6.5 vs. 7.62
- Thread starter tedbiv
- Start date
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
I have been shooting a 6.5x47 lapua for a few years now. I shoot a 139 grain scenar and my rifle is 8 mil to 1000 yards. My wind is only 50 to 60% of the 175 grain matchking in 308.
They are flatter shooting and less powder per round. And the one I shoot uses small primers.
I have been shooting a 6.5x47 lapua for a few years now. I shoot a 139 grain scenar and my rifle is 8 mil to 1000 yards. My wind is only 50 to 60% of the 175 grain matchking in 308.
They are flatter shooting and less powder per round. And the one I shoot uses small primers.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
thanks crumpmd,
is the windage difference due to the bullet balistic differences, or a combination of velocity and weight? For example could you get similar ballistics with a 7.62 at 145gr. Or are these a different design? They seem to be "long" bullets compared to what I see in 7.62. Also is there less recoil since less poweder, or is that noticable?
tedbiv
thanks crumpmd,
is the windage difference due to the bullet balistic differences, or a combination of velocity and weight? For example could you get similar ballistics with a 7.62 at 145gr. Or are these a different design? They seem to be "long" bullets compared to what I see in 7.62. Also is there less recoil since less poweder, or is that noticable?
tedbiv
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
I have gone from shooting .308 to 6.5 Creedmoor and I wish I had done it sooner.
Darin
I have gone from shooting .308 to 6.5 Creedmoor and I wish I had done it sooner.
Darin
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
What Doc Crump said - better external ballistics. Go here: http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/Articles.htm
Read the articles under "Understanding Long Range Bullets" and the one on "What's Wrong with the .30 Caliber." They will give you an idea of why smaller bore cartridges have gained so in popularity.
By and large though, it is a matter of less recoil and better downrange performance.
What Doc Crump said - better external ballistics. Go here: http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/Articles.htm
Read the articles under "Understanding Long Range Bullets" and the one on "What's Wrong with the .30 Caliber." They will give you an idea of why smaller bore cartridges have gained so in popularity.
By and large though, it is a matter of less recoil and better downrange performance.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
A good slick 308 bullet will have a BC approaching 0.5 and weigh 155-175gr.
A good 6.5 will have a BC approaching 0.6 and weigh 140gr or less.
So the 6.5 will be less effected by wind drag and can be launched faster from the same parent case. If it starts faster than the 308 and slows down at a slower rate than the 308 then it will be trucking a good deal faster @ 1000yds, have taken less time (and therefore less elevation) to get there, and (here's the big one) have been blown less far off course than the 308. A full-value 10Mph wind could mean 30-40inches less drift at 1000yds. That's like a third or more less drift, meaning that every error you make in reading the wind hurts you a third less. Take two shooters of comparable skill and equipment, as long as there is any wind at all the 6.5 shooter will beat the 308.
A good slick 308 bullet will have a BC approaching 0.5 and weigh 155-175gr.
A good 6.5 will have a BC approaching 0.6 and weigh 140gr or less.
So the 6.5 will be less effected by wind drag and can be launched faster from the same parent case. If it starts faster than the 308 and slows down at a slower rate than the 308 then it will be trucking a good deal faster @ 1000yds, have taken less time (and therefore less elevation) to get there, and (here's the big one) have been blown less far off course than the 308. A full-value 10Mph wind could mean 30-40inches less drift at 1000yds. That's like a third or more less drift, meaning that every error you make in reading the wind hurts you a third less. Take two shooters of comparable skill and equipment, as long as there is any wind at all the 6.5 shooter will beat the 308.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
tedbiv, I did not believe it could be that much better either until we shot 3/8 mild steel @ 600 yards with it and a .308 side by side. That was eye opening--the .308 just knocked the paint off, the 6.5x47 penetrated almost thru. Both with Berger vld's. High BC bullets hold their energy so much more @ distance. It impressed me so much, mine should be finished in a couple of weeks.
tedbiv, I did not believe it could be that much better either until we shot 3/8 mild steel @ 600 yards with it and a .308 side by side. That was eye opening--the .308 just knocked the paint off, the 6.5x47 penetrated almost thru. Both with Berger vld's. High BC bullets hold their energy so much more @ distance. It impressed me so much, mine should be finished in a couple of weeks.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
I build a 6.5-06, it shoots as flat as most magnum rifes without the recoil. 142 gr SMK at 2900 fps easy, and feeds from the magazine smooth as silk. There are several short action rounds that will duplicate this with some load development. I wanted fast and easy. Run a Winchester case into a 6.5-06 die and you have your new case. Load and shoot as normal.
