Dear all,
I am one of those looneys that has long been attracted to the 6.5 mm cartridges, with the .260 Remington holding the most slots in my safe. About 7 years ago I had a target rifle built on a Ruger action with a 28" Lilja barrel in .260 Remington. I think I am getting as much or more out of that combination than I could out of the 6.5 Creedmore, plus brass is easy to obtain (I use Nosler brass). Please don't make me buy another rifle/cartridge combo! Thanks for the great article John in Handloader.

Handloader came on Saturday and I am reading the article now.

I love the 260 Remington (as well as the 22 Hornet, 223 Rem, 220 Swift, 6.5X55, 7X57, 300 Savage, 308 win, 30-06, 8X57, 338-06, 358 Win, 35 Whelen, etc - well, you get the idea). I don't need another cartridge for which I'll have to buy new dies, additional brass, etc).

But then, the 260 Creedmoor sure looks interesting.

Can you AI it?
Only kidding.
I've a barrel/action about to be chambered to the 260AI the next week or two. I still waffle about giving the smith a call and telling him to change it plane 260, Creedmore, or 6.5x47 Lapua.

Application should dictate choice IMHO:

1) Competition shooting/Hunting + handloading? 260 has most performance and brass options and supply. RP, FED, Nosler/Norma, now Lapua, re-formed 308, HSM, Corbon, etc. are some options for brass.

2) Competition/Hunting (realizing ltd. bullet choices - some match/target design) + affordable factory ammo only? Creedmoor. For handloaders, brass supply has been sketchy (likely Hornady prefers selling ammo anyway). Not many are 'forming brass' from any other case, and Hornady is the ONLY mfg. of brass/ammo to date, to my knowledge.

Since the Above 2 TYPICALLY see better speeds w/139-142s at common pressures they have that niche for many. (I know there are exceptions - but again, taking averages of the masses of users).

3) Competition + handloader + shooting 123-130s, OR Hunting + Handloading and using in a sporter length bbl where more powder is not utilized as much (say 19-23" bbl), I would choose 6.5x47 Lapua.

Bottom line, they ALL are CLOSER in performance than what most shooters can realize in differences. Brass supply, cost, die cost, ammo cost, and availability of all are more different than any difference on a Chronograph. That said, the very more critical 1,000 Yd shooters and beyond, claim the 260 w/139-142s are superior and unmatched by the 47 fwiw, but again, it's ALL ABOUT APPLICATION and above 3 scenario's is how I would decide.

Just my .02.

The other reason I am sticking with the .260 Rem. is the great shooting Remington Mountain rifle I have in that chambering, and my daughter has a Model Seven in .260, plus I have several sets of dies, lots of brass, etc. etc. If I was starting from scratch I think I'd still go with the .260, I tend to like things with Remington in the name, can't help but think of all that name means to a kid of the 60's and 70's, those old ads still bring back wonderful thoughts.

65BR,

As I pointed out in my article, it is extremely easy to form 6.5 Creedmoor cases out of commonly available .22-250 brass using the Cream of Wheat method. One little pop and you're done.

JB, you mentioned at one point that you might cut a bit off the barrel of your Ruger 6.5. Did you end up doing so? I'm wondering how the 6.5 creedmoor would do with a barrel length of around 22"?

Thanks for pointing that out JB...

Sorry I missed that, I do recall you mentioning it here, though not heard of anyone doing it, most seem to buy, or are awaiting Hornady brass from what I have seen i.e. over on snipershide where you have a sprinkling of 6.5C users as well as 47, but the latest talk of Lapua 260 brass has seemingly increasing interest in the 260. No doubt, the 47 and Creed BOTH have design features that offer improvement over Rem's version.

That's a good option to have if/when Hornady is in short supply.

How would quality compare and which brand 22-250 would be preferred......(Lapua cost about as much as 47 and 260 brass - so no advantage there)?

I Like the Creed DESIGN actually better than 260, but to me the availability of components and ammo to me give the 260 a big advantage, as of now, again IMO. That said, there are no flies on the design or factory ammo in the 6.5C, but I think the buying public may well now lean more than ever to the 260 since Lapua is out and handloaders see that as a KEY rationale for choice. I have not heard anything bad on consistency w/6.5C brass, but primer pocket life has been debated.

Time will tell if the 6.5C survives/thrives, if it does not, it will be not due to it's capabilities.

Personally I like hedging things w/brass options being a handloader and having so many 'ready made' stamped '260' cases on the scene, it's hard to overlook that aspect. Just me.

From an industry standpoint, I don't expect to see any other mfg. desiring to offer ammo/brass as the 6.5 mid capacity space seems to be getting crowded, not to mention the legendary 55mm w/120+ years of success/history.....albeit usually in a long action.

I have nothing against any of the rounds, they all offer great accuracy, low recoil, and good killing power to hunters, w/good trajectory and wind drift.

I will be interested if Lapua brass will dramatically change the ease of accuracy obtained with the 260 vs. the 'IMO' better designed cases the Creed and 47 offer.

