Shooters Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm sure it has been discussed over and over but for some reason i have been intrigued but the 6.5 caliber for some time now. And now i'm contemplating about buying one. Any suggestions about which one? Pros and cons?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
My choice was the 260, I built my granddaughter one and she loves it. I like the way shot so much, I built me a 6.5x284. The problem with it is there are very few rifles chambered in it. Remington only makes the model 7, Ruger made one but not sure if they still do. I didn't think much of the options available in an over-the-counter rifleso I had hers one built. Her's is extremely accurate with the 130gr bullets I load for it.


The 6.5x284 is a great 1,000yd rifle but it is a barrel burner it you start pushing hot loads down it.

Another option would be the 260AI but then you have to go custom everything like you do with the 6.5x284.

6.5x55 is another good option and with a modern rifle, it can be loaded hotter than most load data shows and give a little better velocity than the 260. You will probably find more factory rifles in the 6.5x55 than the 260 but all the 6.5's create problems trying to find a new rifle in them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,606 Posts
Yeah, 260 Rem if you want some factory rifle choices. Fewer in the 6.5x55. Both good rounds, IMO. Not sure if anyone is still chambering the 6.5 Rem Mag; maybe Rem in the Mod 673, or???

It wouldn't be too awfully painful to pick up your favorite make of rifle from the used gun rack in any '06 based chambering and rebarrel to 6.5-06 or 6.5-284, and then you have something a little different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,852 Posts
Yeah, 260 Rem if you want some factory rifle choices. Fewer in the 6.5x55. Both good rounds, IMO. Not sure if anyone is still chambering the 6.5 Rem Mag; maybe Rem in the Mod 673, or???

It wouldn't be too awfully painful to pick up your favorite make of rifle from the used gun rack in any '06 based chambering and rebarrel to 6.5-06 or 6.5-284, and then you have something a little different.

I have one of the 673/6.5s and it's a really sweet rifle. There are still some out there, if you look enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,008 Posts
6.5mm Grendel if you want it in your AR-15.
.260 Remington or 6.5x55mm if you're hunting whitetail at normal ranges.
.264 Win Mag if you're hunting whitetail at longer ranges.
6.5mm Creedmoore or .260 Remington for a precision benchrest rifle.
6.5mm WSM (a wildcat) for a long range precision benchrest rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
6.5x55 is my choice. The one I bought my son years ago shoots so sweetly that he says "it's like cheating after the 7 mag, 300 mag, and 338 mag" .

If I were to BUY another new 6.5, it would be a Remington Model 7 in .260 that I could give to a future grandchild.

I have an old Mauser 98 that is beyond reasonable restoration that will be rebuilt as an ultra-light 6.5x55 for the days I don't feel like taking one of my other rifles to the deer stand - and for that future grandchild .

I don't find a practical difference between the 2 cartridges - 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of the other
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
931 Posts
260 REM. They used to chamber the Remington Mountain Rifle in it. My sig pic is a 260 Ruger M77 Compact. I;m not sure if I like the cartridge so well because of the rifle, or vice versa.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,280 Posts
I have a Ruger No. 1A in 6.5x55 Swede and a Ruger KM77MKIIVT in 6.5 Creedmoor. The No. 1 has a 22" barrel and the 77 has a 28" Target barrel. You'll have to reload hunting ammunition for the 6.5 Creedmoor, since the only factory offerings I'm aware of are target loads. The Swede is available in both hunting loads and target loads. While doing some research on it, I found it has quite a benchrest following in Europe and Lapua and Norma both make a lot of different loads for it.

Ruger catalogues the .260 and 6.5 Creedmoor in several guns, but the 6.5 No. 1A is part of a non-catalogued run for Lipseys, only 250 were built so they can be difficult to find locally, but are on Gunbroker. They have made the bolt guns in the Swede, but I didn't see one on their website.

Good luck finding one!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,290 Posts
The 6.5's, as a rule, deliver very good accuracy, excellent SD for the heavier bullet weights and a high BC for all but the shortest bullets, without creating undue recoil. This means you can easily place a well-constructed bullet precisely where it needs to go and count on it to penetrate well, resulting in excellent terminal performance.

What's not to like? :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,106 Posts
Short action I'd like to give the 6.5x.284 a whirl.