Good luck
Jerry
I build a 6.5-06, it shoots as flat as most magnum rifes without the recoil. 142 gr SMK at 2900 fps easy, and feeds from the magazine smooth as silk. There are several short action rounds that will duplicate this with some load development. I wanted fast and easy. Run a Winchester case into a 6.5-06 die and you have your new case. Load and shoot as normal.
Good luck
Jerry
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CCooper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">tedbiv, I did not believe it could be that much better either until we shot 3/8 mild steel @ 600 yards with it and a .308 side by side. That was eye opening--the .308 just knocked the paint off, the 6.5x47 penetrated almost thru. Both with Berger vld's. High BC bullets hold their energy so much more @ distance. It impressed me so much, mine should be finished in a couple of weeks. </div></div>
I'd say, 120gr pill vs elk at over 500yds.... elk lost on the first shot, lol
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: CCooper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">tedbiv, I did not believe it could be that much better either until we shot 3/8 mild steel @ 600 yards with it and a .308 side by side. That was eye opening--the .308 just knocked the paint off, the 6.5x47 penetrated almost thru. Both with Berger vld's. High BC bullets hold their energy so much more @ distance. It impressed me so much, mine should be finished in a couple of weeks. </div></div>
I'd say, 120gr pill vs elk at over 500yds.... elk lost on the first shot, lol
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
7mm also looks interesting.
http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/30cal_fullVersion.pdf
7mm also looks interesting.
http://www.appliedballisticsllc.com/index_files/30cal_fullVersion.pdf
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tedbiv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is it really that noticable? </div></div>
Yes.
At extended ranges (beyond 600yds) the wind drift is SIGNIFICANTLY less. Of course there is less drop but that can be mostly compensated by good ranging and having solid DOPE. But the difference in drift is difficult to compensate for. The difference is startling when you shoot side-by-side. IMO the major advantage to the .308 is barrel life otherwise it's old news.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tedbiv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">is it really that noticable? </div></div>
Yes.
At extended ranges (beyond 600yds) the wind drift is SIGNIFICANTLY less. Of course there is less drop but that can be mostly compensated by good ranging and having solid DOPE. But the difference in drift is difficult to compensate for. The difference is startling when you shoot side-by-side. IMO the major advantage to the .308 is barrel life otherwise it's old news.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
A flatter shooting 6.5 will give you more room for error (then a .308 Win)at unknown distance targets.
A flatter shooting 6.5 will give you more room for error (then a .308 Win)at unknown distance targets.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
My 6.5X284 shooting 140gr bergers runs almost identical i mean with in .25 moa as my 7 rem mag shooting 168 gr bergers to 1050yrds.
6.5 runs 3045 velocity and the 7 rm is 3035 with 14 grs less powder.
Now run either next to a 308 and its no comparison.!
When the 308 gose south it will become a 260 for sure!
My 6.5X284 shooting 140gr bergers runs almost identical i mean with in .25 moa as my 7 rem mag shooting 168 gr bergers to 1050yrds.
6.5 runs 3045 velocity and the 7 rm is 3035 with 14 grs less powder.
Now run either next to a 308 and its no comparison.!
When the 308 gose south it will become a 260 for sure!
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
The only concern I have is terminal ballistics of the 6.5 v. the 308. Scenar and BTHP Match bullets seem to have less effective results than TAP or hunting rounds. I'm in the process of starting a 6.5x47Lapua build but I'm going to put some rounds into ballistic gelatin before I use it for anything other than target shooting.
The only concern I have is terminal ballistics of the 6.5 v. the 308. Scenar and BTHP Match bullets seem to have less effective results than TAP or hunting rounds. I'm in the process of starting a 6.5x47Lapua build but I'm going to put some rounds into ballistic gelatin before I use it for anything other than target shooting.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
aroth
If your concerned about terminal ballistics try a 120 gr ballistic tip. It has a .458 BC and at 3000 fps it still smokes a 308. Easily a good deer round to 700 yards.
aroth
If your concerned about terminal ballistics try a 120 gr ballistic tip. It has a .458 BC and at 3000 fps it still smokes a 308. Easily a good deer round to 700 yards.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
thanks for all the insight. I see most of the posts refer to 120gr -> 142gr bullets. Does this difference of 30-50 gr. ( compared to 175gr ) make a difference on damage/penetration the round can do at distance? Or, is this what all the military testing was trying to determine?
