Why not the 6.5 Rem magnum?

14 December 2002, 15:33

Mauserkid

A .4370 Shank
B .5360 Rim/Belt Cutter Diameter
C .5140 Base Diameter
D .4960 Shoulder Diameter
E .3900 Neck-1
F .3890 Neck-2/Case Mouth
G .3590 Freebore Diameter
H .3490 Pilot Diameter
K 1.9740 Min. Chamber Length/Base-to-Case Mouth
L 1.4880 Base-to-Shoulder
M .3730 Neck Length
N .2550 Freebore Length
O .2200 Rim/Belt Thickness
Q 25 deg Shoulder Angle
R 2.5 deg Throat

Gun Type: Rifle
Reamer Type: Belted
Caliber: .350 Rem. Magn.
CLYMERS REAMERS

I tried to copy every thing for you, hope I did not make a mistake..

The only bad thing I see on this case is the large dia. rim, and a belt.

Later...

14 December 2002, 15:54

dan belisle

The 6.5 Rem Mag has the same bolt face as the 7mm Rem Mag, etc. It's just a shorter case body and a neck sized for 264 bullets. Actually, if you build it in a standard length action where you can seat the bullets out, it will out perform the 6.5-284 and the 6.5-06, as there is slightly more case capacity. They don't make brass for it anymore, but you can shorten any standard mag cases and neck them down to make your own. - Dan

15 December 2002, 19:18

<rogerq>

Have been thinking about having a xp-100 rebarreled to the 6.5 rem mag. What velocity do you think is possible out of 15" tube with reasonable pressure loads. Seems like it would be great deer (mule) gun. Would like to shoot 140 grain bullets. Would the xp-100 action be long enough without pulling the bolt to load?

TIA for thoughts and inputs!

Roger Q.

16 December 2002, 09:49

Idaho Shooter

We all have different tastes, otherwize we would all be killing deer with a Win 94 30-30.
I think the 260 Rem loaded with 120 gr Bal Tips would be the ideal hunting pistol cartridge.
Is it listed in the catalog as an option for the Savage Striker?

16 December 2002, 00:13

<OTTO>

The 6.5RM case is an excellent size for the bullet. problem was the gun makers put it in too short of barrel and velocity suffered. It was obsolete before it hit the shelves. Shoot a Rem 600 w/ 18" barrel at night sometime. What a show. Brass is hard to come by and expensive. You will have to search for dies too. Factory loads are nonexsistant. Brass can be made from other belted magnum cases with some sizing and trimming. It's a belted case so it headspaces on the belt. I don't mind though. Not a good choice for the "average" once a year deer hunter. Besides all that, put one in a 24" or 26" tube and you'll have a belted 6.5-284.

16 December 2002, 05:31

dan belisle

Roger Q, as you are loading it into a single shot there should be no problem, as long as the chamber is throated for the OAL length that you want in the first place. If your Xp100 is a repeater, you will be restrivted by the mag length, but as these are just a 600 action, the mag box and feeding can be lengthened to about 3.0"-3.1", which will give you more performance then the 6.5-284. As mentioned however, with pistol length barrels, you're going to see some serious muzzle flash. -Dan

16 December 2002, 16:51

TomP

I saw a 6.5 mm RM Remington 700 in a Connecticut gun shop, with a standard length barrel. Nice rig, would be a hell of an antelope gun.

16 December 2002, 18:38

<rogerq>

Dan:

Thanks for the info on the xp-100. Mine is the old center grip so I should have no problem with length. I may go to a 20 or 22" tube to alleviate some of the muzzle blast. I really like 6.5mm. Have a 6.5-06 and a M96 Swede in 6.5-55. Sounds like a short rifle, ha! With a bipod should be neat! XP is going to be a switch barrel and I have the right bolt on the way.

Thanks Again,

Roger

17 December 2002, 01:08

Major Caliber

If you want a highperformance pistol cartridge use the 7mm-08, I have a Magnum Research 14" pistol in 7mm-08, it can achieve impressive velocity from it's 14" barrel.

17 December 2002, 01:50

Hot Core

quote:
Originally posted by rogerq:
...Would like to shoot 140 grain bullets...

