Got an itch for a new cal. Any thoughts

Itch's need scratchin'. I think it's a nifty round.

I got my mint condition 6.5 Swede out a couple of weeks ago, and my old mild load of IMR 4895 and the 120 Sierra Matchking loaded out the nearly touch the lands still shoots into 1 MOA if I do my part. I think any of the smaller 6.5's, including the 6.5 Creedmoor, make great cartridges and are effective beyond one's expectations.

Clarence

I have one in a Ruger Hawkeye and really enjoy it.I use it as a light deer rifle,swap the scope for our club 300 yard steel plate matches.Easy to shoot and load for.The factory ammo is some of the best I've seen in years out of the box...Go for it!

Savage m10 light weight wood stock.Miss the feel pf a good wooden stock own to many syn, overmold and other man made stuff.

May your shot be good,your knife sharp and your family happy to see you home.

I handload... I look at it as a "me to" round...

a copy of the 260 Rem...

260 Rems can always be made out of 7/08, 308 or 243 brass if they quit making it...which to me is a big selling feature...

a few guys I know who picked one up complain about lack of ammo availability and components compared to the 260...

what seafire said. +1

quote:

260 Rems can always be made out of 7/08, 308 or 243 brass if they quit making it...

Is it possible to make 6.5 Creedmoor cases from the 308 Win brass?

.260 is a great round. The 6.5 crdm just caught my intrust. Will be summer before i choose got some reading and research to do. Thanks

In the world of "ME TOO" cartridges could it be said that the Creedmore/ the .260 = the .260/6.5 x 55 ? Me thinks that would be giving the .260 a little bonus. roger

You make 6.5CM from .22/250,fireform and load and shoot from then on...

The Creedmoor was designed solely for HP competition. That hunters find it useful is just icing.

Sometimes the icing makes the cake. Think i will give the 6.5CM a try.
Thanks

quote:

Originally posted by kgarr:
Sometimes the icing makes the cake. Think i will give the 6.5CM a try.
Thanks

roger

The creedmore dont have 116years of use and you still have many rifles chamberd for it. No factory ammo for moose and bear.

and that makes it bad? I don't follow that logic at all? Everything was NEW once?

What makes the Creedmoor look so good is that it's free bored more then the 260 so that the bullets of most all the weights are loaded out of the powder capacity. That's why it performs so well. You all know that if you do that to any cartridge it will perform better. As I've said often I have my 260 throated out for the longer bullets. None of my bullets are loaded into the powder capacity. If anyone thinks when a 260 is set up that way that a 6.5 Creedmoor is going to out perform it isn't thinking straight.

Also, the Creedmoor with the bullets seated out still fits into the magazines, where the 260 won't fit since it will be longer than std OAL.

KB

That's a valid point Kabluewy. Remington has a habit of putting some cartridges on too short of an action like the 6mm Remington. I guess your could add the 243 and 260 to that list. I have a neighbor I load for his 6mm Remington. He likes the 110 pointed soft points for hunting. The magazine has enough room to load the bullet out, but his free bore doesn't and if he tries to chamber a slightly too long cartridge he has a heck of a time getting it out of the rifle because the action window is too short. He has to pull the bolt out.

It comes down to using the right tool for the job.

The best way to use a tool is to follow the intended(design) and let it do the work for you.
The 6.5 CM works fine in it's unique package...

The point is to use the 6.5 CM or the 260 in the short bolt actions, and the AR. Both have specific max cartridge OAL. It defeats the purpose of the cartridges to handload them so long they won't fit into the magazine.

Then there is the throat of the chamber. Cutting the 260 throat longer so the bullets can be seated out is a waste of time, IMO.

Apparantly the 6.5 CM is designed so the bullets can be seated out long, and the std reamer is made accordingly, which is the reason I've been planning on getting a barrel chambered in 6.5 CM.

KB

That's the way to do it. I never could get my .260's to do what the CM is doing "without" any tuning and magic. It's been one of the most accurate rifles I ever owned and the ammo has been great. I am now working up some loads just to see where it will go...

