Guess you never had a barrel die mid season. I personally don't care a lick about BR,their guns, loading techniques, etc since it's not a direct cross over to practical rifle. A practical rifle, its ammo, and use are totally different. In Palma it's 15 shots per string. The practical match I shot this past weekend had 90 second par times and I used about 10 rounds per stage. The guns get HOT. I shoot one of those matches or more per month plus practice. There is a reason I do a lot of my practice with a .223 and .308 and just use 6.5 to confirm data and compete if the match doesn't require a .308 Win. I shot more and in higher volume than most guys.

I personally like to get 3K out of a barrel before rechamber or rebarrel because it will get me through a match season. Keeping MV under 3000fps also keeps me from chasing which is good since practical rifle strings of fire can get pretty high. Rechamber becomes a practice barrel while I wait for the new tube to show and install during the off season.

With work guns I've shot out a .300 WIN MAG in 2K. Getting those guns back quickly doesn't always happen. I'm lucky that I can get a match gun rebarrel done quickly. Not everyone can rebarrel their own stuff or know someone that will make it happen quickly.

My buddy Norm has started using Proof barrels which don't get nearly as hot and are holding up well. They should for what they cost and how long wait times are. When I kill this Krieger I'm going to Proof and a Proof is going on my 7mm LR hunting rifle as well.

No offense meant, but the answer is a simple one. Stay home the rest of the month. You can buy two or three barrels and chamber them all with the new reamer you bought with the savings in travel expenses and match fees, etc. Save the best one for important matches. You should know by now, about the round count when a barrel is approaching retirement age. A barrel is NOT going to shoot a clean 100-10X score on Monday afternoon, and shoot a 72-0X score on Tuesday.

I shot the Super Shoot next to Tony Boyer one year. He brought six barrels, and shot them all in a day practicing. His quote to me was: "I just need to find out which barrel wants to win the Super Shoot this year...".

IMHO, if you can replace any of the components it is no longer a "Practical Rifle". A factory police sniper is a practical rifle. A custom action, with a custom barrel, with a custom trigger, stock, bedded, and a scope that currently retails for more than the sticker price on a new, at the dealership 1957 Chevy Bel Air 2dr HT is not practical.

Any discipline that requires a special coat and glove, or front and rear rests is not "Practical".

I became interested in shooting Hunter Class BR many years ago. There was a match about 140 miles from my house. I was naive enough to take a stock Remy 700 chambered in 308 with a 3-9X Leupold taped at 6X.
They didn't laugh at me, they did however, explain the facts of life in any competition. When the rule book says on one page that the stock may not be "Optically Flat", that's a hint. Over that winter, I had a rule book rifle built. The next year I finished tied for 10th in the TCL, and ended up 7th based on X-count.

When I saw my first Shehane "Maxi-Tracker" stock that had the "Hammerhead" eight inch wide fore end and the bare stock weighed over 65 pounds, that was a hint. When I saw a Farley front rest that retails for $1800 or so, that was a hint.

When I saw my first March 8-80X scope that retails for $4300+ that was a hint.

If you spend $300+ for a Whidden "Point Up Tool" to close the tips on Berger, et al HP match bullets to gain two or three points on the BC, that is a hint. Ditto for $300+ die set.

Every form of competition is a money game.

I shoot when I can because I'm a soldier and I'm gone a lot so I personally don't pass on matches or hunting if the opportunity exists. When I'm home I like to be able to grab and go. I don't struggle to pay for barrels, bullets, etc in part because I RO matches so don't pay the match fees. All I pay for is gas to get there and it would take 4-6 matches worth of gas to pay for a barrel.

I struggle to make more critical timelines work than other people live with. I replace barrels as I need to and do it when I'm gone when possible. The rest of time I shoot the piss out of them. I own reamers, gauges, and try to keep a barrel on hand so that I can keep my setup as close to the last barrel as possible. I have seen a barrel go from fine to not good quickly and it was about 500 rounds before I expected it to happen. I didn't have time to get a new tube fitted prior to a match later that month and I had been gone for months prior to that. Luckily I had another rifle that was ready to go and I just had to load up a bunch of ammo.

By your definition, only a factory gun is practical. Practical is actually a class of competition that is used to describe what is very similar to PRS. It is also the class I shoot in 3Gun but that is a little different because of their rules. There are different classes in PRS for factory guns and 3GN has similar classes but more of them. Long and short, Practical Rifle is generally scenario based, from a prop that fits the scenario (ie reverse slope of roof, vehicle, etc), and you are limited in the use of bullshit gimmicks to help you shoot (although PRS allows some retarded gimmicks). I personally dislike the gimmicks because I have never carried a long gun into a fight with a backpack full of specialized shooting bags. I would say anything shot with what you would have on you when you spot game or take contact is a practical rifle. Prone is not practical but it's a dedicated way for me to train wind between 800 and 1000yds.

BR is something totally different because it's like buying a Bowie knife: you can only do one thing with it. It is not a bad sport but not one I have a use for except that BR is responsible for advancements in equipment and I have reaped those benefits in regard to better barrels, bullets, etc. They are also like trap shooters in my experience in that they think BR is the truth, the way, and the light and their ego reflects it. I personally have a lot more respect for guys who can shoot from any position and/or with irons. I also find practical types to be more friendly and helpful.

