260 remington, 6.5X55 & 6.5x47

DCG

Well-Known Member
Am I correct in thinking that 260 remington, 6.5X55 & 6.5x47 all use the same bullet heads i.e. .264/6.5
 
They are all 6.5mm's (or .264" s)


BUT, they are not equal

6.5x47 is limited to max 130 grain bullet

260 Rem - 140 grainers

6.5x55 - 160 grain max.


260 Rem is a great all rounder for deer.
 
"bullet heads"
Even if it were correct to call bullets, heads, which it is not, to call them bullet heads is a tautology.

Not only is the .260 a good all rounder so is the 6.5x55, arguably better than the .260, even if only because of its popularity over such a long period of time.

ft
 
Last edited:
Acrually despite using a 0.264" bullet the actual calibre is 0.256" ;) Which is why we have the .256 Gibbs magnum and the .256 Rigby as they measured the bore size.. Due to the claims of European arms in 6.5mm being oversize I used the tool lathe at work and made up a stepped gauge. The start is 0.255" and it goes up in 0.001" steps to about 0.262". On checking the Mannlichers both have a bore size of 0.256" as does the Swedish Mauser. Using a digital caliper to measure as best I can the groove size both Mannlichers have groove diameter of 0.268". Oversize according to our American cousins but they work on 0.004" groove depth whilst the Europeans have groove depths up to 0.008" deep. Shallow grooves of course are cheaper to make. The Enfield rifling has grooves that taper and are 0.0075" deep at the breech and 0.0055" at the muzzle. I cannot recall the Swedish groove diameter so will have to have another look. Oh an one of the Mannlichers has a brand new Steyr made barrel fitted. It has fired less than 50 rounds including the proofing ones.

I doubt it's possible to button rifle much deeper than 0.004" ;).
 
They are all 6.5mm's (or .264" s)


BUT, they are not equal

6.5x47 is limited to max 130 grain bullet

260 Rem - 140 grainers

6.5x55 - 160 grain max.


260 Rem is a great all rounder for deer.


Vhit list .260 up to 155 Grain [ not that i have used that load]

i find 100 gn good for fox and 129 gn on deer .
 
Thanks for the replys guys, jcs the link you posted made interesting reading, beeing as how everyone seems to have there own favourites I'll keep my conclusions to myself for the time beeing.
 
Thanks for the replys guys, jcs the link you posted made interesting reading, beeing as how everyone seems to have there own favourites I'll keep my conclusions to myself for the time beeing.

:lol: I like them all although I cannot see the need for a .260 rem as after all I already have a 6.5x55, a 6.5x54MS and 6.5x63R (.256 Rigby) which i think covers it rather nicely.
 
All that is new is bad / unnecessary / naff...

All that is old is good / tasteful / etc etc.....

Certainly not :rolleyes: for example the Remington 700 was introduced I believe back in 1953 and let's face it it's naff design. A gash bit of pipe with more bits of tubing brazed up to make a bolt..................Yuck absoluetly horrid :stir:. However a lot of new rifles especially are made to cut costs and increase profit margins and not always to make a better rifle. the .260 Rem is sort of trying to re-invent the wheel to my mind but it obviously please some of you :rolleyes:. Likewise i could not see the point of the WSM and WSSM's. the only one i might have looked at was the .325WSM and only Might have looked at.
 
Imho nowt wrong with remmies , had loads along with sako's tikka's rugers never had a bad one yet
Just the thing for night time manouvers on the quad or rattling around in a landy,i think synthetic is ugly but when its ****ing is down not quite the enviroment for your hand oiled scratchable wooden stock. to me a rifle is a tool and the no frills remmi synthetic rifle ticks all the boxes.

"But" dont get me wrong Brithunter i know where your coming from and if rifles were my 1st passion and i collected them as you do, i would probably be echoing your statements "apart from the remmi jibes" that is :-|

Shotguns are my passion especially big bore English wildfowling guns. a pleasure to admire and use just like you admire your classic rifles each to thier own eh . DF
 
Sorry about that but as you can tell I abhore the 700 Remington. I don't like the way it's made nor how it feels and yes I have shot them. If fact I can honestly say I would not have one as a gift. The 700 classic is not a bad looking rifle form the photos I have seen and I have a couple of friends who have them in 8x57 Mauser chambering however I don't covet them. One an American has a collection of these classics NIB. They are part of his pension plan after the so called professional fund managers lost about 1/2 of his fund with their stupid investments. Not sure if he shoots the 8x57 or not. Hmmm will have to ask him next time we speak.

