SA long range hunting caliber

[Tarheelpwr]

I can't believe that nobody mentioned the 6.5 WSM yet! It has all of the advantages of the 270 WSM plus better bullet availability. Stick it in a 1-9" twist barrel and run the 160 grain Matrix VLD and you're good to go.
Andrew

I offered cartridges that won't burn barrels since target shooting was one of his criteria. No doubt the 6.5 mags will be great ballistically, but barrel life will suffer considerably.

[stomp442]

I was on the fence the same as you with the SA. Here's the article that put me over the edge:

http://www.6mmbr.com/gunweek095.html

I'm doing my LW rig on a SA in 284 next year. I may give up a little performance, but 2800 - 2850 should be doable in a SA with 168s; I'm not interested I 180s. That's not MAX, but is still rather have a 168 running at 2800 than a 140 from a 6.5CM / .260 at 2800.


There is very little difference between the two ballistically as far as windage and trajectory are concerned as they have nearly identical BCs. There is only a slight advantage in energy with the 284 as the heavier weight bullet accounts for more down range energy but it does so using more powder and generating more recoil. If you really want to beat a 6.5 by any substantial margin you have got to use a 180, and again generate even more recoil with a heavier bullet to do it.

[Tarheelpwr]

There is very little difference between the two ballistically as far as windage and trajectory are concerned as they have nearly identical BCs. There is only a slight advantage in energy with the 284 as the heavier weight bullet accounts for more down range energy but it does so using more powder and generating more recoil. If you really want to beat a 6.5 by any substantial margin you have got to use a 180, and again generate even more recoil with a heavier bullet to do it.

Those are valid points. Even with 180's, I don't think anyone would call a 284 a thumper though. It's also not a very big jump from 168s to 180s either. But it is more recoil none the less. The 7mm has 20% more energy. That's enough to take note in my book. Either way, I would not argue that a 6.5 won't get the job done though. I just like the flexibility that larger offering gives.

Part of my criteria for my personal .284 is that it's a sheep gun when I'm in bear country. Even it is far from ideal, but every little but helps.

[yorketransport]

I offered cartridges that won't burn barrels since target shooting was one of his criteria. No doubt the 6.5 mags will be great ballistically, but barrel life will suffer considerably.

Barrel life from the 6.5 mags isn't that much worse than the 270 mags. I've seen 6.5 WSM barrels shooting within 1 MOA with over 1000 rounds through them. Nitride the barrel and you'll go 1500 rounds easy. Then again, I'm of the opinion that barrels were made to be replaced. That's why they're threaded on instead of welded!

Andrew

[Tarheelpwr]

Barrel life from the 6.5 mags isn't that much worse than the 270 mags. I've seen 6.5 WSM barrels shooting within 1 MOA with over 1000 rounds through them. Nitride the barrel and you'll go 1500 rounds easy. Then again, I'm of the opinion that barrels were made to be replaced. That's why they're threaded on instead of welded!

Andrew

No doubt. The mags are all similar. I was referring to the 284 when I referenced barrel life. That should at least double the mags. I just gave input on the 270 in case he was set on it. I'd still lean toward the 7 short mags if I was going mag. 300 shorts will will perform with them running 215's, but that's pretty stout recoil for extended target sessions and the added energy is pretty overkill for 500 yd deer. Same could be said for mags in general for 500 yd deer.

That's the beauty of shooting today. So many options.

[varmint72]

Any of the 6.5 rounds will work perfect for deer size animals.I really like the Creedmoor and would go that route.

[BFish22]

Thanks for everyone's inputs. I'm still between the 260 and 7mm-08. They seem really close and I'll probly be ok with whatever I choose. I'll think about it for a while and be back and forth I'm sure. I can make lapua brass work for each. With the 260 I wouldn't have to resize which would be a plus. The 7-08 would have more factory ammo available which could be a plus. I'm just getting all of my reloading stuff together so I'll be taking on learning how to reload too. Hopefully factory ammo won't be necessary in the near future but having it available if need be wouldn't be bad.

[Tarheelpwr]

Thanks for everyone's inputs. I'm still between the 260 and 7mm-08. They seem really close and I'll probly be ok with whatever I choose. I'll think about it for a while and be back and forth I'm sure. I can make lapua brass work for each. With the 260 I wouldn't have to resize which would be a plus. The 7-08 would have more factory ammo available which could be a plus. I'm just getting all of my reloading stuff together so I'll be taking on learning how to reload too. Hopefully factory ammo won't be necessary in the near future but having it available if need be wouldn't be bad.

You're on the right track. Between those two, I would honestly recommend the 6.5 caliber. The .260 and 6.5 CM are ballistic twins. Hornady has match ammo for around $20 on the CM. It's worth a look if you're starting from scratch on both. The Hornady 6.5 brass has gotten good reviews from what I've seen. Either way, the .260 will do you fine as well. If you're reloading, just stock up and factory won't matter.

It's just nice having quality ammo cheaply available since I'm sure there will be times you just don't want to load before you shoot. I say that because I just bought some 6.5 Grendel ammofor that exact reason:)

[scope eye]

6.5 X 55 will give you more than the 260 and 6.5 Creedmore, without resorting to a WSM case.

Dean