From calculations I made, I believe the neck on the 47 is .319
while the other 2 are around .2594/2.595. I believe the 6.5x55 has a neck of about .313, a known round for accuracy.

Just as my experience showed a preference for a 6mm Rem to slightly overshadow the 243 Win in ease of developing 'bug hole' loads, I think the 47 offers that potential.

It's splitting hairs really, the 260 does make it harder to kiss lands when seated in factory mag boxes w/factory Saami chambers no doubt - not a great thing, though there are options for reamers and mag boxes. Granted, one would have to be Darned good to 'Shoot the difference' when not on a steady table w/sandbags or similar.

I would expect a SLIGHT recoil reduction w/the 47 in a sporter weight rifle, again, splitting hairs.

In selecting one over another, it seems to be more about application, Real accuracy goals/needs, and owner wants/needs with ammo, brass options, and costs of those IMO. A BR shooter might want a 47 but a steel shooter might like less expensive brass in the event one fails/wishes not to recover all ejected brass.

Just some of what I have seen others argue, though I admit I have also used the same criteria to consider when choosing which round, for various projects.

To me, the best reason to use a Creed is a non handloader who wants a mild nice 6.5mm, whether for non dangerous big game/varmints and/or various competition. Hunters do get the option of having many choices by Ruger and I believe Savage has added some 6.5C's along w/their 260s. There may be more, I am not sure.

None the less, there is no 6.5mm round I dislike

Loaded to the same pressures.
I would expect less recoil with the 260 Rem.

Less barrel length.
Less pressures.
Better brass.

Who wants to fire form brass, have a longer barrel, shoot at higher pressures just so they can match a 260 Rem shooting at normal pressures out of a 22" barrel?

Am I missing something here?

SU35,

In my comparison of 6.5 Creedmoor and .260 brass, there was a 1/2-grain difference in powder capacity with a bullet seated, not enough to make a practical difference in velocity/pressure.

They're both great rounds with more similarities than differences. I shoot the 260 and have been very happy with it. Would've been equally happy with the 6.5C for my purposes (mostly hunting).

At the range I've been hearing a few people talking about moving away from 6.5x47 and going back to the 260 because they were having to push the 47 really hard to match speeds with the larger case. Have you guys heard any of that?

I dont think the intention of the 6.5x47 was to ever match speeds of the 260?? I think it was built to best utilize the long 6.5 bullets with good powder in a smaller/efficient round. I have several rifles of the 6.5 caliber and my favorite right now is the 6.5x47. Its easy to load, easy on the shoulder and seems to shoot anything you put in it extremely well. If you wanna match the 260 in speed get a 260.

Yeah, about the only real difference is the shorter overall length of the Creedmoor, providing a little more flexbility in bullet seating depth in 2.8" magazines.

The Hornady Creedoor brass is good, when you can get it, but Lapua makes .22-250 brass which would be an excellent way to go as well.

Midway has Hornady Creedmore brass in stock.

FWIW, I had Pac-Nor build me a 6.5-308....aka now 260 back in the mid 90s...and about then a few 6BRs. For Varmints/paper/deer I still see ALOT of utility for these rounds w/good bullets.

As to the 47, for a fellow that wants to drive 120-130 class bullets and happy w/say 2900/2800 respectively in a 22-23" bbl max, I think it gives up little to nothing in capabilities for game typically hunted with a 6.5 up to most normal distances.

Now granted, if I were shooting competition at 1,000 yds, a 260, and Creedmoor as I said above gives a little speed more due to case capacity in heavier 139-142s, (and many would argue for a 6.5-284 and/or 6.5x55 or an AI variant, and rightfully so - bore life not withstanding) but when you drop down to lighter bullets i.e. 120-130s, the differential is less and a 47 is very comparable in results/data I have seen.

The 47 has the least capacity, therefore least recoil and muzzle lift. Recoil is NOT an issue w/any, but the LESS my muzzle rises and sight pic left undisturbed, the easier I can spot my hits/misses.....and one only needs to run a rifle where you can do so to learn a rifle's trajectory fast...shooting 6mm BRs and 7BR in a rifle has been my most fun calibers I have run. Various 22s were nice, but lacked as much 'bullet signature/impact' when hitting in say grass vs. dirt. SO, having a bullet with enough frontal area and weight/energy yet in a mild enough recoiling rifle (think BR thru 308 case, and 6-7mm bullets thru 120-130gr) to me give a great balance.

No doubt they are all very useful and have more in common then otherwise. On brass - the Creedmoor perhaps suffered inconsistent production meeting supply/demand ratio's but perhaps it will straighten/level out after many owners stock up.

No doubt given the intro of the Creed and timing of a new administration and 'panic buying...HOARDING of components inc. brass/lead/caps' supplies of brass were not always steady so it seems based on owners putting out 'Brass wanted' posts on sights where many Creed users reside. No doubt that was not likely a long term issue, but I seen many such posts and complaints....but I personally was not keeping tabs on the issue since I was not looking for any.

