I see that quite a few manuf. chamber rifles for it in their target/varmint lines.
It has always struck me as a real good hunting round I would snap one up in a minute if someone would chamber it in a decent hunting rifle.
Brass and components are readily available. i'm sure someone could be talked into loading ammo for it.(Hornady?)
Awesome balance of ballistics, performance and accuracy in a compact package!
So whats not to like?

It gets a lot of respect--from real rifle loonies.

It has been around for a while both as a wildcat and a factory round, but the average hunter/shooter doesn't see the "signficant" ballistic advantages the rifle loony sees over, say, a .270.

Plus, even the rifle loonies have never been able to decide whether it works best in a short (2.8") or long (3.4") magazine. In fact there is even a distinction between the two rounds. The short one is called the 6.5/.284 Winchester, the long one the 6.5/.284 Norma.

Plus, 6.5mm rounds have never sold very well in North America. Simple fact of life.

The folks who really want the 6.5x284 expect phenomenal accuracy. They aren't going to get that with the factory rifles out there. As a hunting round, it really has nothing on the .270 like John said (I can't believe I just admitted that!)

the reason why is basically the same as what mule deer said, as a hunting round its not all that impressive at normal big game ranges say 300 yards and closer, the high bc bullets really start to shine beyond 500 yards, most guys who shoot at those kinds or ranges are rifle loonies

Cooper has been building rifles chambered for it for some time, Nosler and Norma offer ammo and components.

That said the other posters are right. I`ve one and don`t see much from it I can`t do with a 260 or 6.5x55 at hunting ranges. I get ~ 150 mfps more from it then the others in same lenght barrels.
The cartridge also is known as a barrel burner like it`s bigger sib the 264 Win Mag, which is likely a strike against it for most. When the ranges get longer, it shines nicely though.....

Looney here,



Average is boring!




We can also say the 270 really has nothing on the 6.5x284 Winchester, the shorter version, in the shorter action.

What takes a 270 win with 61 grains I can do with 58 grains and 22" of barrel in the 6.5x284.
Not that were picking a looney nit here.

They're both dead even out to 500 yards even though the 270 starts out 100 fps faster.

Past 500 the 6.5 rules.

The 6.5x284 will also match anything the 280 AI can put together as well and I don't see the 7 WSM as having any real hunting advantage on it, at 500 there is only 3" of difference between the two rounds.

My 700 Ti 6.5x284 weighs in at 5 lbs dry and 6 lbs with scope and rings.

If you want a short action, shorter barreled light mountain rifle that will match 270 and 280 AI ballistics the 6.5x284 will do it.

If you're just an average hunter the 6.5x284 is not for you. It probably outstrips your skill level.



As far as being a barrel burner, if you're an F class shooter sending 1,200 rounds down range in a season that might be a concern. Hunting it's not.

Its is perfect ballistic cast off.

Stuck between the grand 270 and the "hot" 25-06.

Not to mention the 7-08 for short actions.

Besides, its a 6.5.

They don't sell here.

BMT

Well said Su35 and others. Just depends on what you want or can do? cheers NC

Dennis nailed it as usual....I looked through the new Winchester 2009 catalog at the calibers offered and saw no 6.5-284 is offered.Matter of fact there are NO 6.5s at all..I think.

The cartridge COULD get a big boost if more reasonably priced rifles were available, but you don't see them..Like Dennis says, users of the cartridge guys like SU35 want extreme accuracy,and custom this or that,so factory guns won't cut it,and out to 500 yards,average stiffs like me are doing fine with a 270 and enough scope......

OTOH, I want one because I am tired of my target shooting buddies tell me how ridiculously accurate it is at 600-1000.I figure it can't hurt to have that much precision at your disposal...

+1! As JO'C said, "Hunting and shooting is all about fun & games." Can't see the fun in a 'me-too' cartridge like the 270Win, - even though I'm ashamed to confess I own a few and use them regularly - no matter how practical. A 6.5-284, even if only ballistically equivalent to the old 270Win, is the ultimate expression of dyed-in-the-wool rifle loony individuality - what's not to like about that?

or just "bad" at range estimation in the field.

"Ah took this here mooley at 600, Ah reckon..."

Hey, I am not smirking, just got something in my eye.

... and the guide always agrees - " ... at least 600, yes sir!!"

