Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters does the 6.5x284 eat barrels because

i don't see a 6.5x284 in my future. lol

I run 130 Berger VLD's at 3150 in a 26" barrel with H-4831-SC......

jwp,

While some writers of the day mentioned the .264 might burn out barrels quicker than other rounds (especially Elmer Keith, who hated the entire concept of the cartridge) I suspect the two major reasons it didn't do all that well were:

1) The introduction of the 7mm Remington Magnum in 1962, only three years after the .264.

Back then muzzle velocity and bullet weight were the major measures of a big game round. Very few hunters shot beyond 400 actual yards (though plenty bragged about longer ranges), and muzzle velocity has far more influence on trajectory to 400 than ballistic coefficient. Very few hunters used "premium" bullets, because the Nosler Partition was the only one available and had to be handloaded, thus more bullet weight was considered necessary for big game, especially game larger than deer. The 7mm offered 150 and 175 grain factory loads, both heavier than the .264's 140 grains.

Also, various enthusiastic wildcatters (including influential gun writer Warren Page) had been fooling with 7mm magnums for years. Weatherby already offered a commercial version, but both Weatherby rifles and ammo were expensive. The new Remington 700 the 7mm Magnum appeared in had a kind of toned-down Weatherby-style stock, but both the rifle and ammo cost a lot less than Weatherby's. The Remington combination fulfilled an already existing demand, at a time where even most rifle loonies weren't clamoring for a 6.5mm magnum, since at the time 6.5mm was considered a rather weird "foreign" caliber.

2) Eventually reports appeared that the .264's factory 140-grain load often didn't reach the listed velocity of 3200 fps, even in the long-barreled Model 70 "Westerner." The number 6 Speer manual, published in 1964, published a list of factory ammo chronographed in their lab. In the 26-inch barrel of a Westerner, Remington 140-grain ammo got 3025 fps and Winchester 140's 3139 fps. In the same list, Federal, Remington and Winchester 130-grain .270 Winchester ammo all came reasonably close to the advertised velocity of 3140 fps--from a 22-inch barrel.

There also weren't any high-BC hunting bullets back then; instead there were basic flat-based, softpoint spitzers. As a result of the similar velocities, the .264 didn't shoot noticeably flatter than the .270 at typical hunting ranges. I know this partly because, years later, I owned and hunted with a .264 Westerner.

Between the established .270 Winchester and the new, popular 7mm Remington Magnum the .264 didn't have much chance. Now it might, but powders have advanced so much the 26 Nosler and 6.5-.300 beat the .264's velocities pretty easily.

what puzzles me is how the "the best designed" cartridges often don't make it... for example the 300 RSAUM with 30 degree shoulder should technically be better than the 300 WSM if the "30 degree is optimal" is a truism... yet because it runs 50 fps slower than the 300 WSM and came out a year later it is a has-been... the 6.5 Creedmoor on the other hand has that optimal 30 degree shoulder, and runs slower than the 260, but no one cares, and it is beating the pants off all other short action 6.5s...

Could be “Remington” is the reason RSAUM took a back seat to WSM. They have a track record, screwing up roll outs and marketing.

Creed has a lot more going for it than 30*. Hornady knows how to build and market a new round. They on the other end of the spectrum from Remington.

DF

25, 30, 35, 40 degrees ; Is 30 really optimum, or is that also case capacity, bore, and neck length inter-dependant ?

Yes, Remington Really Pooched the Screw on the SAUMs . sob

I hope these 300 RCM / 6.5 PRC cartridge intros don't follow the 7mm WSM and the SAUMs.
Sure looks like the nifty little 338 RCM is done.

surely the 26 degree shoulder of the 6mm Remington is optimum (evil grin)

Tests in pressure laboratories do indicate that 30-degree shoulders result in more consistent muzzle velocities than shoulder angles much smaller or larger. These have also been confirmed on targets in various ways. Probably the most popular short-range benchrest cartridge before the .222 Remington appeared was the .219 Wasp, a shortened and "improved" .219 Zipper case with a 30-degree shoulder. The .222's shoulder is 23 degrees, but it was blown out of the water by the .22/6mm PPC's--which have 30-degree shoulders, arrived at by considerable accuracy experimentation by Lou Palmisano and Ferris Pindell.

The list of "accuracy" cartridges with 30-degree shoulders is pretty extensive--.22 and 6mm BR Remington, 6XC, 6x47 and 6.5x47 Lapua, 6.5 Grendel--but the angle doesn't have to be exactly 30. The .22-250, for instance, has a 28-degree shoulder, as do the .223 and .243 WSSM's. The .25 WSSM has a 30-degree shoulder, for whatever reason, and while the SAUM rounds never did well in their original form, necking down to 6.5mm resulted in another very accurate cartridge.

