Range Report 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

[Nocalphoenix]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

I dont think anyones selection process is f'd up, just slightly differnt needs.

So to summarize:
Hornady brass might be softer but is cheaper which matters in a tac match where it is lost. Also the creedmoor runs at lower pressures which can also matter when a rifle gets hot on long strings.

The lapua brass is as good as it gets with excellent durablity to off set the initial cost, great choice when recovery of the brass is realistic.

.260, despite remingtons efforts to basicly kill it off it has survived. I still wonder if all of the other 6.5s would even be there if lapua or even winchester had made brass.

Exterior ballistics:
You are all using 6.5 slugs of varios flavors. The biggest swings in velocity I have seen between the three have been about 50-100fps max. It seems there is more variation between individual barrels, lengths and atmospheric conditions than any inherent advantage in any gun.

I still think it comes down to what ever floats your boat. Im gathering parts to build a 6.5 something and ultimately it will probably come down to a roll of the dice to pick the chambering. There may be some minor differences in controlled conditions but in the field I cannot fathom someone being able to say with a straight face that a .260/6.5cr or x47 cost them points that they would have had if they had chosen something else.

 

[DRAM40A1]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

No one even mentioned my favorite........6XC LOL. Thats what I practice with and it got me 10th at the Bash. Whatever we choose, practice with it, become one with it. Practice will overcome BC and velocity..........JMHO.

 

[Austan]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Jedi, stop trying to validate your choice in the cartridge you chose. I've been watching these threads for too long about this debate between the x47 and the creedmore. If your that worked up about it buy a new barrel and chamber it in the creedmore. Then you can try it and decide what YOU like best. I'm not trying to bitch you out or anything so I hope it dosent come across like that. Your posts make you seem like you want someone to tell you- you made the right chioce in choosing a cartridge. Well, I'll say it. "You have done good!"


On another note. I switched from the 260 to the x47 for OAL issues at mag length and better brass. The creedmore wasn't out yet. Thank God for that. I'd hate to have to make the decision now.

Austan

 

[Jedi]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Austan
Dont take my remarks seriously i dont,
I dont need anyone to validate my choice...i dont buy rifles based on pleasing someone else.

Its all in jest if remark is toward myself, strange humor but there ya go

Thnx for ya concern

Happy new year

Guys
PLease stop PMin me asking for sample 130's
I wish i could send everyone some... hell there not that $$ go buy some 130 Bergers, not JLKs but close enuff.

 

[our gang]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

dare I mention the 6.5X55. More powder capacity, longer neck, handles VLDs better.

 

[Tactical]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Karl and Terry thanks for information on this

 

[Wil]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: our gang</div><div class="ubbcode-body">dare I mention the 6.5X55. More powder capacity, longer neck, handles VLDs better.

</div></div>

Dare you stay on topic?? Where, in this thread, has there been mention of wanting to compare the 6.5x55??? Anyone? Bueller?

 

[steve123]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Oh great,just great,Ourgang is on the verge of disreguardation again.haha

 

[our gang]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Well okay, I guess we are in Cuba. Just trying to offer a superior alternative.

 

[Mike]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: our gang</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well okay, I guess we are in Cuba. Just trying to offer a superior alternative.</div></div>

I was going to ignore your original post, but now that you feel a sarcastic retort is called for I will join in the fray.

No one was asking for a "superior alternative" and if we were, it would not be the swede.

Why do you find it difficult to stay on topic? Do you enjoy shitting in this thread? If you feel the swede is the be all, end all, that's fine, but why can't you keep it to the topic? The question was posed for three calibers and three calibers only. Not which caliber was the best or what is the best 6.5 chambering. If that was the case, your comment would be welcome but given that we are asking about three specific chamberings and how they compare to each other, your post was irrelevant.

So if you think we are a totalitarian state because you made a mistake you are in for a rude awakening. We'd be more than happy to show you what would happen if we were "Cuba".

 

[Turk]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Let the ass kissing begin!!!

 

[palma]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Most posts in these 6.5 argument threads fall into three categories:

1. People who have a vested interested ($) in seeing one 6.5 succeed;

2. People who feel their 6.5 is superior to the others; and

3. People who feel offended when #2 posts.

There are exceptions, however.

It would be nice to see a good write up from a disinterested person on the brass for all three.

 

[Mike]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: palma</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most posts in these 6.5 argument threads fall into three categories:

1. People who have a vested interested ($) in seeing one 6.5 succeed;

2. People who feel their 6.5 is superior to the others; and

3. People who feel offended when #2 posts.

There are exceptions, however.

It would be nice to see a good write up from a disinterested person on the brass for all three.

