I'm really getting the itch for adding one of these chamberings to the stable. Mainly just for shooting steel or paper at longer distances but would like for it to do double duty if I'd get the chance to hunt it out west someday too. I need to fill the gap between the 22-250 and 30-06. Any suggestions?
Yes .
Yes
See the same thread/question in the Long Range Hunting sub forum
Seems to be the question of the month lately
Mike
See the same thread/question in the Long Range Hunting sub forum
Seems to be the question of the month lately
Mike
So which one?
Originally Posted by RickyBobby
So which one?
I have a soft spot for the 260Rem in a rifle twisted and chambered correctly.
Depends on distance used. Game shot.
Do want want to build or buy. Desired bore life
All work.
Do want want to build or buy. Desired bore life
All work.
I'd go with the 260. 25-06 would work too
Must depends on what you want.
If you don't want to have to do any resizing, or brass hunting, buy the 260.
If you want an efficient case design, buy the Creed.
If you want to claim to be the king of all speed, buy the Win mag.
From living with the 264, it seems that it shares the same propensity for random pressure excursions as the 7mm mag has.
If you don't want to have to do any resizing, or brass hunting, buy the 260.
If you want an efficient case design, buy the Creed.
If you want to claim to be the king of all speed, buy the Win mag.
From living with the 264, it seems that it shares the same propensity for random pressure excursions as the 7mm mag has.
To answer your original question, of the choices you mention, I would go with the 6.5 Creedmoor. I have had a .260 and loved it, but for a 2.8" magazine box, the Creedmoor is simply a better mouse trap. I currently have a 6.5x47 Lapua in the works which I think may be a better solution yet. It may be the perfect case for a 2.8" magazine box.
That being said, a little recent research showed me that in terms of ballistic performance, the 6mms are going to be a better deal. While the BCs are not quite as good as the 6.5 projectiles, apparently the attainable velocity more than makes up for the slight difference in BC. Big Stick pointed out something to me that I had never considered. 6mm projectiles are substantially cheaper than similar 6.5 projectiles. While you might give up a little barrel life with a 6mm, the cost saved in bullets would likely cover the cost of a new tube. My next barrel will likely be a 6x47 Lapua. Have a look here:
http://precisionrifleblog.com/2014/10/14/rifle-calibers-what-the-pros-use/
John
That being said, a little recent research showed me that in terms of ballistic performance, the 6mms are going to be a better deal. While the BCs are not quite as good as the 6.5 projectiles, apparently the attainable velocity more than makes up for the slight difference in BC. Big Stick pointed out something to me that I had never considered. 6mm projectiles are substantially cheaper than similar 6.5 projectiles. While you might give up a little barrel life with a 6mm, the cost saved in bullets would likely cover the cost of a new tube. My next barrel will likely be a 6x47 Lapua. Have a look here:
http:/
John
Originally Posted by RickyBobby
So which one?
For longevity sake I'd opt for whichever one of the smaller rounds you can find brass to load for!
The 6.5-08 a.k.a. .260 was the darling of the Highpower crowd when I used to shoot and the Creedmoor was designed around the best bullets needed to stretch it out.
Component shortage would dictate for me. If I could find what I wanted I'd go Creedmoor.
Mike
RickyBobby
If you want to go on a western hunting trip, the money you'll spend on a decent long range rig would go a long way towards financing the hunting trip- Where your 30/06 would work fine for everything up to the smaller varieties of whales.
If you want to go on a western hunting trip, the money you'll spend on a decent long range rig would go a long way towards financing the hunting trip- Where your 30/06 would work fine for everything up to the smaller varieties of whales.
Originally Posted by Royce
Where your 30/06 would work fine for everything up to the smaller varieties of whales.
That's sig-line material. Most excellent!
For shooting targets, I would avoid the 264 win (no real need under 1000 yards) and try either the 260 or 6.5x47. Lapua brass is available for both. Although, I am not sure you would see much difference between the creed, 260 and 6.5x47.
John, after the 47, the next step up...in bore life and pleasant firing is the 6.5 BR...
Your comment on 6 vs 6.5 is spot on. IF bore life were same same I would use a 6 for 98% of my shooting. You can run #s of bore life costs vs bullet costs.
I too will likely build a 6x47 if not XC - for their niceties - and realize barrel expense might trump bullet savings, though it does help mitigate it
Then we circle right back to what makes a 243 factory rifle so appealing. Save a custom barrel and burn it out. Sell and repeat, or re-barrel. Twist aside as 95% of shooters can do fine with a standard 10t 243 using 95 Bergers and Ballistic tips. But like you - I like the 47 and XC case design n benefits given a choice.
