24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 6 of 10 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,898
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,898
Jeff,

COL can be anything any handloader wants to make it, within the contraints of case length. But unless you build a custom 6.5x55 on a short action AND with a shorter throat, there's no advantage in chambering the 6.5x55 in a short action.

The SAAMI OAL length was set due to the vast majority of 6.5x55's being Swedish Mausers, the reason the SAAMI 6.5x55 throat is also quite long. The standard 6.5x55 reamsers used by every American manufacturer have this long throat.

This is also the reason that SAAMI set the OAL length for the 6.5/.284 at 3.3"--the "Norma" length. If they had chosen to go with the short throat of the "Winchester" 6.5/.284, then Norma's factory ammo wouldn't fit due to the short throat.

The reason the 6.5/.284 came into existence at all is target shooting. It allowed 140-grain bullets with very long ogives to be seated with the shank of the bullet in the neck, while the short throat of the Winchester version forced such bullets to be seated with the ogive inside the neck. Plus, the longer seating allowed about another 100 fps more velocity, but the main reason was the seating problem with long-ogive target bullets.

Hunting bullets, on the other hand, can "comfortably" be seated to the "Winchester" OAL, with any such ogive/shank problems. This is why most 6.5/.284 sportinge rifles are built on short actions, to save weight.

This whole conflict between OAL and the modern short action is why the .260 Remington and 7mm-08 came to be in the first place. Yeah, you can fit a 6.5x55 or 7x57 round into a 2.8" magazine by seating bullets deeper--but then you run into conflicts with the standard throat. So the .260 and 7-08 were developed to resolve the conflict.

I once had a Model 20 NULA chambered for the 7x57, and while the magazine prevented me from seating bullets out to the SAAMI 3.065", it worked fine and I couldn't see any practical difference in velocity. But the throat was a little too long for the finest accuracy, so I eventually had the rifle rebarreled to .257 Roberts AI. The case is exactly the same length as the 7x57, but the standard throat is shorter.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
BP-B2

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
John,

I understand that Winchester/Olin designed the 284 to fit the magazine box of Winchester 88s and 100s, so a 6.5-284 wildcat was never part of the equation. I think that a reloader's definition of "comfortably", as you have used it, would directly impact what weight/length bullets that reloader would select for his short action 6.5-284. As you know, some folks feel that any portion of the bullet that protrudes belong the level of the base of the neck is a very bad thing, while others claim that since you're not likely to fill the 284 case to 100% capacity, the protruding bullet doesn't have any impact at all on potential velocity performance. Is there a clear right or wrong on this issue, or is it "my way is better" objective "measurement"? Me personally, I don't like to seat my bullets below the base of the neck, but seldom get a case of the vapors if I do happen to select a bullet that requires a little of the base of the bullet to protrude below the neck.

But putting the 6.5-284 aside, you would agree that a 260 built on a long action wouldn't have any COAL issues that would limit the make/model of bullet used, so that the only difference between a 260 in a long action and a 6.5x55 in a long action would be the 2 grains difference in case capacity? The 6.5x55 would be a suboptimal solution in a short action, because the COAL limitations of the magazine and the longer SAAMI specs throat would directly influence the length of the bullet used and the amount of freebore, but the 260 in a long action wouldn't be a suboptimal solution if the barrel was throated for the longest bullet that builder wanted to use? Would it?

JEff

PS - The corollary of this thread is the ageless "How many spirits can dance of the head of a pin?" debate.

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,283
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,283
Depends - is it a long action pin or short action?


Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery.
Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,898
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,898
Jeff,

There are two minor reasons not to seat bullets so that the base protrudes below the neck:

1) Often a "doughnut" of brass will form right where the neck meets the shoulder. This can interfere with accuracy slightly, one reason target shooters prefer those short-bodied, relatively long-neck cases.

2) The problem I mentioned earlier, where the ogive of the bullet ends up inside the neck.

Other than that, there's no reason not to seat bullets below the neck, including the so-called "problem" with powder space. A bullet's base takes up the same amount of powder space whether it's inside a long neck or the case body.