What about ammo availability? I would think it would be easier to find .308/7.62 in the field than 6.5. Or is that not true anymore?
tedbiv
thanks for all the insight. I see most of the posts refer to 120gr -> 142gr bullets. Does this difference of 30-50 gr. ( compared to 175gr ) make a difference on damage/penetration the round can do at distance? Or, is this what all the military testing was trying to determine?
What about ammo availability? I would think it would be easier to find .308/7.62 in the field than 6.5. Or is that not true anymore?
tedbiv
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
I don't know what you mean by "in the field", but .308 ammo will always be easier to find than 6.5 ammo. Match grade .308 ammo, however, is just as difficult to find as match grade 6.5 ammo. Hornady has factory 6.5 Creedmor ammo priced very competitively, while Lapua's 6.5x47 ammo is much more expensive. I think that Black Hills has a factory .260 offering.
Either way, you'll be able to milk the most accuracy out of your own handloads, regardless of the caliber.
Edited to add: I went with a 6.5x47L, for what it's worth. The rifle should be ready in the next couple of weeks.
I don't know what you mean by "in the field", but .308 ammo will always be easier to find than 6.5 ammo. Match grade .308 ammo, however, is just as difficult to find as match grade 6.5 ammo. Hornady has factory 6.5 Creedmor ammo priced very competitively, while Lapua's 6.5x47 ammo is much more expensive. I think that Black Hills has a factory .260 offering.
Either way, you'll be able to milk the most accuracy out of your own handloads, regardless of the caliber.
Edited to add: I went with a 6.5x47L, for what it's worth. The rifle should be ready in the next couple of weeks.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
thanks dman,
good read. so it seems that the problem is with the bullet designers/manufacturers.
they don't have a good design with a BC for the heavy weigth bullets on .30 caliber. not taking into account the added recoil from a larger/more powerful bullet. Although, I've shot some 220gr. 30-06 and they kick the crap out of me. I don;t know if my rifles ( really my shoulder ) can handle 240gr. bullets trying to reach 2800 fps
tedbiv
thanks dman,
good read. so it seems that the problem is with the bullet designers/manufacturers.
they don't have a good design with a BC for the heavy weigth bullets on .30 caliber. not taking into account the added recoil from a larger/more powerful bullet. Although, I've shot some 220gr. 30-06 and they kick the crap out of me. I don;t know if my rifles ( really my shoulder ) can handle 240gr. bullets trying to reach 2800 fps
tedbiv
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tedbiv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thanks dman,
good read. so it seems that the problem is with the bullet designers/manufacturers.
they don't have a good design with a BC for the heavy weigth bullets on .30 caliber. not taking into account the added recoil from a larger/more powerful bullet.
</div></div>
Everyone, even bullet manufacturers, has to play within the rules laid out by physics.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tedbiv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">thanks dman,
good read. so it seems that the problem is with the bullet designers/manufacturers.
they don't have a good design with a BC for the heavy weigth bullets on .30 caliber. not taking into account the added recoil from a larger/more powerful bullet.
</div></div>
Everyone, even bullet manufacturers, has to play within the rules laid out by physics.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
hi ratbert,
I understand about physics, but in the article the bullet drawings showed the .308 bullets to be more blunt at the nose. It seems they could slim that down like the more BC bullets in smaller calibers. Maybe it's the overall length, headspace, and powder requirements that prevent a more efficient design on a larger bullet about 240 grs. Maybe the bullet will be to long in .308 to match the others.
tedbiv
hi ratbert,
I understand about physics, but in the article the bullet drawings showed the .308 bullets to be more blunt at the nose. It seems they could slim that down like the more BC bullets in smaller calibers. Maybe it's the overall length, headspace, and powder requirements that prevent a more efficient design on a larger bullet about 240 grs. Maybe the bullet will be to long in .308 to match the others.
tedbiv
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
tedbiv, you are on the right track with the design of the bullets, however the real problem with the .308 bullets is that by the time the get to a point that they are getting aerodynamically efficient, they are also getting really heavy (200+gr). That means you have to drive them really slow, or increase your case capacities, burn more powder, and dramatically increase recoil.
tedbiv, you are on the right track with the design of the bullets, however the real problem with the .308 bullets is that by the time the get to a point that they are getting aerodynamically efficient, they are also getting really heavy (200+gr). That means you have to drive them really slow, or increase your case capacities, burn more powder, and dramatically increase recoil.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
Always a trade off, high BC flat shooting light bullets and light recoil or downrange performance. If your target is paper the choice is easy.