In the end it's all fun and what your wallet can handle. Many shooters have a few unused rifles and scopes they could re-invest sale proceeds for a better mousetrap
Your comment on 6 vs 6.5 is spot on. IF bore life were same same I would use a 6 for 98% of my shooting. You can run #s of bore life costs vs bullet costs.
I too will likely build a 6x47 if not XC - for their niceties - and realize barrel expense might trump bullet savings, though it does help mitigate it
Then we circle right back to what makes a 243 factory rifle so appealing. Save a custom barrel and burn it out. Sell and repeat, or re-barrel. Twist aside as 95% of shooters can do fine with a standard 10t 243 using 95 Bergers and Ballistic tips. But like you - I like the 47 and XC case design n benefits given a choice.
In the end it's all fun and what your wallet can handle. Many shooters have a few unused rifles and scopes they could re-invest sale proceeds for a better mousetrap
Disappointed in the answers so far.....the real answer is ALL 3!
Good grief,the rifle loony-ism here is sadly on the decline.
Good grief,the rifle loony-ism here is sadly on the decline.
6.5 Creedmoor all day long
6.5 Creedmoor all day long
Originally Posted by RickyBobby
So which one?
264 because you can!!!!!!
I have both 260 Remington and 6.5 Creedmoor…there is no disconcernable difference between them.
Originally Posted by herschel34
6.5 Creedmoor all day long
Originally Posted by herschel34
6.5 Creedmoor all day long
And twice on Saturday?
I'd go with the 6.5 Creedmore.
The reason I'd go with it is that it'll have more "parallel" of the bullet bearing surface outside of the case mouth than the .260 Rem will when both are shot from a typical ".308 Win Dimension" short action rifle.
I think that in concert with the way the things are throated is one of the contributors to the precision the round is capable of. The basic idea is preventing yaw of the bullet before rifling engagement.
I'd rather have a short action than a long one, but if I had some only long action Model 700 laying around and in need of a barrel swap, I'd probably go .260 Remington in it, but set it up to accommodate a longer than S.A.M.M.I spec O.A.L.
The next step up from there would be .256 Newton / 6.5mm-06 but that would be an unlikely one.
The .264 Win Mag doesn't trip my personal trigger. The belted case is an anachronism, I would expect longer useful barrel life from the milder and more efficient offerings, and penultimate flatness of trajectory doesn't matter much to me personally in the grand scheme of things because in target shooting, the distance to my target is known and in the field, I'm not comfortable shooting game at distances beyond 300 yards regardless of what I'm armed with.
The reason I'd go with it is that it'll have more "parallel" of the bullet bearing surface outside of the case mouth than the .260 Rem will when both are shot from a typical ".308 Win Dimension" short action rifle.
I think that in concert with the way the things are throated is one of the contributors to the precision the round is capable of. The basic idea is preventing yaw of the bullet before rifling engagement.
I'd rather have a short action than a long one, but if I had some only long action Model 700 laying around and in need of a barrel swap, I'd probably go .260 Remington in it, but set it up to accommodate a longer than S.A.M.M.I spec O.A.L.
The next step up from there would be .256 Newton / 6.5mm-06 but that would be an unlikely one.
The .264 Win Mag doesn't trip my personal trigger. The belted case is an anachronism, I would expect longer useful barrel life from the milder and more efficient offerings, and penultimate flatness of trajectory doesn't matter much to me personally in the grand scheme of things because in target shooting, the distance to my target is known and in the field, I'm not comfortable shooting game at distances beyond 300 yards regardless of what I'm armed with.
264WM is the one. 160gr PPSN at 3261fps can't be all that bad. If you are wanting a AR10 style rifle then either of the others would work. If you want something special here is a alternative.
http://onlylongrange.com/bn36-carbine-assassin/
http://onlylongrange.com/bn36-long-range-assassin/
http:/
http:/
Originally Posted by TeleCaster
I'd rather have a short action than a long one, but if I had some only long action Model 700 laying around and in need of a barrel swap, I'd probably go .260 Remington in it, but set it up to accommodate a longer than S.A.M.M.I spec O.A.L.
The next step up from there would be .256 Newton / 6.5mm-06 but that would be an unlikely one.
The next step up from there would be .256 Newton / 6.5mm-06 but that would be an unlikely one.