The .284 is a perfect example. The neck is short so almost any 140-grain bullet protrudes below the neck, yet the case still holds more powder than the 7x57 because there's plenty of room AROUND the base of the bullet for powder. We could shorten the case body and lengthen the neck, but then the case would lose a lot more powder room.

As a matter of fact, bullets protruding below the case neck are far more common than not. A 200-grain Nosler Accubond, for instance, protrudes just about as far below the neck of a .300 Weatherby case as it does below the neck of a .300 WSM case.

Sure, a .260 could be built on a long action. The only problem might be feeding from the magazine, but there wouldn't be any major advantage--aside, maybe, from being able to use the super-long target 140's. without part of the ogive being inside
the neck.

It wouldn't gain much velocity, however, because velocity only increases at 1/4 the rate of powder space, and 6.5mm bullet is pretty skinny. You can add a little powder room by seating the bullet out a little, but the .260's neck is pretty short, so you can't see them out much further before the neck won't hold 'em.




“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
I don't understand your question. What is "a long action pin"?

JEff

IC B2

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,268
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,268
With 6.5 swede and the 260 loaded to the same pressure the swede has the slight edge, slight. People talk about long vs. short actions, that bolt throw means very little actually. So it comes down to picking your poison.

If I was building a target rifle though, my vote would go to the 260. That simply because I'd make my brass from something else, like '06, so I can turn the necks and fit the case.

Field rifle, toss a coin, it's all about the same.


The older I become the more I am convinced that the voice of honor in a man's heart is the voice of GOD.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,283
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 28,283
Originally Posted by 260Remguy
...PS - The corollary of this thread is the ageless "How many spirits can dance of the head of a pin?" debate.


It was a humorous reply referring to the gist of the thread.


Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery.
Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 11
C
New Member
Offline
New Member
C
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 11
Got interested in these things after the NRA rag did an article on cutting one down for the wife. Then a Swede moved into the hood. Great people, great guns! "Moose?" "Ya". Hunt with a redone 38 Oberndorf 1900, very crude German prototype looks like with a new barrel according to the brass disk. No where near as accurate as scary CZ550 but I like it better. The real Swedes are much nicer as far as true workmanship goes. Remington's 260 is nothing but a punk marketing ploy that didn't even have the decency to adopt what the Highpower guys developed on the range. I hope Lapua lets it rot! The original Mauser cartriges are unimproved upon to this today in spite of a lot of marketing savvy and gullible Americans. 7x57 is still perfection and the Swede more genteel. And if you think only 2 grains difference is immaterial you're delusional about 6.5-284 as well, but that's OK. Gee, I thought I was over it...Sorry!

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
When you have nothing to say it really doesn't matter how many words you use to say it.

JEff

Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 130
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 130
you said it very well crosshair.

Jim in Idaho, I liked your joke.

I would just like to take a moment to recap as indicated in my original statement.

Of the 2 cartridges in question the 6.5 swede does have a slight edge over the 260. It does.

The greatest argument in favor of the 260 is COAL making it a short action cartridge.

I still say the assets of the 6.5 swede cartridge is all about the cartridge its self obviously in SPITE of it not making "best use of a long action".
The assets of the 260 cartridge, which most overlap the same circle with the Swede, include the 260's ability to be a practical choice in a short action.
you must admit that part of the 260's desirability is that it is a short action cartridge.

I will say again. these cartridges are very similar or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

If a short action is important to an individual, the that is a reason to help guide ones choice in cartridges.

Mr. Sako75 Im sorry you kinda got left behind in this conversation.

if you want a short action go with the 260 remington
if you want to use factory ammo go with the 260 Remington
if you want to hand load for a short action go with the 260 remington
If you want a 260 Remington go with the 260 Remington

if you want a little more punch go with the 6.5x55


1. I now see the wisdom and merits of much older generations.
2. Technology makes things cheaper, easier, and less labor intensive, but not necessarily better.
IC B3

Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 130
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 130
Originally Posted by BossLady
The 6.5x55 will be around when the 260 has joined the 8mm remmag,
7mm and 30 SAUM and all the other silly marketing driven cartridges that have no reason to be on the "what's that "pile.

