Considering case taper increases back thrust and backthrust is apparently REAL important in the Contender I wonder if cases like the 6.5X50 have just too much taper to be loaded to their potential.
Would something like the 260 Bellm that was proposed at one time solve these problems and be worth the effort. Is the case too big to be efficient in a 14" barrel?

LouisB

Nosey minds want to know!

OR

I'm still trying to decide what to do!

TCLouis
I have thought about it & made a couple of inquiries & that's been about it. I haven't gone beyond that.
Rich Jake

There was a good article in Handloader on the Contender chambered in 6.5 MS I believe. The author had JDJ chamber the barrel for him.

The gist of the article is it was a good cartridge in the Contender, ballistically, but suffered from severe case stretching and poor case life. I tended to think the author was maxing it out a bit much too just adding to the case stretching.

I'll take a look see if I can find it here.

Regards

[ 10-10-2002, 06:38: Message edited by: Headstamp ]

When I do the 6.5x50 R Bellm, I am running a .370" shoulder diameter and about a .376" base diameter.... not much taper at all. Standard chamber for a standard 5.6x50 R case is about .360."

I used to chamber 6.5x54 MS set up to make cases from stout .220 Swift brass, but it was never totally successful, and I dropped it. And while the ones I rechambered to 6.5x.257 Roberts solved the problems ok and accuracy while touchy could be most excellent, velocity wise it was a step backwards with the large case in a short 14" handgun barrel.

Later this winter, let's do a .260 Bellm and get some chrono data so we can help put the big question to rest about the shortened .260 Rem. chamber and the potentials that exist using the super thick .307 Win brass to make cases.

Mike