Long action...................I always wanted to do a 6.5 STW with about a #5 contour 28" barrel. Oughta reach out and touch whatever it is a feller feels need stouching.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I'm kind of leaning towards either the .260 Rem or the 6.5 Creedmoor, but the 6.5 Swede doesn't look to bad either. I thought I read somewhere that the Creedmoor is now being used as a sniper cartridge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,804 Posts
If you get something in the T/C Encore line, you can easily get barrels made for almost any cartridge you want. I have a T/C Encore Pro Hunter with a .260 Remington barrel and it's my favorite rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
I'm sure it has been discussed over and over but for some reason i have been intrigued but the 6.5 caliber for some time now. And now i'm contemplating about buying one. Any suggestions about which one? Pros and cons?
The 6.5's have quite a history (even in Africa) and if you research them you may be quite impressed. It may not help make up your mind, but interesting reading. Some of the long range shooters seem to like the 260AI.
www.eabco.com has a 6.5BRM. Check it out.
So many choices. Quite the dilemma, huh:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
magnumitis

I think you will find that unless you are only wanting to shoot single shot, you will find the 6.5x284 is going to take a long action. I built mine from a model 700 and the OAL with heavier bullets, my measurements showed them to be too long to feed into the magazine on a short action. I know the benchrest guys use the short action but they are using it single shot. Then again, maybe I'm not seating mine as deep or something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,753 Posts
magnumitis

I think you will find that unless you are only wanting to shoot single shot, you will find the 6.5x284 is going to take a long action. I built mine from a model 700 and the OAL with heavier bullets, my measurements showed them to be too long to feed into the magazine on a short action. I know the benchrest guys use the short action but they are using it single shot. Then again, maybe I'm not seating mine as deep or something.

the 284 Winchester was designed for a short action, so the 6.5x284 will work in a short action if hunting bullets are your only projectile. When you get into the really long match type bullets then action length on any 6.5caliber becomes more critical if you're worried about powder space.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,290 Posts
the 284 Winchester was designed for a short action, so the 6.5x284 will work in a short action if hunting bullets are your only projectile. When you get into the really long match type bullets then action length on any 6.5caliber becomes more critical if you're worried about powder space.
The 284 Win was designed for a short action, however it failed miserably, along with the 350 and 6.5 Rem Mag cartridges, BECAUSE those short actions didn't allow the bullets to be seated out very far, so they ate up powder space by being seated too deep. (Short, carbine barrels didn't help much, either.) It's not just match bullets that are affected by this, but any heavy-for-caliber bullet you might choose.

The 6.5x284 has been a great deal more successful than its parent, largely because it has been chambered in single-shot or long-action rifles, where it is not so restricted.
 

·
The Troll Whisperer (Moderator)
Joined
·
24,129 Posts
My 6mm/284 is chambered in a P-17 Eddystone, so yes, the longer or standard actions work best for the wildcat 284's.

Have refrained from posting on this magnificent caliber because most members are probably aware of my enthusiasm for the 6.5. Don't think there has been a better caliber when you're talking up to deer sized critters. The many Swedes in the gun vaults have accounted for a heap of them and if I wasn't a gun nut that's the only chambering I would own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,753 Posts
The 284 Win was designed for a short action, however it failed miserably, along with the 350 and 6.5 Rem Mag cartridges, BECAUSE those short actions didn't allow the bullets to be seated out very far, so they ate up powder space by being seated too deep. (Short, carbine barrels didn't help much, either.) It's not just match bullets that are affected by this, but any heavy-for-caliber bullet you might choose.

The 6.5x284 has been a great deal more successful than its parent, largely because it has been chambered in single-shot or long-action rifles, where it is not so restricted.

I think the 284 suffered because Winchester did a lousy job marketing it. Just like Remington has screwed the pouch with the 260, Winchester handicaped the 284 from the get go.

Personally, I have a Marlin XS-7 in 7-08 that is going to be rechambered for 284Winchester and I don't see any problems arising with 130-140grain bullets and powder space. With all the new bullets and powders I see no reason I can't get 2900fps or a touch more with the 140s. I bet the Hornady 154 RN will even break 2700-2800 with little problem.
 

·
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
Joined
·
36,711 Posts
The whole "bullets in the powder space" is a bit overrated, my opinion. Funny how it seems to be quite overlooked with some bore sizes? The little bitty bores suffer the least, because seating their bullets out give much less powder space gain than the fat bores. Yet it's the little ones where the gun magazines get in a snit.....

Put it another way, seating a quarter inch farther out with a .257 or 6mm bore gives much less additional power space than seating a .358 bullet. Probably about half?

On a long drive back from the deer lease, it occurred to me that gunwriters should either 1.) demonstrate that they have passed high school physics, or 2.) refrain from writing any opinions about velocity, load density, sectional density, ballistics, efficiency, foot-pounds of anything .... you get the idea. Those who don't know what they are talking about can still entertain us with stories about their critter hunts and that's fine.

One opinion.......
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top