6.5x55 load data is based on the type 94 and 96 Mausers not modern guns. It holds a lot more powder in a properly throated long action, therefore is faster. The loads we shoot with Berger VLDs wouldn't even fit in a short action !

Two R.F. Sedgley Deluxe Springfield Sporters.
Top 6.55x55, bottom 22-06... a bit more class than any 260, especially since the 6.5x55 is built on a National Match action.
Each will turn 80 next year.

[Linked Image]


Gorgeous rifles. absolutely Gorgeous


1. I now see the wisdom and merits of much older generations.
2. Technology makes things cheaper, easier, and less labor intensive, but not necessarily better.
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
Gag!

Where, pray tell, are you getting "a little more punch" from the 6.5x55? The 2 grains of additional case capacity will provided about 1% more velocity potential, all other factors being equal. 1% is in the slow barrel vs. fast barrel vs. etc. neighborhood. The difference in performance potential between the 260 and 6.5x55 is more like a light touch, hardly a punch.

JEff

Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 666
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 666
I own both. The reason being I like .264 cartridges and neither is capable of doing what the other can. I have a 99 Savage in .260 and could not get a 6.5 Swede to feed no matter where you located the bullet. Then again, I am partial to 160 grain bullets, and can't load them in my .260. Its a trade off. I suppose I lean toward the 6.5x55, but mostly because I have it on a bolt action (Arisaka).

Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 433
C
Campfire Member
Offline
Campfire Member
C
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 433
I see that Savage is producing a light weight rifle in 260 which seems like a nice little Mtn. rifle in a great cartridge. That being said I do own a Tikka T3 Hunter in 6.5x55 which is very accurate and is also nice and light weight and a pleasure to hunt with. I do reload and in my opinion there probably isn't much difference between the 2 when it comes to actual performance on game.

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32,029
I had a 99F in 260, a 243 rebored to .264", and really like it, or I like it as much as I like any Savage lever gun.

What parts did you use to build your 99 in 260?

JEff

Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,579
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,579
I shoot both, and would never be without either..

I look at it as a Ginger vs Mary Anne thing..


"Minus the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the Country" Marion Barry, Mayor of Wash DC

“Owning guns is not a right. If it were a right, it would be in the Constitution.” ~Alexandria Ocasio Cortez

Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 666
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 666
.260RemGuy-----I started with a rusty .308 and it fed .260 bullets perfectly, so I put a new barrel on it. It was a total rework. The blueing was shot, the wood was shot. I shot a small 8 point with it but have not used it since. I'm always trying something new. I use factory Remington 140 grain bullets and it shoots O.K. without reloading.

Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 10
C
New Member
Offline
New Member
C
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 10
I am a new owner of a CZ 550 in 6.5X55.

I was astounded to discover how long the throat was in this rifle. With a 130 grain Hornady Interbond loaded as long as reasonably possible there was two tenths of an inch to the lands!

I have ordered a custom reamer to have the chamber brought to a match style of throat, ie very little!

So whatever you get I would verify the chamber dimensions first. The 6.5X55 by CZ was apparently cut to the old Mauser spec so you could shoot 160 grain bullets and not force them into the lands and blow yourself up.


Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,898
M
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,898
Coltdriver,

Welcome to the Campfire.

Did you shoot that CZ much before ofering the new reamer? The reason I ask is that often CZ's shoot like crazy even with the long throats they typically have in European rounds.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 733
G
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
G
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 733
Mule Deer,
That is true in my 6,5x57R and 7x65R.
Sometimes, someone writes something and people read it and tell others about and finally everybody makes an absolute truth out of it without ever taking the trouble to actually proof it true.
And this story of the long throats is one of those myths, but you obviously know better.
BBerg

Page 6 of 10 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
611 members (2003and2013, 219 Wasp, 007FJ, 160user, 10gaugeman, 17CalFan, 60 invisible), 2,501 guests, and 1,144 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,599
Posts18,398,245
Members73,815
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.160s Queries: 15 (0.004s) Memory: 0.9081 MB (Peak: 1.0664 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-28 13:06:39 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS