.260 Rem or 6.5 Creedmoor?

[RugerOldArmy]

I'm looking to build a new target rifle. Probably another heavy barreled Savage bolt. This will be a typical Savage build, with a custom barrel (PacNor or Shilen), a Rifle Basix trigger, and potentially a stock.

The key question to me is .260 Rem or 6.5 Creedmoor. I'd like 6.5x284, but it is overkill for my intent, and I figure I would get better barrel life with the .260 or the 6.5 Creedmoor. I'm looking for more case capacity than a 6.5x47.

It is my understanding that Lapua brass is readily available for the .260 now, and is for the 6.5 Creedmoor. Case capacity seems about equal.

Choose the 6.5 Creedmoor for the better case design? Any thoughts?

 

[Bart B.]

What targets and range(s) will you shoot at?

Paper with black bullseyes?

Something else?

 

[RugerOldArmy]

Paper, and the occasional prairie dog, when the wind makes a 6mm BR less attractive. Occasional orange pop cans at random distances.

600 yards out to 1000.

I'm sure both will do for that.

I'm less sure which cartridge takes less effort to find a good load for. I'd prefer a cartridge like 6mm BR Norma, or .308 Win, where good loads are easy to work up.

This is almost a toss up, otherwise, isn't it?

 

[Sunray]

Lapua brass is over priced due to it coming from Finland. Really isn't any better because it costs more.
6.5 Creedmoor runs $124.99 per 100 vs $137.99 per 250 for Hornady at Midway. Mind you, neither is currently in stock.
For the .260, 100 from Lapua is more than twice the cost of 50 from Hornady. No shortage of .260 brass.
The Creedmoor runs at very slightly higher pressures with max loads using like bullet weights too.
Lotta stuff gets really popular that isn't any different than stuff that came before it. The Creedmoor is one such cartridge.
Toss a coin.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

Sunray, you make a point, and I appreciate your perspective. I'd agree if I was looking to use a stock barrel, and had those expectations. This will likely be used occasionally at our local 'bubba gun' Benchrest event. I'm hoping to make it a 1/4 MOA gun, and in that role, I'm willing to pay for the consistency I've experienced with Lapua brass.

I'm less familiar with the supply chain for components, for these two cartridges. I'm also wary because Zak Smith described the .260 as finicky to load for.

As such, brass and handloading experience for these two cartridges weigh most heavily in my mind with this choice.

I do, however, appreciate your thoughts, and see merit in what you said. Thanks.

 

[Nature Boy]

I've had this conversation with myself when contemplating something in 6.5 and the answer that I keep coming up with is .260 rem, for no other reason than to be contrarian to what all the "kool kids" say regarding "the creed" being the best thing since gunpowder was invented.

(feel free to discount the above considering it comes from someone who talks to himself a lot)

 

[jmr40]

A 6.5 Creedmoor will be my next purchase. I'm buying an off the shelf rifle and want to be able to purchase factory ammo as well as reload.

If building a custom rifle and handloading you can make a 260 do the same things if the rifle is built right. Just buying the 6.5 simplifies things for me.

 

[MrBorland]

Lapua brass is over priced due to it coming from Finland. Really isn't any better because it costs more.

Lapua brass is relatively expensive because it's top-of-the-line, and a lot of QA/QC went into it's production. It's better because it's, well, better. It may be more expensive than, say Hornady and Remington, but it's actually cheaper than the other 2 "premium" brands (Nosler and Norma). There's a reason why serious target shooters use Lapua brass. While I wouldn't say I'm a serious target shooter, I do want every point I shoot, and I don't want to spend unnecessary & inordinate amounts of time prepping & sorting brass, so I went .260rem and Lapua brass. For me, it was a no-brainer. YMMV.

 

[Bart B.]

Paper, and the occasional prairie dog, when the wind makes a 6mm BR less attractive. Occasional orange pop cans at random distances.

600 yards out to 1000.

I'm hoping to make it a 1/4 MOA gun,

The 308 Winchester is usable in a lot more paper targets than the 26 caliber ones mentioned. 308's can be used in Palma matches, the only cartridge allowed other than the 223 Remington.

I'd get a Bartlein, Border, Brux or Kreiger barrel; they've got a track record of wins and records; those others, very few, if any.

