6.5x55 V .260 Rem

jackfish

Well-Known Member
Just wondered what's the main difference between these two calibres? My pal tells me (after buying a .260) that more people are now going for the .260 against the 6.5, any reason why? I am no calibre expert and fail to understand the differences sometimes!

ATB

​Bryan
 

6pt-sika

Well-Known Member
The 260 is based on the 243/308 family of cartridges so you can make brass from 243 , 7-08 , 308 , 338 Federal and 358 brass if you have to !

With the 6.5x55 you don't have much recourse if you can't find 6.5x55 brass .


Other then that there isn't a whole lot of difference in my always based opinion .

I've owned 4 guns chanbered for the 260 cartridge and killed more deer with this cartridge then any other so far in my life .

Also owned a couple for the 6.5x55 and liked them as well .

Personally I think you won't go wrong with either !
 

6pt-sika

Well-Known Member
FWIW , the 6.5x55 , 260 REM , 6.5 Creedmoor and the 6.5x57 are all pretty much the same thing as far as game concerned !

It's no great seceret that I'm rather fond of all 6.5mm cartridges so you won't be shocked when I say I like all the cartridges I mentioned !
 

Jager SA

Well-Known Member
More case capacity in the swede, slightly better ballistics over the .260 as I recall. The swede also needs a long action whereas the .260 is on a short action, there's is also the .260Ai, which will give a bit more performance. Search the net, I'm sure there's plenty of comparisons.
 

jimbo1984

Well-Known Member
As others said only difference is long / short action as regards power or recoil erc I doubt anyone could tell the difference
 

Haggis Hunter

Well-Known Member
I had a 6.5x55 (Sako 75) and switched to a 6.5x47 Lapua (a rebarreled Tikka 590 - it was a toss up between 6.5 Lap and 260 for the barrel as there was little difference).

My reasons? I prefered the fact the 6.5Lap (and 260) were short action compared to the 6.5x55 being long action - but on reflection this could simply be down to the 'feel' of the rifles I had/have that made me prefer one over the other.

I think I just fell for the marketing hype over 6.5Lap/260 - for all practical purposes a 6.5x55 would have done me fine and saved me a bloody fortune! Particularly as I now have to reload my own hunting ammo.

hh
 

mudman

Well-Known Member
Well a range of factory 6.5 x 55 ammunition is widely available so you do not even have to worry about brass supplies. I do not think any .260 factory is available (?)
 

splash

Well-Known Member
Well a range of factory 6.5 x 55 ammunition is widely available so you do not even have to worry about brass supplies. I do not think any .260 factory is available (?)

Brass is easy to buy or resize !
Remington and Federal make factory ammo.
 

Jager SA

Well-Known Member
Might worth saying...the .260 could be possibly be better served on a long action if you use heavier bullets like 140s as you will be loading these long and they may not clear the short action. Probably more versatile on a long action I guess.
 

Brithunter

Well-Known Member
Oh it seems that none so far know the truth about this :eek:.

The Swedish cartridge is a medium length being 55mm long. Long actions are for 64mm length cases ;). Short actions are for the 222 and .22 Hornet. The Swedish Mausers are shorter slightly in action length when compared to the Mauser 98 which of course was designed for the 57mm case used by Germany and the Mauser 98's front action ring was often notched at one point to allow laoded cartridges to be extracted when re-barrelled to 30-06 as the action is only just long enough for the 64mm case.

The difference in case length between .308 and the 6.5x55 Swedish is of course 4mm (0.157") which is hardly a deal breaker.

If one has a 6.5x55 chambered in a modern action then it should be possible to safely load it to the same pressures as the .260 Remington and due to the extra case capacity if the Swedish it should out perform the .260. The performance gain claimed by the gun writers and trade for the .260 is simply because it operates at higher pressures than the standard Swedish cartridge. The failing of the 260 of course is it's short neck and if one tries to use the heavier bullets it sacrifices powder space as the bullet has to be seated down into the case body where the powder should really be taking up that room instead of the bullets base.

The biggest problem with the Swedish cartridge today as I see it is actually finding brass with the correct head size and not "Americanised".

I too have been a believer in the .26" calibre having until recently owned 6.5x53R, 6.5x54MS and the 6.5x55 Swedish. However I see the 260 Remington as trying to re-invent the wheel :rolleyes: . Oh my own Swedish is built upon a circa 1905 Gustav action fitted with a new Swedish surplus barrel so of course is long throated to suit the 160 Grn RN bullet however it shoots the Speer 120 grain bullets rather well.
 

jthyttin

Well-Known Member
Standard length action is mostly referred as "long action" nowadays. 308 class is short action. Some manufacturers have shorter actions still, but not all. Good example is the minimauser eg. CZ 527. True long action is most often called "magnum action".

Sako has started loading for 260 Rem. I guess Lapua will try and protect their own 6.5x47 Lapua, even though they started producing the 260 Rem brass.
 

Brithunter

Well-Known Member
Standard length action is mostly referred as "long action" nowadays. 308 class is short action. Some manufacturers have shorter actions still, but not all. Good example is the minimauser eg. CZ 527. True long action is most often called "magnum action".

Sako has started loading for 260 Rem. I guess Lapua will try and protect their own 6.5x47 Lapua, even though they started producing the 260 Rem brass.


I did not mention magum length as I saw no need too really.

The fact that a lot of people misuse the terminology is a sad fact. We can only try to enlighten them. Shooting seems to be the one sport where this laziness is even encouraged by the magazines and writers. IMHO it just shows lack of real interest in the sport.

The reason most makers only offer one or possibly two action lengths is cheapness and nothing more than that. Just another case of cost cutting with no real benefit to the shooter and another reason for myself to favour older makes and models ;).
 

Muir

Well-Known Member
I did not mention magum length as I saw no need too really.

The fact that a lot of people misuse the terminology is a sad fact. We can only try to enlighten them. Shooting seems to be the one sport where this laziness is even encouraged by the magazines and writers. IMHO it just shows lack of real interest in the sport.

The reason most makers only offer one or possibly two action lengths is cheapness and nothing more than that. Just another case of cost cutting with no real benefit to the shooter and another reason for myself to favour older makes and models ;).

For years and years, Winchester had ONE action length and modified it for the cartridge whether it be .22 Hornet or 300 H&H. I'm trying to get a handle on when this hype about short action vs standard action came into play. I must have been too busy shooting to notice. The arguments of it being lighter is a little thin considering all the junk folks bolt onto rifles these days. (Like a guy who cuts 2" off of his barrel to "save weight" when all he had to do was carry one less cheese sandwich to lighten the load.) The shorter bolt throw? Really. Work out more!

I don't own a 260 tho I once owned a 6.5-08, IIRC. I do own a pallet load of 6.5x55's. If I was to go the 260 route I would want to have it in a rifle that would accommodate the 160 grain bullets.~Muir
 

tackb

Well-Known Member
The on game performance is broadly similar as there all within a couple of hundred FPS of each other , you just get the one you fancy and worry no more !
 

Brithunter

Well-Known Member
For years and years, Winchester had ONE action length and modified it for the cartridge whether it be .22 Hornet or 300 H&H. I'm trying to get a handle on when this hype about short action vs standard action came into play. I must have been too busy shooting to notice. The arguments of it being lighter is a little thin considering all the junk folks bolt onto rifles these days. (Like a guy who cuts 2" off of his barrel to "save weight" when all he had to do was carry one less cheese sandwich to lighten the load.) The shorter bolt throw? Really. Work out more!

I don't own a 260 tho I once owned a 6.5-08, IIRC. I do own a pallet load of 6.5x55's. If I was to go the 260 route I would want to have it in a rifle that would accommodate the 160 grain bullets.~Muir


Muir,

I have a friend in America who calls the gun writers "Gun Whores" as after all they sell themselves to whomever pays them and write what ever their paymaster wants no matter the truth behind it all.

It's these "Gun Whores" whom have foisted this short action bit onto the shooting public.
 

Muir

Well-Known Member
Muir,

I have a friend in America who calls the gun writers "Gun Whores" as after all they sell themselves to whomever pays them and write what ever their paymaster wants no matter the truth behind it all.

It's these "Gun Whores" whom have foisted this short action bit onto the shooting public.

Agreed. I remember when the Lazzeroni rifles and their proprietary cartridges were on the front of every gun rag. The rifles are still being made but the glowing accounts of their performance stopped when their advertizing budget ran dry. These guys don't write for free but then they do, you're guaranteed a highly varnished truth.~Muir
 
Top