Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters New barrel

What were the many advantages of the Creedmoor over the 260 that JB schooled you on?

Good hint...

My Kimber 1-9" wouldn't shoot anything over 125 worth a phooey, but would put 120-125's into tiny groups.

I'd go 1-8" personally, but I'm over a mile high in Montana.

bonefish, greater ability to seat VLD bullets to appropriate length with the Creedmoor, and possible less throat erosion due to longer neck/sharper shoulder. JB, correct me if I have misspoke your advice to me. I believe these advantages to be real, and if I didn't have a brass supply and dies for the .260 (and, admittedly a fond history with the cartridge) I would go Creedmoor. And I believe the folks who tell me a little more twist wouldn't hurt...but it was too late!
Never had an issue with the .260, in 1 in 9, so think I will be happy for the next 2000-3000 rounds with another one . A Creedmoor...well, in 8-10 years, I'll probably need another barrel, and then who knows.

Every barrel is different, but the factory barrel (1 in 9) was as happy with flat base 140s as it was with 95-129 grainers..and I shot a fair amount of all weights before deciding on the Speer 100 grain HP for varmint use and the 129 grain Interlock for deer. If I can't shoot heavier than 129 flat base...I will be ok. I am at about 3000 feet above sea level where I do virtually all my deer hunting, and lower for everything else.

Pointer....I think one can apply the concept of ecological niches to rifle cartridges. Look at all the .300 magnums that came out in the last twenty years....and how many are popular today. There are only so many of us small 6.5 lovers....and with three cartridges all similar (though I'll admit, not identical), I doubt all three will survive the next 20 years. The one or two that do the most best will probably be around...but all three?

And I have to say, I've enjoyed all the input given to me on this thread. Even if I didn't follow the advice, I pondered it....and then went with what I wanted. Perhaps I'm a looney, too.

I think your choice is fine, only thing is I would have went 1-8" twist, But unless you are shooting 130to 140 gr vlds or hybrids , they "may " not stabilize. Of the 6.5 cartridges in the group of a bunch , I think the .260 is the best , easy to form brass from others in these hard times faster then a 6.5x47 without way high pressures and still fits in a short action, 6.5-284 and 6.5x55 will not. The Creedmore is sort of the same as a .260 just a little different. I think the Creedmore and a
.260 are equals and I built a .260 because I had brass and dies offered to me for free, And I still love mine.........

Thanks, Wyoming260. By the time I had the advice, the 1 in 9 barrel was made and being shipped...so too late to take that advice . Installation is a month out, according the smith...just in time for some May days (when I find one with little wind) at the range at the farm . Bucks only this year for mule deer in Montana region 7, and I plan to be ready.

300 Savage, I ordered a NULA in 260 a couple of weeks ago. I agonized between 260 and 7/08. For the purpose of this rifle, the 7/08 might have been a slightly better call. No idea why I went 260 over the 7/08 but a decision had to be made. I could not tell any difference between the 260 and the 6.5 Creedmore other than the steeper shoulder angle and less taper. I went out and bought 200ct. of 260 Lapua brass and called the issue over. Finally decided on a scope for this rifle tonight. Agonizing over this hair splitting crap is part of the fun for me. For what it is worth, I would have been fine with a 1-9" twist as I will probably never shoot anything over 130g. Went with the 1-8" because that is what was recommended by the rifle maker.

Glad to see I'm not the only .260 fan around. I've used the cartridge (for everything till 2013) since 1998, and have grown sort of fond of it. A few coyotes, several deer, and quite a few prairie dogs. I like my Kimber, but would love a NULA...maybe someday.

Oh, I agree fully! I think it would make for a good series of articles or a book. It's an interesting parallel.

No perhaps about it. Good for you!

This site is a wonderful source of information. Unfortunately it is also a source of enablement for my addiction to fancy sporting stuff.

Well, picked it up yesterday. Gunsmith did a beautiful job. Won't get to shoot till next week though....busy week at work this week. I went 23.25" for barrel length, and there is a subtle, but noticeable improvement in balance. I can hold offhand just a little steadier than with the original 22", I believe.
The gunsmith noted that the barrel is quite tight. A .254 insert would enter, .255 would not. I understand this is land to land, and that the bore itself is ok, groove diameter. My original Kimber barrel accepted a .255 insert, and another Lilja .264 barrel the gunsmith had would accept .256. Need I be extra concerned, or can I try it with starting loads from a manual and not worry? Thanks in advance for any imput from folks with experience in this regard.

Blacktail53. I don't do pictures. Don't own a digital camera, and my phone doesn't have a multimedia plan, so pictures taken on it, stay on it. No apologies, my hobby money goes to rifles and components, as well as some reloading equipment, as that is what interests me. But if you have any experience with the topic I posted about, I'd be happy to hear from you. Perhaps you're enough of a visual learner that you can SEE the difference between a .254 bore and one that is .256. But I hope the words and numbers are sufficient.

Laffin

Most of us would love to see your project in the flesh, but no worries.... I'll use my imagination.

I went .260 myself. 129 IL's are the shcizz.....

Have a nice day

Sorry Blacktail53, my response was a bit sarcastic...last sentence especially . I'd post for you guys, but like I said, I've never gotten into photos...not back in the film days, and not now. Imagine a slightly worn Kimber 84 classic, bolt handle a little shiny and the stock a little sweat stained where my cheek hits it, but with a stainless, not blue, barrel. Same contour, but a smidgen longer. Leupold VX-III in Talley QDs. Should make it to the range next week sometime.
I too like the 129 grain interlocks. I push them along with H4831, and they are a great deer load.

I've recently acquired one of those in 84m Classic 260 with the 2 position safety.

I had no idea it was a 2 position as it looked just like a 3 position. My mistake, but no biggie, if I don't like it I'll change it....

I have mounted a Nikon 3-9 Monarch in S&K rings. Have not tried it our yet. (I had problems with the 6/48 and 1" rings). Anyhow now it's ready to rock.

I'll check it out one of these days.

It does seem to fit better than a newer model, I am curious if they (Kimber) changed the stock.

I've a friend with a 2 position safety 7-08 Kimber 84M. It does feel, subtly, different from my .260, a 2006 model with the 3 position safety. Don't know if they made a change, or if it's just that all wood stocks aren't as identical as the synthetic ones.
I think you'll like your rifle. I'd hunted with my Dad's old m99 Savage for over 20 years when I got my first .260, a Ruger 77 boat paddle. Never warmed up to it, but liked the caliber, so traded up for the Kimber. I used that Kimber .260 for EVERYTHING for 8 years.....deer in the fall, coyotes in the winter, and prairie dogs in the summer. And targets...lots of targets. I have a range at the farm with hanging steel, and those gongs just cry to be rung when I'm out there.
I actually think I shot the edge out of the original barrel, hence the rebarreling job that started this post. I've a .223 now, so the .260 will be retired from the dog towns. But it worked for all those tasks, even if not the perfect PD rifle. Will probably still use it for coyotes...good wind bucking qualities compared to the .223, and much lighter to carry.

I'm not a newie to the 260, I acquired a 700MR DM in 260 when Remington brought it out. For the hunting I do,the chambering is well suited, a personal favorite, and I have used it a lot.

I too was ready to re-barrel that 700 but then this one came along and I thought why not give it a go, see how it works out.

I think you made a good choice, putting a little more length/weight in the barrel....good luck with it.