Author Topic: 6.8 vs 260 (Read 3848 times)

kombi1976 · « **Reply #30 on:** August 06, 2005, 01:13:16 AM »

Cal, I'd have to say that you're more in the majority than the minority. :|
The more I talk to shooters, the more guys I find "muddling along in relative obscurity"!!
Here in Australia a company brought in a stack of 96s about 20 years ago.
They had the bolt handles forged and bent, were dilled and tapped for mounts and rings and were restocked with Ramlines or something similar.
Then they sold them as reliable rifles in a few big gunshops around the country.
6.5x55 ammo may've been hard to buy then but it's a snap these days.
3 guys I know own one as their main rifle and swear by them and I've heard of plenty more shooters who use them as well.
The .223, .243 and .270 may be popular but I seriously think that much of the industry under rates the proliferation of sporterised Swedes.
They're a cheap ready alternative that has even been known to take down buffalo here.
Why do you think I'm not a fan of .260 Rem? :roll:
Because the Swede has already done it with style!!

Coyote Hunter · « **Reply #31 on:** August 13, 2005, 06:54:03 AM »

Harry

I dont think the fact that the 6.5x55 doesnt have an American headstamp plays a very big part per se I think its more the lack of rifles and an unfamiliarity with the round that influences buyers. (Yes, Ruger makes a 6.54x55, but I dont recall ever having seen one for sale anywhere.) Some knowledgeable riflemen may take to the 6.5x55, but the Average Joe will take the path of least resistance and greatest familiarity and opt for a .257Roberts/.260Rem/7mm-08 in a short action or a .25-06/.270Win in a long action as will many knowledgeable riflemen.

I have a strong preference for Ruger actions and although Ruger chambers for all these cartridges, my preferences would be the same as the Average Joe - even though I handload and could squeeze more than factory ballistics out of the Swede.

kombi1976 · « **Reply #32 on:** August 14, 2005, 04:33:48 AM »

CH, I see your point but Ruger isn't the only firm to chamber for 6.5x55.
Sako, CZ and a number of European manufacturers also chamber it and no one can deny that these first 2 are very popular brands.

Buckfever · « **Reply #33 on:** August 21, 2005, 04:01:01 AM »

I am a nobody who 2 years ago bought a 6.5-55 T3 Tikka new, wood and blued because it was a great fit for what I need in a walk hunting gun. Lite gun to carry that throws a 140 gr. bullet for Whitetail. I have very little tracking wounded deer because of the 140gr. and the caliber. It is very accurate, I dare to say more accurate than I will ever be. I have some 140gr. Nosler Partitons, homeloads, with RL-22 about 2650FPS. I have also found that the Hornady 140-139gr. at 2550 that shoot just as good and have the same result hunting with hardly more recoil than a 100gr., .243. I have all the choice I need with Hornady, Federal, Norma and so forth, if I don't want to load for it. What a sweet piece! As for elk I would take a 30-06 or some thing larger. I think if most americans were able to shoot this gun and caliber they would have a very favorable opinion! Great gun for wife or younger hunters also, natural reduced recoil with all the punch and range to and past 300yds. Thanks Buckfever

kombi1976 · « **Reply #34 on:** August 25, 2005, 04:14:02 PM »

Buckfever, you can probably get even more power from your 6.5x55 as it's a modern action and will easily stand over 50,000cup.
Of course, if you're quite comfortable with it's lower recoil then stick with that you have.
If you're going after elk(which sadly I've never had the opportunity to do due to $$$ and locale)why not go another metric cartridge. :wink:
8x57 is a real good 'un. :grin:
Of course 9.3x62 or 9.3x74R is even better!! :mrgreen:

2ndtimer · « **Reply #35 on:** September 17, 2005, 07:59:07 PM »

Better late than never, but I had to chime in on this as a late convert to the charms of the 6.5 bullet and sharing my opinion of the stupidity of Remington's marketing department. I too, believe the 6.8 will never be commercially viable as a cartridge because the majority of US shooters and hunters are only interested in "bigger + faster = better". Which is why Winchester had the foresight to almost overload the factory ammo in the Short magnums so they could be "comparable" to the existing magnums. At least winchester understands the market. The .260 remington is probably a good cartridge, though the 6.5x55 Swede is probably better due to its' greater case capacity and ablility to handle the heaviest bullets available. If Remington had been smart enough to chamber the .260 in their less expensive rifles the ADL and now SPS, it might have had a decent chance. There are a lot of new shooters/hunters who would like something that hits like a .270 but kicks like a .243. But not if it is only offered in the high buck version of the rifles, (BDL, Mountain rifle). Winchester was smart enough to offer their Super Shadow package deal in the Short Magnums through Walmart for less than $400. (I remember, I bought one in .270WSM) This pretty much guaranteed the success of the cartridge by offering it in affordable rifles. (And I believe they are making back the profits on their ammo sales. Explain how .270WSM ammo should be 70% more expensive than .270 Winchester amm?) Fortunately, handloaders are immune to such profiteering.
The cheap rifle is a good way to insure the success of a cartridge. Why do I own a 6.5x55? Well it is a nice, light recoiling, effective medium game cartridge that was available in a decent quality bolt action rifle for less than $400. The Howa 1500 Lightning. But I am afraid that trying to sell the public on a .270 that is 400 fps slower than the standard 270 Win with a bullet that is 15 gr lighter won't cut it. Even if Savage chambers the Stevens for it! But if Remington would pull their head out of the target butts, or wherever they have their heads stuck at the moment, and chamber their new SPS rifle in .260 Remington, I will buy my first Remington rifle. If they don't I guess my next rifle will be another 6.5x55, either a Tikka or CZ 550. Effective, affordable, quality. Hopefully Big Green will take some notes.

kombi1976 · « **Reply #36 on:** September 17, 2005, 10:33:15 PM »

I like the cut of your jib, 2ndtimer. :wink:
It's astonishing that while many folk want the fastest and biggest cartridge in the world they also complain that it hurts to shoot a lot and that for some reason it's really inaccurate....go figure?? :|
Might be that mythical thing called a flinch that nobody seems to have. :roll:
Fortunately the industry seemed to learn their lesson with the 6.5x55 and gave the chambers nice long throats similar to military rifles.
As for the other things you said, I couldn't agree more, perhaps with the exception of purchasing a .260 Rem.
The Swede is just too good a cartridge to bother re-inventing the wheel.

poncaguy · « **Reply #37 on:** September 18, 2005, 06:59:33 AM »

As I've said before, I really love my Ruger 77 in 260......one sweet rifle. Would buy a Remington, Winchester and Stevens in 260 too. I know my "cheap" Winchester Super Shadow 270 WSM is is one great rifle, especially for $400......