Thats right, Sir. Here he came down the shoot, bumbiddy bumbiddy bum... We could see he was a dandy. 600, at least.

What is the 6.5x284's role? For long range shooting (targets) it is great, but few responsible hunters take shots (or have any business taking shots) of 400+ yards. For under 400 yards, there are other cartridges (270, 7mm, 30 cal.) that do the job very well.

From a manufacturer's point-of-view, there is no need to just add another chambering that needs to be inventoried (costly).

djs: Maybe so,but look how many there are already that do the same things! There is so much ballistic overlap that it would not hurt a thing to offer a 6.5 284 in a factory format,like,say a M70 Coyote Light,for guys that want one.It might not shoot like a Bartlein barreled custom, but I bet it would do OK,and would give the cartridge a well deserved boost.

I know I'd be tempted to get one and play with it because even though I have absolutely no problem with "common",the cartridge is so well-proven in long range precision that it would be interesting to play with...besides I find it infinately more interesting than that paragon of boredom,the cold bucket of water in any ballistic conversation,that "get me outta here before I start snoring" ,the melatonin of the rifled tube...........................the 308

My mistake exactly, a new .308 in a Ruger International, which I will probably sell after messing with it for 6 months....and get what I wanted in the first place..

Bob now I have mentioned the .308 you need to get off of here and get some sleep...

6.5x284 is the cartridge to beat at 1K yards for a target shooter, at least in prone competition. It's a barrel burning SOB that has nothing on any decent hunting cartridge at 500 yards and under.
The brass is expensive and my barrels were replaced in less than 1000 rounds and usually at 800. When and if I ever get to competing again, I'll go with the 30 cal.

If the 284win case had been designed as having a 2.0" length, it would have been huge.

Yeah, as huge as 2 inches will ever get.

I cannot help but commenting on some of the comments. Yes, the 6.5/.284 is the darling of real rifle loonies, the kind of shooters who simply cannot stand using a boring old .270, so use something "different."

However, so many of my friends and acquaintances have a 6.5/.284 that it has become the boring old .270 of the not-sot-secret Society of Rifle Loonies. It just might be time to come up with something different from the boring old 6.5/.284....

The only purpose of the 6.5x284 was to shoot very long high-BC match bullets of the type used for minimizing wind deflection at 600 and 1000 yards.

No comparable match bullets were made in .257, .277, or .284. They were and are made in .308 but to get the same wind deflection abilities as a 142 grain 6.5 bullet you would need a 230 grain .308 bullet of the same shape and velocity. That's a major PITA for recoil and other reasons, which is why most .308 match bullets are 155 to 200 grains, which aren't as good and still recoil a lot.

A 6.5-06 would work as well in this regard as a 6.5-284. The latter, though, follows the "short fat" philosophy which gives a a slight accuracy advantage. This is why the 6.5-284 is popular for 1000-yard target shooting. Bear in mind that for 1000 yard target shooting, you don't care about foot pounds of energy, the target never moves, you always know the range exactly (it's the same as the last time you shot), and you get two sighter shots.

None of this has anything to do with hunting and there are many good hunting bullets in .257, .270, .284, .308, etc. That's why the 6.5-284 offers little if any difference for hunting.

"This is why the 6.5-284 is popular for 1000-yard target shooting. Bear in mind that for 1000 yard target shooting, you don't care about foot pounds of energy, the target never moves, you always know the range exactly (it's the same as the last time you shot), and you get two sighter shots."


Yep.

From what I'm told it's a barrel burner.

As good as it is, it's tough road without a Name championing it and marketing $ backing it. There are plenty of better than good cartridges that haven't caught on with the general shooting public.

Well it was from my perspective.

Well excuse me sir's, in regards to factory accuracy.
I'll say it, the 6.5x284 I believe is a far more accurate design than the 270.

It overrides factory. Factory guns do cut it.

I shoot a factory barreled action using a Mcmillan stock.
Nothing done to the action.

This from a mountain barrel. Repeatable time and again.

[img][IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v705/su35/IMG_3827.jpg[/img][/img]



I'll bet Melvin Forbes builds far more 284 case rifles than 270's. and for good reason.

Some factory other than savage chamber a 6.5x284?

I punched out a 260.

That's a factory barrel with a custom chamber.

Its had to call that "factory".

