The Vs. Vs. Vs. Debate

Reloadin Joe

The Vs Vs Vs Debate!

By Joe Evans

257 Weatherby Mag Vs 6.5 PRC vs 264 Winchester Mag Comparing these cartridges reminds me of the old 270 vs 30-06 debate. All are similar but there exists some significant differences. Really, sort of like apples and oranges. Actually, what prompted this article was an essay by Brad Fitzpatrick comparing the 257 to the 6.5. I tossed the 264 in because nobody says too much about it and 3000 to 3100 fps is readily achieved, a little more than the PRC. The 257 and 264 both have the word “magnum” in their title and were designed for long range hunting. Barrel life of either is a little short. PRC stands for “precision rifle cartridge.” This cartridge was designed for long range target shooting and matches where more velocity than the 6.5 Creedmoor would be desired. Barrel life is definitely better than the 257, could only be marginally better than the 264 due to somewhat less velocity. The 6.5 PRC is an entirely new modern design which overcomes many problems endemic with older designs. Short and fat, the PRC does away with the old magnum belt which is generally considered a plus. Personally, I don’t think a belt makes much difference one way or another. The case would undoubtedly be a little easier and less expensive to manufacture. I have run into a situation with belted cases where the belt was positioned properly for correct headspace but head to shoulder length was far too short for a handloader to headspace off the shoulder. Safe case life is dramatically reduced. Fat case design of the PRC could possibly lead to feeding failures, but I don not know this for certain. The current interest in long range shooting has stimulated the development of a number of new cartridge designs with the 6.5 PRC. The manufacturers have stepped up to bat and are offering a superior quality product. Quality of brass in older hunting cartridges such as the 257 and 267 cannot compete here. The 257 and the 264 both consume more powder than the PRC. Well, there is no such thing as a free lunch and if you want more velocity you will have to up the powder ante. The 257 and 264 both, at one time, had light bullet weights available in factory loads for use on varmints and predators. None of these cartridges could be considered as being desirable for varmint hunting. I’ve used the 257 with both 87 and 100 grain bullets on ground squirrels but did not enjoy the experience. With anything of this magnitude it is necessary to have a spotter. . It is said that the 257 and 264 have an advantage in that there are more rifles on the used rack. Well, maybe, but these rifles may be on the used rack because of worn bores, caveat emptor. The 257 and the 264 are criticized for having a loud muzzle blast. Just wear your hearing protectors. By the way, don’t forget your ear protection with the 6.5 PRC. Just like most any powder burning device this 6.5 can injure your hearing. Barrel length? 24 or 26 inch barrels are required for any of these cannons. No carbine length tubes for any of the three! The 6.5 PRC has no old classic rifles available. I guess if you want one you will just have to build one to your specifications. That doesn’t sound like a bad deal at all! Ammo availability? Right now good luck with any of the three. I did find some Remington 264 ammo at $80.00 per box of 20! Hopefully, better times are around the corner. So what do I like? I have a 257 Weatherby and I love it to death. Actually, its been kind of a love-hate relationship. Seriously, I could be happy with any of the three. Having said that, I prefer the 6mm Creedmoor for match work over the 6.5 PRC. For medium game the 257 or the 264 will work equally well. Fact is, I just might have a 26 inch barrel 264 built just to have fun with. After all, it makes a helluva noise and packs a helluva wallop! Really, though, any of these three will work for you. Better yet, considering the increase in the amount of disposable income, why not just acquire all three? Good shooting, make every shot count and conserve ammo!