M7 - I loved my Borden 260 Varmint bbl, and may yet do a sporter in one as I have 3 more Alpine actions begging for barrels. 2 6.5 Bartlein's ready to be chambered and I am leaning strong to the 47 for at least one....as though many might compare differences in the 3, the fact is, I'd be willing to bet big, that 90-95% of the deer and hogs killed, could all have dropped very dead/quick had a good 120-130gr 6.5 been fired from the measley Grendel.

Having shot the 6 and 7 BR, NOT fireforming brass was why I chose those and was 'yet' to have built a 6.5 version, the Grendel is compelling, but a bolt makes more sense....yet I pause thinking you give up another 150-200fps over a BR case.

A 47 will close the gap between a PPC improved case ala Grendel, and the BR vs. the 260 and Creed, while giving POSITIVE feeding in a repeater...minimal recoil and muzzle lift...and VERY close speeds when using 120-130s, to a 260 or Creed in a 21-23" bbl which I prefer in a sporter hunting rifle.

With a 6BR and 95 Ballistic Tips or 105 Amax OR a 7mm BR w/120 Ballistic Tip OR a 120 Vmax......OR a 6.5 Grendel or BR and 120 Ballistic Tip or 129 SST........I would HAPPILY use ANY of those BR/PPC_AI cases to 400 yds on deer.

That said, I have NO doubt a 47 will do for 98-100% of what I intend to do with a 6.5 bore, mostly varmints/paper/deer/hogs and perhaps a sprinkling of other non dangerous big game, with ranges likely not to exceed 400-500 yds as an outlier. Surely not 600+ that John Burns video showed Wayne Van Zwolle taking his elk w/129 w/the Creed.

There is an argument for all three, depending on application, where any/all might do VERY well, but when you split hairs, the edge based on criteria determined by the individual choosing, specific to the exact type of shooting/hunting that will be done, can go to any one......depending.

Glad to see the support and appreciate for these three mild mannered highly efficient and effective rounds. I think the 243 and 7/08 got many in this direction as did the 270 when many realized 30 somethings were not always needed......or even small bore magnums.

Light recoil, self spotting hits w/o a muzzle brake, bore life, wonderful accuracy, and endless diversity of common bullet choices from 85-160gr.....simply covers alot of ground and features I desire in a cartridge. Granted, MANY rounds can well duplicate their performance - but for the balance I have selected for all my criteria, they personally have alot more pros than cons. For other hunters/shooters, their needs may differ and that's ok, a 6.5 or at least modest capacity 6.5 may NOT be the best.

EACH shooter must individually decide WHAT it is they are looking for in variable's to choose the criteria they look for, and in what priority they put them.

SU - re: your comments -

quote[Loaded to the same pressures.
I would expect less recoil with the 260 Rem.

Less barrel length.
Less pressures.
Better brass.

Who wants to fire form brass, have a longer barrel, shoot at higher pressures just so they can match a 260 Rem shooting at normal pressures out of a 22" barrel?

Am I missing something here?]quote


The 6.5x47 LAPUA cartridge typically runs about 37-40gr powder vs. say 44-46 or more in the 260.

As to pressures - granted some/many users of the Lapua '47mm' round PUSH pressures very high to try duplicating a 260 or Creed.....that's NOT my plan if I chamber one up......as to my uses....if I am 50fps shy of a 260 for example, it won't change IF that bullet will take down a game animal at the ranges I hunt. I think Greg R and others here have done VERY well w/260s running in a 16.5" Ruger Compact, knowing well that anticipated/typical vel. loss is about 30-35 fps per inch, an average loss of say 150-200 fps might be pretty much expected over a 22-24" bbl, YET the animal never knows, only the user if they clock over a chronograph.

FWIW, I ran a 22" 260 Sako 75, fav load was a 130 at 2780 w/IMR4350. Sure I could have bumped it up about 50-75fps or more, using H4350 and others, yet I was getting groups where the first 2 of 3 shots were in the same hole.....at 200 yds.....(Federal brass - Rem brass did not reproduce results). I did this TWICE the same day back to back after barrel cool down using a 6.5-20x Leupold.

Headstamp is more in a shooters mind than affecting the outcome of a kill for a hunter, when the first two principals are applied:

1) Use a good bullet
2) Put it thru vitals

I could be VERY happy running ANY of the 3 so long as I had a good supply of ammo and/or brass to handload, and good bullets, and my loads/rifle was producing groups near/sub 1/2MOA which is not uncommon in any of them in a well built rifle, inc. Ruger's as JB has noted.

This assumes one is not making a video on LR hunting on large game at 800-1,000+ yards, which is a whole other topic anyway. Plenty speed is on tap IMO for expansion and penetration save the LONGEST of shots w/the hardest of bullets (think solid copper).