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:

Apparantly the 6.5 CM is designed so the bullets can be seated out long, and the std reamer is made accordingly, which is the reason I've been planning on getting a barrel chambered in 6.5 CM.

KB

I'll loan you the reamer for my long throated 6.5mm R-Bar. That will let you use .243 formed cases -no trim-no neck turning.
"Works great on a mod. 98." That's poetry , boy. roger

I built my 260 on a type 38 Arisaka, so it has plenty of room to load the cartridge long. Then I throated it out. Anyone that believes a 260 loaded with the bullet never passing the base of the case neck not performing better then the way Remington set it up doesn't know what they are talking about. This is only true of the longer bullets that must be loaded in the powder space. This would be kind of the same as saying the improved versions of cartridges do not get a little more velocity any at all. I can fly those 140 grain bullets along pretty dang fast with my set up without dangerous pressure. I'm very happy with it, but if if you don't prefer them that way that is perfectly fine. Me, I like mine the way cartridges were designed, keeping the bullet out of the boiler room. I don't like stuffing a cartridge into to short of an action and seating the bullet deep. I know on the AR's your are bound by the magazine length.

By the time you run a .260 on a long action, you might as well run a 6.5-06 or a .264 mag.

I don't think so.

Model 20 Rifle (The Ultimate Mountain Rifle) - built upon an intermediate length action. It is designed for exceptional accuracy with .308 class cartridges, yet maintains an extremely light weight. The action weighs a modest 20 ounces, and the finished rifle is only 5 pounds. Featuring a 3- inch magazine, the Ultimate Mountain rifle is available in all .308 length calibers, including .243 Winchester, 6mm Remington, .257 Roberts, 7mm-08, and .284. A 3 inch magazine is featured to allow extra versatility during load development.

It comes down to can be done compared to what's practical. I think it's very interesting to learn about what can be done. Meanwhile, as I get older, I generally seek the practical.

If money is no problem, then it doesn't matter. However, money always matters to me, especially as I get older. In the final and hindsight analysis, throwing lots of money at rifle projects has never yet proven to be as satisfying as initially thought.

So, in keeping with that line of thinking, the first question I ask myself, in considering a 6.5mm, is what do I want to accomplish that I can't do easily with a 6.5x55?

The answer of course is to use a short action. Not just any short action, but a readily available and reasonably priced one. That's what the 260 is designed for, in std SAAMI specs.

The 6.5 CM is also designed for a short action, but the case is a little shorter than the 260, and has less slope, and sharper shoulder. It's designed to allow for the bullet to be seated out.

It's simple to me. For a handloader the 6.5 CM is an excellent choice. If a guy values the use of factory loads more, then the 260 is a better choice.

Here's an example of what I mean about practical:
I recently bought a Winchester youth model 70 push feed in 243. I had the barrel seperated from the action. then I sold the bottom metal, the stock and the barrel, and recovered over half of the cost of the whole rifle. Then I bought a finished Boyds walnut stock, special run, at sale price. It has checkering, sling studs, and recoil pad. I also bought a Williams bottom metal unit. The whole assembly is awaiting the services of a gunsmith, which includes a barrel chambered in 6.5 CM.

Maybe that's not practical to some, because it's not instant gratification. It takes time, and is appreciated by those of us who like to put together parts, and don't mind dealing with a gunsmith for final assembly. I'm thinking the final assembly will be worth the trouble. Of course it's not a real custom rifle. I suppose it's classified as semi-custom. The cost is a fraction of full custom, but shoots the same nonetheless (or better). This is not the first time I've done similar projects, and I find them very satisfying.

KB

K B You might want to look at the 6.5x47 Lapua. .470 bolt face and you can use .243 cases trimmed back 4 mm but you might not have to neck turn.308 cases but you'll have to neck turn them also.

6.5x47 --- hummm. Lapua brass is good too.

KB

quote:

Originally posted by Kabluewy:
6.5x47 --- hummm. Lapua brass is good too.

KB

I've got two -47's in that boat and love both of them.

Alan