6.5 Super LR

5

5RWill

New member
http://www.6mmar.com/65_SuperLR.php
65_slr_vs_65_x_47_lap__1.jpg


Just found my next rifle chambering for my next LR rifle in the next years. Hopefully it gains some popularity. Basically a .260 with a 30 degree shoulder and an elongated neck for advantage in seating depth. It seems to have the best feature of every 6.5 SA cartridge to date. Velocity of the the 6.5-284, compact design not exceeding the .260, and a strong case design like the creedmoore and lapua. Alot will say it compares to a .260AI which it does but it doesn't have to fire formed and has a longer neck, but performs all the same functions.
65_cartridges__2.jpg

.260 Rem (left) vs 6.5mm Super LR (left Center) vs 6.5 Creedmoor (right center) vs 6.5 x 47 Lapua (right)
 
Last edited:
Me too lol. But the reason i'm so excited about it is i get 6.5-284 performance without have to having a long action, or seating the bullets so low that it compresses or takes away powder capacity. I had planned on rebarreling my 5R to a Rock Creek 5R m24/m40 contour still chambered in .308. But now i think i'm going to get it rebarralled in 6.5Lr for sure. I just can't resist
 
Last edited:
The 30 degree shoulder angle and the long neck of the 6mm Super LR is another potential benefit of the 6.5 mm Super LR. Not only does it help to avoid the throat torching effect that people associate with a short neck, but the 30 degree shoulder angle has also been a hallmark of some very accurate cartridges
Click to expand...

So yeah throat erosion should be reduced when comparing to the .260AI or 6.5-284
 
Maybe I'm missing something. Your pics show the 260 and LR next to each other. Only difference appears to be a sharper shoulder, so unless the throat is longer, how can bullets be seated differently? The head to shoulder and OAL seems to be identical on each.
 
Maybe I'm missing something but with 55.5 gr water and a max oal of 2.845, other than being in a short action and capable of being used in an AR platform. What benefit is there over a 6.5x55 with 58.4 gr water and a max oal of 3.150? While it isn't offered in an AR platform a Rem 7400 can be converted as a modern action semi option. I also don't really see the point in the AR.

Oh, don't take this as being critical about any of the short action .264's. And if I won an AR in a raffle or something similar, I'd shoot the heck out of it.

So, I could just be missing the boat on the Short Action vs Long Action argument.

What I can see is more options in rifles chambered for short actions .264's. But, other benefits just aren't objous to me.

And, it could just be late and I'm feeling crochety; I'd just rather invest the time in building a swede in a modern long action.

Disclaimer, I do have a .243; just so ya all don't think I am deadset against short actions. sometimes that 1/4" less on the bolt throw is nice :D
 
Maybe I'm missing something. Your pics show the 260 and LR next to each other. Only difference appears to be a sharper shoulder, so unless the throat is longer, how can bullets be seated differently? The head to shoulder and OAL seems to be identical on each.
Click to expand...
There is the link to all the data about the cartridge above the first picture, it might not be that noticeable.

" The 6.5 Super LR case is also well suited for shooting the big 139-142 gr. bullets well from magazine length loadings because the long neck makes it so magazine length loadings with the bigger bullets does not leave a lot of bullet bearing surface back in the case."

This is the way i see but i could be wrong.
It has a longer neck allowing for the longer bullets (139 scenars mainly to me) to be seated deep enough for magazine length yet not affecting powder capacity of the case. Unlike the .260, in which to seat the 139gr scenar to mag length in say a remington 700 it takes up powder capacity of the case. I say remington 700 because my sako allows me to seat bullets relatively long OAL of my last loads were 3.33 using 129gr SSTs. Sako does use a "medium" action also which is a great idea. Need to have a remington modified to one, would be awesome.

Maybe I'm missing something but with 55.5 gr water and a max oal of 2.845, other than being in a short action and capable of being used in an AR platform. What benefit is there over a 6.5x55 with 58.4 gr water and a max oal of 3.150? While it isn't offered in an AR platform a Rem 7400 can be converted as a modern action semi option. I also don't really see the point in the AR.

Oh, don't take this as being critical about any of the short action .264's. And if I won an AR in a raffle or something similar, I'd shoot the heck out of it.

So, I could just be missing the boat on the Short Action vs Long Action argument.

What I can see is more options in rifles chambered for short actions .264's. But, other benefits just aren't objous to me.

And, it could just be late and I'm feeling crochety; I'd just rather invest the time in building a swede in a modern long action.

Disclaimer, I do have a .243; just so ya all don't think I am deadset against short actions. sometimes that 1/4" less on the bolt throw is nice
Click to expand...

It has no benefit over the swede really or the .284 with the exception of barrel life. But thats the whole point is achieving 2900+ fps in a short action .264 cartridge without having to fire-form brass and now having the throat durability increased due to the 30 degree shoulder. Also no neck turning or trimming to make the brass. Only downfall to me will be using Rem. or Winchester brass, not that it's bad by any means i just like my nosler brass. It like Lapua has a considerably thicker neck, but when forming the 6.5Lr the thicker neck forms a donut when put through a full length resizing die and has to be turned. The remington & winchester versions of .243 and .260 do not have to be turned. Just run through a full length resizer, then you prep them like any normal casing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top