to the short action and having one in the XP100R with 15" barrel and an old Rem 788 that was a 308 and I had it rebarreled to a 260.
The XP will out shoot the rifle and it's 6" longer barrel.
The XP likes Varget and 120grn Speer Hot Cores and Nosler Ballistic Tips in 120grn. Both shoot 3/4" at 100 off bipod and 1.5" at 200yds. I have taken a coyote at 305 yds with it holding on the first ballistic plex line in the Burris B Plex scope. Boom, FLop.
I had an Encore in the 6.5x55 but traded it. I know several that like the rifle and encore in this caliber. I cold shoot either if I had to.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
Lawdog, what the .260 does offer over the Swede, is it WILL fit nicely in a true SA/2.80" mag box. The Swede really needs a med. or long action to take advantage of it's extra powder cap. If you squeeze a Swede into a 2.8" SA, you'll use up that extra space pushing the bullet into the case.

I took action length into account when I built the 6.5mm Swede for my wife. The added performance you get when reloading more than makes up for a slightly shorter bolt throw. Everyone that owns Swede's says the savings of a fraction of an inch in bolt travel doesn't offset the advantages the 6.4mm Swede offers over the .260 Remington. Swede's forever. Lawdog

You guys are more fun to watch than my Labs fighting over a stick!!

Both are good rounds, but the Swede looks better coming out of the box!!

Back to basics: My 11 yo son started shooting a 6.5x55 last year and loves it! Good basic round that will see him through a lot of game. Couldn´t recommend it mnore highly -and neither could he!

quote:

Originally posted by steve4102:
First, is the 6.5 a long action rifle (CZ)?

The only "short" action I know of, that will take a 6.5x55 is the short MRC - an intermediate action really. But to me, short vs. long action is of less importance.

My personal choice would be the 6.5x55. Either caliber will do about the same in the field, have about the same selection in dies, but the 6.5x55 is not only a classic, it also has the better brass selection available.

- mike

I'll add $.02 as well.....I built my 6.5X55 on a '98 Mauser and will take it hunting deer in Minnesota or Wisconsin or Wyoming any day over a .270. As a matter of fact I no longer own a .270 and have no plans to get one.
Right now I'm also building a M-70 featherweight in .260 and if it shoots as good as I hope I'll then rechamber the swede to 6.5-06

The 120 grain .264 bullet at 3,000'/sec is very good at putting venison in the freezer and IMO as well as the .270 without the recoil of the .270.

think of available ammo...

Ammo availability is a problem w/ both so really it comes down to the rifle you want to build it on. For me, true SA, a .260 or .260ai. For a med. or std. action, go 6.5x55. Either will do what you ned done.

Steve,
Either choice would be great for a first rifle. There was an article in a past issue about loads for the 260 and 6.5x55. The rounds were loaded to about equal velocities in modern rifles. If you are interested I could get the issue number for you and you could order a copy of the magazine. I am reluctant to send the magazine away since I own a Ruger and M70 Featherweight in 6.5x55.

Jim

For what its worth:
My first and only rifle for many years was a pre 64 Model 70 in 270 passed to me from my grandfather. It works well, but something lighter on recoil would have probably suited me better for a first rifle. The steel buttplate didn't soak up much recoil. I still hunt with that rifle during deer season though, as it brings back memories of many good hunts and animals taken.

Jim

I like your choices for your boy. He'll shoot better with lighter recoil, and learning to shoot better will serve him better over time than more gun. Hin gun can be lighter for carrying if you choose a lighter recoil load. Of your two choices I'd go with the 6.5x55, especially if you reload. Even if you don't, I surveyed my factory load options in the two calibers last fall, and in this area I found more options in 6.5x55. I'd probably do the new stainless Win. Featherweight for him. It's handy, light weight and requires less maintenance and that's also attractive for a younger hunter. BTW I'm not bad mouthing the .270 or 7mm 08 for whitetail. My Avitar shows a good 96 yard, 4 round group with my M.70 in .270. But, for a boy the milder recoil options with a 6.5x55 seem an better choice. I'd feel comfortable shooting any whitetail I've ever seen inside 250 yrd.s with the right 6.5x55 load.

If those are the choices, it really doesn't matter in the real hunting world. The fit difference for a smaller person will come about when you think about the 260 in a model 7. For an 11 year old, that would be my choice.

If you want to expand some, do what I did for my 12 year old, build them a 6.5-284 with a short barrel and stock, load it down to start with, and let them have some fun. Actually I built it for me, but can't seem to get it back from her now that she's 15.

quote:

Originally posted by Tex21:
.270 vs. 6.5x55

What difference, if any will 0.013" make in terminal performance?

The 6.5x55 is one of the world's great cartridges. Just get your son a 6.5x55 and don't look back. It'll be plenty gun for anything he'll tackle until he can afford to chase critters that bite.

Ditto. Another advantage the 6.5X55 has is that lo-ong neck for those lo-ong 6.5 slugs. All the military 6.5s share something in common with the 7X57 too, -they kill out of proportion to their power with bullets that have outstanding sectional density. That can't be said about the 270. I like the 6.5X55 because it was designed for long bullets, lower pressures with that odd sized case, and tolerable recoil -all are qualities that make it eminently suitable for youth.

What Buckshot said!

Handloader No. 228 April 2004 has the writeup by Barsness about loads for the 260 and 6.5x55.

Howdy,
I own and shoot both the 6.5x55 and the .260 Remington in a Mannlicher and a Remington M7. I would rate the .260 in a Remington M7 as hands down best for a beginner, a woman, or one that is recoil shy. The 6.5x55 is the winner for everyone else. The 6.5x55 is the hands down best for reloading due to the larger and longer cartridge case, allowing use of the heavy 6.5mm slugs that have given the 6.5s their success over the years. Interestingly, my M7 shoots best with the little 120 and 125 grain bullets, so go figure. Have only killed one deer (axis doe) with the .260, and it pitched down and skidded 10 feet, dead as can be. The 6.5x55, just lays them down.
LLS