Re: .260 rem vs 6.5 x 47 Lapua what do you have?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: vkc</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It was mentioned that all 3 are the same ballistics wise, which is not completely correct in my opinion. 6.5x47 does not have enough case capacity to push the 140grs as fast as the 6.5cm or 260rem.
Lapua brass seems to be the holy grail of reloading, but after comparing the difference in accuracy, I'm not sure if it is really worth the extra cost. Under 1/2 MOA vs. maybe a fraction more under 1/2 MOA. Don't know how many shooters out there that must have Lapua brass, can actually shot and range etc. accurately under stress to benefit from the difference. Either way more than enough to hit a chest sized plate pass 1000 yards.
Give me a better barrel and chamber, good bullets and concentricity. I'll use the cheaper Hornady (6.5cm) or Federal brass (260rem) to shoot under 1/2 MOA, and I won't worry about losing a few fired cases. Plus, I'll have more case capacity and be able to push the 140grs high BC bullets faster. </div></div>
Lapua(and Norma)from brass differentiate themselves from the cheaper brands due to consistency, service life and they don't need any prep or uniforming; there ready to go out of the box. Remington, Winchester and others may not be as consistent from batch to batch and you'll need to uniform the primer pockets, chamfer, deburred, and in some cases resize, just to get to Lapua factory tolerances. So, for most, it's not the accuracy but the consistency that make them the holy grail.