Perhaps Alan - aka GSSP will see this thread and chime in...he has had some very impressive results w/his personal 47 Lapua's - 2 rifles......and it is intriguing...however no doubt, many can question pressures used, even though Alan has to date had no safety issues, handloading safety does need to be in check for any round loaded.

"match speeds" was a bad phrase for me to use. The long range guys like to push bullets fast. In order to get the speed they want they have to push the smaller 47 case pretty hard. By going back to the larger 260 case (some of them had used 260's in the past) they can reach the desired velocity without pushing it so hard.

That's what I've been hearing at the range. I'm not a long range guy so that's why I asked about it.

I've got two 260s, two 6.5 Swedes and one 6.5 Creedmoor. I could never decide between them so have them all.

I got some creedmoor brass from Midway and loaded some 129gr SSTs using the Superformance powder. I was quite impressed with the powder. It was very consistent in velocity with duplicates in each string and standard deviation in the four loads I tried went from 7 to a high of 13.
My Ruger Hawkeye has the 26" barrel and velocity was higher than the Hornady data with all loads. That, in my experience is quite unusual. At the max of 46.7grs my rifle got an avg. vel. of 2951fps & a .25" 3 shot group.
I am eager to find some time to re-test that load some more. I have never had velocity or accuracy of that level with any of my other 6.5s. Result of rifle or cartridge? At this point I can't say, but it sure is fun and should make a deer unhappy this fall.

The Creedmore was designed to allow the use of VLD bullets seated long & still feed from the magazine of a short action, as in the 300 rapids event of across-the-course Highpower.

The .260 will shoot VLDs just fine, but is better at it when the bullets are seated long for single loading as in prone slow fire like F-class and Highpower Mid & Long range events. Go to a long action and it shoots VLDs loaded long even from a magazine.

Hunting was never part of the equation in designing the Creedmore. Not that it can't be used, just that it holds no significant advantage over the .260 in hunting situations.

7Heaven, Don't change what you are doing Nice shooting.

Barry, Agreed. That said, no reason the Creed won't equal a 260 in the field, it's nice esp. given the lack of support that has waned w/the arms mfg. in 260, that Ruger is offering a few Creed rifles, and as in their 260s, using the preferred 8" twist covering all bases. I do see Hornday offering loads OTHER than Amax's which granted flatten deer well esp. broadside lung shots, but not ideal for all angles. They are broadening their market w/more ammo, as is Ruger doing sporter rifles vs. just the Target/Varmint 77 originally.

It's a coin toss w/very subtle differences in REAL world performance of the three.

Where can I find this article?

Thanks,

Mark

Latest issue of Handloader.

Look for the misspelled "Creedmore" on the cover.

Doh!

Creedmoor!

My retailer has ordered 3 Savage LRP's and 600 Lapua brass. One rifle and 200 brass for me in 260 Rem, minds were changed when Lapua brass became available, to 260 Rem instead of the Creedmore.

I still find it interesting that when I contacted Hornady directly about 5 years ago to offer a load in the 260, they told me they never would because 6.5 doesn't sell enough to make it worth it.

Actually, they must have already had plans for the Creedmoor! Little white lies......

Yeah, I'm weaning myself off of Hornady ammo (other chamberings, obviously) due to their deliberate fracturing of the already tenuous 6.5mm market (and it appears that some dishonesty on their part can be added to the list). They aren't doing hunters or the industry, or even themselves, any favors by pimping the Creed-less. They may sell a little Creed-less ammo in the short-term, but they could have made as much money loading good .260 Rem ammo as they will make with their Creed-less venture folly. Wonder if their Creed-less folly is ego driven.

I like it. I call the 6.5Creedmore the 6.5 Worthless, but Creed-less is nice too. There is nothing it can do that can't be done better by the 260Rem or 6.5x284.

It's been a pet bitvh of mine for years that if ammo and gun companies would put some time into existing cartridges, the customers would be much better off. They should stop trying to sell us the next "bill of goods", and just make what we have better.

And another anticapitalist.

Glad here that they don't listen to boring people like yourself. Reminds me the USSR where everyone drove the same style of car.

I thought that's what they did - they made the .260 better.

How is less velocity and no better accuracy better?

As P.T. Barnum used to say "There's a sucker born every minute". 6.5 Creed-less/Worthless owners are suckers. The Creed-less was thought up by two guys looking to make a buck when all they had to do was make 260 ammo and guns better.

I don't really care one way or the other, I just wanted to see how emotionally tied people were to their babies.

Back in 1995 Jim Carmichel wrote an article about his 6.5 Bobcat and 6.5 Panther. The Bobcat, if you will remember is a 6.5X250 and the Panther was the 6.5X308. The Panther is now the 260 Remington. He wrote a real nice article with quite a bit of testing and range time for both cartridges. I need to check my Outdoor Life mags and get the month that it was published.
Butch

Just read the article and a good one it is.

