Thoughts on 260 Remington?

[Doyle]

Well, my .260 has an 18.5" barrel and nothing I have ever shot cared. However, I don't consider myself a long range hunter. I never get to hunt any place with more than a couple hundred yds of visibility.

[rodfac]

Hunters are taking elk at 700+ yards with the 6.5 Creedmoor, no reason the 260 won't kill deer at 400

Good grief..."hunters", there's a far better name for those that try these stunts on actual game animals, but it'd get me banned...

I'm probably wasting my breath anyway. I'd suggest ringing some steel way out there, or punching paper...leave the game alone or learn to stalk closer.

BTW, here are the ballistic figures for a Sierra, .264 120 gr bullet SPBT, at 3000 fps muzzle velocity, & zeroed for 300 yds.

At 1000 yds = drop: 340" (28 feet), wind 5 mph = 61" drift, Velocity 1132 fps, 370 fp-lbs of energy.

Rod

[Rifletom]

I'm with rodfac on this. 700 yards, with the 6.5 Creedmoor!? Really? This is not hunting. This is "sniping", or not knowing how to stalk closer to your quarry. I know all about "no ground cover" and all that, so, let's not go there. But, when did shooting across a canyon[300+ yards] come to lobbing bullets at ridiculous ranges become hunting? It's called hunting for a reason. We ain't Recon sniperator's, we're hunters. Get closer. Learn the method.
BTW, nothing to do with the .260 Rem. All "hunting" cartridges.

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by Rifletom

I'm with rodfac on this. 700 yards, with the 6.5 Creedmoor!? Really? This is not hunting. This is "sniping", or not knowing how to stalk closer to your quarry. I know all about "no ground cover" and all that, so, let's not go there. But, when did shooting across a canyon[300+ yards] come to lobbing bullets at ridiculous ranges become hunting? It's called hunting for a reason. We ain't Recon sniperator's, we're hunters. Get closer. Learn the method.
BTW, nothing to do with the .260 Rem. All "hunting" cartridges.

I'd read somewhere that in sniper training they are taught to get as close to their target as they can! I think the sniper is expected to get his target, not wound and certainly not miss!

[Whistlebritches]

Originally Posted by dvdcrr

Helllo,
I was wondering about your thoughts on 260 Remington as a plains hunting cartridge.
Logically, on a short action platform, if you want to move up from 24 cal to shoot 120-130 gr. bullets, the next available 308 spawn is 260 Remington. Basically looking at the numbers 2800-2900 fps.with 130 gr. bullets. I would really like a 22" barrel, however it appears that 24" might be necessary to get to the 2900 fps mark. However with 120 gr. more speed is available. I like 130's, but if 120 gr. has acceptable BC and SD (to me acceptable would be equal to or better than 243 100 gr. SP.) then I would be OK with 120 gr.
Do you think this cartridge has the speed and flatness to be really good on plains game including 200lb deer, antelope to 375 yds? Or too slow/ not stellar performer?

When they develope something that will outshine the 25-06 in the shooting situations you describe.........I'll replace mine.Til then 117 gr Hornady BTSP's and SST's rule the day and the game.

[Archie]

My information makes me agree with Wyosmith and Ratshooter.

The 6.5x55 Swede with 160 grain bullets is what I consider my 'anything' rifle. By 'anything' I mean any problem I need to resolve in my life. I live in the "Great Central Plateau" and travel coast to coast. I don't intent to go to Alaska or further,

Were I building a rifle from the ground up, I would want a 6.5x51mm cartridge (6.5x.308Win). The .308 is a commoner head size; the only reason to deviate from the Swede. However, I would stipulate the barrel to be twisted for 1:7 twist to handle the heavy bullets.

I use bolt action rifles nearly exclusively. I have no reason to fire a fusillade.

Ratshooter's comments based on 'the old guys' are based on experience. Sectional density works well on game. The laws of physics have not changed. It still works. Other than in some hunting stories, most of us regular guys cannot make a precise shot, off hand, at four hundred or more yards. I doubt most hunters can even see a game animal four hundred yards off.

Onn the other hand, if one simply wants an AR-type rifle that will shoot at targets at 700 yards and past, be my guest. Find someone having one and ask him. Just don't ask me to encourage you. Stand on your own and make up your own mind.

[Doyle]

Were I building a rifle from the ground up, I would want a 6.5x51mm cartridge (6.5x.308Win). The .308 is a commoner head size; the only reason to deviate from the Swede. However, I would stipulate the barrel to be twisted for 1:7 twist to handle the heavy bullets.

Isn't a 6.5x.308Win simply another name for .260 or is there something else different?

[jimbob86]

here are new bullets/powders available for the .270 Win now that let it shine as a great hunting cartridge. The new Winchester Deer Season XP 130 grain seems to work especially well and I just tried it in my 24" barreled Rem 700.

