.260 rem

newby.204

Anyone use .260? do you use it on paper or deer? what are your thoughts on it?, do you have it hard finding ammunition?

Norwayviking

why not go 6,5x55 instead.
Good round for both paper and hunting.
And easier for ammo too i believe,unless you reload.

Tackleberrywho

newby.204 wrote: »

Anyone use .260? do you use it on paper or deer? what are your thoughts on it?, do you have it hard finding ammunition?

.260 or 6.5-08 I'll call it to keep things simple.

Bigger than the .243 for more knock down and better BC.

Argueably a contender against the 7mm-08


I have only ever met one irish man who raves about them.
The 6XC would "argueably" out perform it on paper

The 7mm-08 and .308 would out perform it on deer.

John Carmichael got remmy to make it and it never really took off.
I know Remmy offer it factory ammo, not sure does anyone else.

You could get stuck with a white Elephant that is hard to feed and harder to sell on.

tomcat220t

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

.260 or 6.5-08 I'll call it to keep things simple.

Bigger than the .243 for more knock down and better BC.

Argueably a contender against the 7mm-08


I have only ever met one irish man who raves about them.
The 6XC would "argueably" out perform it on paper

The 7mm-08 and .308 would out perform it on deer.

John Carmichael got remmy to make it and it never really took off.
I know Remmy offer it factory ammo, not sure does anyone else.

You could get stuck with a white Elephant that is hard to feed and harder to sell on.

6XC;)

Tackleberrywho

tomcat220t wrote: »

6XC;)

I know!

OllieNorth

Sorry tac dont see how a smaller head in a shorter case can be better than the 260. Also 6xc barrell life is allegedly significantly shorter than 260. Personally I think its a very versatile round with head weights ranging from 105gr to 142gr (think someone does a 160 as well not sure). Only drawback is you would need to be part of the pilot scheme to take full advantage.
I think it has the possability to do all from serious target to varimint to deer. Have one my self and love it.

tomcat220t

OllieNorth wrote: »

Sorry tac dont see how a smaller head in a shorter case can be better than the 260. Also 6xc barrell life is allegedly significantly shorter than 260. Personally I think its a very versatile round with head weights ranging from 105gr to 142gr (think someone does a 160 as well not sure). Only drawback is you would need to be part of the pilot scheme to take full advantage.
I think it has the possability to do all from serious target to varimint to deer. Have one my self and love it.

What do you use the .260 for ?Any details?The 6xc gets around 3000 + barrel life !

Tackleberrywho

OllieNorth wrote: »

Sorry tac dont see how a smaller head in a shorter case can be better than the 260. Also 6xc barrell life is allegedly significantly shorter than 260. Personally I think its a very versatile round with head weights ranging from 105gr to 142gr (think someone does a 160 as well not sure). Only drawback is you would need to be part of the pilot scheme to take full advantage.
I think it has the possability to do all from serious target to varimint to deer. Have one my self and love it.

I only know of one man in the 26 counties that raves of the prowess of the .260....
And he was shooting a 6.5-.284

tomcat220t

Hornadys 6.5 Creedmoor has almost identical ballistics to the .260 rem with lots of factory ammo ,match and hunting !Another option is the 6.5x55 with better boiler room for the heavier rounds and again lots of factory match and hunting ammo but not suited for a short action.The .260 rem lacks the boiler room to push the heavier rounds (140gr) fast enough to have any ballistic advantage over the 6xc ,imo.

It wasn't me!

tomcat220t wrote: »

The .260 rem lacks the boiler room to push the heavier rounds (140gr) fast enough to have any ballistic advantage over the 6xc ,imo.

In addition, if you want to use it in a true short action, you'll have to seat those long 6.5mm bullets very deep to make the length, which compromises your powder capacity and efficiency.

tomcat220t

It wasn't me! wrote: »

In addition, if you want to use it in a true short action, you'll have to seat those long 6.5mm bullets very deep to make the length, which compromises your powder capacity and efficiency.

Lapua solved this issue with their 6.5x47 .Very accurate but only draw back with that round is a small primer ,imo.

It wasn't me!

tomcat220t wrote: »

Lapua solved this issue with their 6.5x47 .Very accurate but only draw back with that round is a small primer ,imo.

Nice round. Was used to shoot a 600 ex 600 in the 300m prone at the Worlds last year. However, while it's great for a lot of things, it was designed between Grunig and Elmiger and Lapua for 300m, and it just doesn't quite fit the bill there, where there's really no need for anything above 6mm, and the pay-off in terms of recoil and such means better shooting.

tomcat220t

It wasn't me! wrote: »

Nice round. Was used to shoot a 600 ex 600 in the 300m prone at the Worlds last year. However, while it's great for a lot of things, it was designed between Grunig and Elmiger and Lapua for 300m, and it just doesn't quite fit the bill there, where there's really no need for anything above 6mm, and the pay-off in terms of recoil and such means better shooting.

The 6br seems the one to beat @300-600 yards .Thats where the first ever berger vld had been introuduced as a 6mm 105gr vld for 300 meter .

It wasn't me!

tomcat220t wrote: »

The 6br seems the one to beat @300-600 yards .Thats where the first ever berger vld had been introuduced as a 6mm 105gr vld for 300 meter .

Yep, damn near universal in ISSF competition. Few people using old favourites like .308 win and 6.5x55, and a few using new things like the 6XC (slightly faster than 6BR for no perceptible extra recoil - not bad if it were as cheap to load or as widely available) and the 6.5x47, but 6BR rules the roost. It's just exactly right for the discipline.