Adamjp,
"Where possible I use Lapua brass, then Norma and then others although I'm looking forward to developments with the emerging case manufacturers like Alpha, ADG and Petersen. Lapua/Norma are preferred through hard won experience as when I start reloading I will batch the available brass - the variation between good ol' Hornady/Winchester/Federal brass in the same packet is scary."
--Gee, I am also VERY well acquainted with Lapua and Norma brass, along with Petersen and others. But have been using Hornady 6.5 Creedmoor brass since 2010, when I bought my first 6.5 Creedmoor rifle, and off-the-shelf Ruger Hawkeye at a local store. Also bought a few boxes of factory ammo, and the rifle's very first 5-shot group at 100 yards with 140-grain A-Max factories went .6". The brass proved very consistent in dimensions, and had also lasted for many handloads since then--along with subsequent 6.5 Hornady brass. In fact I've found Hornady brass in a bunch of other rounds from the .250 Savage to .300 Weatherby excellent in every respect in the past several years. Have also been using Hornady brass for my new 6.5 PRC, in a custom rifle with a Lilja barrel that weights about 7-1/2 pounds scoped. It shoots half-inch FIVE-shot groups with either Hornady factory ammo, or several handloads using OTB Hornady brass.
"Simple fact is that when first launched the Creedmoor was heavily marketed by Hornady, just like they did the 204 Ruger before it, and most recently with the 6.5 PRC (full page adverts in the magazines, pushing product to the reviewers in print and online). Nothing wrong with that, but you must admit that Hornady do have a habit of strong marketing campaigns, sometimes for pretty mediocre product."
Yeah, Hornady promoted the 6.5 Creedmoor during its first three years, just like any company does. But I had learned long ago to wait a little before trying any new round, to see if it lasted. Which is why I waited until 2010 before buying one, along with ammo. Bought it because the trusted guys at the local gun store said both rifles and ammo shot great, not because of anything I read. The word-of-mouth proved to be accurate. (Oh, and I did the same thing with the .204, and found it was everything claimed by Hornady, when using their ammo in an off-
the-shelf rifle.)
"My issue is that I have an innate dislike of faddish behavior perpetrated by manufacturer marketing and industry magazines/websites which are sometimes nothing more than advertorials. I know there is an industry out there to sell products, be they rifles, ammunition, or column inches (or is that column electrons now?). I look forward to reading about it, but don't think I won't consider the outcomes with a level head and call BS when the words don't add up to reality."
Would love to hear how "faddish" applies to a cartridge that is now a world-wide standard, a dozen years after its introduction.
"My point is, and remains that there are equally effective products for those who choose to use them. Yes, they do lack ammunition options across the counter which makes them a reloader choice, but they are as effective as the Creedmoor."
Oh, gee, what an insight. I might just run out and buy rifles chambered in those other rounds, but already own just about every one you would list, and none are the first I've owned in those chamberings, often going back at least two decades. Once again,your answer was exactly what I expected.
