Home
I've gotten interested in the .260 rem due to its good ballistics and low recoil. I know this is a tough question to answer, but where would you draw the line in hunting with this round? I know it would be fine for whitetails at 200yds, but would it be fine for an elk at 400 yds? I know shot placement has everything to do with it, but everything has a breaking point where it becomes almost unethical to hunt this animal at that range sort of thing. Where would you draw the line with the .260 rem shooting a 140gr bullet? Should you base the answer on energy in ft/lbs? Thanks.
dont poke at critters bigger than yotes at 400(a personal limit, nothing more) but i wouldnt hesitate to put a 140 grain bullet out of my 260 at a bull elk sitting at inside 300.....wouldnt hesitate to shoot a moose with one either.....basically within the ranges i care to shoot big game, anything short of a griz ill use the 260 on....
As you have said, this is a difficult question. It's hard to get enough data to really say. But here are a couple of indicators:

One of the Scandinavian countries made an attempt to correlate the rapidity of the kill with the cartridge used. The Swedish 6.5x55 did quite well on alg, and I think you can depend on the 260 being indistinguishable from that.

My own opinion is that the 260 is closer to the 30-06 in killing power than many people suspect. It will reliably drill a 14-16" hole, and the chances of that transecting a vital spot are quite good.

My main go-to big game gun is a 7x57 loaded to modern pressures and using heavy for caliber bullets. I think it is quite adequate for anything I care to hunt, since I'm not interested in the large bears. The 260 is not really that much different from the 7x57.

As you pointed out, one key is shot placement. Another is bullet construction. Standard bullets generally need to impact between 2100 and 2800 FPS, and Partitions need to impact somewhere above about 1800 FPS. If you are using the appropriate bullet impacting at the appropriate speed and putting it in the right place, then I think that the fact you are using a 6.5mm 140 bullet instead of 30 caliber 180 grain bullet is less important.
There's a lot better elk rounds than a .260. I have little doubt that it will do but most everyone has a .30-06 as well!

IMO the .260 is a deer and pronghorn round suitable to 400 yards in the hands of a skilled shooter. IMO 120 grain bullets are great for this task.

If you must shoot elk with it, get some 140s and keep the range to under 300 yards.....

The little 6.5 rounds are truly amazing!
The 6.5x55, which is a ballistic twin to the 260 is good for as far as most people have any business shooting. At 2,700 most bullets retain 2,000 to at least 400 yards. I have made a couple of 350ish yard shots on pretty big mule deer and have had dead deer and exits with 140 NP. It works on elk fine, but you have to keep in mind (in my opinion anyway) that while it is an adequate elk cartridge, there is not a lot of margin of error for being any more than adequate.

You are right, shot placement is the key. The 260/6.5 Swede are low recoiling, accurate, and easy on the shoulder, and thus easy to shoot. Easy shooters putting a 140 bullet of the proper construction in the right place are better than a heavier bullet ill placed.
Thanks guys! I appreciate the first-hand info!
I would be quite willing to carry a .260 after just about any non-dangerous game on earth. Haven't quite done that, (of course!) but have used the 6.5x55 and 7x57 on quite a variety, both in North America and Africa, with basically the same weight range of bullets, and when I have done my job both cartridges have done theirs.
The characteristics of a 6.5mm bullet will give some counterintuitive results. Remember, it is a long skinny bullet with a high BC.

If a bullet impacts in its design range, the length of the wound channel is practically constant. For Speer and Sierra hunting bullets, that is almost always 2100-2800 FPS at impact. For Hornady, it is more like 1800-2800 FPS. Let me reiterate: Anywhere in that range of impact speeds the bullet will make practically the same length wound channel, about 14". Nosler Partitions do about 2-3" more, have no upper limit, and open at 1800 FPS. Other bullets will have different properties.

With the appropriate bullet, that means you can expect the standard, one-each wound channel at ranges beyond where I would normally choose to shoot. Do the ballistics for your chosen bullet, and make sure you take shots that put the bullet in its design impact range. You may be surprised how far that is for the 260.

I think that fatter, heavier bullets do give you some margin for the times that you hit a major bone. So I might choose a 7x57/162 or 30-06/180 for elk or moose. But would also not hesitate to use a 260/140 if that's what I felt like using that day.