Great points made by many. I am confident that quality 260 ammo starting w/proper brass, powder, and bullet, and used in quality rifles w/proper twist, will shoot neck and neck w/the other two, one only needs to see comparison's made by Zak Smith. He pitted the 47 vs Creed vs 260 all against each other in thorough testing, in accurate rifles w/top ammo. I myself have shot groups sub .2 moa in a custom 260, and even my Sako was a 1/2 MOA rifle.

I think somehow Butch many somehow contrived that Jim was responsible for the 260. As you know a round dating WAY back in PO Ackley's book, not to mention it was Asquare's round FIRST seeking Saami rights......Jim seemed to not correct history. It is interesting he does not take 'credit' for the Bobcat i.e. 6.5-250AI - Creed also.

It's all moot, as are many of the subtle differences in these rounds, but I do agree above that the industry should try perhaps to work together instead of diluting and confusing others in a fragmented niche market.

Many would be owners of these 6.5s likely feel 'why buy a rifle in a round that may well be obselete when I can buy a 270, '06, or '08 and get MORE choices in ammo and rifles than any 6.5?'

Instead of penalizing would be buyers w/higher ammo costs w/say yellow/green box ammo in 260 vs similar ammo in the 3 other's above, maybe the round would have actually thrived much more to a broader market than the remaining loonies that largely handload.

If Hornady 'Stays the course' over time it may get traction in the Creed, but only IMHO if they continue offering quality ammo at sane prices, w/good bullet options both for the competitive crowd, and the sportsman who largely are made up of deer hunters.

I truly believe they have an uphill battle as many lack confidence in the future of the round, given how big Green abandoned their '6.5 Panther'....LOL.

A potential lack of a future only makes a cartridge more attractive to a true loonie,LOL.

Jim wrote the article in 1995. A Square applied for SAMMI in 1996. You may wanta check that Cliff. The Bobcat was not an AI if you will check Jim's article and photos. You need to get your facts straight.
Butch

The Creedmoor was designed to shoot 140gr-class bullets at the same velocities as a .260 Rem only in a shorter package.

It does that. That is it's reason for being. Period.

Jim's article was published in Sept. 1995. If you will look at the prints in the article you will see the JGS reamer print was approved on 9-94 and ground 11-94.
Cliff, the print shows a 30deg. shoulder.
Butch

Butch, what I was trying to convey, is that the Bobcat and the Creedmoor are both based on the 250-3K case, not identical rounds. Sorry on that confusion in my wording.

Re: my comment about who had the rights w/Saami, yes Jim wrote about the Bobcat and Panther PRIOR to a 260 being approved by Saami, yet LATER when Remington got the 260 introduced, Jim received credit for inventing it.

From what I know, ASQUARE applied first to Saami, but Remington somehow came in later, and for whatever reason, Remington received approval. No matter how and why that happened, many gave Jim credit for inventing the round, citing his work on the Bobcat and Panther article. He never seemed to correct those who were unaware that the round had a history LONG before. I think Jim was completely aware of the facts, and was planting the seed in his writing, about the virtues of a mid sized 6.5, as he likely was 'in the know' of the soon to be released 260.

When I was midstream in the build of my 6.5-308, I got wind of what Remington had in the works and I contacted Remington (in 95) - they said, 'We cannot confirm nor deny'.....so I contacted the Lonoke, AR plant, I was able to get a 'print' of their round, and compared it to a 6.5-308 reamer print Chris at Pac-Nor gave me before my rifle was done, as I wanted to know if the new 260 ammo would work in my rifle. That is also what I told Rem when I asked and that's when they admitted/and ONLY said, 'can't confirm nor deny' as I questioned about running their ammo in my chamber.

Read a post here on the topic in 2004 where JB chimes in.

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/274561

I shoot both the 260 Rem and the 6.5x47. When I recently spent a bit over $4k to build a custom LR hunting rifle. I went with the 6.5x47. Here's why.

260 Rem: 20 deg shoulder

1. Prep brass
2. Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, TRIM
3. Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, TRIM
etc, etc

6.5x47:30 deg shoulder

1. Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, Load, Shoot, etc, etc, etc

I did not forget to include TRIMMING with the 6.5x47. I've never needed to trim the cases.

And my hunting load uses Rel 17 pushing the excellent 140 gr Nosler Partition to 2865 fps.

The small primer whoops butt on both the 260 and 6.5 CM.

Nuf said!

Alan

Except in real cold, say single digits and under.

A peek at Midway shows Creedmoor Hdy factory match for < $26/box of 20. Load data is on the box, so it can be reloaded w/o a lot of experimentation. A target shooter could afford to use factory, and not reload. Hornady decided to have it available at low cost from the beginning. Other than .308 Win, I do not know what match ammo is this low in price.

Other 6.5 cartridges have match ammo listed, but more expensive.

6.5 SE list has some < $20/bx Prvi, but the match ammo is Lapua, etc. and the price is much higher. The Prvi would let a person get started with a hunting rifle w/low ammo cost. RWS has a 140-gr dual core load at over 2850 fps - hottest 6.5 SE load I have seen - do not know test barrel length.