Always a trade off, high BC flat shooting light bullets and light recoil or downrange performance. If your target is paper the choice is easy.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
For a long time now bench rest shooters have sworn by the 6.5, but I was always under the assumption that you need to handload as factory ammo is scarce for that round. Is it still hard to come by in good factory loading or is readily available now?
Which 6.5 variation seems to be working the best now.
How is the barrel life now for them?
Gary
For a long time now bench rest shooters have sworn by the 6.5, but I was always under the assumption that you need to handload as factory ammo is scarce for that round. Is it still hard to come by in good factory loading or is readily available now?
Which 6.5 variation seems to be working the best now.
How is the barrel life now for them?
Gary
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
Gary check out the 6.5 Creedmoor from Hornady. Factory match ammo works great and is about $24/20. You can also handload it if you want and bump up the velocities. Been using it for over a year now and like it alot. Of the 4 matches I shot the Creedmoor in I only used handloads at 1 to see if it made a difference, It didn't and then went back to the factory loads. All 4 matches were first place finishes.
There's actually an article on our team rifles in the October Special Weapons for Military and Police. Here's part of it
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/special-weapons/ga-precisions-65mm-creedmoor/
Gary check out the 6.5 Creedmoor from Hornady. Factory match ammo works great and is about $24/20. You can also handload it if you want and bump up the velocities. Been using it for over a year now and like it alot. Of the 4 matches I shot the Creedmoor in I only used handloads at 1 to see if it made a difference, It didn't and then went back to the factory loads. All 4 matches were first place finishes.
There's actually an article on our team rifles in the October Special Weapons for Military and Police. Here's part of it
http://www.tactical-life.com/online/special-weapons/ga-precisions-65mm-creedmoor/
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
A good friend likes to say that the .260 is everything the .308 should've been... LOL
A good friend likes to say that the .260 is everything the .308 should've been... LOL
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Powder Burns</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Always a trade off, high BC flat shooting light bullets and light recoil or downrange performance. If your target is paper the choice is easy. </div></div>
here is what a 140 berger did at 265 yd, from one of my 11yr old's
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Powder Burns</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Always a trade off, high BC flat shooting light bullets and light recoil or downrange performance. If your target is paper the choice is easy. </div></div>
here is what a 140 berger did at 265 yd, from one of my 11yr old's
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
I love the 308 because it is pretty easy to load for (IE it will shoot about any powder/bullet combination fairly well) but the 6.5 bullets got me hooked about 6 years ago. I have taken two whitetail bucks with the 6.5x284 using Hornady SST bullets. The internals on both were turned to mush. The BC on the 6.5 bullet is better. As for terminal ballistics, well dead is dead.
I currently have a 6.5x284 and 260 Remington. The 6.5 Creedmoor is almost done and the 6.5x47L is ready to go together. Now all I need is more time to shoot!
I love the 308 because it is pretty easy to load for (IE it will shoot about any powder/bullet combination fairly well) but the 6.5 bullets got me hooked about 6 years ago. I have taken two whitetail bucks with the 6.5x284 using Hornady SST bullets. The internals on both were turned to mush. The BC on the 6.5 bullet is better. As for terminal ballistics, well dead is dead.
I currently have a 6.5x284 and 260 Remington. The 6.5 Creedmoor is almost done and the 6.5x47L is ready to go together. Now all I need is more time to shoot!
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
Here is another way of looking at it.
Shooting Lapua bullets through the 6.5 Grendel, I use 9 grains less powder than my 308 load, and it has more velosity at 1000 yards than the 308. If a small case 6.5 fired from a standard AR can beat the 308, imagine how much better a 6.5 is with a larger sized case.
I have an EO-Tech with the 308 ballistic reticle mounted on the 6.5 Grendel, the center dot is my point of aim out to 300 yards, and its dead nuts on. The 600 yard point on the reticle for the 308 is a good 100 yards off with the Grendel. I put 550 yard targets half way between the 300 and 600 yard dot. The 6.5 doesnt drop nearly as much.
Here is another way of looking at it.
Shooting Lapua bullets through the 6.5 Grendel, I use 9 grains less powder than my 308 load, and it has more velosity at 1000 yards than the 308. If a small case 6.5 fired from a standard AR can beat the 308, imagine how much better a 6.5 is with a larger sized case.
