question about 6.5x284

exhogflyer

exhogflyer

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Jul 28, 2009
840
15
66
Near Albany, NY, USA
#1
I see very little for precision/tactical style rifles in this caliber and was wondering why? F class and benchrest crowd loves them for power/accuracy but I'm wondering if something makes it less desireable for other uses? i know barrel life ain't great but if you back off the charge a little it should last longer? Was considering converting my unused Savage in this caliber to a tactical style, what say the hide? Thanks all in advance...
 
#2
Re: question about 6.5x284

The 6.5 x 284 is a fantastic 1,000-yard cartridge capable of superb accuracy at about a 7.62mm perceived recoil. It will shoot inside a 300 Winchester Magnum without the punishment, thus the nickname, the "Fag Mag."

They also eat barrels up at about the same rate (between 1,000 and 1,200 rounds before "X-count" drops off using the military/NRA 1,000-yard bullseye target).

If you don't have an ammo shop that handloads for you you'll have to do it yourself.
 
#3
Re: question about 6.5x284

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: exhogflyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I see very little for precision/tactical style rifles in this caliber and was wondering why? F class and benchrest crowd loves them for power/accuracy but I'm wondering if something makes it less desireable for other uses? i know barrel life ain't great but if you back off the charge a little it should last longer? Was considering converting my unused Savage in this caliber to a tactical style, what say the hide? Thanks all in advance...</div></div>

Because the military is sticking with the .30 cal come Hell or High water. They don't care if there are better calibers out there. This ignorant mindset goes clear back to Douglas "Meet the Press" MacArthur, (or "Dug out Doug" as some still like to call him). In 1929 he ixnayed the .276 Pederson. A medium powered 7mm cartridge that was what the Garand was originally engineered for. Whose ballistics beat the 7.62 even today!!

Since the military uses the .30 cal(7.62 NATO), tactical users use what the military does. Law enforcement uses what they do too. General commonality. And so it perpetuates. The most piss poor round able to shoot to 1000 yds. is kept.

The new generation likes light and super fast. So light and fast they need to twist the barrel twice as tight and start shooting bullets that won't fit in it's mag to even get to 1000. The military doesn't want to change anything....that would break the supply chain. And we all know how hard that would be to fix.
 
#4
Re: question about 6.5x284

sandwarrior, you DO know the Army is soliciting for the M24 to be re-barreled to 300 Win Mag, right?

It is the interim solution until USSOCOM selects their Long Range (33 caliber) Sniper System, which is what the Infantry Center is planning on strap-hanging on.
 
#6
Re: question about 6.5x284

There are usually at least 1 or 2 rifles at our local competitions in 6.5x284 (mine is often one of them). 6.5x47 lapua and 6x47's have become more popular lately. With the 6.5x284 the benchrest crowd is using 28-30" barrels to get the desired velocities. I think 28-30" is not very practical for a tactical match. I have seen 6.5x47 lapua's get 2950fps out of a 26" barrel built by Travis Ridell shooting 130jlk's very accurately and with much better barrel life. You can fit it in a short action and mag feed, and there is much less felt recoil. My accurate loads in my 6.5x284 only produce 2781fps (25" barrel) but is VERY accurate. I am capable of much higher velocities but for my particular rifle the accuracy is not there. Plus the horrible barrel life. I think these are some of the reasons why the tactical crowd hasn't run with the 6.5x284
 
#7
Re: question about 6.5x284

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sinister</div><div class="ubbcode-body">sandwarrior, you DO know the Army is soliciting for the M24 to be re-barreled to 300 Win Mag, right?

