Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Rifle & Shotgun Discussion
new rifle
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow" data-source="post: 1054500" data-attributes="member: 7123"><p>Except that really, it's not. The .264 Win Mag gives you 300-350 fps more in 139/140 grainers than 6.5-284 (around 12-13% more vel). The .264 win mag's reputation for barrel burning is well-deserved.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If that's true then it's completely undeserved because it's not even close (see above).</p><p></p><p>I agree that the 6.5x55 is a great choice, and when loaded to it's full potential, is almost the equal of the 6.5-284 - just a scrunthair away in performance. Not talking about the .260 rem-equiv. reload-manual data of course.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Now that one I'm not familiar with, but it sounds interesting - it would be a barrel burner, but it would sure also give some great performance at long ranges with 117s-120s. Should be roughly equal to .25-'06 though.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow, post: 1054500, member: 7123"] Except that really, it's not. The .264 Win Mag gives you 300-350 fps more in 139/140 grainers than 6.5-284 (around 12-13% more vel). The .264 win mag's reputation for barrel burning is well-deserved. If that's true then it's completely undeserved because it's not even close (see above). I agree that the 6.5x55 is a great choice, and when loaded to it's full potential, is almost the equal of the 6.5-284 - just a scrunthair away in performance. Not talking about the .260 rem-equiv. reload-manual data of course. Now that one I'm not familiar with, but it sounds interesting - it would be a barrel burner, but it would sure also give some great performance at long ranges with 117s-120s. Should be roughly equal to .25-'06 though. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Rifle & Shotgun Discussion
new rifle
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom