.260 Rem vs 6.5x55, or the .264 Belted Mags?

[RugerOldArmy]

Any opinions on 6.5mm cartridges? I'm very interested in building (with some gunsmith help too) a 6.5mm/.264 Sporter on a Mauser action.

This is for deer and targets, and I do reload, so factory ammo isn't an issue. I don't, however, have experience loading the belted magnums or a .264 Win Mag would be a potential preference.

Between:

.260 Rem
6.5x55 Swede
6.5x55 Rem Mag
or .264 Win Mag

What would be the best choice?

How does .260 Rem stack up against 6.5x55? I don't have reloading data with similar barrel lengths.

6.5x55 Rem Mag seems the least attractive, being belted and significantly weaker than .264 Win Mag. I dunno if I need the trouble associated with headspacing belted mags for the increase in power though.

All use the same .264 bullet selection, no? Nice long-for-caliber high BC stuff.

I hear that opinions are like....well, we all have 'em. I'm interested in preferences of one over another.

 

[crackerjack]

6.5

I settled on 260 Rem. I like the advantage of short action .Seems to me the mags have diminishing returns and more barrel and recoil (if memory is correct 264 win mag needs 26" tube to reach full potential) , but it depends on size of game and distance using it as if it is needed.I shot 6.5x55 before 260 rem and always enjoyed it, in newer actions think it has more case capacity for heavier loads than 260 rem .The 260 Rem seemed to be ideal trade off , short action, accurate, low recoil, wide range of bullet weights, (varmint to heavy game) and effective killing round at reasonable distance. Thats just my opinion, never felt under gunned with my handloads (in my area) , but do think for 260 Rem best performance to be realized one has to handload. Reread post if long range, hunting and target is a deciding factor you may want to look closer at 6.5/284
as I limit my shooting to 350 yds or less with the 260 rem. .
Hope it helps.

 

[JohnKSa]

You can get more out of the 6.5x55 than the .260 if you are reloading for a modern rifle. The .260 is pretty much maxed out from the factory.

As loaded by the factory, these two rounds are pretty much clones of each other with the .260 being more compact.

Have you looked into the 6.5-06? If you're gonna reload anyway, you can push this round a bit more than the .260 or the 6.5x55 without getting into a belted cartridge.

 

[Gunblast]

Those are great cartridges, but I prefer the 6.5 Grendel to all others. It is just such an efficient little jewel!

Jeff Quinn
gunblast.com

 

[JohnKSa]

The Grendel's a neat cartridge, but unless you're OAL limited by the magazine or action, there's no reason to go any lower than the .260Rem.

 

[Drue]

The .264 Win Mag is a fine cartridge but it more gun than most people feel necessary for deer hunting and has a reputation for being hard on barrels. It lost out in the marketplace because most people who wanted magnums also wanted to be able to use heavier bullets than the .264 could provide.

The 6.5 Rem Mag packs a real punch into a Rem 600 or Model 7 sized action. The 6.5 Grendle provides amazing performance in a round that will work in an AR-15 and feed through the magazines. Outside of the size requirements of these actions, other, more common calibers can provide equal or superior performance.

For deer and targets, either the .260 or the 6.5x55 would be ideal. I would guess that it would be easier to get the 6.5x55 to feed properly in a standard Mauser but only a gunsmith could say for sure.

Drue

 

[mete]

There's one other , the 6.5/284 which is popular with long range target shooters. But the 6.5x55 with real loads [not the reduced factory ones] was my deer rifle for many years and it never disappointed me.In a modern rifle the 140 can be driven at 2750-2850 reasonably.The 140 I think is the best weight as it has high SD and BC so it holds it's velocity well.

 

[USSR]

I shot at 1,000 yard F Class Competition this past year with a custom built rifle in 6.5x55. Basically with handloads using 139-142gr bullets, you can get about 100fps more out of the 6.5x55 than a comparable .260. Another advantage of the 6.5x55 is that Lapua brass is available. Because only Remington brass is available for the .260, many .260 shooters are necking up Lapua .243 to use in their .260. Aside from this, the .260 can be used in a short action which many shooters prefer, whereas the 6.5x55 is strictly a long action cartridge. Hope that helps.

Don

 

[atblis]

6.5x55

Being able to get Lapua brass is a big big plus. Remington brass is crap.

Having the the long action is kind of an advantage (IMO). You can pretty much load the rounds as long as you want and not be limited by action/mag length. In fact, my 6.5x55 loads are closing in on 270 for OAL. From a handloaders standpoint, 6.5x55 has a performance edge on 260 (more capacity and a longer neck).

