.260/6.5

[cmsds]

hi guys slightly confused at what bullets to put through my new rpa hunter thumbhole, its 260 remmy, am I write in thinking that it will fire .264 bullet head or does it have to be .260 .Theres not a lot to choose from in .260 but plenty in 6.5 mm

[1967spud]

6.5mm or .264 are the ones

[jcampbellsmith]

A 270 Win fires .277 inch diameter bullets. A 260 Rem fires .264 inch diameter bullets. Marketing men pick the names with little regard to the details.

 

Regards

JCS

[maximus otter]

Marketing men pick the names with little regard to the details.

 

Remember that the :

 

.218 Bee

.219 Zipper

.220 Swift

.221 Fireball

.222 Remington

.223 Remington

.224 Varmint Master

.225 Winchester

 

... all use the same diameter of bullet!

 

maximus otter

[gbal]

cmsds: don't worry about labels-it's quite complicated and not consistent in detail,as per other posts.

 

Your 260Rem is a cartridge,that takes 264 " bullets,which is 6.5mm in metric.

The 260 is often happiest with bullets in the 120-140 g weight range. (Don't use heavier at this stage).

One reason for the labels is to avoid confusion-see the list of 22 centre fire cartridges,all being 224 calibre.

There already is a 264 Winchester in USA,and a 264 Remington would just muddle things(Imagine someone who is naive just getting a box of 264 cartridges for a trip-made worse by there being possibly 264Win being made by either Winchester or Remington companies."GIve me a box of Rem 264s might mean 264Rem had that been the name give instead of 260Rem,or 264win,made by Remington...etc-you can see that confusion at the least could arise.The 260Rem was very nearly called the 6.5-08,which is what it is-the 308Win cartridge necked down to 6.5....

Plenty of 6.5 calibre cartridges too...eg 6.5x47Lapua is ballistically close,6.5 x55 too,,but there is only one '260Rem' cartridge,even if it's not 260calibre...it's a 6.5/264calibre!.

 

You need 264 or 6.5 calibre bullets in your 260 Rem cartridge chambered rifle! 120 or 140 g seem best (Lapua bullets being metric weights are more 123 and 139g) with design/construction suitable for your use (target or deer eg).

 

Initially a bit confusing,but simple really once you know.Good cartridge,all round.

gbal

[FGYT]

cmsds: don't worry about labels-it's quite complicated and not consistent in detail,as per other posts.

 

Your 260Rem is a cartridge,that takes 264 " bullets,which is 6.5mm in metric.

The 260 is often happiest with bullets in the 120-140 g weight range. (Don't use heavier at this stage).

One reason for the labels is to avoid confusion-see the list of 22 centre fire cartridges,all being 224 calibre.

There already is a 264 Winchester in USA,and a 264 Remington would just muddle things(Imagine someone who is naive just getting a box of 264 cartridges for a trip-made worse by there being possibly 264Win being made by either Winchester or Remington companies."GIve me a box of Rem 264s might mean 264Rem had that been the name give instead of 260Rem,or 264win,made by Remington...etc-you can see that confusion at the least could arise.The 260Rem was very nearly called the 6.5-08,which is what it is-the 308Win cartridge necked down to 6.5....

Plenty of 6.5 calibre cartridges too...eg 6.5x47Lapua is ballistically close,6.5 x55 too,,but there is only one '260Rem' cartridge,even if it's not 260calibre...it's a 6.5/264calibre!.

 

You need 264 or 6.5 calibre bullets in your 260 Rem cartridge chambered rifle! 120 or 140 g seem best (Lapua bullets being metric weights are more 123 and 139g) with design/construction suitable for your use (target or deer eg).

 

Initially a bit confusing,but simple really once you know.Good cartridge,all round.

gbal

 

 

actually 0.264" is 6.7056mm ( inches x 25.4 = mm)

 

i put it down to where the dia is measured ie top or bottom of the lands so Bullet or Bore diameter ???????

 

0.308" is 7.82mm not 7.62mm

[trazman]

actually 0.264" is 6.7056mm ( inches x 25.5 = mm)

 

i put it down to where the dia is measured ie top or bottom of the lands so Bullet or Bore diameter ???????

 

0.308" is 7.82mm not 7.62mm

Well, .308 is the actual diameter of the bullet, 7,62 is caliber measured from top of the lands... But there are different standards for measuring caliber and the other standard measures from bottom of the lands...

[gaz6br]

What are you using the rifle for ??

 

Gaz

[gbal]

FGYT,

Actually 1 inch = 254 mm (and 1cm= .39370 inch)

 

But that isn't the issue-as you suggest,sometimes 'size' is measured including the lands,and sometimes its the bore (which is greater).There really isn't universal agreement ( Britain ,and USA favouring one,Europe the other....mostly).