Nobody has a 1/4 MOA rifle at 1000 yards. 3/4 MOA is as good as the best will keep all test shots inside of. Of course, there'll be a rare, tiny group about 1/4 MOA, perhaps once in a hundred 3-shot groups. I don't state accuracy by the smallest groups shot; they're nye impossible to repeat.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

The 308 Winchester is usable in a lot more paper 6 targets than the 26 caliber ones mentioned. 308's can be used in Palma matches, the only cartridge allowed other than the 223 Remington.

I'd get a Bartlein, Border, Brux or Kreiger barrel; they've got a track record of wins and records; those others, very few, if any.

Nobody has a 1/4 MOA rifle at 1000 yards. 3/4 MOA is as good as the best will keep all test shots inside of. Of course, there'll be a rare, tiny group about 1/4 MOA, perhaps once in a hundred 3-shot groups. I don't state accuracy by the smallest groups shot; they're nye impossible to repeat.

Bart,

I have a Palma rifle already. By your signature, we have similar interests, have shot in similar events, but you likely are more dedicated, and perhaps skilled.

I concur on Kreiger...but remember, this is a cheap Savage Drop-In barrel project. I can get very nice barrels from Shilen and Pac-Nor, made on solid Pratt&Whitney tooling, with my choice of reamers and rifling. That is more than good enough for this project. This is a 'bubba benchrest'/Prairie Dog gun, and will make me happy.

Any experience in reloading for these two cartridges?

Nobody has a 1/4 MOA rifle at 1000 yards.

You know, I'll choose to differ with you on this point. I'm sure you're trying to manage my expectations on shooting longer ranges. You needn't.

I appreciate your time and input though.

 

[horsey300]

Sunray, you make a point, and I appreciate your perspective. I'd agree if I was looking to use a stock barrel, and had those expectations. This will likely be used occasionally at our local 'bubba gun' Benchrest event. I'm hoping to make it a 1/4 MOA gun, and in that role, I'm willing to pay for the consistency I've experienced with Lapua brass.

I'm less familiar with the supply chain for components, for these two cartridges. I'm also wary because Zak Smith described the .260 as finicky to load for.

As such, brass and handloading experience for these two cartridges weigh most heavily in my mind with this choice.

I do, however, appreciate your thoughts, and see merit in what you said. Thanks.

The creedmoor has its merits, but I'd go for the .260 the .308 is easy to load, the .243 has been a breeze, why would the same case with a 6.5 be different?

 

[Varminterror]

6.5 Creedmoor over the .260, unless you make your .260 brass from Lapua Palma brass. The small primer in the Lapua 6.5 Creedmoor will end up saving you money in the long run. For the bullet in flight, the difference is almost NOTHING. For how long your brass lasts, which bullets you can use and how you have to seat them, the Creed has the upper hand. The 260's only upper hand is in brass availability.

I haven't noticed the Creedmoor to be easier to load for than the 260, but I DID notice it took me less time to develop a tight shooting, low SD load than it did for my 260. However, I have about 15yrs more reloading experience under my belt than I did when I worked up my loads for the 260. I got into the 260 15yrs ago, I got into the Creedmoor less than 15months ago, even though I had been loading for 10yrs by then, my precision rifle loading skills (and toolkit) wasn't anything like what it is today.

Personally, where I have most recently landed in the whole 6.5mm mess is the 6.5 SLR. Lapua Palma 308win brass, necked down & turned. Tough, consistent brass, with small primer pockets. More case capacity than the 6.5 Creedmoor with all of the advantages of the steep shoulder and long case neck, but without the mag length vs. lands issue of the 260, and using a touch less powder. So I'll be getting all of the advantages of the 6.5 creedmoor for improved case life and minimized trimming, BUT with more horsepower AND with more readily available brass, since it's easily made from any 308 family case - including the incredibly durable Lapua Palma 308 small primer brass.

So that's my recommendation out of that mess - either get the Creedmoor or the SLR, depending on whether you want to be able to use factory ammo, or not. Most of my rifles have never tasted a factory load, so it's kinda irrelevant for me.

 

[eastbank]

i have three .260,s and in a good action, for me its 6 of one and half a dozen of the other between the .260 and the 6.5 cm. twist and barrel lenth being equal. eastbank.