On the .260 Rem vs Creedmore question, one way to solve the conundrum is to just get a .260 with a 3" mag box.
Just curious as to your comment on the 6.5-06, why is that unlikely? Seems to me to be the best of both worlds, easy to load for, and cheap brass too.
You can hardly walk into a good sized gun store back here without tripping over lots of 6.5 Creed brass and factory ammo. I see dies for it everywhere.
The other two not so much,although i am sure it's out there but not too much around here. These stores sure don't stock what's not moving. The cartridge seems to be getting a lot of traction.
The other two not so much,although i am sure it's out there but not too much around here. These stores sure don't stock what's not moving. The cartridge seems to be getting a lot of traction.
Any 270 supplies?
Originally Posted by 65BR
Any 270 supplies?
Yup.
Originally Posted by elkhunternm
Disappointed in the answers so far.....the real answer is ALL 3!
Good grief,the rifle loony-ism here is sadly on the decline.
Good grief,the rifle loony-ism here is sadly on the decline.
We all know that once he makes his choice between these 3, and gets the rifle like he wants it, he will be making another choice for the next...
Originally Posted by BobinNH
Originally Posted by 65BR
Any 270 supplies?
Yup.
How simple, convenient, and economical.
But what FUN is that?!? Lol.
260 is probably the easiest to care for. Does everything well.
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by TeleCaster
I'd rather have a short action than a long one, but if I had some only long action Model 700 laying around and in need of a barrel swap, I'd probably go .260 Remington in it, but set it up to accommodate a longer than S.A.M.M.I spec O.A.L.
The next step up from there would be .256 Newton / 6.5mm-06 but that would be an unlikely one.
The next step up from there would be .256 Newton / 6.5mm-06 but that would be an unlikely one.
On the .260 Rem vs Creedmore question, one way to solve the conundrum is to just get a .260 with a 3" mag box.
Just curious as to your comment on the 6.5-06, why is that unlikely? Seems to me to be the best of both worlds, easy to load for, and cheap brass too.
I failed to articulate clearly. What I intended to write was that thhe 6.5 mm -'06 would be an unlikely choice for me -one that I wouldn't be inclined to make. The closest I'd get is if I stumbled on to a well sorted, high condition "first model" Newton rifle in .256 Newton at a dirt-cheap price, or one of the No.1's chambered to it that are rumored to be out there. Otherwise, a 6.5mm-'06, like all the other necked-down '06 rounds out there, isn't going to do anything for me that my boring old .30-'06 No.1B isn't already doing with complete satisfaction.
Originally Posted by Royce
RickyBobby
If you want to go on a western hunting trip, the money you'll spend on a decent long range rig would go a long way towards financing the hunting trip- Where your 30/06 would work fine for everything up to the smaller varieties of whales.
If you want to go on a western hunting trip, the money you'll spend on a decent long range rig would go a long way towards financing the hunting trip- Where your 30/06 would work fine for everything up to the smaller varieties of whales.
I really like the way you think!
Ricky
With a little research, and pairing up with a buddy or three to share driving/lodging expenses, you could have an excellent do-it-yourself hunt for deer and elk. There are left over big game licenses every year so drawing isn't a problem.
With a little research, and pairing up with a buddy or three to share driving/lodging expenses, you could have an excellent do-it-yourself hunt for deer and elk. There are left over big game licenses every year so drawing isn't a problem.
Ruger made some Number 1s and 77s in 256 Newton for one of WBR's friend, maybe Robert Chatfield-Taylor.
Originally Posted by 260Remguy
Ruger made some Number 1s and 77s in 256 Newton for one of WBR's friend, maybe Robert Chatfield-Taylor.
They did indeed....I saw the M77's. Or some of them anyway. Don't recall seeing any #1's.
When did belted cases become anachronisms? Somebody better tell Weatherby and the major manufacturers about this.
Originally Posted by BobinNH
Originally Posted by 260Remguy
Ruger made some Number 1s and 77s in 256 Newton for one of WBR's friend, maybe Robert Chatfield-Taylor.
They did indeed....I saw the M77's. Or some of them anyway. Don't recall seeing any #1's.
When did belted cases become anachronisms? Somebody better tell Weatherby and the major manufacturers about this.
No need to tell the "majors" as they already got the message -hence things like the .300 Remington Ultra Mag and other modern magnums that don't use a belted case.....