6.5-06 is the next step up and supposedly an excellent round. I don't believe there is commercial brass available.

I've never found that big a difference between long actions and short actions. For what it's worth, heavier rifles generally shoot better anyways (there isn't that big a weight difference anyways).

 

[Ol` Joe]

I`ll follow Mete, a 6.5x284 makes a nice round for deer or target, IF you reload.

The 1000yd bench shooters are useing quite a few of them and excellent brass is available from both Norma and Laupa, I`m also told Hornady makes proper brass for it but haven`t seen any yet. The round has load data available in a lot of the manuals now and is SAAMI reconized.

I own and use two 260 Remingtons a 6.5x55 and a 6.5x284 and use the 260 for my hunting. This may change as I develope more loads for the 6.5x284 but to be honest the little 260 equals the Swede with same pressures and the 6.5x284 appears to need a barrel 24" or longer to show an apreciatable gain over either of the other two with 22" barrels.

 

[Gunblast]

John KSA,
I did not mean to imply that the Grendel is superior to the others, I just love the effiency of the cartridge. For instance, comparing the Grendel to the .260 Remington:

Using the 123 Scenar for example, the Remington beats the Grendel by roughly 300 fps. However, to get that 11.5 percent gain, it needs 72 percent more powder, which also produces more muzzle blast and recoil. These percentages are roughly the same with other bullet weights also.

In my Grendel, for deer hunting I prefer the 100 grain Nosler. It kills beautifully, with almost no recoil, and relatively mild noise.

It will never equal the .260 in power, but in accuracy and efficiency, it is a dandy little cartridge, and will cleanly kill any game that will the .260 or 6.5x55. As far as the bullet is concerned, a 500 yard .260 is a 400 yard Grendel. I also love the 6.5x55, and to a lesser extent the .260 Remington. Both are wonderful cartridges. My problem is that I am a nut over the 6.5 Grendel. More info here, if desired:

http://www.gunblast.com/AlexanderArms_65Grendel.htm

Jeff Quinn
gunblast.com

 

[michael_aos]

I've got an AR-10 in .260 Remington and a Remington 700P in .260 Remington.

They're AMAZING shooters. Big, heavy, long target rifles.

I'm currently toying with the idea of a "walking" light varmint / 300yd plinker. Eying 7-8lbs, scoped.

I considered the 6.5 Grendel, but I'm currently leaning toward converting a Remington 700 SPS .243 to 6mm BR.

Mike

 

[JohnKSa]

True, but the real strong point of 6.5mm calibers is the long for caliber bullets. You mentioned the 100 grain and 123 grain bullets--both of these are actually on the light end of the bullet weight scale for 6.5mm calibers. That's the price that the Grendel has to pay to fit into an AR magazine.

I do like the 6.5Grendel for what it does and think it deserves more attention than the 6.8SPC. As you point out, like most other cartridges that are on the low end of the caliber in terms of case capacity, it's very efficient. But like most other cartridges that are on the low end of the caliber in terms of case capacity, performance really fades fast as the bullet weight increases.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the efficiency is really a byproduct of the handicap forced on the case by the OAL design restriction. It's a neat cartridge, but if you're going with conventional design hunting rifle, there's really no point in going lower than the .260Rem, IMO.

BTW, I'm not entirely confident in the trajectory posted on the Alexander Arms website. It shows the 123gr Scenar shedding velocity more slowly than what I would expect from a 140gr BT bullet.

 

[Preacherman]

I think the 6.5x55mm. cartridge is as legendary to European sportsmen as is the .30-'06 in the USA. It's built up a well-deserved reputation as one of the classic all-round cartridges for almost any size deer. I know there are more "modern" and more "efficient" cartridges available, but for my money, I'd have to have a really, really good reason before considering anything else in this bore size - at least in a bolt rifle.

 

[RugerOldArmy]

Whoa! Many excellent responses. I wouldn't have thought 6.5mm/.264 was that popular. Thank you all.

CrackerJack: I hear you on the diminishing returns with mags, but I am looking for another long range setup (I have a .308 setup I'm quite happy with.) I'm a single dad, and my older son wants to start shooting seriously with me. .260 or 6.5x55 Swede would be nice for him, but he can handle the .308 too. Long range target shooting (and potentially pronghorn hunting, but more likely mule deer) would be the intended use, with the emphasis on target shooting. My idea of fun is shooting pop cans (or attempting to) at random distances 300-700+ yards out. Random distances, estimate range, estimate wind/drop, etc. I do expect to move back to Albquerque though, and I've always wanted to hunt pronghorn, which are hard to get up close on. 6.5 was chosen because of the BC/ballistics, and long range is attractive to me in a smokeless centerfire rifle. Thanks very much for mentioning 6.5/284. I was browsing Speer when I got the bug for this, but did find 6.5x284 in my Hornady reloading manuals. (Reloading is a large percentage of the fun for me.)

JohnKSa: Considering the similarity of .260 and 6.5x55 Swede, I think your point that there is no advantage to the .260 is well taken. I'd choose the Swede (which I do find very interesting). I'm thinking a short action is probably out, and I'd go with a long action to have more room to play with OAL, rather than have issues with magazine-imposed OAL limits. Thanks also for mentioning 6.5-06, which sounds very attractive. I found that in Hornday, and it seems to have the edge on everything but .264 Win Mag, and isn't belted. Forming cases might require neck turning though....

I'm curious why the popular (and neglected in my thinking) 6.5/284 is being considered for long range shooting over the 6.5-06 or .264 Win Mag. It seems these would have an edge.

GunBlast: I know next to nothing about the Grendel. This is a potential AR round, no? Considering this to be a long range bolt gun, should I explore this further over some of the cartridges listed?

Drue: I've heard the .264 Win Mag barrel-life point. At this point, being compelled to tinker and inspired to dream, an eventual rebarrel wouldn't be an issue, I'd consider it a sign this was a successful project! What bothers me more is the concept of reloading a cartridge that headspaces off a belt instead of the shoulder. (Maybe I just have to get over that though.)

mete: You're right on what attracted me to this caliber. Perhaps you have insight into why 6.5/284 is becoming the attractive cartridge over .264 Win Mag or 6.5-06. Efficiency?

USSR: Your post let me know that 6.5x55 wouldn't fly in a short action, which I didn't realize (sounded .308 Win size to me). Thanks. Hmmm...1000 yard F Class...damn...that sounds fun! I'd like to seriously try that, after practicing, and watching an event to see how embarassed I might be! (I remember reading a story of a 1999 competition in England where the winner, who shot a 6.5x55 Swede (sako/tikka?) put _10_ rounds in 4.5 inches at 1000 yards ...and I thought TGO was impressive with a pistol! Damn!)

atblis: I hear you on action length! I've also considered/reconsidered wether I really want a Mauser action. I was looking at Sarco Inc. for Mauser actions, and was a bit disappointed in the surplus stuff. (Conditions offered, no VZ-24 actions, no good German 98K actions, and I believe the K31s were small rings, but could be wrong.) I'm also wondering if I should consider a stiffer Rem700 action with a faster lock time might be appropriate for long range shooting. It seems like a Mauser or Savage action would be easier to rebarrel. I need to get the Kuhnhausen mauser manual and learn more before part selection. Never tried Rem brass. I've had good results in .308 with everything I've tried though (Win, LC, Norma, and Lapua...I'm probably the only one not to see an accuracy difference, but I'll be damned if Lapua isn't ready to load out of the box. A bag of Win requires some work, but shoots well for me. The only thing I don't like about LC is the fact that I have to work up seperate loads with it. I need to standardize for this project on just one. Probably just a few hundred Lapua to start, depending on the cartridge chosen, availability, and the need, if any, to form original cases.)

Ol' Joe: Heh, another vote for 6.5x284. Other than barrel life and efficiency, is there a compelling reason? Wouldn't 6.5-06 or .264 Win Mag have an edge in the wind?

Michael_aos: I expect I'll be going for a 10-11lb rifle here too. 26". I would like a 6mm BR too (theres a cartride I'd hate to get stuck in a die though!)...but I have a never ending yen for guns...and sons to send to school. This splurge should keep me going for a few years, I expect to feel really guilty after I buy a suitable LR scope. But life's short!

Preacherman: I hear the call of the Swede too. Very likely if this evolves into my sons LR gun. (He did make honor roll the last 6 quarters in HS). The only thing is that legend and history are reflected in most of my guns (the majority are BP, several flinters, 1911s, BHPs, Colt Walker (clones) etc.). The goal for this is a long range shooter.....but I'd have likely said the same thing to an anonymous poster!

