Thread: New .27 calibre, .277 Fury..

Greetings to you both Sakoswarosorted and RUMPY,
My point, perhaps poorly made is that here are two new cartridges related to technology that has failed commercially in the past that appear to be aimed to fill voids that do not exist. It seems to me (and I have been wrong in the past) that their life may be short. Other cartridges that have appeared recently such as the 6.5 and .30 PRC plus the 6.5 Grendel and Creedmoor and others do seem to fill a gap. Two of my recently purchased rifles (this century) are T3 Lites in 6.5 x 55 and .223 (8 inch twist) might have been a Creedmoor and a Grendel if I had procrastinated a bit longer. I do qualify as an old firearms enthusiast but my Red Bands are only used for gardening and my last Swandri has long rotted away. The T3 6.5 mm wears a 6 power scope and is a great lightweight stalking rifle my lightweight stalking body however seems to have deserted me. Hand loading for my modest collection of old soldiers is most enjoyable to me hence my last comment.
All the Best Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings to you both Sakoswarosorted and RUMPY,
My point, perhaps poorly made is that here are two new cartridges related to technology that has failed commercially in the past that appear to be aimed to fill voids that do not exist. It seems to me (and I have been wrong in the past) that their life may be short. Other cartridges that have appeared recently such as the 6.5 and .30 PRC plus the 6.5 Grendel and Creedmoor and others do seem to fill a gap. Two of my recently purchased rifles (this century) are T3 Lites in 6.5 x 55 and .223 (8 inch twist) might have been a Creedmoor and a Grendel if I had procrastinated a bit longer. I do qualify as an old firearms enthusiast but my Red Bands are only used for gardening and my last Swandri has long rotted away. The T3 6.5 mm wears a 6 power scope and is a great lightweight stalking rifle my lightweight stalking body however seems to have deserted me. Hand loading for my modest collection of old soldiers is most enjoyable to me hence my last comment.
All the Best Grandpamac.

The Grendel was designed specifically to work in the AR15, it has just made it's way into micro action hunting rifles, it was never designed to replace the 6.5x55 or similar cartridges.

The Creedmoor was basically meant to compete with the 6.5x55 and 260 but fit comfortably into a short action.
In a way it was a marketing exercise, but right from day dot the cartridge was deigned for target shooting and was available in suitable target rifles, with a sensible barrel twist and good factory ammo available for target shooters from day one. Something the 260 and Remington never did.

The PRCs are similar to the Creedmoor in that they were offering what many other cartridges did (mostly wildcats) but good factory rifles and ammo was available from the out set.
They may not have been filling voids as far as ballistics goes, but you'd be hard pressed to find factory rifles and factory ammo at the same price that offers the same performance as these.

I shoot a 260 and think it's great, there's no need for me to sell it and buy a Creedmoor but that doesn't mean there are no benefits to the CM over the 260.
First and foremost being factory ammo, don't think I've ever seen a box of 260 ammo for sale.

All agreed.

As you say, some of the major pluses often cited for the Creedmoor is that it is shorter than a .260, better fits a short action and was designed for target shooting so is “inherently accurate” (whatever that means). If those are major pluses, surely the 6.5 x 47 Lapua would be an even better choice? It’s shorter still and was also designed as a target cartridge. Admittedly, Hornady has supported the Creedmoor far better with quality ammunition in sufficient quantities, and manufacturers have got on board with a huge selection of rifles.

My point? Perhaps Creedmoor is no better than others; just better supported? I don’t have a dog in the fight as I don’t have a 6.5, and I would never criticise anyone’s choice. Personally, if I wanted a 6.5 it would be the Lapua. No desire here to be pushing velocities to the max.

Cheers

Originally Posted by Spitfire

My point? Perhaps Creedmoor is no better than others; just better supported? I don’t have a dog in the fight as I don’t have a 6.5, and I would never criticise anyone’s choice. Personally, if I wanted a 6.5 it would be the Lapua. No desire here to be pushing velocities to the max.

Cheers

You are bang on.
A guy can walk into a gun store, buy a heavy barrel 6.5CM and some good factroy match ammo, slap on a scope and you can shoot to a 1000m and not be left wanting. I've never seen 260 or 6.5x47L ammo in a gun shop for either hunting or target.

The shorter OAL length does help the Creedmoor, but some factory rifles will get a 260 to the lands at mag length.
The 6.5x47L is claimed to be more inherently accurate, which does seem to have some truth to it but it's not reason enough to go that route for most people.