Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Why the 6.5 caliber?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="SavageHunter11" data-source="post: 1780448" data-attributes="member: 100006"><p>I can say, from personal experience, when I was picking my 6.5mm short action cartridge ten years ago that I picked the Creedmoor over the 260 and 6.5x47 almost entirely because of brass. In america at least, I have never seen 260 Rem brass on a shelf to this day and 6.5x47 is boutique and expensive cartridge. It's not out of my ability to form 260 brass but when Creedmoor is so readily available and cheap and I can load bullets longer (at least that was the case in 2010)....it's a no brainer to go with the Creedmoor regardless of the menial velocity improvement the 260 rem has.</p><p></p><p>I do really like my Creedmoor but I will admit it has lost much of its appeal with this influx of supporters who think it's the greatest thing ever and won't hear a word against it. It's quickly falling into the same category as Glock, Vortex, 270 Win, etc because of the supporters unfortunately and my 6.5 Creedmoor probably won't be a 6.5 Creedmoor once I shoot my barrel out next summer.</p><p></p><p>The other calibers you mentioned it's hard to make the comparison because they are not short action catridges. It's like saying the 338 Lapua is better than a 338 Federal....well duh, the 338 Federal is a necked up 308 Win and the Lapua is a dedicated Magnum. It's hardly a fair comparison.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SavageHunter11, post: 1780448, member: 100006"] I can say, from personal experience, when I was picking my 6.5mm short action cartridge ten years ago that I picked the Creedmoor over the 260 and 6.5x47 almost entirely because of brass. In america at least, I have never seen 260 Rem brass on a shelf to this day and 6.5x47 is boutique and expensive cartridge. It's not out of my ability to form 260 brass but when Creedmoor is so readily available and cheap and I can load bullets longer (at least that was the case in 2010)....it's a no brainer to go with the Creedmoor regardless of the menial velocity improvement the 260 rem has. I do really like my Creedmoor but I will admit it has lost much of its appeal with this influx of supporters who think it's the greatest thing ever and won't hear a word against it. It's quickly falling into the same category as Glock, Vortex, 270 Win, etc because of the supporters unfortunately and my 6.5 Creedmoor probably won't be a 6.5 Creedmoor once I shoot my barrel out next summer. The other calibers you mentioned it's hard to make the comparison because they are not short action catridges. It's like saying the 338 Lapua is better than a 338 Federal....well duh, the 338 Federal is a necked up 308 Win and the Lapua is a dedicated Magnum. It's hardly a fair comparison. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Rifles, Bullets, Barrels & Ballistics
Why the 6.5 caliber?
Top