That belted case isn't the best idea for maximum case life. That would be my primary objection to it on a 6.5 mm rifle that I would buy with intention of running a high round count through.
It doesn't bother me at all on my .375 Holland and Holland, though
.Rimmed cases don't bother me, either, as my ongoing enjoyment of the lowly, old-school .30-30 testifies to.
If anachronism really bothered me, the centerifre rifles in my gun room now would be chambered to something other than the .250 Savage, .257 Roberts, .30-30, .30'06, .303 British, and .375 Holland and Holland that they're chambered to, I wouldn't still harbor the lifelong affection for the Marlin 336 and Ruger No.1 that I do, and I'd get with the program and ditch my old Lyman Great Plains Rifle and the patched .495" round balls it shoots for a 209 primed inline muzzle loader firing sabot bullets.
I reckon I actually like anachronism.
That being the case, maybe the 6.5mm rifle that I'll probably never buy should be a 6.5 x 55 Swede Mauser or 6.5mm Mannlicher-Schonauer..
TeleCaster I get it. I don't look at the 264WM as a cartridge for high round count. Better things for target shooting like a 6.5Creedmoor,260, or 6.5x55.But the 264 is a wonderful hunting cartridge.
So no I don't view all cartridges through the lens of a target shooter or hand loader.
But I do like to poke a little fun(all good natured) at folks who think some new invention from the factories is truly "new" and "cutting edge",when in fact most of them have lineage that can be traced back to the first half of the last century,but are hawked as the latest and greatest with a few minor tweaks,better powders,and modern bullets.
Even the cutting edge 6.5 Creed evolved based on reshaping the 250 Savage case;and people were necking down and blowing out 404 Jeffrey cases to 30 caliber a long time before the 300 RUM saw the light of day. Short magnums go back to the 1950's, when some smith blew out 348 Winchester cases,cut an extractor groove in them,and necked them to various calibers.At least a couple of boutique 7mm Magnums today are nothing more than derivatives of a case design dating back to 1912 or thereabouts.....talk about anachronisms! LOL!
Belts served a useful purpose for some of our most useful and effective BG cartridges, likely invented without giving a thought to target shooters and hand loaders.Who cares about them? If the companies depended on the hand loaders to stay afloat, they couldn't remain viable.
So I chuckle when savants comment on the latest stuff,declaring it so good that other stuff be relegated to the scrap heap. In a sense most everything you can fit in the magazine of a bolt action rifle out there today is an "anachronism", in a sense.
So no I don't view all cartridges through the lens of a target shooter or hand loader.
But I do like to poke a little fun(all good natured) at folks who think some new invention from the factories is truly "new" and "cutting edge",when in fact most of them have lineage that can be traced back to the first half of the last century,but are hawked as the latest and greatest with a few minor tweaks,better powders,and modern bullets.
Even the cutting edge 6.5 Creed evolved based on reshaping the 250 Savage case;and people were necking down and blowing out 404 Jeffrey cases to 30 caliber a long time before the 300 RUM saw the light of day. Short magnums go back to the 1950's, when some smith blew out 348 Winchester cases,cut an extractor groove in them,and necked them to various calibers.At least a couple of boutique 7mm Magnums today are nothing more than derivatives of a case design dating back to 1912 or thereabouts.....talk about anachronisms! LOL!
Belts served a useful purpose for some of our most useful and effective BG cartridges, likely invented without giving a thought to target shooters and hand loaders.Who cares about them? If the companies depended on the hand loaders to stay afloat, they couldn't remain viable.
So I chuckle when savants comment on the latest stuff,declaring it so good that other stuff be relegated to the scrap heap. In a sense most everything you can fit in the magazine of a bolt action rifle out there today is an "anachronism", in a sense.
Originally Posted by RickyBobby
I'm really getting the itch for adding one of these chamberings to the stable. Mainly just for shooting steel or paper at longer distances but would like for it to do double duty if I'd get the chance to hunt it out west someday too. I need to fill the gap between the 22-250 and 30-06. Any suggestions?
If you want to exceed the 30-06 then the .264 Mag is your daisy..
Still remember the old winchester ads for the 264..wouldn't even think of anything else .
Originally Posted by herschel34
6.5 Creedmoor all day long
I love it, I have 3 260 Remington's and only one 6.5 creedmoor.
Id go 260 all day long and have. It's not like the 308 case is ineffecient. You can drive a 260 faster than the creedmoor. The only real argument for the creedmoor doesnt apply to me because I wont be loading mile long overweight bullets in the 260.