6.5x47 Lapua factory match ammo is expensive ~ $59/box.

.260 Rem list shows Cor-Bon match at ~ $47/box.

They would all be low cost and easy to hand load. Creedmoor is the only one I would shoot much with factory loads.

I've read some of this here and there. I've not experienced it yet and my favorite time of year to work up loads is in the dead of winter.

Alan

1895 - Hornady was smart enough to realize the price of gas is a factor in how much people drive.....or what they burn it in.....the ammo costs will no doubt give an easier path to those willing to try it.

Alan, I have trimmed a few 243 in my day, and a 260 on occasion, but I partial size and perhaps don't run my loads as hard as you I don't know, no doubt as you go up in bore size on the 308 case, trimming seems to be less an issue......worse w/243, better w/a 7/08.

I do know I never needed to trim 6BR or 7BR brass and the 47 has the same attributes. What I do recall is someone mentioning that their 260 in a Sako was the Smoothing feeding rifle they had.......and I had a couple, as did long ago the older AII and L579s both in 243 and those 'less efficient' lower shoulder angles do help it seems.

So long as a rifle feeds smooth and reliable I don't mind a sharper angled round, though Terry Cross tried a 260 AI and went BACK to the original due to it's better feeding - IN the rifles/platforms he works w/for steel/silhouette - tactical matches. I never ran an AI, and concern over feeding has been a reason. In reviewing his report http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek046.html you can see however he ran a 40 degree AI, so I can see a 47 w/30 degree working better.

I think you did get your 47 feeding properly after the custom action maker tuned it correct? No fault of the round I am sure as the 47 seems to do fine in most repeaters from what I have seen.

BTW, I did find one very interesting variant of a 260...

http://www.6mmar.com/65_SuperLR.php

Reading up on it, it would have been the way Rem MIGHT have gone, and it would have been ever so slightly better in design, not that it would make alot more speed or accuracy, but it would not hurt either.

As nice a design it is, I expect it to remain a wildcat round shot by a few discriminating shooters in custom guns.

I think I'll stay with the 6.5X55.

OK,
Before somebody says they saw this in 1940 I want to post a picture.

22 Vampire killer,17 werewolf,and a 22 pussy cat.
The first 2 are built on 458 Mag basic brass and the 3rd on 44 mag brass. I see real promise. Dave Kiff has the reamer prints.
Butch

I think Butch is on to something....


Never had any problems with the small primers not going off, even in subzero temps last fall in Montana. We have shot alot of 6.5x47 in competition and now use a modified 6mm variation of it. The 6.5x47 will run at the same speeds as the 6.5 CM and the 260. 3000fps with 130's is the norm, 2870 with 139's is the norm with my reamer in 26" barrels. The 260 has the advantage with inexpensive brass available, and now with Lapua making brass, it may be able to be pushed to a new performance level as well. Kinda want to chamber a barrel with my 260AI reamer now and see how the Lapua brass will work.

LMAO - Thanks Butch - Great pic - I learn something new everyday!

TMR - guess you have not skipped the 08 case entirely and tried the 6.5RM or 6.5-284?

Butch, btw, I know you have done several 47s...must be a reason why...other than always having something guys drool over in your gunporn...I mean art. I must find out what it is! LOL.

You all have a Happy Mother's Day weekend.

That's a 'cannot lose proposition' albeit very simple one! Can never argue a Sweet Swede. Never NOT liked the ones I owned. The deer HATED them, EVERY Single ONE hit by a Swede of mine seriously.....DRT.

Luck I guess

Yeah, there ain't any flies on a good 6.5x55. I've used one on a bunch of different game out to close to 400 yards, and it just flat works.

My present one is a custom FN Mauser with a "California English" stock and 21" Lilja barrel. It will shoot pretty well....

.

I have a plain old Ruger Mk II in 6.5X55. Shoots pretty well, too!


.

Wherever did you find that rifle?

Boy,

After reading all of this, I think how simple it is to just stick with my 260 Remingtons...although, I also enjoy a couple of 6.5 x 55s.. and my favorite round still is the 6.5 x 57...

But this thread inspired me on something else...

I think I will explore necking down a 6.5 x 47 to 22 caliber...

I bet that would make a nifty varmint round!!

so should I call it a 22 x 47 or a 5.56 x 47?

I was thinking of maybe necking up the Creedmoor case to a 30 cal. Maybe add a bit of a rim. Make a dandy lever round.

Wouldn't that be something like a 300 Savage?

Alan

Isn't that what RWS calls the 5.6x57? Methinks someone beat you to it...

Grasshopper,
The 5.6X47 would be different than the 5.65X57 RWS. About 10 millimeters.
Butch

or 308 Marlin.

OK! I was tired! And my eyes were seeing things...

Still even more tired...

If the 6.5 x 47 is based on necking up the 250 Savage case, then necking it down to 22 caliber would give you what cartridge?

guess you weren't the only person that missed the sarcasm intended...