</div></div>

4. People whose only purpose seems to be adding fuel to a fire and fanning the flames.

There is a good write up on all three. Zak smith has already done it. And as many have noted ad nauseum, brass is not the issue.

 

[palma]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mike</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: palma</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Most posts in these 6.5 argument threads fall into three categories:

1. People who have a vested interested ($) in seeing one 6.5 succeed;

2. People who feel their 6.5 is superior to the others; and

3. People who feel offended when #2 posts.

There are exceptions, however.

It would be nice to see a good write up from a disinterested person on the brass for all three.

</div></div>

4. People whose only purpose seems to be adding fuel to a fire and fanning the flames.

There is a good write up on all three. Zak smith has already done it. And as many have noted ad nauseum, brass is not the issue. </div></div>

Really? I've read Zak's article, and the quality of brass (or the lack thereof) was mentioned throughout. .260 (bad), -47 (good), Creedmore (good in pre-production but no access to production). There was no empirical brass data included in the article. My initial batch of -47 (which was from one of the earliest runs) was absolutely terrible, worst that I've seen from Lapua.

 

[Mike]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

I understand where brass may be a concern for those that bench shoot and reload, but performance is the focus, not brass. For most of the run and gun tactical shooters who lose copious amounts of brass at matches, the quality of brass becomes less and less of a factor.

Most everyone I shoot with is not going to pay higher prices for Lapua brass when Winchester will get the job done and at half the financial loss at the end of the day.

Point is if you are choosing your caliber based on the quality of brass, then you are either wasting money, or participating in an entirely different aspect of tactical shooting.

 

[palma]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

If pure performance, then what's the issue? They're almost identical.

260 139 @ 2820
1000 267" 25.50 7.4mil | 53" 5.00 1.5mil 1000

123 6.5x47 Lapua @ 2930
1000 260" 24.75 7.2mil | 59" 5.75 1.6mil 1000

6.5 Creedmoor, 140 AMAX @ 2810
1000 276" 26.25 7.7mil | 57" 5.50 1.6mil 1000

Brass is the most important issue to me. With gear, gas, food, lodging, air travel, etc., I think of brass as an additional cost. I don't have the opportunity to shoot in many non-bench rest type comps, but if I did, a couple of hundred dollars of brass every couple of weeks would seem trival compared to the other stuff. I might put an AR15-type brass catcher on my rifle if the cost was significant enough.

 

[Mike]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Palma,

You hit the nail on the head "what's the issue"; really nothing.

I'm not going to throw a couple of hundred dollars every couple of weeks out. That's a brand new custom rifle with S&B glass per year. I'd rather cut that significantly with lesser brass and make it a couple of dollars every few months.

That's just me though, YMMV.

 

[Tactical]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Palma if you compare you need to compare at SAMI Mag Length of 2.8" or under and with same bullet

To the guys ticked about his 6.5x55 that round takes a long action and that says no way to guys who want to run a bolt hard, light and fast. If I went LA it would be differnt claiber all the way but we are talking SA calibers here

Mike the brass cost is usually so slight a cost ( 4000.00 rifle, 3000.00 scope 1500.00 plane tickets 500.00 car 500.00 room) when everything else is thrown in and most comps are far from a place you lose everything you shoot. I will take the Lapua brass when I can get it to avoid the prep on the other brass. 40.00 extra for brass does not hurt so much when you really look at the costs

 

[Shady_Jay]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

.260 sucks the fat one. No one should ever shoot it. Send me your brass after you re-chamber to something else.


Cordially,

 

[matchking]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Captain Kick-Ass</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.260 sucks the fat one. No one should ever shoot it. Send me your brass after you re-chamber to something else. </div></div>

I say the same thing about the x47. Send 'em to me - they're costly.

 

[our gang]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Darn, wish I thought of that as I run a lot of 260 brass through my DPMS 260LR!
may I have some too?

 

[Shady_Jay]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: our gang</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Darn, wish I thought of that as I run a lot of 260 brass through my DPMS 260LR!
may I have some too?

</div></div>

You have been posting the same old tired ass pictures since day one.

Nobody likes you.

Go to Houston and give Lazy21 the Father's Day he finally deserves.

 

[cpt.creedmoor]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

classic....

 

[Dagsta]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

+1 CKA that is classic

 

[Turk]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

OG on your next photoshoot trim your CUMCATCHER!

 

[our gang]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

On days after Christmas my true love gave to me 4 big assholes on an internet site.
AMFs

 

[Shady_Jay]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

don't break your hip on the way out

 

[ChadTRG42]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

LMAO!

 

[our gang]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

I always wondered who watched the I Love Lucy reruns.........

