Thread: 6.5's

Ok. lets say you have one of those silly short action things , I can't for the life of me figure why anyone would choose a Creedmoor over a 260, given equal barrel length
Please enlighten me.

Because it has a catchy name?

Why would you go 260 over a 6.5X55 Swede?

If you lived in the usa you would have lots of cheep good factory ammo for the creadmore and not for the 260, in NZ I have no idea

Originally Posted by jakewire

Ok. lets say you have one of those silly short action things , I can't for the life of me figure why anyone would choose a Creedmoor over a 260, given equal barrel length
Please enlighten me.

Similar (but not quite the same..) performance with the ability to seat long projectiles out and still fit mag

Originally Posted by Beaker

Why would you go 260 over a 6.5X55 Swede?

Requires med/long action to mag feed

Originally Posted by Ryan_Songhurst

Similar (but not quite the same..) performance with the ability to seat long projectiles out and still fit mag

That actually has no impact on actual performance, rather just potential performance. I'm pretty confident you would still have more case capacity in the 260 even if you had to seat the projectiles at a normal depth.

Quickload would give you the answer to that one Wildman but I don't have it loaded on this computer yet. I'll get onto it as the case taper etc might throw up an interesting answer. If you "improved" a 260 there could be no doubt, but as it stands the Creedmore is already an "improved" style of cartridge . . . .

Originally Posted by Tentman

Quickload would give you the answer to that one Wildman but I don't have it loaded on this computer yet. I'll get onto it as the case taper etc might throw up an interesting answer. If you "improved" a 260 there could be no doubt, but as it stands the Creedmore is already an "improved" style of cartridge . . . .

Yeah pretty sure I've looked at it but can remember the numbers. And my quick load is buried in the shed...

I think I looked at seating depth at the time and the cartridge I looked at, comparing two extreme seating depths, there was less gain than adding an inch of barrel.

I think the act of seating projectiles way out as a way to improve performance has been confused these days. I think the real advantage is seen through getting the projectile close to the lands and thus accuracy. Not significant improvement in speed gained....



Sent from my F5321 using Tapatalk

I just bought a 6.5 creedmoor (bergara b14 hmr model)didn't go in with any calibre in mind to the shop (shooters supplies. Chch) had a 2506 in my hand saw it out corner my eye liked it looked at some different rifles after that but came back to bergara wanted a rifle at for up to 700 yds ( my max range for my shooting at this stage but could potentially be shot further ) not much recoil Plus I suppressed its 22 inch barrel not to long I will reload I just liked it 6.5 creedmoor just ticked the boxes for me and my budget get it Wednesday day will do a review of rifle when I Ste it in

Doesn't have to be a Short Action for a 6.5, can be brave and go a 6.5x.284... but I know for many a few extra grams to carry and moving the bolt ever so slightly further back is how does one say....

To be fair I've never understood why everyone insists on a 6.5 being Short Action??? I love my 6.5x.284, a very accurate rifle, even with me behind it.

PS, I do shoot 6.5s.

Originally Posted by jakewire

Ok. lets say you have one of those silly short action things , I can't for the life of me figure why anyone would choose a Creedmoor over a 260, given equal barrel length
Please enlighten me.

A good explanation regarding the differences between the 6.5CM and 260 Rem in this article from American Rifleman magazine.
https://www.americanrifleman.org/art...-65-creedmoor/

its the fashion cal at the moment plus it does 20fps more that something already invented