It is the interim solution until USSOCOM selects their Long Range (33 caliber) Sniper System, which is what the Infantry Center is planning on strap-hanging on.</div></div>

It's already happened in a number of cases. That's why the M24 was selected. My point is the military sticks with .30 cal when there are and have been better bullet choices in the 6mm, 6.35mm 6.5mm, 6.8mm and 7mm that don't require a magnum to get a bullet well past 1000 yds. before going subsonic. And the reason tactical shooters use what the military uses is because that is what they would be expected to us in a "field situation". That's why .308/7.62 is still seen so often in tactical shoots. In true competitions where no caliber limitation restricts the shooter, most go with the flattest least wind drifting-est case. A 6.5. The 6.5-.284 has a lot more oomph behind it than does a .260. But, a .260 gets bullets on @ 1k a lot faster, flatter and with less drift than a .308/7.62 by a big margin.

Edit:

The .260 shoots within inches of how flat a .300 WM shoots @ 1000 and actually has less wind drift. That's using a 140 gr. Scenar @ 2900 vs the 190 gr. @ 3100 (A191) See the point? You don't need a great big bullet to do the work...you need an efficient bullet.
 
#8
Re: question about 6.5x284

Ammo commonality is key. NATO uses the 3 rounds, 5.56, 7.62, and 12.7, and it would take an act of God to alter the scheme enough to open the door to another chambering on a large scale. Personally, I like the .260 most, but most any other shooter, including one with a .260, stands a better chance at a clean target than I do, so my preferences are of less importance.

My viewpoint is that although the 6.5-284 gets the round to the target with less drop and drift, all rounds have drop and drift, and the key issue is developing the skills to accomodate the ones associated with the load you're currently using. The .260 will do it a lot more times than the 6.5-284 before the barrel is toast.

So as I see it, if the round will reach, good enough; if you need more than that, I wish you good fortune in your quest. We all shoot in the same coditons, and it's the conditions that determine the hit probabilities. At the really interesting distances, the guy with the skills wins; the gun's just a tool.

Greg
 
#9
Re: question about 6.5x284

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Greg Langelius *</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ammo commonality is key. NATO uses the 3 rounds, 5.56, 7.62, and 12.7, and it would take an act of God to alter the scheme enough to open the door to another chambering on a large scale. Personally, I like the .260 most, but most any other shooter, including one with a .260, stands a better chance at a clean target than I do, so my preferences are of less importance.

My viewpoint is that although the 6.5-284 gets the round to the target with less drop and drift, all rounds have drop and drift, and the key issue is developing the skills to accomodate the ones associated with the load you're currently using. The .260 will do it a lot more times than the 6.5-284 before the barrel is toast.

So as I see it, if the round will reach, good enough; if you need more than that, I wish you good fortune in your quest. We all shoot in the same coditons, and it's the conditions that determine the hit probabilities. At the really interesting distances, the guy with the skills wins; the gun's just a tool.

Greg</div></div>

Greg,

We barely have commonality now. The dimensions are the same but the loads don't work well in each others equipment. The thing that kills me is our allies have come up with several solutions that the our ordnance people have ignored.

The rifle is a tool, yes. But compare it to any other tool. If you had to frame a house would you prefer a hammer or an air-nailer. Cutting steel...would you want a hacksaw or a cutting torch. Better yet a laser or plasma cutter?? There are better tools on the market than what we currently employ.
 
#10
Re: question about 6.5x284

Good points all.

My point is that the tool is clearly adequate, and maybe the simplest approach to a caliber switch.

All those more capable tools are desirable, who woudn't want them? But when it comes down to doing it with what I can afford to switch to easiest; it's the .260 that comes first to mind.

Greg
 
#11
Re: question about 6.5x284

Imagine sandwarrior trying to school sinister on this subject
smile.gif


BTW sandwarrior, you quoted 2900 MV from a .260 driving a 140 gr. bullet. That's 6.5-284 territory! What's the case life like, and can you open the bolt without the use of a mallet after firing?
 
#12
Re: question about 6.5x284

Gotta give the .02

If you have the money for the extra barrels then 6.5-284 is great.Although with mine at 1200 rounds the barrel was about spent.Also my shoulder would be a little sore the next day.It was only 12 lb rifle and no muzzle brake.
Something to consider! With R-17 powder in 6.5-284 one might get 3100 fps with 140's but would probably get 800-1000 rounds barrel life.