Anyhow, there are a lot of things I have read from you that make me wonder; some of these included. We are also way off topic. Thanks for the advice but I disagree with you on a lot of fronts.

All rifle competition demands optimum performance from both the competitor and his equipment. However, IMO the shooter is more critical than the equipment in High Power and Practical shooting events and the equipment is more critical than the shooter in Benchrest shooting events.

quote:

Originally posted by Grenadier:
All rifle competition demands optimum performance from both the competitor and his equipment. However, IMO the shooter is more critical than the equipment in High Power and Practical shooting events and the equipment is more critical than the shooter in Benchrest shooting events.

You nailed it right on the head!

I served way back, you are serving now. Less has changed in terms of the mission, than has been replaced by higher tech.

Perhaps a more appropriate working definition: if you could not carry it into combat, and get ammunition resupply it is a toy. Or, carry it all day hunting. Or buy ammunition for the firearm at Cabela's/Midway, it is a toy.

A little over a hundred years ago, the original Hi-Power competitors made fun of the Schuetzen shooters because of the impractical nature of breech seating. Not much later, they adopted the heavy shooting coats and pants that forced them to waddle, much like ducks, and a glove about an inch thick to hold the rifle.

Competition, of any nature, regardless of attempts to limit the (very expensive) equipment race, always turns into one.

Despite what has been written here about the magical 6.5 Creedmoor and its long range lethality, the US Military is not going to buy any. They have to live in the real world, competitors refuse to.

Any form of competition with marked yardages and wind flags and rests allowed, is a game.

I figured you'd get your dander up about what I said, Rich. Yes, both types of disciplines depend on specialized equipment and both disciplines depend on highly skilled shooters. But I stand by what I said.

For those who are not familiar with the shooting we are talking about . >>>------------->

The 6.5 Creedmoor was designed for the Tubb 2000 platform. It just happens to perform well in just about any platform. Not saying that it is the last word or anything.

Those are good videos. Thanks for posting them. All shooting sports are interesting to me and the more people we can get involved in shooting the better our lot in life will be.

Joe

I guess I was on the 6.5 bandwagon before it was cool...we have been shooting 6.5x55s and 260s for the better part of 15 years. We have 2 260s for loaner guns on the ranch, we found that guys could shoot them accurate and they tended to drop game well. If I were to buy or build a gun today, I'd go Creedmoor, as I think it has more "wind in its sail". More loads, brass avalible, and OTC ammo--plus resale might be better too--if you do that sort of thing, as for me my nephew has a 260, and our 2 ranch guns are 260s...so I see nothing wrong with that round either...

Wasn't Bernosky's group fired with a 6mm Hagar?

Lapua has made an official announcement that Lapua 6.5 Creedmoor brass will be available first quarter 2017. It will use small rifle primers and have a 1.5mm flash hole rather than 2.0mm. It's about darn time. One of the biggest complaints about the 6.5 Creedmoor, in competition, has been that the the cases are too week to push hard, and brass life is too short. I think this brass will allow folks to run loads at similar pressures to the 6.5x47, and achieve similarly low variances in ballistic stats. The playing field has finally been levelled between the 6.5 Creedmoor and the 6.5x47 Lapua. I hope Lapua is making the web for their 6.5 Creedmoor brass the same as for the 6.5x47. There is no reason not to do so.

quote:

Originally posted by hdxr750:
If you were going to build a new to you Rifle... Would you chamber it in 6.5 Creedmore or .260 Remington? And Reloading is no problem.

Currently the creed has better factory support for long range ammo, but if you like (or don't mind) reloading, then the 260 might have an edge. It might come down to magazines. If you want to use the AICS type magazines then the creed is a little better suited for fitting long pointy bullets. Personally, I'd opt for the 260.

what ColoradoMatt said, plus one. The Remmy 700 SA box limitation at 2.800" makes a difference.

1 in 8" twist . Thats just automatic . Unless you want to shoot long bullets. Like I would like to. A 140 gr monometal expanding bullet with a G1 bc of more than .6 . Something that would actually be tough AND ballistically efficient. So I would like a Creed in a gain twist that ended up 1 in 7" .
I didn't start out being a totally sold out Creedolian. After I got mine , the more I shot and reloaded for it the more I liked it . Then I developed some loads in a friends 260 Remington. I appreciated The Creed even more after that !! . Just an all around better case design. And now , 4 years after getting mine ,the 6.5 Creedmoor just gets better and better with more and more support. As to the making brass , its not at all difficult. Just fire form 22/250 brass . Fairly instant 6.5 Creedmoor brass.
As to long range hunting. Imho it depends on the game . Coyotes, wolves , some deer . Ya , the mid velocity 6.5s are great. For true big game, elk , moose . Then something like the big fast 338s and bigger are much better choices. Or put another way, if a 6.5 is too small , then you need a 338 .

ThiS month's American Rifleman has a good article about the creedmoor and the article compares it to the 260.