Heck I'd hunt the big bears with it if it was all I had (or the 6.5x55). Has served me very well with standard cup and core, heavy for caliber bullets (160gr.). Building a mannlicher in the caliber now that I suspect to do most things I need doing very well.

I'm a sub-300 yard guy, prefer under 200, really like under 100. Maybe that makes a difference in my results.
Originally Posted by DocGlenn
I've gotten interested in the .260 rem due to its good ballistics and low recoil. I know this is a tough question to answer, but where would you draw the line in hunting with this round? I know it would be fine for whitetails at 200yds, but would it be fine for an elk at 400 yds? I know shot placement has everything to do with it, but everything has a breaking point where it becomes almost unethical to hunt this animal at that range sort of thing. Where would you draw the line with the .260 rem shooting a 140gr bullet? Should you base the answer on energy in ft/lbs? Thanks.


What rifles are still chambered in .260 Remington or are you going to have one built? It would be pretty cool to build one one with a 1-8 twisted barrel. I can't say I personally would want the standard 1-9 barrel but a 1-8...
Moose hunting in Sweden is mostly from stands, shots are usually less than 100 yards, and Swedish hunters must demonstrate ability to hit a moving moose target at 80 meters. They must account for shots taken. This sort of hunting style and discipline makes the 6.5x55mm cartridge very feasible. If you look at studies of cartridges used there, distances traveled, shots required, you see many of these moose moving 70 and 80 meters before dropping.

By contrast, spot and stalk hunting in Canada or Alaska might mean a longer shot at a moose on the edge of a wood, river or swamp.
If the 260 makes an adequate wound channel to kill the game you are hunting (which I would argue that it does for any NA game), then your only consideration is to keep the impact velocity high enough to expand the bullet properly. Those velocities are listed pretty well in the above posts.

You could shoot anything in NA with it and not tell much difference from most any other common caliber outside the really big boomers. So, "yes," I would shoot an elk with it at 400 yards.
Nah, a 260 won't kill elk.

[Linked Image]
That's a neat picture!
If the cartridge is capable of winning 1000 yd matches, then It's capable of killing at 300-400yds on critters like mule deer and elk. The very thing that makes the 6.5x55 and 260 capable of winning long ranges matches [sleek bullets that shed velocity very slowly and drift grudginly] help them carry the needed energy to expand bullets, break bones, and destroy tissue.

I once read of Clay Harvey killing a NC black bear at around 200 yds with a 6.5x55 and 160 grain bullets. The bear weighed almost 500 pounds. One of those long 160 grain Hornadys when thru the bear from stem to stern. If a 6.5x55 will shoot thru 6' of bear, I think a 260 can handle 15-20" of elk chest.
Quote
Clay Harvey


If he points at the sky and says "that way is up" take it with a grain of salt.

Not doubting the 6.5, just Clay.
Originally Posted by MattMan
Nah, a 260 won't kill elk.

[Linked Image]


Yeah, it's great for women and kids, but......

You can lump me in there. I love my .260, just wish I found it earlier.

George
It is one of the most popular moose rounds in Scandinavia (well, actually it's ballistic twin the 6.5 Swede is) - but the fact remains research (meaning actual data) showed that moose shot with the equivalent - fell within a few yards - of virtually every larger round.

I'd never hesitate to hunt animals up to, and including moose, with it - that is, if I was using a premium bullet.

I'd hesitate hunting grizzly with it - but I'd bet that I'd be OK with it - if I needed it for defense from a big bear.
Originally Posted by MattMan
Nah, a 260 won't kill elk.

[Linked Image]


Gotta say it again, great pic of a happy successful hunter!

Can you tell us a bit about the hunt, rifle, bullet used etc..

Thanks
Yes, the 260 is very capable at 400 on elk as is the 7mm-08.
Proper bullet & proper placement=A lot of work to pack the critter out.
Shooter skill and accurate rig in field conditions at that distance is assumed in my post.
Thanks again guys for all the feedback. Nice to have comments from guys with hands-on experience. Thanks again!
I figure if Greg Rodriquez's kids can pop some serious African plains game such as Zebra and Kudu with a 16-1/2" 260 Rem using 120 TTSX's, we can do like wise on elk.

I also think Denton is spot-on. Match the max distance to the terminal velocity your bullet needs to successfully expand.