I have an EO-Tech with the 308 ballistic reticle mounted on the 6.5 Grendel, the center dot is my point of aim out to 300 yards, and its dead nuts on. The 600 yard point on the reticle for the 308 is a good 100 yards off with the Grendel. I put 550 yard targets half way between the 300 and 600 yard dot. The 6.5 doesnt drop nearly as much.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
wont you guys please stop doing this?!?!?! my wallet is crying now as it knows I'm going to be shelling out more and more money now for a new build.....sigh 6.5 here i come
wont you guys please stop doing this?!?!?! my wallet is crying now as it knows I'm going to be shelling out more and more money now for a new build.....sigh 6.5 here i come
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
What is the killing power on the 6.5 like, med game? I would like to be schwacking Dall sheep with it, maybe a Moose at 500 or under, is this a good round for that? Also, I can build this on a small action, right?
What is the killing power on the 6.5 like, med game? I would like to be schwacking Dall sheep with it, maybe a Moose at 500 or under, is this a good round for that? Also, I can build this on a small action, right?
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
Rob:
Read the article, and saw a picture of your rifle. What is the nylon/velcro thing on your stock just behind the bipod?
Thanks,
James
Rob:
Read the article, and saw a picture of your rifle. What is the nylon/velcro thing on your stock just behind the bipod?
Thanks,
James
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
James that is a SO Tech Skid Plate so that if you throw the rifle onto a hard surface you don't have a hard on hard combination which could slip or bounce. It works [retty good. Here's a link for you to check them out.
http://sotechsnipergear.com/revisions/skid.html
James that is a SO Tech Skid Plate so that if you throw the rifle onto a hard surface you don't have a hard on hard combination which could slip or bounce. It works [retty good. Here's a link for you to check them out.
http://sotechsnipergear.com/revisions/skid.html
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
whats the barrel lfe like on these 6.5 configurations. i hear the 6.5x.284 will eat em up quickly, 1200-1800 rds. what about 6.5x47 lapua and 6.5 creedmor?
whats the barrel lfe like on these 6.5 configurations. i hear the 6.5x.284 will eat em up quickly, 1200-1800 rds. what about 6.5x47 lapua and 6.5 creedmor?
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
6.5 is just hands down a better choice for most of us. All rifles must balance recoil and down range effectiveness. The .260 Rem hits the sweet spot in this balancing act perfectly. If you make the bore any bigger you must go to a heavier bullet to get the same BC. 7mm must go up to 168gr or more to equal a 6.5mm 130gr BC. A 130gr 6.5mm at 2950 fps has recoil that most people can handle with out flinching or a lot of training not to flinch. As we all know it's much better to hit your target with a lighter bullet than miss with a big one. If you can shoot a .300 Win Mag well for many rounds at a time do it, but I sure can't. I can get as flat or flatter a trajectory with a .260 Rem and only give up 150 ft-lbs of energy at 1000 yards to the 300 Win Mag. Keep in mind the .260 Rem still has about 750 ft-lb at 1000 yards, that’s twice a 9mm luger at the muzzle. If you put a high sectional density controlled expansion bullet like a swift Scriocco in the right spot with that much energy you can kill most anything short of the big 3, the key being putting the bullet in the right spot. The mild recoil well help most of us with that shot placement.
So you have an idea match round and hunting round all in the same cartridge. In fact the .260 Rem is a great tactical round too! If you really want more velocity than the .260 Rem get the .260 AI and you can still shoot .260 Rem ammo in a pinch. AS for the 6.5-06 there is no commercial ammo and brass is $36 a box of 20 GASP! For what maybe 100 fps? Don’t bother. The .260 Rem is the best cartridge available bar none. You don’t need long actions, or magnums, just a great cartridge and great bullets.
I liked the demigod articles on .260 Rem vs 6.5 Creedmoor ect. After reading them and others on the same subject it seems a shame that Remington did nothing with the .260 Rem cartridge, but I wish Hornady would just make .260 Rem brass rather than reinventing the wheel. The .260 Rem is clearly more than good enough to do the job they designed the 6.5 Creedmoor for, why give up the reliability of the tapered .260 case to get nothing more than brass, ammo and load data availability. All these could have been archived by Hornady simply making their own .260 Rem brass and loads and publishing the load data, then they could sell it to all the .260 Rem owners as well as new buyers that want the superb 6.5mm bullets.