Hey Roger, That is another area that got it(6.5RemMag) in trouble when it was initially released. I'll come back to this.

Don't forget to consider the time period the cartridge was originally released - 1966(?). Back then there were only two sides to bullet issues, either small and fast (O'Conner) or big and as fast as you could reasonably get it going (Keith).

Anyone interested in a relatively lightweight rifle had nobody in the main Gun Rags to support their choices. That was back when it was popular to trash the 30-30 and 35Rem as completely inadequate for anything.

Then those same folks relished whining about putting the 6.5RemMag in such a short action. At the time, I wondered why they didn't understand why it was a good thing, because the 264WinMag was available for the long actions. It eventually sunk in(to me) that the whole "short action concept" was in direct conflict with what those writers had written over and over and over, etc. Now to go back and praise such an innovative concept just wasn't in their character.

And bullets just weren't as good back then. With a few exceptions, going "heavy for caliber"(actually cartridge) made good sense in order to get deep penetration. (In some cartridges it still makes good sense today!)

Then the "coup de gras" was administered by those same folks when they were "forced to review one". They quickly found that the excellent 2-diameter Hornady bullets (which performed so well in all the long actions) didn't provide adequate neck grip when Seated deep enough to feed from the M600/660 magazine. Even though there were PLENTY OF OTHER 140gr 0.264" bullets available on the market, they had their blinders on and just had one more thing to trash the 6.5RemMag about.

I've no idea at all if the excellent 140gr 0.264" Hornady is still 2-diameter or not. It sure helped achieve top speeds in the 264WinMag at reduced pressure, as do many other excellent Hornady bullets in a wide variety of calibers.

So, be careful with your bullet selection and you will do fine.

17 December 2002, 11:04

BigIron

IMHO, it wasn't the short action length that doomed the 6.5RM, it was the introduction in a carbine-length barrel and in a rifle whose looks weren't liked by many.

A buddy of mine tells me his 25-06 is pretty blasty with a 24 inch barrel. I can only imagine what the noise factor would be if he shortened that barrel by 5.5 inches! The 6.5RMag awfully close to a 25-06 in both bore diameter and powder capacity, so.....

Had Rem introduced the 6.5 & 350 Rem mags in the M700 with 24 & 22 inch barrels (respectively), they would have sold well. The 6.5 in a longer barrel is at least the equal of the 25-06 and 6.5-06, and the 350 had few challengers in the middle bore arena. The M700 short action is very popular.

By the time Rem got around to chambering these cartridges in the M700, their fate was sealed by the fate of the M600/660 rifles.

By the time riflemen figured out that the M600/660 were pretty cool rifles, they were long dead.

In today's world a 6.5 SAUM makes a lot more sense than going through the hassles of making 6.5RMag brass.

[ 12-17-2002, 02:11: Message edited by: BigIron ]

18 December 2002, 06:26

Stonecreek

I had a short action Ruger 77, 22" barrel, in 6.5 Remington. I used .264 brass (had a plentiful supply) and .264 dies (with a half-inch or so sawed off of their bases) with ample success. My load was with 120 grain Sierras (I think 120's offer you optimum velocity in this size cartridge) and I took deer and coyotes with it.

If I wished to have a similar rifle today built from available bolt actions, I would opt for the 6.5-284 since it requires no bolt face alteration and its case capacity is within a fraction of the same.

I would definately avoid using the WSM case. It will require both bolt face alteration and magazine alteration, and will likely only allow you only two cartridges in the magazine. On top of that, it will be challenging to get it to feed properly.

Since both Remington and Ruger made standard length barreled rifles (M700 and M 77) in this cartridge, it was apparently not just the short barrel of the original M600 which caused its failure to become popular.

02 January 2003, 03:10

Rob-airto

I am loading some 6.5RM for a model 600 this week. I am using Sierra 120 gr spitzers. Those 120s are seated pretty far into the case due to the magazine length. I can't imagine why someone would load 140s into a model 600 rifle. They just need to be seated too deep. If a guy can find a model 700 that would be a much better choice for the longer bullets provided the bullets can be seated out of the case farther. I certainly can't see rebarreling a rifle for this caliber when there are much better non-belted cases available in 6.5MM. Oh well, to each his own.