Alan
Originally Posted by GSSP
I figure if Greg Rodriquez's kids can pop some serious African plains game such as Zebra and Kudu with a 16-1/2" 260 Rem using 120 TTSX's, we can do like wise on elk.

Alan


Kind of goes to my point about the 6.5 bullets allowing the Swede and 260 to get the most out of the powder charges. Too many people look at the paper ballistics and fail to account for the over 100 yrs of proven success that the 6.5s have achieved all over the world on all sizes of game.
Since I know the 250-3000 was a serious critter gitter in the day, the 260 must be whoompin serious. I wouldn't hesitate to hunt large stuff like moose and maybe black bear with it.
Originally Posted by Lonny


Can you tell us a bit about the hunt, rifle, bullet used etc..

Thanks


Ruger 260 Compact, moly'd 140 AB, Ramshot Hunter, 2625 fps muzzle velocity...

My wife is a killer, what else can I say?

I explained it all over here ->

260 vs. 308
I use the 260 a lot. While it is not a cannon, it will produce some lethal results even out to 400 yds with no problems.

If elk hunting with a 260 and a 125 grain partition, I would not feel undergunned if I was shooting at an Elk at 400 yds.

I have confidence in the bullet doing its job at that distance.
the only other factor is Seafire's bullet placement at that distance.

If the shot failed, I'd have to blame my bullet placement.+
I shot an elk at 175 yds with a load out of an 06 that was a 30/30 duplication load, with a 165 grain ballistic tip.
The MV was 2250 fps. the 650 lb cow elk, had the bullet penetrate both lungs destroying them, plus the upper half of the liver, plus cutting the esophagus. she made it about 60 yds and collapsed.

a 125 partition would easily do as much if not more damage at that distance.
I think that the limits that you put on the 260 are directly related to the skill of the shooter, the accuracy potential of the rifle, and correctly matching the bullet to the intended target.

If you are a reloader, the 260 is a very useful varmint and non-dangerous game cartridge. If you are not a reloader, there aren't many 260 factory loads available and those that are available are (it appears to me) intended to shooting deer.

I've settled, for the most part, on the following bullets in my 260s:

95 grain VMax for varmints and small deer, anything under 125 lbs.
100 grain BT or Partition, medium game.
120 grain BT, medium game.
129 grain SpirePoint or SST, medium game.
140 grain Partition, medium and larger non-dangerous game.
140 grain AMax, punching paper.

If limited to 1 bullet for all purposes, I'd opt for the 140 grain Partition, however since I'm not, I shoot a lot of 100 grain BTs and 129 grain Hornadys.

Jeff
Originally Posted by jimmyp
Originally Posted by DocGlenn
I've gotten interested in the .260 rem due to its good ballistics and low recoil. I know this is a tough question to answer, but where would you draw the line in hunting with this round? I know it would be fine for whitetails at 200yds, but would it be fine for an elk at 400 yds? I know shot placement has everything to do with it, but everything has a breaking point where it becomes almost unethical to hunt this animal at that range sort of thing. Where would you draw the line with the .260 rem shooting a 140gr bullet? Should you base the answer on energy in ft/lbs? Thanks.


What rifles are still chambered in .260 Remington or are you going to have one built? It would be pretty cool to build one one with a 1-8 twisted barrel. I can't say I personally would want the standard 1-9 barrel but a 1-8...


The only reason to have a 1-8 is to shoot 140 grain VLD target bullets. My 1-9 will shoot everything else- for some reason, it even shoots 130 Norma target bullets. 1-8 would not be ideal for the lighter bullets though.

I have killed elk to 350 yds with a 260 using 140 grain slam (factory ammo). Complete pass through on both shots too.

Originally Posted by dennisinaz
Originally Posted by jimmyp
Originally Posted by DocGlenn


What rifles are still chambered in .260 Remington or are you going to have one built? It would be pretty cool to build one one with a 1-8 twisted barrel. I can't say I personally would want the standard 1-9 barrel but a 1-8...


The only reason to have a 1-8 is to shoot 140 grain VLD target bullets. My 1-9 will shoot everything else- for some reason, it even shoots 130 Norma target bullets. 1-8 would not be ideal for the lighter bullets though.