6mm Rem a good round, a victim of Rem marketing prowess.

Better round than .243, but you’d never figure that out based on sales.

DF

Dogger, not to bash you...

I've been to the Hodgd site many many Xs for different cartridges.

ALL I'm going to say is Hodgdon lists of Charges AND Velocities is..... suspect ! My Oehler does NOT verify many of their stats.


Jerry

Not only do I remember that but between '86-'90 I have a friend who was considering a 264 WM and I told him that it had a rep for burning barrels.

He got a 270 WBY Mag instead...?

Jerry

I'm feeling there was a niche for the caliber and velocity that rifle and ammo companies didn't want to put money into because of the mediocre popularity of existing chamberings, and names associated with other companies as in "Remington" for example. But then a new one came along with a neutral name and is almost as fast as a .260 Ackley Improved and ammo and rifle makers didn't want to miss out. And as others have mentioned Hornady (not a rifle maker) was involved.

First off, I am a 6.5-284 slut. I have used it competitively in 1000 BR and for most of my longer range shooting for the past 20 years or so. I have used R17 almost exclusively in my last two barrels. Barrel 1 on this rifle lasted only 500ish rounds before toast. I shot 130 Norma Diamonds almost to exclusion of other bullets. 50 grains of R17 would push them 3200 fps. I shot a lot of 1 1/2-2" 500 yard groups with that bullet. Not very reliable on game I found out.

I got 800-900 rounds out of my BR rifles and I used mostly VV N160. I suspect that I could have gone over 1000 with 4831 or 4350- who knows.

R17 is VERY hard on barrels.

Just chambered up a 6x47L and I will avoid R17 in this rifle. The 6x47L lets me seat bullets however I want with a short magazine.

The 6.5-284 lets me seat bullets however I want with a long magazine. It is inherently accurate and easy to find loads for. A 6.5-06 is as fast but in my experience, a little tougher to find great loads.

the 243 is the worst barrel burner of all- even with single based powders.

30 degree shoulders seem to optimize accuracy. The 6PPC guys pretty much solved that riddle. Why mess with success?

I have a 260AI that I love. It is very accurate and easy to load for and nips on the heels of the 6.5-284 BUT you have to fire-form and it has that 40 degree shoulder.m Next one I do is with a 30 degree shoulder.

Hornady listened to the users, their customers, took notes, went to work and built a round that answered the questions, solved the issues presented.

They didn't just roll out and hype a round they thought might work.

DF

You forgot to mention the 7 & 7 factor.

Didn't read the entire post but don't forget the Swede it can come very close to the 6.5x284 with a proven long barrel life. Only downside if you want to call it that is it needs a medium or long action to really shine same as for the x.284 cartridges. And if you blow the shoulder out to 30 degrees you have the best of all things 6.5 in my opinion. I keep hankering for a big 6.5 Nosler, Weatherby etc. but what I would really gain over the Swede is mostly smoke and mirrors as far as a hunting rifle in my hands.

I have a 26 Nosler and enjoy shooting it.

When I go hunting, I'm more likely to grab my Swede, Creed or 7-08. They're handier and do what needs doing.

I think for LR shooting, the faster round helps with cross wind. Drop is less an issue now with rangefinders and ballistic scopes.

DF

I'd take something else on a prairie dog shoot - just sayin'

Which is precisely why I am going to try the 6.5-.280 AI, in an attempt to stave off throat erosion for as long as I can.

Ed

I own a bat action ,bunx barrel 6.5x284 for competition and it is very accurate,i also own a 6.5x284 hunting rifle and this rifle which is a savage weather warrior this rifle is also very accurate. I don`t think most people will ever wear out a hunting rifle barrel used mostly for hunting. yes the 6.5x284 is a great cartridge to hunt with ,but here is the down side of a 6.5x284> ammo may be hard to find,so you better learn to handload. if you do not want to handload your own ammo stick with a normal cartridge 308 win.,30-06 ,243 win,270 win., 7 mag rem,300 win mag,there maybe a couple other ones too, but buy what I call grocery store ammo the ones I mention are easier to find when needed.there is nothing worst than when you go on a hunt ,you forget your ammo and when you get to the area you wanted to hunt and you can`t find any ammo because you have a not to common of caliber. Pete53

I guess 'bunx' is still making barrels!





Jerry