What is essential to accept is that CARTRIDGES are given names which are typicallly very close to/exactly the calibre,but often vary-in post *4 here,Maximus Otter lists some eight cartridges that are differnt in the case size but share a common 'calibre' ,and therefore bullet diameter, but it is actually none of them-their calibre is a common .224.(add in the Nato 5.56 too;there are others,including some metric cartridges.

As I briefly outlined,the reason is to distinguish the various cartridges -as they are all 224 centre fire-and it would be a recipe for serious/dangerous confusion not to distinguish them clearly-hence eg 222Rem and 223Win ( but there is also the earlier 225 Win etc etc.) The 22 Hornet (aka 5.6x36R in Europe) originally came in 223,but soon changed to 224...very early Hornerts may well need 223 bullets (and such were made for it).The Savage 22 High Power is actually 228.....(now obsolete). You get the picture.

And the defensible (but not the only) reason-it's to distinguish similar cartridges.

There are other 'anomalies' or whatever in most calibres....there are lots of 30 calibre cartridges....and the 308 Win is pretty much the 7.62 Nato including bullet diameter of .308 (there are a few minor non dimensional differences between the civilian and military round,so newcomers do understandably ask about interchangeability,as with 223Win/5.56Nato):the 307 is the 308 rimmed for lever action;yet the .303 British needs .311 bullets,as do some soviet cartridges......how about the 303 Savage?-sorry,despite being called 301 Savage in England ( and examples of WWII era Savage 303 bullets measuring 308+ and 310 have been found..). Let's not get into pistols- 38 special and 357 mag are equidiameter bullets,and 9mm .....

 

The word is NOMINAL - that's their name,not neccessarily a precise measure,even if there are +/- lands options too( UK and Europe didn't agree on which convention either...).

 

You just need to know what you are intending to shoot,and be advised accordingly. A very few cartridges can be wrongly chambered,and subsequently fired,with sometimes catastrophic results.

 

As for 6.5s.....well the 6.5 Mannlicher Schoenauer was often bespoked by London gunmakers and refered to as the .256 or .257 Rigby-just a blatent attempted proprietary appropriation.The 257 Roberts was a 7x57 Mauser (or 276 in London) necked down to the "1/4 inch" (.25) category

I think the ".223 and a half" magnum is a spoof on all this imperial/metric/convention inconsistency,but you never know in the wildcatty world. Meeeeiow!

...as they say .....go figure! (not quite any figure,though).

 

gbal

[FGYT]

FGYT,

Actually 1 inch = 25.4 mm (and 1cm= .39370 inch)

 

But that isn't the issue-as you suggest,sometimes 'size' is measured including the lands,and sometimes its the bore (which is greater).There really isn't universal agreement ( Britain ,and USA favouring one,Europe the other....mostly).

 

Sorry Typo yes 1" = 25.4mm Im better using a Cad Drawing than Typing combined with bad spelling not good on keyboard However handwriting wasnt bad enough to become a Doctor

 

Was Just doing my Engineer bit should just of quoted the bit you said

 

 

 

 

 

Your 260Rem is a cartridge,that takes 264 " bullets,which is 6.5mm in metric.

 

with : No 0.264" is not 6.5mm in metric its 0.2mm bigger which is Huge in Precision engineering terms @ 6.7mm

 

 

On another point My FAC is marked to buy 0.260" and 6.5mm Ammunition

 

and for hunting 0.260" / 6.5mm Expanding missiles (yes i know it should be bullets) so a RFD could reuse to sell me 0.264" missiles as its not marked on my Ticket to aquire

[gbal]

FG,

Yes,it's a bit cpmplex but relatively unimportant....my handwriting was wellbad enough,but my Latin wasn't quite up to all the big words....likewise typos occur....

 

I meant "in the context of firearms calibre nomemclature" that 6.5 metric is often 264 imperial (as 264 Win Mag) not that there is any precise arithmetic translation....and my previuos post just touched on a few of these 'irregularities"! ( we've been into the curious engineering appentice practice of (mis) labelling the units after the decimal (tenths,hundredths ,thiusands....) but the shorthand works for purpose-though doesn't transfer readily into mathe generally.No Matter.It's ....pragmatic.

The FAC term is 'expanding missiles' so that is correct useage-bullets would do,"heads" is pushing it for some on here-quite understandably,but so long as clear communication is achieved, terminological

inexactitudes are peripheral,and verg on pedantic-useage is peculiar to the domain....to polysyllabilise it.

Some of this derives from the FAC useage of calibre,rather than 'cartridge',for perfectly understandable reasons...there didn't used to be so many 'cartridges' in the same calibre! (let alone the somewhat misnamed ones). Any ambiguity can be resolved of course-and the erstwhile use of "308/7.62" on FACs is a common accepted workable solution for those two (twins).