Oh the beauty of a traditional oiled finish is a few rubs with a bit of oil in the palm of the hand and scratches dissappear unless they're gouges. My project BSA Monarch had a well abused wooden stock ( I think it was a landie rifle). I will be stripping the old varnish off and re-shaping the wood to a lighter more rounded profile more in keeping with my aim of creating an early 19th century sporting rifle style. Repairing the stripped out sling mounts and hopefully getting it chequered. I can refresh chequering but have never really tried laying out a new pattern and doing it from scratch.

Now of course I don't use a quad and as a recreational stalker/hunter my needs/requirements are a little different to yours.

As for nowt wrong with remmies :eek: Hmmmm there are plenty who would disagree ;) Tis a shame as Remington is an old maker and to see it slip to such depths is very sad :(.
 
The 260 came from no ballistic revelation. It was an easily produced and certified (SAAMI) cartridge at a time when Remington needed "the next new thing". The 6.5x308 has been around for years and with the 6.5 bore craze in full swing, it was a no brainer for Remington. This is much the tactic they used some years back with the 17 Fireball. Wow. That is a 17 MachIV with a different name. The MachIV was an already established factory rifle cartridge built originally by the O'Brien Rifle Co so it was a cheap way to jump on the band wagon. In both cased, very little to no R&D work was needed and they were able to go almost directly into production. The 260 is a fine round but it is nothing that hasn't been around for many decades as a wild cat: and not a very popular one, either. So when compared to the 6.5x55, it is only the relatively new kid on the block. The new kid is the 6.5 Hornady Creedmore, and before that, the 6.5x47 Lapua. Heck, the 6.5 Remington Magnum is newer than the 260 (6.5-08).

As to the Remington 700's, I am like BH. I have let my opinions be known. I think I have three of them: a .222, a 257 Roberts, and a 308 Police Sniper. The Deuce gets shot at prairiedogs and targets, the 308 at targets, and the Roberts.... at targets! I won't take a stock-factory Remington in the field for big game and especially dangerous game. The extractors are fragile spring steel clips and the bolt handles brazed into place. I have repaired many of these items in the past. I still have the jigs I built for replacing/staking the extractors into place and positioning the bolt handle to be heli-arc welded back into place. The breaks were that common.

If a person has a SAKO extractor fitted and the bolt handle removed and properly welded to the body, then I would say :thumb: as a hunting rifle.~Muir

Check that: I sold the .222 last year...
 
Last edited:
You Americans must be a rough arsed lot :D bolt handles breaking off ??? :eek:

I dont go after "Dangerous game" with this rifle just the humble old fox ! so it does for me.

Looking back now i can remember having a problem with a 700 .220 swift, that used to leave a fired round in the chamber due to that silly circlip extractor so i will agree thats
a weak point.

But on the whole i have had little bother with the 700's, they are never going to be a sako or Holland & Holland but all my remmi rifles have given me good service . DF
 
I was at a 500M off hand shoot one day in New Mexico and three bolt handles came off of 308's that day. Maybe Remington got their brazing act together but I have fixed too many of them to trust them far afield. The shop I worked for back in the mid-eighties had a collection of 8 or 9 Remington rifles with broken bolt handles. We shipped them off all at the same time as they were warranty work. Seven months later the rifles returned with the bolts still unattached; just as we had sent them. We ended up fixing them ourselves.

As I said, heli arc the bolt into place and install a Sako extractor and I'm OK with them. They certainly shoot well. The Sniper of mine will shoot pulled, surplus US Govt 173 grainers into 3/4" at 200M. It's a rather rare rifle (pre-"Varmint" designation heavy barrel) so I am loathe to rework it. Too bad. I keep it for it's accuracy.~Muir
 
Back
Top