Thanks all, for the help with this project. Much thinking to do. I do believe that I've ruled out .260 Rem and 6.5x55 Rem Mag. Many good choices left: 6.5x55 Swede, .264 Win Mag, 6.5-06, 6.5/284.

Much thinking to do!

 

[jefnvk]

Lets put it this way. NONE of the deer I have shot with the 6.5x55 have gone outside spitting distance of where they were shot, and only one has ever moved. It is all I have ver used for deer, and you'd ahve a hard time convincing me that I would need anythig else.

As for accuracy: yes, it is an accurate gun. Not going to win Camp Perry, but a Stock Rem 700 Classic with stock Simmons Aetec with stock Remington factory loads will run just over an inch, and I can't prove that is not me.

 

[ECVMatt]

I will break the mold here and admit that I am not a fan of the

.260 Rem. I did not have good luck with it killing deer. I tried many different hand loads and could not seem to find the right magic. I do like the .264 Win Mag. I looked for a long time to find one and when I finally did, a friend of mine seemed to need it more than me so I gave it to him. It is a great shooter and hammers deer.

I know that you did not ask about this, but have you considered the 7mm-08?
I have just begun to play wiht this round, but my first kills with it have been considerably better than with the .260.

I guess if I had to choose, I would go with the .264.

Hope this helps,

Matt

 

[CB900F]

RugerOldArmy;

I think you'll find that all the major reloading manuals specify that the belted mags be headspaced on the shoulder, not the belt. That being the case, as it were, there's no reason to ignore the .264 because of the belt.

I've been reloading for the 6.5X55 for over ten years now. Nice round, excellent accuracy and terminal effects. Personally, I think the entire short action hype is mostly that. Very few people can shoot accurately enough to prove that they have to have the shorter action in order to improve their scores. So, I don't worry about that aspect either. Me, I'd go the 6.5 Swede route again, no second thoughts.

900F

 

[ECVMatt]

I agree with CB900F...

I forgot to mention last night to forget the rim and headspace off the shoulder.

Go for the .264 you will love it.

Matt

 

[Gunblast]

RugerOldArmy,
The Grendel was designed to get the most long-range efficiency from the AR-15 rifle. If using a bolt gun, I would choose a 6.5x55. I wish that Savage would chamber their 10FP for that sweet little Swede!

Jeff Quinn
gunblast.com

 

[brentein]

260 only comes in Reminton brass

Somebody mentioned earlier that the 260 Remington only has Remington brass available and that is not true. If reloading, your choices are: Remington, Norma & Nosler with both the latter being almost twice as expensive as the Remington.

 

[R.W.Dale]

Somebody mentioned earlier that the 260 Remington only has Remington brass available and that is not true. If reloading, your choices are: Remington, Norma & Nosler with both the latter being almost twice as expensive as the Remington.

You dredged up a 5 year old topic to say THAT????

Post dates----- post dates

the statement you're discounting might have been true when it was made 5 YEARS ago

 

[Float Pilot]

I own quite a few rifles. Over 40
Five of them are chambered for 6.5x55mm.

My most recent 6.5mm Swede addition is an 1980s era Winchester Model 70 featherweight push feed. With some glass bedding she will shoot half inch groups at 100 yards with some hand-loads, (and oddly enough, Federal Factory Ammo) and around one inch groups with just about everything else.

I had a 260 rem. It was OK and it is a very good cartridge, but a short action does not let me load to longer COALs. I think a 260 Rem would be great in an AR-10 size platform.

edit:

Oh no! I just read the dates...

 

[natman]

So you want to build a 6.5 sporter on a Mauser action. (I assume it's a 98).

260 Rem: Great cartridge, but there's no point in using a short action cartridge in a long action.

6.5x55: Excellent choice. Ballistics equal the 260 and will exceed it when loaded to comparable pressures. Should go into a 98 Mauser with little or no modifications.

264 Mag. If you want the last drop of performance, this will deliver it, but at a cost. It's a large case for the bore size with the usual drawbacks; short barrel life, noise, recoil, etc. It will also require opening the boltface on a standard Mauser and altering the feed rails.

Personally I'd go with the 6.5x55 and load it to modern pressures.

 

[brentein]

Whatever Mr. 6000+ posts. Some people google a certain Keyword phrase like I did to get to a 5 year old post and are still looking for up to date information and I provided it and it is accurate. It is my first ****ing post and my last one (especially now) because of *******s like you who ruin it for others because you have nothing else to do but post 6000+ times!

goodbye to this site!