Winchester vs Lapua, 6.5x284 Brass
- Thread starter JerryK
- Start date
Rich De
Member
Just remember, the Winchester brass mic's around .495" on the base where the Lapua/Norma/Hornady 6.5 x .284 mic's right at .500". If your chamber is cut with the Lapua type reamer, it will allow your base to somewhat "bulge", but not effect accuracy. On the other hand, if you FL resize, you will be working the brass quite a bit unless you use a Win. 284 FL or body die just for sizing the body. You could have a reamer ground to correct this and then just use Winchester brass??
Rich De
Rich De
The original .284 was developed by Winchester and wildcatters decided it would be even better at 6.5mm (or .260) than the original .284 (or 7mm) and so the wildcat 6.5 X 284 came into existance. Some early examples of Winchester .284 brass were of extremely high quality, and current batches aren't too bad either but take a little prep. There were various versions of the 6.5 X 284 wildcat, none however were standardized by way of SAAMI or CIP (Euro equivalent). And some fella well recognized in long range circles bought ALL of the remaining highest quality Winchester .284 white box brass.
Norma saw all of this, and possibly with a little elbow jogging by Bill Shehane, came out with the 6.5 X 284 Norma as a standard CIP chambering. The case dimensions are just a very little bit different from the original .284 Winchester case, probably to make it a "unique" chambering for lawyering purposes. From what I've heard the original Norma 6.5 X 284 brass was of exceptional quality but I have not been overly impressed by any that has passed my way in recent years.
Lapua makes brass for the 6.5 X 284 Norma CIP standard chambering. The Lapua brass I've had for 6.5 X 284 has been of excellent quality, so much so that I have had a reamer specifically spec'd for use with Lapua brass.
But back to the rub. While generally the 6.5 X 284 wildcat based on the original Winchester .284 case and the 6.5 X 284 Norma are very, very close, they are not identical. Depending on reamer design they may be interchangeable in a given chamber or not. Ballistically they are the same.
If I had to do it over again I'd still go with the 6.5 X 284 Norma chambering, simply because of the excellent Lapua brass. That and the fact that mine flat out shoots so very well.
Norma saw all of this, and possibly with a little elbow jogging by Bill Shehane, came out with the 6.5 X 284 Norma as a standard CIP chambering. The case dimensions are just a very little bit different from the original .284 Winchester case, probably to make it a "unique" chambering for lawyering purposes. From what I've heard the original Norma 6.5 X 284 brass was of exceptional quality but I have not been overly impressed by any that has passed my way in recent years.
Lapua makes brass for the 6.5 X 284 Norma CIP standard chambering. The Lapua brass I've had for 6.5 X 284 has been of excellent quality, so much so that I have had a reamer specifically spec'd for use with Lapua brass.
But back to the rub. While generally the 6.5 X 284 wildcat based on the original Winchester .284 case and the 6.5 X 284 Norma are very, very close, they are not identical. Depending on reamer design they may be interchangeable in a given chamber or not. Ballistically they are the same.
If I had to do it over again I'd still go with the 6.5 X 284 Norma chambering, simply because of the excellent Lapua brass. That and the fact that mine flat out shoots so very well.
Bob Kingsbury
New member
I'm afraid you have been ill advised. Bake some M & M's and you will see what happens to brass
Rust:
As to the original Norma 6.5x284 brass, it did measure very nicely indeed. It also took them 4 generations to get it "right" and they still could not do it. One generation (the 2nd or 3rd I believe) was recalled. I gave 475 to Scott Fletcher to use in a varmint gun trip out west. I threw the rest in a trash can at Hawks Ridge. I once tested about 60 cases from the 4th generation. Without ever fireing a shot, Fed 210m would fall out of the primer pockets with a slight tap on my loading bench. I was seating them with a Sinclair tool and I could feel little resistance on the unfired brass and none on the two that would not hold the primers.
I have also been corresponding with a fellow shooter who was using expanded up Norma 6.5x284 Norma brass in a 284 Shehane. He could not even approach my fire-forming loads with the Norma. He switched to Lapua and everything changed for the best.
I experienced the only pierced primer in my life while using 6.5x284 Norma brass and it blew out the face of a BAT bolt (about $650 at the time) like you had hit it with a hammer and ice pick. Bottom line, you could not give me 6.5x284 Norma brass. Been there and done that and paid the heavy price.
My $.02,
Jim Hardy
As to the original Norma 6.5x284 brass, it did measure very nicely indeed. It also took them 4 generations to get it "right" and they still could not do it. One generation (the 2nd or 3rd I believe) was recalled. I gave 475 to Scott Fletcher to use in a varmint gun trip out west. I threw the rest in a trash can at Hawks Ridge. I once tested about 60 cases from the 4th generation. Without ever fireing a shot, Fed 210m would fall out of the primer pockets with a slight tap on my loading bench. I was seating them with a Sinclair tool and I could feel little resistance on the unfired brass and none on the two that would not hold the primers.