I've also seen factory guns with 1-in-9 twist barrels that wouldn't even shoot 130s well at all. 1-in-8 works well with everything.
Wish W.D.M. Bell would chime in on this one. frown
IMO it will do elk at 500 if you can. It will put down 300lb mulie bucks at 520yds with ease.

I've been on the 7-08 wagon along time. I totally dig my 260 mtn rifle. I need a couple years to see if it can truimp the 7-08 on big bucks! I'm thinking it will.
Originally Posted by MattMan
Originally Posted by Lonny


Can you tell us a bit about the hunt, rifle, bullet used etc..

Thanks


Ruger 260 Compact, moly'd 140 AB, Ramshot Hunter, 2625 fps muzzle velocity...

My wife is a killer, what else can I say?

I explained it all over here ->

260 vs. 308


MattMan, you are making me miss our Compact .260 darn it.
Doc-personally I feel that the 260 is one incredibly capable round and would have absolutely no issues using it on elk to 400 and under the right conditions quite a bit further than that.

Someone mentioned having an 06 around. To this it's my personaly opinion that in order for the 06 to penetrate more than the 260 would with a good 140 the 06 would have to use the 200. I feel that the 140 out of the 260 will penetrate just as far as a 180 out of an 06.

Comments to the sort of it'd be ok to 300 and under and such really crack me up... smile

Dober

Dober
Hey, I have seen 140's from the .260 bounce off animals and drop to ground unexpanded at 301 yards....
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Hey, I have seen 140's from the .260 bounce off animals and drop to ground unexpanded at 301 yards....


Beyond 300, the 260 has similar trajectory to the 45/70 as well.
I think that the OP's question is subjective to the hunter. For me, I'd feel comfortable shooting at elk to 250 or 300 yards with the cartridge. I'd push it out to maybe 350 for deer.

What a minute, that's as far as I shoot at those animals with any caliber!
[quote=Mule Deer]Hey, I have seen 140's from the .260 bounce off animals and drop to ground unexpanded at 301 yards.... [/quote

not to knock our resident DEAN here, on the contrary, I have witnessed the 260 with a 100 grain Ballistic Tip, drop a deer at roughly 300 yds, several times..DRT..

and I witnessed it thru the Leupold scope on top of my 260 Ruger, with the scope set on 4 power.. even with an MV of 3350 fps, the round had light enough recoil that I didn't lose sight picture..

both times I did this, I had the luxury of a solid rest, off the hood of a pickup, and the deer were not aware that I had seen them as they were walking thru a thinned out forest, with just enough brush to think they were safe the first time

the second time it was in open country, with the deer just being cautious.. I had seen in an open area, while driving my 4 Runner, got out on the driver side, they were on the passenger side of vehicle..

pulled out the rifle from the case, got a solid rest, picked my target, and bang flop.

funny, the one deer I had to track that had a solid hit from a 260 was shot with a 100 grain partition, went thru both lungs and still made it a 100 yds thru the woods..and this was shot within a 100 yds or less.. and it was not a very big deer at all..small buck taken last day of the season, about 3 PM... it hung in the butchers shop a hair over 45lbs after having the head and cape taken off..

Yeah, I shot Bambi!
Originally Posted by Dan360

Beyond 300, the 260 has similar trajectory to the 45/70 as well.


That is too funny laugh
Extreme limit? Well, I dunno...Eskimos have been known to shoot polar bears with .222 Remingtons, .22 Hornets, and such. So if you step up to the relative cannon that the .260 is, I should think...Cape Buffalo??
Seafire,

I guess my post about 301 yards was just a little too subtly ironic.
bearbacker,

I once hunted with an Inuit who preferred the .22 Magnum rimfire for polar bears. He shot them in the heart, and said that after 15 minutes or so they just lay down and went to permanent sleep. He had a .30-30 but said it made too big a hole in the hide.
OMG. Then that .260 artillery piece must be good for...elephant, at least? LOL

Yeah, MD, I've been called a rabble-rouser. What can I say?

I immensely enjoyed your articles this month (January 2010)in the American Rifleman and American Hunter, by the way. Got a great chuckle from your remarks about the pushfeed in the Model 70. You made your point in a memorable fashion. Keep it up!
I'll try! Glad you liked 'em.
Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Seafire,

I guess my post about 301 yards was just a little too subtly ironic.