After much reading and talking with my gunsmith I decided to have Jon Beanland build a 6.5x47.
He used a Rem Mdl-7 SS action, Rem trigger, Rock bbl.4.5 taper 8 twist cut at 22.5" and HS stock. Scope is a Swaro. Nova 6x.
This rifle will shoot .2--5shot groups @100, using 39 grn of H4350 and 129 A-Max.

Coach

New to the board but interested in this topic. I have a Swede that shoots great and am a fan of 6.5s. I also have a Grendel in an AR which is one of the most accurate rifles out of the box I've ever owned.

On to my next project and thus a request for any opinions. I have another Swede but want something different in a 6.5. I've been thinking of a 6.5x284 but short barrel life seems to be an issue. I wouldn't mind a 6.5 Grendel but am also considering the 6.5X47.

So, which would be the easier modification using the Swede action and a custom barrel? What mods would be required to get my Swede action to feed a Grendel?

RowdyDan,

First off the Swede has a .480" rim diameter. The 6.5x47 Lapua has a .473" diameter. The 6.5 Grendel has a .44". The Grendel will be too small to fit the bolt face of your Swede's action. You'd have to either obtain a new bolt with a .44" bolt face or have 'smith work it so; if that's a possibility.

The 6.5x47 will provide better ballistics, great Lapua brass, small primer pocket to hold up to nuclear pressures.

I'm sure a good 'smith could work any issues that might have to do with putting a short round cartridge into a long action; such as blocking the mag.

Alan

Eeww, Eeww, Eeww! You are going to love that combination! And built by Jon! Oh yeah! He was on my short list of 'smith's to build my two -47's. Chris Matthews of Longshotrifles.com built mine and had a very fast turn around time; days, not weeks/months/years.

Alan

This is one of my 2 6.5X47 Lapua. I did most of the metal work, rebarrel front octagon sight, and scope bases. James Anderson did the rear iron sight, trigger guard, and cut the octagon barrel. He also did an excellent job on the wood.

The next one is the a Mod 7, Shilen barrel, Jewell trigger, Dan Armstrong bolt handle job. I did the metal work except the bolt handle. Charley Santoni did the metal coating and the stock paint on the Brown Precision FS stock.



I also did a 6X47 Lapua for one of my Grandsons on a 600 receiver. They are our go to deer rifles at this time.
Butch

I thought amax were in 120,123, and 140? Is that perhaps an SST?

Butch, what bullets are in your 'deer loads?'

Have you put this load over a chrono?

I use 130 TTSX Barnes with 39.5 of H4350. It shot around 5/8" and I didn't chrono it. 2 shots and 2 deer. One at 75yds and the other at 215 yds.
Butch

I have one too. I bought it new back in the 90s and was told [by Ruger at that time] they were meant mostly for the European market. I may bring it to NC this year again for a deer hunt.

Those Ruger Swedes are highly regarded, never seen a Ruger in Stainless - in the 77, but the blued ones sure seem to impress from all accounts, though as the 260, it too is no longer mfg. to my knowledge. Maybe a ltd. run down the road will be made.

For those wanting less expensive top quality brass, and throating w/o COL issues run thru the mag, it's hard to beat as it handles thru 160s w/o a hiccup.

Today's bullet technology OTOH gives high performance 6.5s in 120-130 which run fine in short actions.

Btw, Butch, always nice seeing your art in fine execution. On the 6x47, what is your current hunting bullet? 8 ROT?

Thanks.

Randy Robinett makes primarily BR type bullets, but he has acquaintances that cull a lot of deer. The use the 6X47 with 10 twist and his 95 grain flatbase hollowpoints. My Grandson has only shot it at the range.

This is his 600 receiver.

The other side with the G33/40 cut.

I told Pierce that he could have it painted any color he chose. What other color would an 8yr old boy that spends his time on the Military Channel want?
Charlie Santoni did this one also.
Butch

LOL, that is a beauty....hiding under that camo Thanks for the pics. 2 pos. or 3 safety?

A 3 pos by Dave Kiff.
Butch

Butch

That kind of reminds me of Charley's photo booth he's used to take pictures of two of my rifles in.

He's very good at what he does!!

Alan

Pierce's rifle was on his website, I haven't checked to see if its still there.
Butch

I found this piece to be very informative and entertaining. Just click the pic for the story . . .

I'm not up on the case dimensional differences between the 260 and Creedmore, but couldn't one run a creedmore reamer to about the depth of the 260? Use Lapua's .308 Palma brass for it's small primer pocket? Best of both worlds, nearly?

Call it the 260 Norton

Kaiser Norton

KN - yes.....but if you read this article, you might change your thoughts on a SR primer in a 308 case:

http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com/2010/01/cartridges-lapua-small-primer-308.html

Note - do read comments by Kevin Thomas - who works w/Lapua USA...

