Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Any 6.5-.284 Fans?

Mike[/quote] Having enough magazine length seems like the key factor to consider when putting a 6.5-284 together.[/quote]

Depends on what you're looking for.

The rifle involved in my article is an Ultra Light Arms Model 20, and when Melvin Forbes developed the ULA rifles the first one was a Model 20, so named because the action weighs 20 ounces--quite a bit less than a short 700 action, which goes around 35 ounces, nearly a pound heavier.

Melvin wanted to create the "ultimate mountain rifle," and chambered that first one for the .284 Winchester, because it gets quite a bit out of a short-action hunting rifle. But he also made the inside length of the magazines in Model 20s 3" long, so handloaders would have at least somewhat more flexibility than the industry-standard magazine, which runs at most 2.85" long. So this particular ULA's magazine allows cartridges somewhere between the 2.85" overall length allowed by some (not all) factory short-action magazines, and the 6.5 Norma's 82mm (3.228") industry-standard overall cartridge length.

Have also fooled with the 6.5-284 Norma before, and the difference in length doesn't allow any significant amount of velocity increase due to "extra" powder space, as some people theorize, due to the 4-to-1 Rule. But it does provide more flexibility in seating longer bullets to their most accurate OAL.

Oh, and the weight of the Ultra Light, with a 15.5 ounce scope mounted in ULA rings, is 6 pounds, 11 ounces--with a 24", #2 contour Douglas barrel, which I prefer in ULAs/NULAs, because they balance better for me. Which is one reason I acquired the 6.5-284, since most of my big game hunting (even at "semi-retired" age) involves considerable up-and-down hiking.

John

I believe those were a couple of low end Rem 700 barreled actions that they put into MDT Oryx chassis, put tuners on, et cetera for a series of experiments.

You're probably right; I'd have to watch it again. It was telling, though, that it seemed to throw a wrench in the oft-quoted, "The CM shoots any factory ammo accurately out of any factory rifle"...or something along those lines, the recently released Hornady podcast dealing with the CM being a pretty good case in point.

A more realistic statement would be "Because of the good chamber/throat dimensions that are industry standard, you're more likely to find that a 6.5 CM rifle shoots a variety of ammo well than you are with a number of other cartridges."

I keep hoping to acquire one of those uncommon Ruger #1s in 6.5-284. Uncommon meaning no one wanted one when they were new, but now they have vanished from the market

Bingo. Much more realistic.

3.1" will work. I don't like the 6.5-284 in a 2.8" SA, not with long bullets.

A number of years ago, I built this one on a Pre-64 M-70 that was a shot out .243 I picked up for $400, stock and barrel had been shortened. I bought it for the action. I swapped out parts to convert SA to LA, got a 26" Krieger fitted in 6.5-284. I fitted a Boyd classic, glassed, free floated and finished, sent it to Errol Case in MO for checkering. It's wearing a Z5 3.5-18x44, has a Jewell trigger.

It's an 8 twist, likes the 140 Berger Hunting over 48.8 RL-17 at around 3K FPS. I started out with Vv 165, popular at the time with LR target shooters. Vv 165 has accuracy nodes, whereas RL-17 not so much and is slightly faster. The best accuracy was with Vv 165 around 2,950 fps at the right node. RL-17 was nearly as accurate without nodes; I could inch up loads without groups changing that much. It'll shoot sub MOA at 400, sometimes half MOA.

I did try the 140 SST, but terminal performance seemed erratic. I understand that the later SST's are pretty good, probably not too unlike early vs. contemporary NBT's. Those SST's were (and probably still are) very accurate.

DF

Probably the only rifle I owned and sold and wish
I had kept was a Ruger #1 sporter in 6.5-.284. I sold it and a couple others to buy my first NULA in 7-08. That rifle had a palm swell grip on the stock that did not fit my small hands and short fingers so I ended up selling it also. Sure wish I had kept the Ruger!

Eileen,

I forgot my password on the rifles and recipes. How do I go about resetting it?

By the way, love the subscription to rifles and recipes. There is so much entertaining content that you can spend hours reading. It's like having another gun gack book available for e-reading when ever you have a connection. When I see a recipe that I want to try, I simply print the page it is written on to prevent having to find it again.

Thanks for everything!

Onerifle

Uno Mas!



J. Sipp and Son, ( Justin Custom) 6.5 -284 Norma, Montana 1999 action.



ya!

GWB

Why a short round in a rifle that allows the longest of rounds unless a "collectable" #1 like the 308 Win USPS recently lost?

Nice rifle. Short 1999 action or long?

Send me an email at riflesandrecipesgmail.com and I'll fix that for you.
Eileen

Might I ask a possibly dumb question: with the advent of the 6.5 PRC, what is the advantage of a 6.5x284? I'm not coming from any particular viewpoint but it seems the case capacity would be about the same. The PRC would have a larger case head and body which might mean 1 less in the mag box. Other advantages of a 6.5x284?

Thanks.

my gunsmith/friend (RIP) had a 6mm-284 Winchester about 30ish years ago. i'm not going guess the action, but it had a 26" Douglas heavy barrel on it. he showed me 1/4" and under groups at 100 yards that made me cry. 87gr Hornady? SP going at 3400fps+/- were medicine for deer.

he would have loved the 6.5-284.



probably the reason why anything bigger/smaller than the 6.5x55 was needed? i guess?

Actually, the powder capacity of the 6.5-284 is a little less than the PRC's--about 57 grains versus 61 grains when the same bullet is seated to the same overall length. The difference in potential velocity isn't as much, due to the 4-to-1 Rule, and amounts to around 40 fps with 140-grain bullets.

The ULA holds three in the magazine, and so does my 6.5 PRC, built on a short-magnum 700 action by Charlie Sisk.

In my experience it's somewhat easier to find 6.5-284 brass (you can even make the old-fashioned way, by necking down .284 cases! And it's easier to find suitable actions.

Unfortunately .284 Win brass is almost impossible to find these days. One of the factors in the F class crowd turning to the PRC case based wildcats.

Had two rifles in 6.5x284, both McMillan/Tubb 2000… Barrel burning slut of a chambering. Both retired after 700 rds, but I did manage a win with it…..

The big one! Congrats 👍

Service rifle shooter playing games and got lucky!