Ya think......... grin

Dober
I saw the comment as more ironicly subtle, than subtly ironic...
Really, which factory specs rifles with 1 in 9" ROTs won't shoot 130 grain bullets?

The only factory barrels that I have in 260 are Remingtons and Savages which all seem to shoot anything from the 95 grain VMax to the 140 grain Partition pretty well and a couple of them do exceptionally well, for factory barrels.

Jeff
Seafire, don't feel bad, my first deer w/338/06 was in the woods from a stand I never had been in before that dawn, at sun up shot a 55lb deer, around 40 yds thru the chest, it ran about 100 yds also, passing by my stand where I could see the silver dollar sized hole and blood pumping. The 200 BT sailed thru both lungs. Later a nice 8pt. at 200 dropped DRT and a very nice 6pt WT dropped in about 3 'death lunges' so perhaps those little deer are not big enough for the larger 'cone shape' energy dispersion? Who knows. I truly felt later I would have been better off had I taken my then 6mm TCU Carbine loaded w/85 SGK HPs where energy transmission would have been quicker in the short wound channel.

I had really thought I was shooting a doe about twice the size and distance or I would have passed on the deer, but odd things do happen afield, as again, never had hunted in that area nor stand and at early legal light, range estimation and body size was off.

As to ROT, I have a Sako 75 GW for my son, it has put 2 out of 3 into the SAME hole at 200 yds w/130 ABs. Twice the same day! And I do mean the Same hole, first and second shot both times, thanks to a 6.5-20x for testing. Federal brass did it (one group 308 stamp, other 7/08), RP would not duplicate.

Did I get lucky? I think not. The 75s have 9" ROT in 260 and mine shoots fine inc. 140 amax, bergers, RP CLs, and 142 SMKs that I tested FWIW.

Now I do have to temper that info, with my first quasi '260', a 6.5-308 Win that was a 23" 9 ROT, mistakenly bbl'd as I had ordered an 8t. That rifle came in just months prior to Rem 260 intro, but I compared blueprints on the round thanks to the Lonoke, AR plant folks, to my champer reamer spec and concluded I could use factory ammo. It worked/fired fine, no problems, but key holes and patterns resulted, no tight groups. I tried 140 PTs in that rifle also w/no success. That was a custom bbl that shot respectable groups using 100 Sierras, 129 SPs, and 100 NBTs.

If building a 6.5mm, IMHO an 8 is the way to go, some use 8.5s and if a longer bbl 260, 6.5 CM, or 6.5x47 L I can understand, as a 6.5x284 or 264 WM to keep pressures down. At the same time, I would not 'count out' a 9 ROT 260 to shoot well until tried. My experience varied. I would think perhaps the 130 Berger might prefer the 8 or 8.5t as the 140 NAB, but the 130 NABs again shot fine in my boy's 9 so you just have to try each rifle to see what they like.

I do seem to recall two M7s, one an 18.5" blue, the other a 20" SS, did not like anything heavier than a 129 SP, and both sported 9t.

Just wanted to pass on my results. Greg, if your 1885 was tested with 130s I wonder if it was ABs or Bergers? Some say they had a 9t, but I could have sworn long ago I read in Browning Literature/catalog they came in 10t and if printed, may have been a mis-print/typo, or perhaps my mind is failing, I don't know. One thing to consider on twist, there are many variables, inc. the 'advertised ROT' vs. the 'actual ROT' which sometimes varies. Likely not much, but perhaps enough to matter. I do agree that given a choice, I prefer an 8t everytime with both 6mm and 6.5mms, as I do a 9t w/7mms.
Oh, as to limits, just as with any other round, only ltd. to the choice of bullets.....and shot placement in most circumstances and standard rounds.

A good (or appropriate bullet for game i.e. a solid Barnes for Elephant and Rhino LOL) bullet w/shot placement will determine success, if one or both is not in play, failure may/can result....or at least dismal results.
Jeff,

I haven't seen it in every example of any particular factory gun, but I have seen it in some examples of all of them. In fact, that's why Federal ended up doing 120-grain Fusion and TSX loads instead of 130s- they couldn't get the accuracy they wanted in enough factory guns with 130s.
Originally Posted by GregR
Jeff,

I haven't seen it in every example of any particular factory gun, but I have seen it in some examples of all of them. In fact, that's why Federal ended up doing 120-grain Fusion and TSX loads instead of 130s- they couldn't get the accuracy they wanted in enough factory guns with 130s.