So for barrel #2 I ended up with 6x47L.Couldn't be happier!!!

115's at 3100 fps,no sore shoulder,6BR accuracy.Expecting 2500-3000 rounds barrel life.

F-class at Bisly.The Britts won with their 7mm's.BC rules at 1000 yards.

Steve
 
#13
Re: question about 6.5x284

Wow! Lots of good stuff here and way more going on than I first thought about.Hmmm....I really have to think about this if I want to go all thru this and find out 1) it's heavy with the 30" tube and 2) short barrel life with full power loads.I guess i was thinking that since I already have it, it would be less money spent than building one ground up but now I'm not sure.What would you all do?
 
#14
Re: question about 6.5x284

I am a real fan of the 6.5x284 and it has been a fav hunting round for out of my Rem 700 Ti short action.

I keep hearing here at the Hide that that 284 length rounds can't feed out of a short 700 action with a Wyatts box.

I still have yet to have a hicup or mishap in feeding.

I keep hearing that I'll have seating problems that the Ogive
with 6.5 bullets will not work in a short action.

Again, I still have yet to have any problems with bullet seating. I load at 2.950 to 2.960 and have seen no pressure problems. Just bought a Quick Load to give me an idea of where
I' am at with pressures. So far the rifle is well into the safe zone.

That said,

Yesterday I just talked with James at Rock Creek Barrels and ordered a 6.5 tube, Light Palma, 27" fluted.

It's going to be 6.5x284 and it will be a hunting rifle.
Action choice is a FN SPR short action.
Stock choice is a Manners MCS-T They are just about to paint it, MARPAT Camo.

I hope to run Berger 140 hunting VLD'S at 2,900 mv. That is what is needed for them to open up at 1000 yards at 1,600 fps.
2,900 is all I need to do that. That is my benchmark.

I've had very good accuracy success loading Ramshot Magnum rifle powder
in my current 6.5-284 getting speeds over 3,000 with 140's and
shooting 125's at 3,150 mv.

Using Quick Load,
Magnum Rifle powder 55 grains.
140 Berger VLD
27" barrel
2.950 COAL

QL says I'll get 2,912 mv at 49,886 psi peak chamber pressure.

That's a low pressure and just maybe it will help in preserving the throat.

If I were competing in sniper matches I would go 260 Rem.



 
#15
Re: question about 6.5x284

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sandwarrior</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Because the military is sticking with the .30 cal come Hell or High water. They don't care if there are better calibers out there. This ignorant mindset goes clear back to Douglas "Meet the Press" MacArthur, (or "Dug out Doug" as some still like to call him). In 1929 he ixnayed the .276 Pederson. A medium powered 7mm cartridge that was what the Garand was originally engineered for. Whose ballistics beat the 7.62 even today!!

Since the military uses the .30 cal(7.62 NATO), tactical users use what the military does. Law enforcement uses what they do too. General commonality. And so it perpetuates. The most piss poor round able to shoot to 1000 yds. is kept.

The new generation likes light and super fast. So light and fast they need to twist the barrel twice as tight and start shooting bullets that won't fit in it's mag to even get to 1000. The military doesn't want to change anything....that would break the supply chain. And we all know how hard that would be to fix. </div></div>

Sandwarrior,

You are my new hero! What you have said is EXACTLY correct regarding why our military has stuck with .30 caliber projectiles. The Armed Forces have dinosaur responses to even the most critical of changes!

*Dinosaurs: Impossibly slow to awaken, and once finally cognizant, they trample their own environments and thus further ruin their own well being and interests.
 
#17
Re: question about 6.5x284

260 IMHO is the way to go for a tactical match. It is known to feed well out of a short action. Good barrel life. Great accuracy. Factory match ammo. The 6.5x47 would be a close second for me only because I have heard that it doesn't feed as well as the 260. This could be flimsy however because the 6.5x47 is used extensively in tactical comps so someone has figured out how to make it work. I like that the 260 has more case capacity. I would use 308 Lapua brass necked down to 6.5. Its substantialy cheaper than the 6.5x47 brass.
 
#18
Re: question about 6.5x284

FWIW - I was stuck with wimpy .260 Remington loads until I bought Quick Load. It's then that I discovered the difference between the .260 Remington and the 6.5-08 (A-Square?) are some phantom "internal dimensions" that I have never been able to determine.

Of course, I started slowly and have since then worked my way up to 43.5 grains of Reloader 17 shooting 142 grain SMK's. It's proven to be an excellent laser beam of a long range cartridge to say the least! I've shot out to 1080 yards with the only errors being "user generated".
 
#20
Re: question about 6.5x284

barrel length is approximately 21 inches.

I've <span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="font-style: italic">calculated</span></span> the muzzle velocity in excess of 2800 fps, <span style="font-weight: bold">BUT</span> I haven't had a chance to Chrony those loads yet. Hate to say it but as far as MV goes, I'm frankly not sure.
frown.gif


Here's the rifle that shoots this load.

http://www.snipershide.com/forum/ubbthre...329#Post1014329
 
#22
Re: question about 6.5x284

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SpotcheckBilly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Imagine sandwarrior trying to school sinister on this subject
smile.gif


BTW sandwarrior, you quoted 2900 MV from a .260 driving a 140 gr. bullet. That's 6.5-284 territory! What's the case life like, and can you open the bolt without the use of a mallet after firing?


</div></div>

Sorry, that was with a 28" barrel and slow nitro-powders. that wouldn't be a tactical set up. More F-Class. In truth the velocities one would normally expect from a .260 in a tactical configuration (24" barrel) with a 140 would be more in the 2700-2800 range with the odd possible load workup to 2850

However, I would like to point out the some of the 123 gr. 6.5 bullets are nearly as ballistically efficient as the 140 gr. bullets. Those can attain the 2900-2950 mark from a 24" barrel.

I have never shot one down to where the barrel needs a setback. In fact I haven't owned one, just helped a friend do some load work-ups. That entailed a mere few hundred rounds. Regular heavy shooters of the .260 would have to chime in for barrel life. Along that line I will acknowledge that the 6,5-.284 WILL go through barrels quickly if loaded to the extreme of it's capability. Download it a little and it doesn't wear so fast.

It is true the .308 can go a long time without wearing out a barrel. But even lower powered 6.5 bullets do a much better job than the higher BC .308's pushed hard so they can get 2500 or so fps.
 
#23
Re: question about 6.5x284

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: exhogflyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is the 260 all that much better than the 308? Worth building yet ANOTHER rifle? Oh boy here we go..... </div></div>


YES!
 
#24
Re: question about 6.5x284

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: SpotcheckBilly</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Imagine sandwarrior trying to school sinister on this subject
smile.gif

...

</div></div>

I could imagine us both waiting in the prinicpals office waiting to get swats...

If it isn't apparent already I totally agree with MuleHunter, if you compete, the .260 is a great round. At least go to something with better natural BC's in average weights than the .30 cal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

9
Battle of the Savage 110s
Replies
171
Views
7K
Thump_rrr
T
BausFactor
Exclusive Group Buy: KMRNL’s Precision Two Round Holders – Long Action Stainless and or 6.5 Creedmoor Sidewinder
Replies
4
Views
615
BausFactor
BausFactor
Rpatton73
Firearms FIREARMS FOR SALE - ***UPDATED 03.31.2025***
Replies
1
Views
503
TheNarrator
TheNarrator
V
New Guy from SW Texas
Replies
4
Views
225
HitEmHard
HitEmHard
JG26_Irish
Prepping a pair of Safari Rifles SH-style
Replies
7
Views
640
JG26_Irish
JG26_Irish
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts