False - same bullet, same brass cost, same primers, but less powder used in the 6.5 creed = lower cost in 6.5 creed. In this case, that larger capacity and faster speed is working against you.
False - if loaded to the same pressure, as you keep preaching, case head expansion will be identical. However, even when NOT loaded to the same pressure, necks get thinner, faster in the tapered body, slope shouldered 260. Nobody ever talks about Improving a 6.5 creed to eliminate case stretch and reduce trimming. Frankly, most of my cases die to case head expansion, and considering 260rem, by design, runs large primers, while the 6.5 predominantly runs small primers, meaning a stronger case head, and less expansion per shot, such we get MORE loadings before the 6.5 stops holding onto primers.
Better hunting cartridge 260 rem
False/subjective bias -There’s no data to support the 260 is superior here, just your subjective bias. At huntable ranges, there’s no substantial difference between the two. Here are a few opposing angles for which the 6.5 is superior for hunting:
1) Hunters don't need to reload, so they use factory ammo. Factory ammo selection on local shelves is typically greater for 6.5 creedmoor than 260 in the modern era, such a 6.5 creed hunter has more options.
2) Hunters tend to use factory ammo, and heavier bullets penetrate better - there are more heavy bullet loads on the shelf for 6.5 creed than for 260 rem, so the 6.5 hunter has the advantage.
3) Hunters don't need custom rifles, such the factory 260 rifles on the market with short mag boxes can't utilize the heavier bullets which offer better penetration.
4) The 260 uses more powder than the 6.5 creed, so the reloading hunter has to spend more on ammo, just to hunt
Any factory gun put out in 260 now has had any rifle twist or short leade resolved.
The twists have been changed, but you're speculating at best here to say the leades have been modified away from SAAMI spec reamers. I know the freebore was no different in the last 260 I worked on, and it faced the same limitations for bullet weight the models before it had faced. Short mag boxes. Why? Because the mag boxes are as long as they can be, which is why the shoulder was moved back and the case shortened for the 6.5 and 6 creed. When I custom reamed my 260, 260AI, 243, and 243AI for long, high BC bullets, the results was a single shot, port fed rifle.
260 inherently more accurate as bullets came out for long range.
False - Please provide objective data to prove this advantage in"inherent accuracy," because every other cartridge designer has acknowledged the steep shoulder, short, fat powder column case design as superior to produce "inherent accuracy" than the older taper body, slope shoulder cases. My personal experience has been the same - in blowing out the shoulders and bodies of 260's, my life became easier at the development bench. Same with 243win --> 243AI --> 6 creed, the more I blew out the body and shoulder, following the footsteps of experienced cartridge developers like Ackley, the easier it was to coax the round to produce on target at long range.
Also the shoulder angle and case length aid in minimizing throat erosion and bullet shear angular yaw are held to smaller margins compared to 6.5cm.
Minimizing throat erosion = False - Half of the advantage PO Ackley proved with his case designs was the advantage of steeper shoulder angle in improving throat life. Your statement is either a lie, or a lack of knowledge.
"Shear angular yaw...." = False at best. This is jargon-gibberish which might fool some, but certainly doesn't me. Throat dimensions are what they are, and are not inherent to any case design. I'd argue, dimensionally, it's easy to prove a taper case with a steep shoulder is far more sensitive to inherent yaw due to the way the cases can lay in the chambers. The 6.5 Creed has a longer case neck, for greater/longer bullet support during primary ignition, .285" vs. .259", so again, demonstrably, there's LESS opportunity for induced yaw as bullets enter the leade in the 6.5 creed.
So a pack of lies and misinformation... Any real objective data to support superiority? Or are lies and muzzle velocity all you are bringing to the table?