The 6.5 Creedmoor and the 6.5x47 both give up case capacity to the .260 Rem to no advantage. Sure with very heavy bullets loaded to magazine length the 6.5 is about the same as the .260, but Hornady also publishes velocities from a 28” barrel to puff the performance of the 6.5. Good match ammo for their .260 Rem is now readily available from Black Hills through GA Precision (139gr Scenar about $22 a box shipped) and from Hunting shack Montana through Sniper central (123gr Scenar $26 a box). Midway lists 17 commercial loads for the .260 Rem, 4 for the 6.5x47 (at $56 a box!), and only 2 for the 6.5 Creedmoor (at $24 a box), and this does not include the match loads I listed above. Recent runs of Remington brass seem very good. I am loading them to 2950 fps with 130gr Norma Diamond line bullets with no pressure signs what so ever. Shooting 0.25 inch groups at 100 yards, that with no case prep, or culling by weight or uniformity.
They both use the same action, it just does not make sense to me, but I may be missing something. I respect what Hornady was trying to do when the .260 Rem was languishing but it just does not apply any more. Don’t waste your time with the 6.5 Creedmoor or the 6.5x47 these cartridges will become footnotes in cartridge history while the .260 Rem is and will remain the dominant 6.5mm cartridge. If you don’t believe me look what round GA Precision paid Black Hills to load for them, the .260 Rem. Lets all tell Remington we want more quality factory rifles chamberd in .260 Rem, just think what a winner a Remington 700 SPS tactical in .260 Rem for $600 would be! At least Nosler has a clue, has anybody tried Nosler brass?
http://www.snipercentral.com/hsmammo.htm
http://www.midwayusa.com/BROWSE/Bro...3&categoryId=9331&categoryString=653***690***
http://www.gaprecision.net/ GA does not advertise the .260 Rem ammo, but they have it, call and ask.
6.5 is just hands down a better choice for most of us. All rifles must balance recoil and down range effectiveness. The .260 Rem hits the sweet spot in this balancing act perfectly. If you make the bore any bigger you must go to a heavier bullet to get the same BC. 7mm must go up to 168gr or more to equal a 6.5mm 130gr BC. A 130gr 6.5mm at 2950 fps has recoil that most people can handle with out flinching or a lot of training not to flinch. As we all know it's much better to hit your target with a lighter bullet than miss with a big one. If you can shoot a .300 Win Mag well for many rounds at a time do it, but I sure can't. I can get as flat or flatter a trajectory with a .260 Rem and only give up 150 ft-lbs of energy at 1000 yards to the 300 Win Mag. Keep in mind the .260 Rem still has about 750 ft-lb at 1000 yards, that’s twice a 9mm luger at the muzzle. If you put a high sectional density controlled expansion bullet like a swift Scriocco in the right spot with that much energy you can kill most anything short of the big 3, the key being putting the bullet in the right spot. The mild recoil well help most of us with that shot placement.
So you have an idea match round and hunting round all in the same cartridge. In fact the .260 Rem is a great tactical round too! If you really want more velocity than the .260 Rem get the .260 AI and you can still shoot .260 Rem ammo in a pinch. AS for the 6.5-06 there is no commercial ammo and brass is $36 a box of 20 GASP! For what maybe 100 fps? Don’t bother. The .260 Rem is the best cartridge available bar none. You don’t need long actions, or magnums, just a great cartridge and great bullets.
I liked the demigod articles on .260 Rem vs 6.5 Creedmoor ect. After reading them and others on the same subject it seems a shame that Remington did nothing with the .260 Rem cartridge, but I wish Hornady would just make .260 Rem brass rather than reinventing the wheel. The .260 Rem is clearly more than good enough to do the job they designed the 6.5 Creedmoor for, why give up the reliability of the tapered .260 case to get nothing more than brass, ammo and load data availability. All these could have been archived by Hornady simply making their own .260 Rem brass and loads and publishing the load data, then they could sell it to all the .260 Rem owners as well as new buyers that want the superb 6.5mm bullets.
The 6.5 Creedmoor and the 6.5x47 both give up case capacity to the .260 Rem to no advantage. Sure with very heavy bullets loaded to magazine length the 6.5 is about the same as the .260, but Hornady also publishes velocities from a 28” barrel to puff the performance of the 6.5. Good match ammo for their .260 Rem is now readily available from Black Hills through GA Precision (139gr Scenar about $22 a box shipped) and from Hunting shack Montana through Sniper central (123gr Scenar $26 a box). Midway lists 17 commercial loads for the .260 Rem, 4 for the 6.5x47 (at $56 a box!), and only 2 for the 6.5 Creedmoor (at $24 a box), and this does not include the match loads I listed above. Recent runs of Remington brass seem very good. I am loading them to 2950 fps with 130gr Norma Diamond line bullets with no pressure signs what so ever. Shooting 0.25 inch groups at 100 yards, that with no case prep, or culling by weight or uniformity.