I have also been corresponding with a fellow shooter who was using expanded up Norma 6.5x284 Norma brass in a 284 Shehane. He could not even approach my fire-forming loads with the Norma. He switched to Lapua and everything changed for the best.
I experienced the only pierced primer in my life while using 6.5x284 Norma brass and it blew out the face of a BAT bolt (about $650 at the time) like you had hit it with a hammer and ice pick. Bottom line, you could not give me 6.5x284 Norma brass. Been there and done that and paid the heavy price.
My $.02,
Jim Hardy
Last edited:
Yes. Get some new advisers. Brass can be annealed at around 670-degrees F. You never, ever want to anneal it down by the case head. That is dangerous. Last time I looked, baking was an all-over proposition.
Brass is hardened by working it. The RWS logo says "It's fire hardened." Like so much advertising, it is a lie. Well, the RWS brass is good, but it isn't "fire hardened." Heat can only soften it. Too much heat -- like the old wives tale of heating it cherry red -- ruins it.
You can work harden your cases by firing 3-4-5 times with milder loads 45,000+ psi. But it will still grow a bit.
Best guess is there is a mismatch between you chamber, your brass, and your dies, and neither annealing nor work hardening will solve the problem.
.................However, I got, what was one of the first batchs from Bill Shehane, shot the record in 2002 on the 8th. reload and was still shooting it when I retired that barrel with 13 reloads (100 pieces of brass).Rich:
I remember that as well. Seems like such a short time ago. If I remember correctly, you shot your record with a 284 Super (blown out 284 to 40 degree shoulder) and the 147 Clinch River. I also remember how they played with your head when they called you to the target shed. But, you came out more than a little happy. Great times for sure.
Jim
I remember that as well. Seems like such a short time ago. If I remember correctly, you shot your record with a 284 Super (blown out 284 to 40 degree shoulder) and the 147 Clinch River. I also remember how they played with your head when they called you to the target shed. But, you came out more than a little happy. Great times for sure.
Jim
Not a problem. You want us to remind you that (likely) you've got fewer brains as well ;-)Jim..........Thanks for reminding me that I am 8 yrs. older now with much less hair
Rich De
(And I'm in the club, too.)
Jim,
My experience with Norma 6.5 X 284 was extremely disappointing. The reject rate out of the box was about 80%. About 20% of the rejects were salvaged for load development by a lot of neck turning. The rest was bad enough that the necks would have been too thin for the chamber.
Since then I bought a thirty year supply of Lapua 6.5 X 284 brass from a good lot, spec'd a reamer to work with the brass that also works very well with an off the shelf Redding FL sizing die, albeit the neck has been honed to open it up a little to the desired diameter. Almost foolproof, or at least difficult for me to screw up.
My experience with Norma 6.5 X 284 was extremely disappointing. The reject rate out of the box was about 80%. About 20% of the rejects were salvaged for load development by a lot of neck turning. The rest was bad enough that the necks would have been too thin for the chamber.
Since then I bought a thirty year supply of Lapua 6.5 X 284 brass from a good lot, spec'd a reamer to work with the brass that also works very well with an off the shelf Redding FL sizing die, albeit the neck has been honed to open it up a little to the desired diameter. Almost foolproof, or at least difficult for me to screw up.
D
Dan Conzo
Guest
JerryK
The old boxed Winchester brass is (in my opinion) every bit as good or better than Lapua brass except the the primer pockets in some lots become loose sooner. The flashholes are always centered in the pocket unlike some lots of Lapua brass and they much closer than Lapua. The boxed WW brass is also much lighter than Lapua. I don't mind using Lapua brass it's very good. I'm just starting to mess with new Winchester bagged brass, a friend of mine broke a score LG record with it last year (which has been broken this year) @ 1000 yard b/r.
The old boxed Winchester brass is (in my opinion) every bit as good or better than Lapua brass except the the primer pockets in some lots become loose sooner. The flashholes are always centered in the pocket unlike some lots of Lapua brass and they much closer than Lapua. The boxed WW brass is also much lighter than Lapua. I don't mind using Lapua brass it's very good. I'm just starting to mess with new Winchester bagged brass, a friend of mine broke a score LG record with it last year (which has been broken this year) @ 1000 yard b/r.
D
Dan Conzo
Guest
JerryK
There was a typo error in the second line of my reply-I left out the word "weigh" I meant to say in the phrase "they weigh much closer than Lapua."
There was a typo error in the second line of my reply-I left out the word "weigh" I meant to say in the phrase "they weigh much closer than Lapua."