 

[Bart B.]

You know, I'll choose to differ with you on this point.

. . .regarding my comment that there are no 1/4 MOA rifles at 1000 yards.

Dick Sulfridge holds the three, 5-shot group 1000 yard agg record of 3.9 inch (.39 MOA). His largest group was about a third larger. He also holds the six 5-shot group agg record at 1000 at 4.2 inch (.42 MOA) his largest group for this agg was also about a third bigger.

If anyone's shot 1000 yard aggs of a few to several 5-shot groups 1/4 MOA or smaller, let me know. The record aggs for a few or several 10-shot groups are much bigger.

I put 5 shots into about 2 inches at 1000 with a aperture sighted Palma rifle; once. No way am I going to claim that it's a 1/5th MOA rifle. Those 5 shots were called in an area about 3/4ths MOA. Pure luck; that's all.

Or are you thinking a 1/4 MOA rifle at 100 yards will also shoot 1/4 MOA at 1000? A common thing these days.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

6.5 Creedmoor over the .260, unless you make your .260 brass from Lapua Palma brass. The small primer in the Lapua 6.5 Creedmoor will end up saving you money in the long run. For the bullet in flight, the difference is almost NOTHING. For how long your brass lasts, which bullets you can use and how you have to seat them, the Creed has the upper hand. The 260's only upper hand is in brass availability.

I haven't noticed the Creedmoor to be easier to load for than the 260, but I DID notice it took me less time to develop a tight shooting, low SD load than it did for my 260. However, I have about 15yrs more reloading experience under my belt than I did when I worked up my loads for the 260. I got into the 260 15yrs ago, I got into the Creedmoor less than 15months ago, even though I had been loading for 10yrs by then, my precision rifle loading skills (and toolkit) wasn't anything like what it is today.

Personally, where I have most recently landed in the whole 6.5mm mess is the 6.5 SLR. Lapua Palma 308win brass, necked down & turned. Tough, consistent brass, with small primer pockets. More case capacity than the 6.5 Creedmoor with all of the advantages of the steep shoulder and long case neck, but without the mag length vs. lands issue of the 260, and using a touch less powder. So I'll be getting all of the advantages of the 6.5 creedmoor for improved case life and minimized trimming, BUT with more horsepower AND with more readily available brass, since it's easily made from any 308 family case - including the incredibly durable Lapua Palma 308 small primer brass.

So that's my recommendation out of that mess - either get the Creedmoor or the SLR, depending on whether you want to be able to use factory ammo, or not. Most of my rifles have never tasted a factory load, so it's kinda irrelevant for me.

Thanks Varminterror. That is the kind of info I was looking for. I've reloaded for 37 years. Some cartridges are certainly easier to find good loads for than others...but as we all know, each gun is different.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

Or are you thinking a 1/4 MOA rifle at 100 yards will also shoot 1/4 MOA at 1000?

Bart,
I'm thinking of a rifle that can shoot 5 5-shot 1/4 MOA groups at 100 as a 1/4 MOA rifle.

I'm thinking you're considering the difficulty of reading wind, holding to the same POA at 1000, bullets going transonic, etc. etc..... lead you to no longer consider that a 1/4 MOA rifle.

No offense intended. We're likely dancing around words. I think wind alone, might lead you to say what you're saying. (Even reading wind flags is an art.) I consider that a different, and highly enjoyable, challenging issue.

But yes, I still consider it a 1/4" MOA rifle...but that it is on me to try and get 1/4 MOA results at 1000...which is challenging, to say the least.

 

[Bart B.]

I'm thinking of a rifle that can shoot 5 5-shot 1/4 MOA groups at 100 as a 1/4 MOA rifle.

That's near benchrest record size. They're typically not shot from shouldered rifles; free recoiling ones.

I'm talking about group shooting at 1000 yards at 5 to 6 am when there's no wind. To me, reading the wind is observation skills, math and science, not art. Especially because the wind speed above the line of sight is faster than in the line of sight.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

That's near benchrest record size. They're typically not shot from shouldered rifles; free recoiling ones.

