6.5x47 or .260

Malxwal

Well-Known Member
Renewal time, and as such time to put in for a variation. I have a Tikka M595 that will be getting re-barreled.
Looking at the 6.5x47 versus the .260, I've read a lot, spoken to a few knowledgeable people, and generally the concensus is 6.5x47. Not one to shun a lot of informed opinion, but would like to hear any more info from those who use them.
The rifle will be used for roe, occasional red, any vermin, and informal gongs/targets out to realistically 500'ish probably, although the bulk of the rounds through it will be at targets, so it will have a slightly heavier barrel profile.
Go on, give me your tuppence worth...
 
I have a 6.5x47 now its my target rifle very happy with it out at 900 yrds with 123 amax and 140 nos hunter, has med heavy fluted barrel but you can't get factory hunting 260 you can but I would make some calls first or think of another cal 270? with a choice of ammo from 130 to 150 , if that fits your needs pro easy to find factory ammo if you don't wish to reload.

next rifle will be box standard run of the mill cal :roll:
 
Last edited:
I have a 6.5x47 now its my target rifle very happy with it out at 900 yrds with 123 amax and 140 nos hunter, has med heavy fluted barrel but you can't get factory hunting 260 you can but I would make some calls first or think of another cal 270? with a choice of ammo from 130 to 150 , if that fits your needs pro easy to find factory ammo if you don't wish to reload.

next rifle will be box standard run of the mill cal :roll:

No issues reloading for whatever comes home. Amongst things I've read/heard/been telt, factory ammo for either is not much good, and that 6.5x47 very forgiving to load for.
 
I've a 6.5x47 which is a rebarreled t3 done by Steve kershaw, it's an 18in tube sporter profile and was the easiest thing I've ever load developed for
I've never shot a 260 so can't compare
 
It is very easy as others say ,shoots like a thing on rails and why I turned mine into a range rifle brass is over a tonn per 100 spud is your man he found all I needed and lots of bullet choice just find your dies first they can by troublesome to locate .
 
I have 2 x 260 Rems, but if I was starting again, I would look at both the 6.5 x 47 Lapua and the 6.5 Creedmoor. Very little to choose between the three. Attached is an old article on this topic - 6.5mm Shootout: .260 Remington vs. 6.5x47 Lapua vs. 6.5 Creedmoor

Regards JCS

Thanks JCS, I think I've read that one through a few times now. I've spoken to some people who know a lot more than me through building, shooting and owning 6.5x47, not so many .260 owners such as yourself. Will you be shooting a .260 at the SGA next weekend ?
 
Thanks JCS, I think I've read that one through a few times now. I've spoken to some people who know a lot more than me through building, shooting and owning 6.5x47, not so many .260 owners such as yourself. Will you be shooting a .260 at the SGA next weekend ?

No, I'll be taking the 6XC again, just like last year. The winner last year used a 260 Rem. Best regards JCS
 
I don't own neither of them. I start from a simple idea. If range work ( formal) would be the most important, a 6.5x47 probably would be the answer. If deer is the main purpose of the rifle, the 260 would be my choice. The extra case volume isn't a handicap, certainly if you want to shoot heavier bullets for reds. Accuracy wise it can't be bad. Just look at Mark Ripley of 260 Rips fame.
If the Tikka has a long enough action even the 6.5x55 comes to my mind.
 
I have a.260, wonderfully accurate. I opted for the .260 as 6.5 x 47 brass was not available at the time. There is only a hairs breadth between them. The .260 may just shade the 6.5 x 47 in velocity but not by much, depending on projectile and powder selection. To get the best of both hand loading is a must.

regards
Mike.
 
I have a 260 that I built when the 6.5x47L was still relatively young.
If I did it again, Id go for the Lapua. Just more efficient. Probably not much at all in it in terms of performance.
 
Back
Top