That was interesting link, but, either I missed it or they didn't say what the base case was. One mentioned that it was fatter than the .308 and .260 (they are identical so no need to mention both unless you get paid by the word) - that must mean it's most likely .500" at the head, just like the old .284 Win. parent case to the 6.5x.284 Sako and same size as the .376 Styer - but they also say it's smaller than the .260 Rem- should have said shorter instead as I assume that's what they meant. Larger in diameter but shorter, wiht slighlty less case capacity and higher suggested pressure.

They mention exceeding CIP standards of 63,000 psi - well, there's not much room before primer problems surface so 65,000 is usually the peak for standard case sizes, normally, no matter the strength of the brass itself. By the same token, the .260 can also be brought up to 64,000psi or 65,000, just like the 6.5x47. No advantage there for the 47mm case compared to the 51mm case.

Another mention was that factory ammo was about 100fps slower than the .260 Rem, but also that it possessed better downrange ballistics?

Most everyone knows this isn't possible unless it produces higher velocities with the same bullet - does it? The 130 gr. data provided showed over 2,900fps with 130's - well, guess what my daughter's .260 does- exactlty the same thing except higher speeds with the 123gr. No advantage for the 6.5x47 in ballistics, but no real disadvantage either.

Lapua brass is available for either.

Yes - it would be a cool round/rifle to have, although the 6.5 Creedmore does about the same thing. Do we really need another 6.5 since we have the Creedmore and the .260?

The answer to that should be an emphatic "NO" - but - one may build whatever one desires - ain't it great!

I'm looking forward to hearing how it shoots, Neale.