6.5 creedmor
- Thread starter shuamee
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
the shotty
Well-Known Member
Another +1 for the lrp, I skim bedded mine but that's about it. Even then the only reason I did that was for the experience of doing it myself. I'm getting .5 moa right now and 2880 fps with 140 amax and could go a bit hotter yet. Still playing with the bergers.
i ordered the lrh today in a 260. what would yall suggest for optics? ive got a couple of nf scopes but nothin small enough or light enough to put on this gun. i do like mil dot reticles im still working on reading them tho. i dont get to shoot too often i mean i live on a farm and can walk out and shoot anytime i want i just never have time. i havent been able to keep up with the gun and optics stuff lately. any suggestions?
loaders_loft
Well-Known Member
Try a leupold vx3 4.5-14x40 or x50 with the 30mm tube mounted with talley's. That is what I'm mounting to my 6.5-06 when it gets back from cerakote
loaders_loft
Well-Known Member
Go with h 4831sc for the 140's around 45.5 to 46.5 gr for the 260
the shotty
Well-Known Member
What is your budget for scope? Some of the NIKON and viper vortex get great reviews and you can get them much cheaper than a leupold that would offer the same features. I have a vxIII 6.5-20 with Target knobs on mine but if I were to do it over I would do a vv pst or a sightron sIII in a 4-16x though I do like having higher magnification.
cornstalker
Well-Known Member
shortgrass
Well-Known Member
I think you've got it backwards! I think the Creedmore will be the one to 'slip into obsolescence'. Only one maker of brass or loaded ammo. Nothing more to offer than the .260, on the practical side of this discussion. And then there's the advent of the 6.5 x47 Lapua (again, one maker of brass, but, a maker with a sterling reputation).
+1. For now, the 6.5's are hot with reloaders that are target shooters, and/or specialty hunters. I'm not sure the mass market wll ever take to the 6.5 with so many other calibers available. The high BC bullet makes this caliber, and the mass market is generally unaware of this concept. I don't think the Creedmore offers enough of a benefit, if any, over the 260 to justify it's longevity. iMHO
thats what i was thinking for the same reasons. it was just a few things that i have read lately mde it out like the 260 was just slipping away.has anybody worked up loads for this particular rifle or one with the same barrel length and twist? just looking for a good place to start. ive never owned a 260 and to this day i dont know anybody that has one.
loaders_loft
Well-Known Member
You should get 2800 -2850 and top accuracy. For hunting, the A-max or there is a140 ballistic tip now.
Big John 50
Member
Hey folks!! My 2 cents:
When Jim Carmichael designed the 6.5mm cartridge which Remington adopted as the .260 Rem he based it on three conceptual premises. To load it differently than that certainly is possible within SAAMI specs but violates the targeted levels of velocity/ recoil, and his other two bases (it's been waaay too long since reading the article in Outdoor Life).
The 6.5 CM was designed for accuracy at a much higher CUP spec than the .260. To say that they are (external) ballistic twins may be close to correct. Their internal ballistics are quite not the same. Too, the chamber specifications, particularly in the throat, speak volumes as to the intended bullet weights the CM will handle in contrast to the Remington round.
Now, the point that absolutely tips the scale to the middle in favor of them both!! A man told me almost 20 years ago, regarding my two 6.5 Swedes, that relaoding the 120 pill was neither fish nor fowl in terms of a varmint or a game weight. For weeks I wrestled with that comment until it dawned on me he meant that bullet is a 'do it all' weight.
So, if you can get good accuracy from the CM chamber with fly-weights despite its longer throat, well, bully for you! Just don't expect it. The .260 may be better suited to the lighter bullets depending on how the mfr cut the chamber. And both casings have what it takes to drive 140s clean through big, tough animals.
The scales of ballistic justice will usually tip toward the middle since every single cartridge has more good than another cartridge but also carries into the comparison equally bad characteristics, be that recoil, price per box, availability in your area, harshness on barrel life, lack of punch down range, etc. (ie: a .300 magnum is better than a .243, or vice versa, the .243 is better than the .300)
So there you have it, tongue planted firmly in cheek, the definitive comment on why to avoid a difficult choice and just buy one of each!!
When Jim Carmichael designed the 6.5mm cartridge which Remington adopted as the .260 Rem he based it on three conceptual premises. To load it differently than that certainly is possible within SAAMI specs but violates the targeted levels of velocity/ recoil, and his other two bases (it's been waaay too long since reading the article in Outdoor Life).
The 6.5 CM was designed for accuracy at a much higher CUP spec than the .260. To say that they are (external) ballistic twins may be close to correct. Their internal ballistics are quite not the same. Too, the chamber specifications, particularly in the throat, speak volumes as to the intended bullet weights the CM will handle in contrast to the Remington round.
Now, the point that absolutely tips the scale to the middle in favor of them both!! A man told me almost 20 years ago, regarding my two 6.5 Swedes, that relaoding the 120 pill was neither fish nor fowl in terms of a varmint or a game weight. For weeks I wrestled with that comment until it dawned on me he meant that bullet is a 'do it all' weight.
So, if you can get good accuracy from the CM chamber with fly-weights despite its longer throat, well, bully for you! Just don't expect it. The .260 may be better suited to the lighter bullets depending on how the mfr cut the chamber. And both casings have what it takes to drive 140s clean through big, tough animals.
The scales of ballistic justice will usually tip toward the middle since every single cartridge has more good than another cartridge but also carries into the comparison equally bad characteristics, be that recoil, price per box, availability in your area, harshness on barrel life, lack of punch down range, etc. (ie: a .300 magnum is better than a .243, or vice versa, the .243 is better than the .300)
So there you have it, tongue planted firmly in cheek, the definitive comment on why to avoid a difficult choice and just buy one of each!!
shortgrass
Well-Known Member
My .260 Rem. and .260A.I. reamers are some of the most used reamers in my shop in 6.5mm. Next runner-up is the 6.5 x 284. I seriously doubt any chambering based on the .308 Winchester case is going away any time soon.
Sully2
Well-Known Member
I have a 6.5-20 Zeiss Conquest on my 260...