I think when one veers off the commercial path or round choice as the 260, Creed, and 47 there is one that to my thinking makes sense for a custom if a handloader likes to make their brass....

http://www.6mmar.com/65_SuperLR.php

Not knocking your idea, but the results of testing small rifle 308 brass may not support any benefit, and for a hunting round, POSSIBLY could have ignition trouble, something the smaller capacity 47 seems to not have much of unless bad primers are used.

Hornady put some great thought and research I am sure to 'TWEAK' their baby the best they could...IMHO, and I am confident they went LR primers for a reason. Lapua, chose 'small' for their smaller sized round...based on their test results.

I believe Powder and primer choice must work in unison for positive ignition under the worst of conditions, in a given size/designed case.

I can appreciate where this topic has come from and where it's gone. I wanted to add a little of my own experience of late.

I took possession of my 2nd 6.5x47 last October. It's a lighter (8 lb 10 oz) hunting rifle in 6.5x47 on a Pierce action and #3.1 Broughton barrel.




I started with Rel 17 and CCI 450's this past fall when the temps were in the 40's and continued through the winter when I had temps in the 20's. Both the Berger 140 VLD and 140 Partition did well in ladder's @ 360 yds. I focused first on the Partition as I had 500 of them on my bench. Ended up with this.


Just this past week I wanted to move over to the 140 VLD with it's .612 BC. The 140 Part has a .490 BC. My 140 VLD ladder looked like this. Several good nodes, then topping out at 3021 fps with 43.5 gr in 21 deg F temps. Their was just a hint of pressure via sticky bolt lift. This was fine as #9 and #10 is what I wanted to focus on.


I settled on 42.1 gr for 2965 fps and 8 SD (I jotted down the wrong powder charge, 2906 fps and 7 Sd on the target thus they are incorrect). This was at 70 deg F three days ago.


Yesterday I ran a 600 yd primer test having discovered several months back with the 140 Part that the Fed 205m primer gave lower ES/SD. In my big Surgeon/AICS sniper rifle (17+ lbs) I shoot the 130 VLD with 40.8 H4350 and CCI 450's. Great load giving 10-shot sub 1/2 moa single digit SD's all day, every day! But for Rel 17, the Fed 205m is tops.

Same results with the 140 VLD. A 10-shot string av 2975 fps gave a 16 ES/5 SD with the Fed 205match primer in 65 deg temps.

No pics of the 600 yd targets as the wind was switchy between 4 and 8 o'clock and the horizontal is not pretty but the vertical was 4-1/2". Not great but doable enough for me to persue a bullet seating depth test in the near future.

Hope I was able to add something to a fine cartridge.

Alan

Cliff,

Why, oh why did you have to go and post that link to the 6.5 SuperLR for?

I was perfectly happy in my ignorant bliss with the multitude of 6.5's that I now own. I was thinking just one more, a 6.5 Creedmor in a #1-A and I'll be set. Now you've gone and thrown a monkey-wrench in my plans....

I'm thinking Remington 40-X w/25" 1~8 twist, std 40-X contour, fluted and in an A-5 Mickey (Red/white/blue flame) that I just happen to have stashed away.

Do you realize what it's going to cost me?

OTOH, perhaps I'll just drive 5 mi over to Pierce Engineering, and Have John build be one on one of his actions... hmmmm...

Edw

Cliff,

Darn! I never even had a chance. The short reamer print was made 2 days after I took delivery of my Pierce -47. It looks very interesting.

Alan

Ed, I'd get a Pierce w/funds from the 40x being sold, Alan's has been very good to him! I NEVER regretted any custom action....

On round choice, I don't think the biggest 'issue' is picking the 'right or perfect 6.5mm'....It may well just be deciding on one.....then staying happy with it and not second guessing what you did pick I know, easier said than done when you are a Looney...don't ask how I know. There is no known cure other than just having fun learning as you go!

Nothing says you HAVE to use just one....if you can afford more.

Good brass, loads, rifle quality and optic will mean more IMO than which one you get, for all but the most discriminating shooter and/or going a full 1,000 yds or more, any of them will work in a pinch!

Alan, I agree, the SLR is a well thought out concept...just a barrel and dies away.... Maybe after a LONG career w/your 47, you MIGHT run that reamer thru your bbl and clean up some throat. It may be an option.

Eeewww, yeah! Maybe, I might find just how fast Rel 17 will burn out a -47 barrel running 140's at 2975 and give the SLR a try.

Alan

SO long as you don't blow a case, I can't disapprove. Safety first but I know you care just as much about your hide as I do mine, so perhaps you can give us a report down the road on the SLR. Can't imagine running any faster than your 47, but it is a larger case, albeit not a Small primer Lapua case.

It will be interesting when Lapua 260 brass users wring those out w/RL17.....

I won't tell you the load but my .260 averages 3177 with a 130 gr. berger and REMINGTON brass with Reloder 17......... no pressures and a sd in the single digits. The 30" barrel may help some of that ,its the smoothest krieger ever made in my humble opinion.

Had to dig for this thread???

late to the game but find this thread one to keep and read again. Tag.