They both use the same action, it just does not make sense to me, but I may be missing something. I respect what Hornady was trying to do when the .260 Rem was languishing but it just does not apply any more. Don’t waste your time with the 6.5 Creedmoor or the 6.5x47 these cartridges will become footnotes in cartridge history while the .260 Rem is and will remain the dominant 6.5mm cartridge. If you don’t believe me look what round GA Precision paid Black Hills to load for them, the .260 Rem. Lets all tell Remington we want more quality factory rifles chamberd in .260 Rem, just think what a winner a Remington 700 SPS tactical in .260 Rem for $600 would be! At least Nosler has a clue, has anybody tried Nosler brass?
http://www.snipercentral.com/hsmammo.htm
http://www.midwayusa.com/BROWSE/Bro...3&categoryId=9331&categoryString=653***690***
http://www.gaprecision.net/ GA does not advertise the .260 Rem ammo, but they have it, call and ask.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
You need to recheck your info as GAP doesn't offer that ammo anymore. They sold out of it a few months ago and it's going to be a while. Look here:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1184195
Glad you like your new .260 but alot of people will disagree with some of your post and the superiority of the .260 LOL
You need to recheck your info as GAP doesn't offer that ammo anymore. They sold out of it a few months ago and it's going to be a while. Look here:
http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1184195
Glad you like your new .260 but alot of people will disagree with some of your post and the superiority of the .260 LOL
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
That’s too bad GA is out, good thing I got 400 rounds a few months ago, it reduces the available loads to only 18 GASP! vs. 6 total for the other two rounds. Still a trouncing to say the least LOL. By having 3 different rounds that basically do the same thing it reduces the availability for all the rounds, economy of scale and all.
Please feel free to disagree, but if you do, please bring facts, not brand loyalty or pure opinion
That’s too bad GA is out, good thing I got 400 rounds a few months ago, it reduces the available loads to only 18 GASP! vs. 6 total for the other two rounds. Still a trouncing to say the least LOL. By having 3 different rounds that basically do the same thing it reduces the availability for all the rounds, economy of scale and all.
Please feel free to disagree, but if you do, please bring facts, not brand loyalty or pure opinion
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: calbearz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thatâ??s too bad GA is out, good thing I got 400 rounds a few months ago, it reduces the available loads to only 18 GASP! vs. 6 total for the other two rounds. Still a trouncing to say the least LOL. By having 3 different rounds that basically do the same thing it reduces the availability for all the rounds, economy of scale and all.
Please feel free to disagree, but if you do, please bring facts, not brand loyalty or pure opinion
</div></div> ROB01 of Team Blaster probably has a hell of a lot more experiene on the subject than you so you may want to watch your tone. Why not bring up the poor barrel life of your .260?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: calbearz</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thatâ??s too bad GA is out, good thing I got 400 rounds a few months ago, it reduces the available loads to only 18 GASP! vs. 6 total for the other two rounds. Still a trouncing to say the least LOL. By having 3 different rounds that basically do the same thing it reduces the availability for all the rounds, economy of scale and all.
Please feel free to disagree, but if you do, please bring facts, not brand loyalty or pure opinion
</div></div> ROB01 of Team Blaster probably has a hell of a lot more experiene on the subject than you so you may want to watch your tone. Why not bring up the poor barrel life of your .260?
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
No problem LR. I'm just waiting for the 6.5x47 cult to come down on him. LOL No need to argue the points that have been discussed here in length over the past year or so again for a new member. Anyone who doesn't know and is looking can just search for them.