Seeing how most shooters likely see the 260 as a "deer" cartridge and the 120gr 6.5mm has a SD of .247, just a bit higher then a 130gr .277 cal and equal to a 165gr .30 it should do just fine. No one ever questions eiither bullet in the other calibers of this SD as being enough for deer.
I do think RP may a huge mistake limiting the 260 to a 9 twist, as it sometimes causing issues with some wts., and lastly, they IMHO should have launched the gun/ammo w/120 gr Corelokts given the primary use by most hunters - Deer hunting.

The 140s initially were apparently underloaded at around 2550, vs. the 2750 advertised/spec'd.

Greg, esp. if the 130 tested was a Barnes, I can imagine being a long monometal bullet, it acts as a much heavier bullet requiring faster RPMs to shoot well.

The 120 Barnes is bad medicine IMHO in the velocity range of a 260 and 6.5x55. No doubt it will give penetration etc. like a heavier lead core 6.5mm bullet, if not more.

Can't imagine much that Fed load 'TSX' cannot take in NA, with shot placement.
The 120 TSX worked beautifully for my kids on kudu and zebra, but I would still prefer to see a 130 for big stuff. I really miss the old 140 gr. Trophy Bonded Bear Claw load.
I'm shooting 140 grain Partitions in several 1 in 9" ROT Remington 260 and 6.5-284 barrels with MOA+/- accuracy. My 20" 7 MS parts gun shoots them into better than MOA groups, while my 24" 260 700 and 24" 6.5-284 7 do no worse then 1.5+/- MOA and the others fall somewhere in between. The 120 grain BTs and 129 grain SpirePoints and SSTs usually shoot the best groups, but no bullets in the 95 to 140 grain range shoots worse then 1.5+/- MOA in the 7 260s and 2 6.5-284s that I shoot on a regular basis.

Jeff
Greg, I can see the reason you want a heavier slug, Larger animals like them less wink I wonder if the TBCC was Disc. due to various twists/accuracy results in various brand factory rifles?

Be interesting to look when I get home at my Asquare manual to see if the 6.5/308 Asquare was Saami'd originally as an 8" ROT?

Jeff, I'd bet the 9" ROT 700/7s do better running the 140s at top speeds, but would expect them to get less consistent at lower speeds. I did not Chrony my loads w/PTs thru my 6.5/308 so it's possible they were not up to snuff. I recall burning up some AA powder at the time that may have been less than optimal. As I mentioned, the boy's Sako 9 shoots well, but I never had any luck w the loads I tried, in my Rem 7's. I have heard the 125 PT is often simply a better shooting bullet than 140 PTs in 6.5 but generalizations are flawed as an adage an old BR shooter told me is true, 'you never know till you try a specific bullet/powder combo'...in your particular rifle.

Many times there are trends. One would expect once you have a given velocity, with a known/checked twist rate, you can predict if a bullet is spinning well enough to expect to shoot. There should be 'sweet spots' in RPMS for various bullets.

Agreed that you can often tune the accuracy of a particular bullet/barrel combination by varying the velocity. You can often get good accuracy out of barrels that have too slow a ROT and a bullet that is too long for that too slow ROT by pushing the bullet at, or close to, the maximum safe pressures. This method seems to work in 140 grain in 1 in 9" ROT .264" bores and 120 grain in 1 in 10" ROT .257" bores.

I've never had much success with the 125 grain Partition in any .264" bore rifle. I don't know why, but the 120 grain BTs and 129 grain Hornadys will all shoot better groups with less effort than anything that I've tried with the 125 grain Partition.

Jeff
My own philosophy is that I see no reason for pushing a cartridge near its boundaries. After all, there are so many pawn shop '06s floating around that I have no reason to ask the .260 to try to be one.

That being said, as a deer and antelope gun, the .260 Rem has few rivals. I also know that it is plenty ample as a cow elk cartridge. Beyond that, I am grabbing a bigger gun because I can.
260 guy, hate to admit I never bought 120 NBTs, but did 100s as I got a STEAL on almost 2k of them years back when I had my 6.5-308 built. The 129s shot so well in it, and my '96 Mausers I never saw a reason to shoot the 120s or 125s. 120 CLs did a few deer in DRT, as they were cheap enough to beg me to try them. Accuracy was not stellar, but killing results were!