I chrono-ed it yesterday at 3,100 fps and the bullet shape makes it hold trajectory quite well. Can't wait to shoot something with it.

JP

This is "New"?

I have and old Outdoor Life book "Deer Hunter's Yearbook 1984" .... there's a chart in there somewhere where they chronoed different guns/ barrel lengths .... and gave what was considered standard velocities ..... noting guns are different, individually .... 3,100 f/sec was always considered the nominal velocity for a 130 gr bullet (they got an average of 3,140 for their 24" barreled gun) .....

There might be some better bullet shapes out there now, but I remember 1984 .... the first year I hunted deer ..... the .270WIN fed a 130gr BTSP was considered the flattest shooting non magnum gun available then ..... This stuff is not "NEW" .....

[jimbob86]

Finn Aagaard wrote about his dad using a 7x57 military rifle with a 29" barrel.

I have a couple with 29" tubes .... it'd help keep the kids from getting overly excited and firing with the muzzle inside the ground blind again...... that is LOUD.

[fourbore]

The 6.5x55 Swede with 160 grain bullets is what I consider my 'anything' rifle. By 'anything' I mean any problem I need to resolve in my life. I live in the "Great Central Plateau" and travel coast to coast. I don't intent to go to Alaska or further,

I found 200 rounds of corrosive primed ammo with 160 grain FMJ RN bullets. Price very right. I walked away as I did not want the hassle of a soap & water clean up. I decided to go back and buy the ammo and pull bullets. I dont think it should be necessary to exclude Alaska and in fact these bullets have taken elephant. Not to say ideal or even legal, but; for information - they have a penetration reputation. Poetic.

It just works out nice in life, the bigger the game and larger the bullet the closer you want to be and lower velocity is ok. And for the smaller and less significant critters the longer distance and lighter bullets will shoot flat out.

Mostly hypothetical chit chat - such is the mystique of the 6.5. I guess you can multiply that by any MM you want, 52,53,54,55 right on up the line to some absurd weatherby.

The sights on my Swedish Mauser are marked up to 1900 meters. That is 2077 yards. I believe that was with the 160 grain slugs.

[ndking1126]

dvdcrr, I would recommend the 24" for open country and max pbr. 22" would work too but with a slightly shorter pbr. If the 24 is too long it can be shortened.

You're on the right track. I love my 260 (26 heavy barrel, not a hunting rifle though) and suspect you'll be very happy.

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by Doyle

Isn't a 6.5x.308Win simply another name for .260 or is there something else different?

Your wrong there, it's another name for the 263 Express!

[Doyle]

Your wrong there, it's another name for the 263 Express!

Never heard of her.

[Jack O'Conner]

We often make the long drive to western South Dakota for antelope hunting where my shots tend to be quite long. But my older .243 has never let me down. Accuracy is far more important than the weight of the bullet. I hunt with 95 grain Black Hills Ammo featuring the SST bullet. Your 260 will be fine if you shoot an accurate load.

Jack

[bamaranger]

I had an affliction for a .260 for a couple of years, long before the 6.5 CRM craze started. Options for a new .260 are pretty limited these days. I did find a Ruger American so chambered about 2 yrs ago, but when the store made its put up or shut up offer, that American .260 was priced too high for my pockets. It is a rare chambering in that model.

Were I to continue down the .260 path, I think I'd get a trashed Savage 110 (long) action, rebarrel with a slim sporter weight 22" tube with a long throat, and stock it in the light synthetic handle without going too broke. A tidy 3x9x40mm or maybe a 4x12x(?) would give me enough X power to shoot as far as I ever should on big game. Should be faster/flatter than a 6.5 CRM or a standard throat .260.

You guys are gonna bankrupt me with all the guns you remind me I want!!!!!

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by Doyle

Isn't a 6.5x.308Win simply another name for .260 or is there something else different?

I think your talking about the 263 Express!

[Doyle]

Well, I had to look up the .263 Express and found out that it is just a primitive (failed) version of the .260 with a different shoulder angle.

[Don Fischer]

No, no no. A primitive failed version of the 6.5x308!

[TimW77]

This post ought to upset a few whiners...

Don fischer Told Doyle that the 6.5x308W is not another name for the .260...

Sorry Don but YOU ARE WRONG...

The "common name" for the .260 Rem is the 6.5x308 but it is ALSO known as the 6.5x308 A-Square...

The .263 Express is basically the same BUT made by necking UP the .243 Win (that is where the "3" comes from in the name)...

About 1955 or 1956, right after the .308 Win came out "Ken Waters" took the recently introduced .243 Winchester, necked it down to use a 6.5 mm bullet and called it the 263 Express.

The sole difference between Ken's version of this 6.5mm and others was the use of .243 Win cases which he found easier to NECK-UP than necking down the .308 Win...


"In the 1970s, we discovered the 6.5-06..."

Kind of late to the party guy (57+ years). The first version of the 6.5-06 was introduced in 1913 well before Winchester introduced its .270 Win...