No problem LR. I'm just waiting for the 6.5x47 cult to come down on him. LOL No need to argue the points that have been discussed here in length over the past year or so again for a new member. Anyone who doesn't know and is looking can just search for them.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No problem LR. I'm just waiting for the 6.5x47 cult to come down on him. LOL No need to argue the points that have been discussed here in length over the past year or so again for a new member. Anyone who doesn't know and is looking can just search for them.</div></div>
Agreed, ROB01! I'm a big 6.5x47L fan but I won't knock any .264 cal. rifle. That said, I wouldn't say that one is the all and end all of the 6.5's. Just bugs me when people with little to no experience pop off at mouth when they should be listening.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Rob01</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No problem LR. I'm just waiting for the 6.5x47 cult to come down on him. LOL No need to argue the points that have been discussed here in length over the past year or so again for a new member. Anyone who doesn't know and is looking can just search for them.</div></div>
Agreed, ROB01! I'm a big 6.5x47L fan but I won't knock any .264 cal. rifle. That said, I wouldn't say that one is the all and end all of the 6.5's. Just bugs me when people with little to no experience pop off at mouth when they should be listening.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alaskaman 11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What is the killing power on the 6.5 like, med game? I would like to be schwacking Dall sheep with it, maybe a Moose at 500 or under, is this a good round for that? Also, I can build this on a small action, right? </div></div>
The Swedes have been taking moose with 6.5x55 for ages. With proper bullet choice, handloaded 260 Rem. ammo will have no problems knocking down a swamp donkey under 500 yards. You've got nearly 1500 ft.-lbs. of energy and plenty of velocity left for proper expansion.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alaskaman 11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What is the killing power on the 6.5 like, med game? I would like to be schwacking Dall sheep with it, maybe a Moose at 500 or under, is this a good round for that? Also, I can build this on a small action, right? </div></div>
The Swedes have been taking moose with 6.5x55 for ages. With proper bullet choice, handloaded 260 Rem. ammo will have no problems knocking down a swamp donkey under 500 yards. You've got nearly 1500 ft.-lbs. of energy and plenty of velocity left for proper expansion.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
What do you guys think of 6.5 CM as a hunting round? I'm sure it is fine for whitetails, but would you think it would be adequate for mule deer or elk? If i read the info correctly, the energy is about the same as a .300 win mag @ 400-600 yds with less recoil than a .308? Seems like a 140gr Berger would be a good hunting bullet. Let me know if I'm off base on this. Thanks.
What do you guys think of 6.5 CM as a hunting round? I'm sure it is fine for whitetails, but would you think it would be adequate for mule deer or elk? If i read the info correctly, the energy is about the same as a .300 win mag @ 400-600 yds with less recoil than a .308? Seems like a 140gr Berger would be a good hunting bullet. Let me know if I'm off base on this. Thanks.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
No, the 300 WM has more energy at any distance. Drop and wind drift are comparable though.
No, the 300 WM has more energy at any distance. Drop and wind drift are comparable though.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, the 300 WM has more energy at any distance. Drop and wind drift are comparable though. </div></div>
Thanks, that makes sense based on bullet weight alone.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No, the 300 WM has more energy at any distance. Drop and wind drift are comparable though. </div></div>
Thanks, that makes sense based on bullet weight alone.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
Yep, you're essentially launching bullets with about the same BC, at about the same velocity. They will fly about the same, but the heavier one is going to win out in terms of energy.
Yep, you're essentially launching bullets with about the same BC, at about the same velocity. They will fly about the same, but the heavier one is going to win out in terms of energy.
Re: 6.5 vs. 7.62
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alaskaman 11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What is the killing power on the 6.5 like, med game? I would like to be schwacking Dall sheep with it, maybe a Moose at 500 or under, is this a good round for that? Also, I can build this on a small action, right? </div></div>
The Swedes have been taking moose with 6.5x55 for ages. With proper bullet choice, handloaded 260 Rem. ammo will have no problems knocking down a swamp donkey under 500 yards. You've got nearly 1500 ft.-lbs. of energy and plenty of velocity left for proper expansion. </div></div>
Pardon me for using the quote button (usually eats up too much space), but that is one I have never heard before. To call a moose a swamp donkey. Gotta love the way you guys think!
Good one that! Swamp donkey...
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kombayotch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Alaskaman 11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What is the killing power on the 6.5 like, med game? I would like to be schwacking Dall sheep with it, maybe a Moose at 500 or under, is this a good round for that? Also, I can build this on a small action, right? </div></div>
The Swedes have been taking moose with 6.5x55 for ages. With proper bullet choice, handloaded 260 Rem. ammo will have no problems knocking down a swamp donkey under 500 yards. You've got nearly 1500 ft.-lbs. of energy and plenty of velocity left for proper expansion. </div></div>
Pardon me for using the quote button (usually eats up too much space), but that is one I have never heard before. To call a moose a swamp donkey. Gotta love the way you guys think!
Good one that! Swamp donkey...