 

[Jedi]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

260 and 6.5Cm guys can someone provide OAL with bullet set @ neck junction.
x47 this is 2.800 with a 130 jlk
that means junction of bullet boat tail and bearing surface at or just above neck junction of case

Using a 308 case and 140 Amax for a wag
260 is in 2.925 area ???

6.5CM guys wot kind measurement you get??

With only boat tail below case neck junction you max out case powder capacity...thou there is a accuracy enhancement reason according to the BR crowd

Just one more thing to think about, pert sure both 260 and 6.5CM compromise powder capacity of case staying at common Mag lengths.

So althou 260 and 6.5CM have more overall case capacity once you account for encroachment of bullet into powder column

Jeez that makes my head hurt but its a valid point, i,m sure there is a way to calculate capacity lost to bullet encroachment....I,m not doing it i hate math.

happy new year

 

[Austan]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Jedi, measure a jlk from the boattail to the point. The 6.5cm is 1.66 from the base to the neck/shoulder junction. This should give you the oal answer your looking for. If you tell me the measurement you get, I'll get oal on the 260 brass. Then you will have apples to apples comparison. All oal's with the same jlk bullet.

 

[FCS]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

142 SMK / 139 Scenar is about 2.930"
140 SMK is a bit shorter, don't have that info with me right now.
130/140 JLK is going to be real close to 3.00"

I've got 260 dummy rounds set up with 140 A-max, 140 SMK, 142 SMK, 139 Scenar, 130 Norma, 140 JLK, 140 Berger and 123 Lapua. Will post those OALs when I get home.

 

[Rob01]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Just measured the 140AMAX and the 6.5 Creedmoor and it is at 2.850". Well within the AI mag length of around 2.865-70. Will let you know what it is with the 130s when they show up.

 

[Jedi]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Austan
130 jlk 1.375 overall bullet lenght, thats what you needed right?

 

[Rob01]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Austan the case OAL is 1.92". Not to the neck/shoulder junction.

 

[Austan]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

right, sorry Rob. 1.66 to neck/shoulder.

No Jedi, from the top of the boattail to the point.

 

[Austan]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

I just grabbed a random 130 vld This particular bullet measures 1.185 from the base of the bearing surface to the point. Oal with bullet seated to (base of bearing surface/top of boat tail) inline with (neck/shoulder junction). we get:

6.5 CM 1.66+1.185=2.845 OAL

6.5X47 1.55+1.185=2.735 OAL

260rem 1.78+1.185=2.965 OAL

 

[Jedi]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Rob
Probably real close jlk n 140Amax look to be same lenght via eyeball technology
Bullets to you when wee wench makes P/O run

Swamps site says 130 OAL 1.410??
Boat tail length .210
6.5cm 1.92 + 1.2 = 3.04

Lets use what i measured them at 1.375 which is also same measurement for 140Amax
6.5CM 1.92 + 1.375 - .155(boat tail)= 3.14

Rob
You sure you measured it right???
Austan numbers 6.5CM
1.92 to neck junction
140Amax 1.375 OAL
Minus Boat tail lenght .155

Loaded 6.5CM set with bullet @ neck junction 3.14???

Some one ck my numbers did i screw that up??

Just found a case spec from hornady 1.92 is case OAL not base to neck junction

However that brings something rather interesting 1.92 6.5CM case OAL equates to 6.5x49

so a 6.5x49 is better than a 6.5x47....sure
x47 designed to run at higher than standard pressure of 6.5CM (6.5x49)

Hornady sales pitch looks to be more sideways, more of the same just repackaged

 

[Austan]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Some conclusion to the above with this particular bullet. The 260 within mag constrictions is going to lose case capacity, as if we didn't all know that allready.

The 6.5 CM under standard 2.8 mag constriction would lose case capacity as well. It has allready been pointed out as well that there are mags that would allow this OAL. The 6.5x47 could be let out a little gaining case capacity. However this would probably result in subsequent pressure increase if that extra case were to be filled. I'd think if a guy were to use the generous mag oal, the 6.5cm and this particular bullet would be the cats ass. More math in a moment...

 

[Austan]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

case capacity:

The 6.5CM measures .459 at the case/shoulder junction and .471 at the base.

The 6.5x47 measures .456 at the case/shoulder junction and .470 at the base.

Nearly indentical with the 6.5CM being a touch bigger and also being longer in the case, it obviuosly hase more case capacity. In addition, they both have a 30 degree shoulder angle so there are no loss/gains to be had. Yes a 6.5x47 could be loaded hot enough to look the same as the 6.5CM on paper. At the same time, the 6.5CM could be loaded hot and beat the x47. When all is said and done, the 6.5CM will win. Now there is still the brass issue. Lapua brass is decidely better and more costly. THe tactical guys lose brass therefore can't/won't justify the cost. There is a place for both cartridges. I can't say the same for the 260. Seems to maximize its performance, you would have to use a long action, and then why not just use a sweede...


Are we just running in circles with this...

 

[FCS]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Win 70 with mag spacer removed allows closer to 3.00" OAL from internal mag.
Rem 700 with feed ramp notched, AI mag with front reinforcement strap removed allows for 2.980" or so OAL.

260 can be made to run really well in a SA rifle, LA is not needed.

 

[Jedi]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Austan
great info
read 6.5CM =6.5x49

X47 is designed to be run at higher pressures 63,000

They all the same, 260 loses its case cap advantage because bullet sits in powder column at normal OAL
6.5x49 vs 6.5x47??? standard pressure case vs high pressure case??

the winner is.....6.5XC lol

 

[Austan]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

FCS, have you done this. This is to say- Do you have any velocity info of 260 at these OAL's with a 130 vld or similar?

 

[Tactical]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Anyone know case capaicty on all these calibers with 139s loaded to 2.82" OAL?

 

[FCS]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Yes I have done this.

2925 with 139 / 142 from 26" barrel, that was the accuracy node w/no pressure signs. Possible to push faster but accuracy went away and no, I couldn't get to next accuracy node w/o running into pressure signs.

Chrono book is in IA, I'm currently in NM. Will post data when I get home next week.

 

[Jedi]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Austan
i had my AICS mags modded so i could do same thing but in 308,
I run 2.920 OAL and feed from mag...chamber was setup for this OAL.

Doing so would make 260 clear winner, i get insane FPS from 155 scenar doin so in my 308.

But at normal mag lenght....260. 6.5x49(creedmore) and 6.5x47
same same as in equal... anyone tell ya different at normal mag length is trying to sell you something

 

[FCS]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

2.860" OAL from un modified magazine, I agree the 6.5X47 would be hands down winner and is what I would run. 6.5X47 and 6.5CM were not around when I went to 6.5mm, I do see a X47 in a future build as it is best match unmodified Rem 700 SA.

I'd take Lapua 6.5X47 if limited to 2.860" or shorter OAL.

260, with modified mags/feed ramp is going to out perform 6.5X47 or 6.5 CM with the heavy bullets. 260 needs 2.950" OAL to really perform with the bigger bullets, 6.5X47 and 6.5 CM were designed around 2.800" OAL and are better fit to factory standard SA.

 

[Jedi]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Tactical
I,m sure someone could work it out based how much case cap is lost due to bullet in powder column...not me thou

260 is going to hurt most @ standard mag lenght

6.5x49 (6.5 CreedMore) will be affected but not as much

x47 minimal powder column intrusion.

Glad i already have a x47 and dont have to make this choice now, my head would hurt

 

[Ratbert]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

One of the things that gives me pause with the CM is availability of reloading equipment. Yes I know the Hornady guys have said over and over that their dies are top shit, but I would still like to be able to order a Lee collet and crimp die, a redding body die, a wilson seating die, and/or a RCBS mic. Having to have stuff custom made would be a PITA. I'm surprised no one else has mentioned this, am I the only one who feels this way?

 

[Rob01]

Re: 6.5x47 vs 260 and 6.5creedmore

Yes I measured right. Think you posted the same time Austan did and you didn't see his correction. The 6.5 Creedmoor can be loaded out to normal mag length and put the boat tail juntion at the neck junction. 2.850 fits easily in AI mags.

Don't see anything sideways about offering an accurate factory loaded match round with very good ballistics at a good price. Seems like good business. Picking up where Rem dropped the ball with their .260. With the Lapua brass problems thread in the Reloading section seems like there might be some chinks in that great brass armor.

Sure this is aimed at me
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">same same as in equal... anyone tell ya different at normal mag length is trying to sell you something</div></div>

But sorry to let you down I don't get anything whether the 6.5 Creedmoor succeeds or falls on its head. Sponsored by them doesn't equate to working for or owning part of the company. No checks coming my way.

Don't think you answered the question yet though that if they are all the same ballistically then why spend twice as much for the factory ammo or for brass for the 6.5x47 over the 6.5 Creedmoor? What do you get for spending twice as much for the same results beside a lighter wallet?

Ratbert, give it a little time. The round just came out this past year. You need to give the companies time to make the products and you need to call them and let them know you want them. That said I am one of the "Hornady guys" who said the dies are the shit and I did because they are. All my other dies are Redding neck and body and Forrester Ultra Seaters and I like the RCBS Precision mics too and will egt one when they come out but the proof is in the pudding with the Hornady dies. They work and for cheaper than the others. My runouts are at max .002 for brass and .001 for loaded ammo. Same as with my more expensive die sets.