"The 6.5 Creedmoor is a .308 case, very slightly shortened, and with the shoulder set back..."

This is WRONG ALSO!!!

The 6.5 Creedmoor is NOT a shortened .308 with shoulder set back and different shoulder angle.

It is IN FACT a necked down .30 TC with no other changes!!!

Since the .30 TC was developed from the .250 Savage, it (the .250 Savage) AND the .22-250 can be used for making 6.5mm Creedmore cases with additional steps...


I purchased my .260 several years before the Creedmore came out. Others can say all they want but after all the research I have done, I would STILL choose the .260 over the 6.5 Creedmoor. Does NOT matter what action type. Although I currently just have a bolt action now, I am planning on having an "AR-10 TYPE" rifle built and it will be in .260 Rem...

T.

[Don Fischer]

A 130gr 270 bullet traveling at 3000+fps that miss's isn't worth much.

[Don Fischer]

Originally Posted by TimW77

This post ought to upset a few whiners...

Don fischer Told Doyle that the 6.5x308W is not another name for the .260...

Sorry Don but YOU ARE WRONG...

The "common name" for the .260 Rem is the 6.5x308 but it is ALSO known as the 6.5x308 A-Square...

The .263 Express is basically the same BUT made by necking UP the .243 Win (that is where the "3" comes from in the name)...

About 1955 or 1956, right after the .308 Win came out "Ken Waters" took the recently introduced .243 Winchester, necked it down to use a 6.5 mm bullet and called it the 263 Express.

The sole difference between Ken's version of this 6.5mm and others was the use of .243 Win cases which he found easier to NECK-UP than necking down the .308 Win...


"In the 1970s, we discovered the 6.5-06..."

Kind of late to the party guy (57+ years). The first version of the 6.5-06 was introduced in 1913 well before Winchester introduced its .270 Win...


"The 6.5 Creedmoor is a .308 case, very slightly shortened, and with the shoulder set back..."

This is WRONG ALSO!!!

The 6.5 Creedmoor is NOT a shortened .308 with shoulder set back and different shoulder angle.

It is IN FACT a necked down .30 TC with no other changes!!!

Since the .30 TC was developed from the .250 Savage, it (the .250 Savage) AND the .22-250 can be used for making 6.5mm Creedmore cases with additional steps...


I purchased my .260 several years before the Creedmore came out. Others can say all they want but after all the research I have done, I would STILL choose the .260 over the 6.5 Creedmoor. Does NOT matter what action type. Although I currently just have a bolt action now, I am planning on having an "AR-10 TYPE" rifle built and it will be in .260 Rem...

T.

I'm glad you came up with Ken water's name, my memory's not what it used to be. Let's see, 263 Express is actually the 243 x 308! Ya know, maybe long past time for building new cartridges on old case's!

P.O. Ackley Volume I page 356. cartridge is made by necking down the 308 case. Can also be made by necking up the 243 case. Largest developement work was done by Ken Water's of New Canaan, Ct.

Interesting. There were 6 different 6.5's on the 30-06 case, each slightly different. I should have looked up the number of them on the 308 with different names! Ah, in Ackley's vol I only one on the 308 case, the 263 but I read about the 6.5x308 also just can't remember where! Not Mentioned in Vol II.

[old roper]

In Ackley book page 356, what was interesting was Author's note bottom of page over to next page. This is just first part " Conversely, the 270 or 7mm with equal weight of bullets, presents greater gas area and will produce greater muzzle velocities over practical ranges."

[gw44]

The 260 was lift to die, just was not show cased at all !!!

[jackstrawIII]

260 would be fine. The 6.5 Creedmoor is making the 260 obsolete. If you reload, it matters not. If you ever want to buy ammo off the shelf, 260 is going to be harder and harder to find.

First comment was all you needed. 100% correct.

The 260 is a great cartridge and I love making brass from old Lake City 308 cases... however, if I were a betting man, the Creed is the cartridge of the future.

[2ndtimer]

Originally Posted by Sure Shot Mc Gee

Short action cartridges only appeal to short action likers. I prefer long actions cartridges due to their ability to hold more powder. I shoot a 1/4 bore 06 and like it allot.
Although, the 260 is a Remington design. 6.5 Creedmoor being Hornady's. I've never seen Hornady slam dunk a popular cartridge of their design into obsolescent's over night like Remington seems to have done. >Allot.<
My advice: Buy the creedmoor.

I don't know about Hornady killing a new proprietary cartridge overnight. Ever hear of the various Ruger Compact Magnum line of cartridges? I believe they were a very short lived Ruger/Hornady joint venture.
I still say that if Remington had offered the .260 Remington in their 24" barrel SPS rifle when it first came out, it could have been a smashing success, and the 6.5 Creedmoor probably never would have been attempted. It certainly is true that Remington's marketing wizards rival the Cleveland Browns front office in ineptitude!