I merely compared the 125 to the 140 PT, but based on the experience I had w/129s on deer, I'd venture to say at 260/6.5 Swede speeds, there may be less difference than more, on how a 129 compares in wt. retention, penetration, and frontal diameter vs. the 125 PT. I'd not hesitate to punch an elk, blackie, or even Moose w/one.

Right now 130 ABs are doing so well, it's my 'go to bullet' for now. Later I may try the 140 versions, and when my Bartlein bbl coming gets chambered up, I can envision taking a deer w/Bergers 130gr as I hear they spell lights out also.

I like to experiment no doubt, but I as you Jeff found long ago the 129 is a hard bullet to beat for any 6.5, whether 8 or 9 ROT, and for most general Big Game. NEVER have shot a bad group in anything w/129s. That is referring to the SP, as there is a diff in the SST, I hear some say it's 'softer' and can imagine it might be, so I would simply use the old proven SP.
My Rem 700 SS CDL fluted barrel, 24 inches long, handles 140's just fine. Those were corelok's. I like to shoot 120 ballistic tips and 120 corelok's in the rifle.

The 260 Rem is a classic example how Remington always screws up launches of new cartridges. (or often does re 7mm mag). That little 260 Rem is what the 243 win was touted to be; a dual purpose varmint and big game cartridge. Had they promoted it as such, and provided the correct ammunition for the cartridge, and not stopped after a few years, their success selling it would have been much greater I suspect. They launched with the fat mags around the corner and freaked out in my opinion, bailed, and started introducing their Saums.
I don't own or have ever shot a 260 Remingtion. But I have and still hunt with a 6.5 x 55 all I can tell you is that while I would think long and hard about a 400 yard shot with any cartridge because I don't shoot at those ranges, since my home range is a lot shorter than that. That being said, Yea you put a good 120 to 160 bullet in the right spot like an elks heart or lungs and guess what you better have a real sharp knife and some meat bags. I have always looked at the 6.5 x 55 as being something of a pocket 270, And there are no flies on the 270 as a game getter. If I didn't have a 6.5 x 55 and wanted a 6.5 mm cartridge, I would buy a 260. And this if from a fellow that shot most all if his elk except 2 with either a 7mm Remington Mag or 338 Winchester Mag. Mostly with the 338 because I like the rifle. The other two that was with a 6.5 x 55 and some Norma 156 gr Loads from 21 years ago.
Aggie, agreed.....they (Rem) perhaps correlated their EGOS w/size and paper stats of cartridges, instead of looking deeper as those in the know do smile

Shot placement is a necessity regardless of power, etc. I don't advocate long range shooting for the masses, but realize when those who prepare and study ballistics well, having sufficient range time, they CAN be effective further than many hunters w/o that experience and knowledge. If in doubt......one should likely hold fire.

My furthest kill was a deer right at 400 yds, using a pipsqueak 6mm BR. I had practiced often to 415 yds and well knew where to hold w/my mil-dot scope, threaded a 105 amax thru both lungs broadside w/retained energy of just over 1k, and it was down in less than 25 yds.

I had 100% confidence when squeezing off that shot as I knew my rifle, and the range. I had virtually no wind, a calm animal walking slowly so conditions were good. A rock solid rest w/a heavy bbl Ruger #1 w/Kepplinger set trigger breaking at 8 ounces made it a chip shot to be honest. When all is right, shots can be made much further but bullets drop and drift ALOT as one gets on out there and I typically use a 400 yd limit for me, and usually kill at if not much less than half that distance.

When the conditions are poor i.e. bad shot angle, having surplus energy, etc. is not a bad thing if one is considering a shot. If one knows their rifle and cartridge limits and is confident all is usually well, but if confidence is lacking, one might better change what tools they use for the job. I believe a LACK OF CONFIDENCE can be detrimental to bullet placement just as excessive recoil as lack of shot cycle follow thru may occur.
It should do at least as well as any 6.5mm loaded with 160 gr. RN bullets. Elephants, T-Rex, whatever.

Edited to say, 'within 300 yards of course.'
© 24hourcampfire