None of this denies precision- indeed some names were an attempt to minimise wrong cartridges being bought and then persuaded into chambers cut for other cartridges..... PO Ackley of course wanted his Improved cartridges to be the regular carridge inserted and fired with safety in his 'improved chamber'-and capablre of decent performance if only the 'regular' cartridges were available-raher a neat idea,and makes his improved case forming about as simple as it gets-fire a 'factory' spec cartridge!

 

There are other minor factors too-the British reluctance to use German cartridges- with which they were competing in Africa-or at least their names,and likewise an American aversion to metric -eventually eroded by surplus 6.5s etc,which were well enough engineered and just plain worked.Then there is SAAMI-indirectly,in the 260 case....A Square Arms submitted the design as "6.5-08 A Square",but a somewhat later (identical spec) submission by Remington somehow pipped this,and the 260Rem became the adopted SAAMI cartridge......if your RFD offers any 6.5-08 ammo,it will have collector status!

One could write a book....

Shakespeare-an underated semantic engineer and ballistician,managed it in a line:

 

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet...",and very nearly the field application:

 

"If you shoot it,does it not also bleed..."

 

Once you know enough of this,it becomes "Much ado about nothing" -often

 

"Distinctions without differences" or is it "Differences without distinctions".... "whatever" as they say these days,and I can't remember the Latin offhand-probably metric ...well, decimal ,anyhow. :-)

 

Keep up the precision (I did linguistics,and strictly at the time of purchase,the refered to 'missiles' are not 'expanding' though have that future potential,when fired. I would not raise this "heads up" with the RFD or FLO ,however. :-) :-)

 

g

[The Gun Pimp]

 

Remember that the :

 

.218 Bee

.219 Zipper

.220 Swift

.221 Fireball

.222 Remington

.223 Remington

.224 Varmint Master

.225 Winchester

 

... all use the same diameter of bullet!

 

maximus otter

 

Which is why I don't see a reason to use the decimal point - it's just a number - not a measurement.

[gbal]

Which is why I don't see a reason to use the decimal point - it's just a number - not a measurement.

point taken....away? :-) So:

 

" The 222 Rem and 223 Win cartridges both fire .224 inch diameter bullets."

[FGYT]

 

Which is why I don't see a reason to use the decimal point - it's just a number - not a measurement.

 

 

See what the FEO says if you ask for 0.219 Zipper for Roe (scotland ) and CWD/Muntjak Rest of UK Oh Aye it says .219 but takes a .224" bullet so is over the .22"cal min

[gbal]

See what the FEO says if you ask for 0.219 Zipper for Roe (scotland ) and CWD/Muntjak Rest of UK Oh Aye it says .219 but takes a .224" bullet so is over the .22"cal min

 

 

The reqirements for a Roe rifle in Scotland are minimum " 50g bullet,2450 fps MV and 1000 ft lb energy".

The 219 Zipper (note- no decimal) comes in OK:

 

50 3500 1330

55 3300 1360 factory load is 55 3110 1200

60 3300 1450

 

with a .224 diamete bullet.You might even request a lever action (Win 64,Marlin 336) and/or bolt action (Krag Jorgensen,Lee Enfield,etc).

 

While enlightened discussion is usually productive,when the law's requirements are met,it's probably not the time to mention that 243 win is actually .236 in the British system (and it's specified .236 in N Ireland legislation.)

 

But the conventional, accepted,legal cartridges are uncontroversial,and often 'better' anyhow,overall. Perhaps a good additional reason woud be needed to request a specific departure from current practiceand guidlines.

 

gbal

[Toby]

223 Win?

Remington surely?

[gbal]

223 Win?

Remington surely?[/quote

 

 

223Rem(ington) .... Jo,det er godt -tusen takk !

 

The 223WIN is actually the remarkable 223 Rem loading that shoots tiny groups,gongs,xbulls all day,and is accurate to at least 1000yards,thus being the cartridge of choice for podium shooters,and the name simply reflects this.... :-)

 

 

...you can see the risks of confusion when some one asks for "A box of Winchester 223 ammo " ..or " a box of 223 Winchester ammo " meaning 'a box of 223Rem ammunition as loaded by Winchester'-or "A box of 223Rem ammo-no ,not that Winchester stuff,I want Remington's own ammo" .

At least these 'errors' won't be dangerous,or make the ammo unshootable..unlike with some other calibre/cartridge possibilities.

 

 

 

So far we are lucky,no 223Win....yet.....maybe the next 224 cartridge will actually use the 224 label,somehow overlooked so far.... 224Simples ... or.. 224KISS .....or.....224True,...or.. 224WHYNOT...or just ....224 !

 

g

ps 22Honest is a contender,as we've actually had the 22Cheetah

[jcampbellsmith]

.223 WSSM? Regards JCS

[gbal]

.223 WSSM? Regards JCS

I've gone (stark,staring) metric : 5.6x whatever length it is (of course the bullet diameters are actually anything from .222 to .228 inch.....but at least that's not that's not on the tin!)

 

georg