All agreed.
As you say, some of the major pluses often cited for the Creedmoor is that it is shorter than a .260, better fits a short action and was designed for target shooting so is “inherently accurate” (whatever that means). If those are major pluses, surely the 6.5 x 47 Lapua would be an even better choice? It’s shorter still and was also designed as a target cartridge. Admittedly, Hornady has supported the Creedmoor far better with quality ammunition in sufficient quantities, and manufacturers have got on board with a huge selection of rifles.
My point? Perhaps Creedmoor is no better than others; just better supported? I don’t have a dog in the fight as I don’t have a 6.5, and I would never criticise anyone’s choice. Personally, if I wanted a 6.5 it would be the Lapua. No desire here to be pushing velocities to the max.
Cheers
Bookmarks