Not "calling you out" by any means, just pointing out that a 6.4-284 chamber reamer is most likely a "match" reamer and you probably have a custom, match grade chamber for that rifle.

Chamber's matter.

BMT

A number of years ago I watched a nice 6 inch 10 shot group form right over my head at the Pa 1000 yard BR club.Fired by the teenage Hoover girl.Women make great natural shooters.5 of those shots would have set a new record.When you see that type of accuracy in action it tends to want to make you take a second look.At least I do.At some point in time a 6.5-284 will be on my build list.
For some reason top flight proven BR rounds just dont seem to be that popular.Must be a loonie type of thing.
dave

A 6.5/06 (perhaps improved) would be more in line with a hunter's eye and would get the speed of the 270 and high b.c./s.d. of the 6.5 bullets.

I recall Wayne Van Zwoll building a custom hunting rifle in 6BR. It shot well, but far from the .1's so common of a target gun.

It gets a little hairy translating the advantages of a target cartridge in the hands of a knock-kneed tyro out in the field (me).

The field needs more precise shooters, not slight precision in bullets and cartridges IMO. Hence, the 6.5-284 is no better than ones we already have, even off a bipod.

Here we go again with the "barrel burner" BS...the 220 Swift was a "barrel burner"...TOTAL BS...I've had Swifts with 3000 rounds through them and still getting <1/2" accuracty...the 264 is a "barrel burner"...TOTAL BS...I know people with 264 with 2500 rounds through them and still getting <3/4" accuracy. The 17 Rem is a "Barrel Burner of the first Water"...well maybe...I only get about 2000 rounds before needing a new tube, but that's because I load it to the gills, then vibrate the powder down and add some more. DO THE SAME with ANY bore size and you will get throat and barrel erosion and the more powder you burn the more "burning" you get.

ANY RIFLE OR CALIBER that shoots loads over about 42 KPSI produces throat temps that will "Burn" steel.

The "Barrel Burner" BS is just someone wanting to jaw flap and stick their face on some forum. When will it ever end.

Oh yeah...my 6mm-284's and 22-243's "burn barrels" also...what the HE** do you expect from varminter's jacked as high as they will go...I can also burn out a 30 cal barrel in less than a season of shooting rats at long range if I don't keep it cool and use good shooting and reloading techniques.

One of the reasons why the makers don't chamber for the 6.5 x 284 or the 260 is the hunting public won't support it...the same with the 8mm's...They even had to change the name from 8mm to 325 to get them to sell at all...the same with how many other excellent calibers that have come and gone...I mean even a greedy bunch of corporate execs will learn after a while where the money comes from and what sells...

None of the stores in my area has had a 260 W since they first came out and the one store that had two sold only one. After two years sent it back to the main store who swapped it for another caliber a year later when they couldn't get rid of it. I've never seen or heard of a 6.5x284 around here in 12 years of watching, and many of the "sports clerks" don't know what you are talking about when you ask for a 6.5 Norma.

Besides what the HE** is the matter with the Savage offering...out of the box a 1000 yarder at a $1000 bucks or so. And what's with the "factory only" BS...if you want one they are easy to build...F*** the factory's.

There's way too much whiskey fumes swirling around some of the gaseous vapors arising from these forums, I think.

The 140 gr 6.5 cal bullet just happens to hit the magic numbers as far as BC, SD, bullet weight, case capacity, long range stricking energy and velocity is concerned. It makes it an excellent caliber for long range target OR hunting, but so does the 300 gr, 338 cal bullet and so does many other calibers and bullets...you just have to do your own thinking and not let the BS hype blind you to the many other facts.

The 6.5x284 gets all the love it needs from those who know a thing or two...the rest don't have a clue anyway and don't deserve to have one.

Rant over.

Luck on your projects.

I have a 6.x284 I'll admit to doting over a bit. It's a serakoted stainless MRC 6.5x284 Norma barreled action in a 5 part Serengeti laminated walnut stock. I like it.





I'm glad it shoots better than I take pictures of it. It's a lot prettier than the pics show, but that might be ok since I can be the jealous type about certain things.





It works.

SU: I was not knocking the cartridge or comparing it to a 270 at all; I was just observing that most 6.5 284 rifles are going to be custom, that most of the people who want one will want custom,or be inclined to go custom,and that it may take a custom rifle to realize the full potential of the cartridge.

That's the point I was trying to make...maybe I did not articulate that very well.....

The 6.5`s are gaining more in popularity these days, especially the 6.5/284.

However the 6.5mm onto itself, has the infamous historical reputation as the caliber that killed JFK. Whether or not that event had anything to do with its lack of popularity or sales within the shooting world over the last 4+ decades, I really don`t know!

I think we`ll see more offerings in the 6.5`s. Ruger has already begun offering the 6.5mm Creedmore for this year.

NFG,
Come on dude.Tell us how you really feel.
I could take a run of the mill varmint hunter,first year handloader. Set him up with a 6mmPPC no turn neck in a rig you could carry, and he'd be outshooting 99% of the people that go to his local rifle range.By outshooting I mean shooting tighter groups and killing more vermin out to 400 yards with the PPC.No special reloading required.In fact i've done just that.
I guess its just not sexy enough to put stuff like that in the gun rags.
Im thinking the 6.5-284 suffers from the same lack of sexeyness.

dave

Since this was the cal that took out a Kennedy , this should have made it sell better.

I knew I should have copywrighted the Kennedy thing

dave7mm... I know how you feel. Being in the pits and watching groups form up from 6.5-08s had a lot to do with me building one.



Now I wonder??? What if we took a WSM, and necked it to 6.5... And called it the 6.5 Kennedy Express. Maybe then we'd sell some 6.5's. I'm probably going to hell for that one

The 6.5-284, like a thousand other wildcats out there, was around long before the recent long range target crowd picked up on it. Yet, it only became popular recently and only because it is so effective for long range target work.

The PPC's whether 22 or 6mm never saw a big commercial market, yet they were/are the two most accurate cartridges known. same can be said for many, many other "target rounds. The 6.5-284 is an excellent cartridge but doesn't "fit" into the commercial market just as the 6mm Benchrest, 6 x 47, PPC's,7mm BR....

..........Yep! For Teddy anyway......At the very least, if JFK were alive today, he`d not only be a Repubican, he would also be literally appalled at todays disgusting far left whacko Democratic party.

No offense but that is total BS reasoning.

First of all its was just a run of the mill average reamer that punched it out and second "the barrel" was just as accurate and shot just as well/good when it was a 260 Rem. The groups were the same no difference except in speed.

There is nothing custom about this rifle except for the stock.

Your out on thin ice man.

No problem Bob.

I had a 25-284. I'm a recoil wuzzy, it puts my neck out and the rest of the day is shot, instead of spent shooting. I had hoped the 25-284 would be a pussy-cat. It wasn't, I went to a 250 Savage. I believe it deserves a whole family of cartridges, something like it could do everything 308 and 30-06 cartridges do, ie, the best of both. Just leave a few baby kickers around me.

I considered the 6.5x284 for my most recent barrel build..but went right back to the 260 Ack Improved....10 grs less powder...much cheaper 308 brass...2925 fps w/142 SMKs....I love to take sod poodles off their mounds @ 1K yds....guess I'm a looney....

NFG,
What exactly is your experience with the BARREL BURNING 6.5 x 284.

Any experience on the line at Camp Perry, any time at the Regional matches? Ever shot F class anywhere? Ever own a rifle chambered in 6.5? I Know what I'm talking about when it comes to the cartridge and what it does to barrels.In the course of fire that is shot at the long range comps I attended, you typically had 30 minutes to shoot all the sighters you wanted, and 20 shots for record.

I competed with a 6.5x284 for 5 years in long range prone NRA type matches, with thousands of rounds down the range year to year. Kriegers,Harts, Shilens, all die a hell of a lot quicker in 6.5 than in the comparable 300 win mag.IIRC the USAMU changes their barrels out on the 6.5 @ 1000 rounds, and when they shot them, changed their barrels on the 300 win mag at the 2000 mark.

Friends of mine that travel to the F class world championships and place well, tell me the same thing about their barrel life's competitive abilities.

To me dead or burned out means you can't hit the 10 ring on call any more at 600 yards, much less 1000. Not hitting what your shooting at doesn't work for me.

By the way, I've seen 1/2" guns at 100 yards shoot like S**t at 300-600 yards.
Have a good day.

Excellent! The right tool for the right job.

Next long range heavy build will be this same round.

I have a 5lb 25-284 that my 12 year old shoots...alot.. It don't kick. You must be a recoil wussy if a 25-284 is hurting you!

I have been shooting my 6.5-'06 for 25 years, and I killed my first deer with a M94 Swede 6.5X55 in 19(mumble). I think the Swede introduced me to the short, handy rifles for hunting, and the Ruger Hawkeye .300 RCM I got last year reminded me again.

I have only owned a .270 Win for about 15 minutes once even though I know it is a great hunting cartridge. I think those 6.5s biased me. I didn't jump on the 6.5/.284 train because I already had a rifle that did the same things.

If Ruger doesn't introduce a 6.5 RCM Real Soon Now I will be making up a 6.5 Rem Mag carbine to go hunting in 2010 or 2011, Lord Harry willing and the creek don't rise.

jim

Just finished assembly...260 AI..s/shot Salvage large shank action w/Pac Nor 28" x 1.118" no taper tube..8 twist/3 groove...weighs just over 17# on the scale....pics & targets to follow...

What's the role of any specific cartridge? It's unlikely any of us could make a credible argument that any cartridge is perfect and therefore should displace every other in its class. The 270 Win is a 'perfect' medium game, long range (whatever that means to anyone) cartridge - but so is the 7mm Rem Mag, 7mm WSM, 270 WSM, 25-06, 6.5-284, 264 Win Mag, etc, etc, etc. In other words, each cartridge is perfect for its application in the eyes of the loony who wields it.

The role of the 6.5-284? For me it's an August afternoon in the Talkeetnas with a ram I've been watching slowly feeding closer for 3 hours, now 427 yards away and ready to disappear into a valley. It's now or never - well, he's hanging on my wall as I write this. Do I think I couldn't have made that shot with a 300WSM, 300 Win Mag or 270 Win? No, but that afternoon that role fell to the light 6.5-284 I was carrying and it whispered "present."

"If you want a short action, shorter barreled light mountain rifle that will match 270 and 280 AI ballistics the 6.5x284 will do it."



Isn't that what the .284 itself was designed to do?

I must admit that I have never understood the argument about how much superior the .264 caliber bullets are in b.c. When comparing Nosler's and Hornady's 6.5 and 7mm bullets of the same design and sectional density (120-6.5's vs 140-7mm's and 140-6.5's vs. 160-7mm's) the 7mm bullets have a higher b.c. in each case. If I wanted the least wind deflection/velocity loss I'd be shooting a 160-gr. 7mm bullet.

What am I missing?

Personaly, I shoot a .260 Rem because it has more "momentum" at 200yds than the .270 Win. That's what Remington says anyway!

True, and in a world of theoretical ballistics there may be no advantage for the 6.5s. But when inconvenient realities (e.g., recoil of heavier bullets in equally light rifles impinging on soft human shoulders lying prone for long range shots) lighter bullets with equal BCs have an advantage IMHO. This is the main reason that 6.5s have displaced larger calibers in target shooting, cumulative effects of repetitive recoil - again, advantage lighter bullets IMO.

Personally, I like the plain old standard 284 Win. Not much diff, just enough more smack IMO to make it an all around doin' it cartridge. I've only had one for one deer season, but it is a dandy.

I know a number of folks who absolutely love the 6.5x284, regardless of format: Norma or Winchester. But they all agree
it's hard on barrels, and after 2000 rds or so, they need to
take a couple inches off from both ends, rechamber and re-crown.

It's been that way with any/all 6.5 barnstormers. The only
6.5 cartridges I know of that is somewhat gentle on the barrel are the 6.5x55 Swede and some of the earlier European military rifles chambered in 6.5xwhatever (50, 54, 55, 57mm). But those cartridges aren't exactly 1,000 yd target specimens. As a friend of mine says, the only difference between the 6.5x55 and the 6.5x284 is a 100 fps or so of MV.

Frankly, not sure I'd compare the 270 Win with any 6.5 cartridge.
You rarely see a 6.5 bullet these days heavier than 140/142 grs.
The only .264 cartridge that eclipes the 270 Win with a 130-gr bullet is the 264 Win Mag, that I know of. But the cost of such
high velocity is a short barrel life. Besides, the 264/6.5mm doesn't require the velocity the 270 Win generates to be an effective hunting cartridge. They do very well with 140-gr bullets in the 2600-2700 fps MV range, normally providing deep penetration and quick kills (assuming proper bullet placement).

