Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I plan on doing a similar video testing them. To me 270 is an obvious winner. I'm interested to see the 7-08 vs 6.5 creed results.And the 7mm-08 is better than both.
P
Agreed.Meh, all are very capable cartridges. It has more to do with the rifleman than the rifle. If I had to pick one it would be the 270 as it is a bit more versatile.
The funny thing is, the 260 has virtually identical ballistics to the creed, but would feed better because of it having some taper to the casing.I've always liked the 260 and 25-06 too, although the 260 sort of never caught on.
The good Swede Mauser has taken a lot of moose. Great rifle, great cartridge.I rather have the old swede in a large ring 98 than a 6.5 Creedmoor. They reinvented the wheel and it still turns 360 degrees.
I plan on doing a similar video testing them. To me 270 is an obvious winner. I'm interested to see the 7-08 vs 6.5 creed results.
100% And the 260 would be better in an AR-10 feeding wise because of its slight body taper.If you really want an apples to apples comparison the 260 Remington is the cartridge to compare it to in a rifle with the right twist to shoot bullets of the same type and construction.
The 6.5x55 and the 260 Remington both exceed the performance of the Creedmoor , what the Creedmoor does that the 6.5x55 Swede / Skan doesn't do is fit in an AR10 , the 260 Remington does absolutely fit in an AR10.
The only reason the Creedmoor exists is marketing , fads come and go I seriously doubt in another 20 years the Creedmoor will be a thing.
Lots of the younger folks ( millennials and zoomers ) extoll the praises and talk about powder and bullet developments being the lynch pin for the 6.5 creedmoor being superior. The problem is those same propellant / bullet advancements also benefit cartridges that hold more water.