I'm talking about group shooting at 1000 yards at 5 to 6 am when there's no wind. To me, reading the wind is observation skills, math and science, not art. Especially because the wind speed above the line of sight is faster than in the line of sight.

Benchrest is what I've shot the most Bart. What I described as a 1/4 MOA rifle, wouldn't win a local match, let alone the Super Shoot. (Look up the aggregates.)

I'm with you on reading wind...to a point. Over 1000 yards, wind can vary, in strength and direction. I don't believe I've ever met anyone that could do that math in their mind, considering changes in speed and direction, at various ranges, over 1000 yards. That is why I consider it an art.

Then again...in Benchrest, you're shooting aggregates...not X's, right?

We're close enough, I'll simply concede. I know where you're coming from...even if we differ on what a 1/4 MOA gun is.

Again, my intent wasn't a debate, nor a pissing match.

 

[Howard Roark]

Both are great choices. I prefer the .260. Sherri Gallagher and Brandon Green have both won the nationals and set many records with the .260. Good enough for me.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

Thanks Howard...good to see another old, well remembered name. I haven't been here much lately. I'll miss RCMODEL.

Seems a tough decision. I was leaning to the shorter, fatter case, but mainly due to my perception that they are easy to load for. Perhaps I read too much into a comment on .260 Rem being finicky by Zak Smith.

I might be best off picking the cartridge they have a tight-necked sharper reamer for, when I order the barrel.

 

[Howard Roark]

Thanks Howard...good to see another old, well remembered name. I haven't been here much lately. I'll miss RCMODEL.

Thanks for the kind words ROA. I too sorely miss RC's wisdom and wit.

The .260 is not finicky at all to load for in my opinion. I've used IMR and H 4350 as well as Reloder 17 with very good results.

I would not bother with a tight neck chamber. They're more trouble to load for than their worth, diminishing returns and all of that. Sherri shot Rem brass in a standard chamber when she was in the AMU. Her record stands for itself.

That said, you can't go wrong with either cartridge.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

Thanks Howard. I always appreciate your advice. .308 Win was cake to load for in my experience...maybe it goes to reason a necked-down version would be as well...slower powder or not.

My best to you and yours.

 

[Bart B.]

What I described as a 1/4 MOA rifle, wouldn't win a local match, let alone the Super Shoot. (Look up the aggregates.)

I just looked at the 2016 Super Shoot results. Every competitor had some groups over 1/4 MOA.

Some benchrest batches are for score.

At 1000 yards with everything else perfectly repeatable, a muzzle velocity spread for a 308 Win of about 6 to 7 fps causes a 1/4 MOA vertical shot spread. Which is one of many reasons why 1/4 MOA groups at 1000 are more luck than equipment precision plus shooter skill.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

I just looked at the 2016 Super Shoot results. Every competitor had some groups over 1/4 MOA.

Heavy Varmint (13.5-lb) 100 Yards
1st Bill Goad 0.1766
2nd Jeff Summers 0.1918
3rd Bart Sauter 0.1934
4th Hal Drake 0.1972
5th Ken Pritt 0.2056

Heavy Varmint (13.5-lb) 200 Yards
1st Jeff Gaidos 0.2428
2nd Jeff Summers 0.2656
3rd Larry Costa 0.2729
4th Wayne Campbell 0.2769
5th Barney Small 0.278

Heavy Varmint (13.5-lb) Grand Agg
1st Jeff Summers 0.2287
2nd Larry Costa 0.2413
3rd Jeff Gaidos 0.246
4th Wayne Campbell 0.2617
5th Ken Pritt 0.2626

Light Varmint (10.5-lb) 100 Yards
1st Jim Carmichel 0.1922
2nd Cris Harris 0.1946
3rd Tony Boyer 0.1984
4th Jack Neary 0.2044
5th Kip Jones 0.2074

See any winner with a group as big as a 1/4 MOA? And these rifles often shoot better than even these fine individuals achieve on a given day, as they adjust for conditions.

Note Bart, I never said these people never shot a bigger group. I said a 1/4 MOA won't win the super shoot. Even the 5th place shooters beat that in some matches.

 

[Bart B.]

Yes. Six of them directly, more mathematically. Any over .2500 is 1/4 MOA plus.

All agg's are the average of several so the biggest group is larger than the agg, often 50% bigger.