Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Ken Waters, father of the .260 Remington

I believe so. I'm perplexed as to why it did not have a more eager reception at and shortly after it's introduction. Don't know if a better all round cartridge could be designed for deer hunting at ranges most of us can be effective. It can be loaded with 100gr bullets or 140gr or any in between and kill very well without kicking the snot out of the shooter young or old, big or small. With a little more marketing whoopie from the experts and more realistic views on what it takes to kill a deer by hunters it could have been a barn burner. If more hunters had been able to hunt with, for example, a factory 129 grain Interlock loading from Hornady a much better opinion of the round would have been formed. I too discovered the .260 in December 1997. I bought a Stainless Model 7 along with a factory youth stock for my son that Christmas and he killed his first deer with it the following week. He was 7 years old the day after Christmas. He still loves it.

Fortunately the Creedmore has come along with the support it needs to be successful, meaning hunters can continue to enjoy the advantages of a short action 6.5. But it's no better a hunting round than the .260 for the vast majority of deer hunters. Not to argue the benefits of a sometimes slightly faster twist and better case design because I can't. But then when the bullet lands at 30 or 300 yards the deer can't either.

Remington failed with the 260, like they did with the 6mm, 280, and with the various short magnums. 260 was introduced with 1 in 10 twist, a twist that would not stabilize the 140 grain thumper that they promoted. No target rifles introduced,and no match grade ammo.
It seems to have survived on its own anyway. I have a model 7 ss t hat has used 120, and 129 grain bullets from the start.precision is more than adequate. Long live the 260!

Single simple reason the 260 never took off is the 7MM08 in a hunting rifle does everything better.

I figgered nothin to loose and held up one of my 7mm/08 catridges butt first for her to see. An she fell over DEAD. That 7m oh ate stamp skeered her plumb to death. Somethin a .260 would never have done. No doubt.

I read in Hornady's 9th edition that Jim Carmichael was involved in developing the .260 Remington. They should check the historical records. P.O. Ackley attributed the ".263 Express" to Ken Waters in the Handbook for Shooters & Reloaders, Vol. 1, p. 356 (pub. 1962). In Ken Waters' Notebook, p. 364, we read that Mr. Waters developed the cartridge (.308 necked to .264) in the mid-1950s.

260 was introduced with 1 in 10 twist

I thought that was flat stupid from day one. If you are going to copy the ballistics of the 6.5x55 then copy what made it great. That would be it's 1-7.78 twist barrel.


Now they have it in 1-8 with the new 700 SPS. Same story as the 244, too little too late. You really only get one shot at the brass ring in the gun world, screw that up and you might as well hang it up.


I had a buddy that bought one when they first came out. We loaded up some 155 grain matchking's They didn't fly sideways at 100 yards but they did print oblong holes. Probably would have been sideways out farther.

It shot 120 grain matchkings well.