IF I was to use the caliber again it would most definately be the 6.5 x 08, or the same thing different name, 260 rem.

It strikes me we're talking two different games here.

The 6.5-284 is a great target round, and it is also a barrel burner. 1000-1300 rounds seems to be about it for competitive barrel life. But competitive shooting is a different game than wanging away at 450 yard clay pigeons. In a heavy barreled target rifle, it may be worth it. Whether it is any better than a 6.5X55 or 260 or a straight 284 is open to debate.

It of course can also be an accurate round in a lightweight sporter, as the groups above can show. But it's impossible to prove, empirically, that there's any superiority. I've got a MR contoured 280AI that can match those groups above, virtually on demand. I've got a 52 year old M70 270 that will hang in there as well. It's a neat cartridge, but to take a 3-shot 100 yard group in a lightweight sporter (in any cartridge) and conclude anything meaningful about the cartridges abilities is wishful thinking. You can't compare these groups with the 10 or 20 shot group out of a target rifle. That lightweight rifle could be a 250 Savage or a 270 or a 308 and the targets would be similar.

It does keep the mental gymnastics at work though, justifying why ours is better than the next guys, huh?

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=744461

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=168425

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=518468

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=518468

Above are 4 different companies that make 155-160g bullets in 6.5 caliber. BC range from .318 to .509.

Midway only lists one bullet over 150g in .277 caliber the 160g NP, BC .434.

2750 fps with 160g Woodleigh's is easy to obtain with my 6.5x284, 2950-3000 fps with 140g, 3100-3200 fps with 130.

Even if we compare published data, Nosler list the max velocity of the .270 WCF with 140g as 3018fps, the 140g in the 6.5x284 as 2925 fps.
-93 fps in favor of the .270.

With 130g bullets, the .270 is listed at 3102 fps, with 6.5x284 is 3092.
-20 fps in favor of the .270.

2758 fps is the highest velocity listed with 160g bullets in the .270, no bullet is listed with the 6.5x284 (Nosler doesnt make a 160g bullet) but 2750 is easy in my rifle.

So you say you cant compare a 6.5x284 to a .270, I beg to differ. You can send bullets of better BC/SD at similar velocities. Why shouldn't you compare?

Since .270 Winchester isnt used in competition very often, I wonder what the barrel life of a 150g Berger from a .270 pushed as hard as it can be pushed in an F-class rifle would be compared to the 6.5x284?

Let me throw this into the mix. There is a theory among some experimenters that long necks on cartridges reduce the erosion rate of the powder gases. The theory says that the brass acts as a heat sink and helps to reduce the metal heating in the throat. M. L. McPherson cites the .243 Win vs 6 mm Rem as examples of the phenomena (Rifleshooter 3/4 2006).

Assuming this is a true explanation to this pheonomena, then the older 6.5's usually have longer necks and this may explain some of their resistance to throat wear. So why not neck the 7x57 down to 6.5 x 57 AI and shoot a LOT of rounds to see about throat erosion. Anyone care to experiment?

doc,



Now that's exactly the kind of thing I'd just love to do, had I the resources. Alas, it'll be a while.

Best Regards

Nancy Thompkins Galleger used to shoot a long necked cartridge, but I forget the caliber. I'm pretty sure it was a 243 that she shot over the course. It was supposed to help stop some throat erosion.

I don't believe the long neck theory. Where the throat wears is a long distance in front of the neck, wherre the rifling starts.

I don't believe it either, said that I believe NTG used it. If it would have been the s**t, every HP competitor I know would probably have a chamber cut that way to save their good barrels and zero's.

Under competition scenario, is a 6.5x284 harder on a barrel than a .270 Winchester- all else being as similar as possible?

Truth is I don't know. I've never heard of or saw anyone on the line with a 270. I've used the cartridge hunting for years, but never thought about it as a "match" cartridge.

I've always used what worked for winners as my guide to caliber selection.

If anyone knows a long range accurate caliber, it's the HOOVERS !
With the selection in bullet weights is makes it a good choice for med sized hunting and a long range butt kicker. I have a Rem 700 LA with Hart stick barrel and love it !

Tack

Good gracious guys you all have my ole brain spinning the 6.5x284 is/was my next build the 260 AI is VERY interesting..........................let me call Karl Feldkamp .