Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Is the .260 Rem dead?

It sure seems to be. Just a couple of years back, it was not that difficult to find at least some decent factory ammo. Local shops even here in SC would stock several different brands and loads. Today, you'll be lucky to find a dusty old box of 140 grn Cor-lokts. Even the mail order houses that I relied on, seem to have dried up quite a bit.

It's a real shame, it was not marketed better. It's a damn fine round. I guess the 6.5 Creedmoor just sounds sexier...

The 6.5 was engineered better re twist, short magazine fit with the low drag bullets of current popular interest, and true accuracy oriented factory ammo. As an off the shelf performer it is sexier.

The 260 has always been a niche round, and will continue that way.
The Creedmoor seems to be making it to the mainstream consciousness.

If there'd been advertising glitz like that for the .260 for us to repeat, it'd be an "off the shelf performer" too.

Midway shows 13 ammo choices currently in stock for the 260.

Both because the Creedmoor is better designed for the reality of short-action magazines and long bullets, AND because Hornady and Ruger started out with the correct rifling twist for longer bullets, and produced very accurate (yet affordable) ammo and rifles. They did everything right that Remington missed with the .260, and followed up, instead of giving up on the .260 like Remington did relatively quickly after its introduction in 1997. Some of the factors that have mostly killed the .260 couldn't have been foreseen by Remington, but some could have, and it certainly could have used better (and longer) factory support.

Don't get me wrong. I've owned three .260's and have one right now, a special-run Tikka T3 from Whittaker Guns with a 1-8 twist. It's one of my favorite "modern" rifles, but my Ruger American 6.5 Creedmoor not only bypasses the cartridge-length problem but shoots even better!

Proof once again that Remington couldn't sell a bucket of water to a man whose pants were on fire.

If sales go down any more maybe they will just change the name to 6.5 Rem Express(that even looks better on paper) They did it with the 280 and 244.

+1 - the T3 with a 1:8" twist is a winner.

I'm hanging on to mine. In 30 years only the really cool people will have one, like owning a 6mm Remington today.


Plus, given current demand for it and the generally depressed firearms market overall I'd have to take half what I paid for it just to get rid of it...

The Tikka website shows 1:8 as the standard twist for the .260 in the T3x. Of course that magazine does present real problems when you try to load rounds over about 129 grains and even the 123 grain A-Max is over long by a few thousandths when seated to hit the lands. But with the Tikka you can use their WSM magazine and get another .07" of OAL. It's not much but it is enough to hit the lands and stay within mag confines using the aforementioned 123 and probably some other higher BC bullets in the 120-130 grain range.

It's certainly a handloader's cartridge. With the availability of ammo, the Creed is likely to establish a permanent and significant leg up on the .260Rem. Now I'm just waiting for Remington/Ruger/Winchester to produce a basic, plain-jane, factory Creed stainless sporter. Ruger did for a little while. I'm not needing a threaded, fluted, vented, hydro-dipped, cerakoted, Pep-Boys bling version.

I have long thought that Remington's launch of the 260 would be an interesting Harvard Business Review case study on how not to launch a new cartridge. I find it interesting that Remington chose to emphasize muzzle velocity speed when they loaded 100 and 120 grain bullets in the 6.5 Rem Mag, while choosing to emphasize who knows what when they chose to only offer a 140 grain load in the "standard" grade/price ammo in the 260. If, as some believe, the 260 had the potential to be a better dual purpose varmint and medium game cartridge than the 243, it seems as though Remington would have helped the 260 get traction if they had offered a wider range of bullet options. I don't claim any particular expertise in marketing, but I have to wonder if the 260 would have had more success if Remington had initially offered a 100 grain bullet at 3,200 fps and a 120 grain bullet at 3,000 fps instead of, or in addition to, the relatively slow 140 grain load that they chose to launch with. In addition to the handicap of limited factory ammo options, Remington never cataloged the 260 in three of their best selling CF hunting rifles, the 700 ADL, 700 BDL, and 7600, which seems like a clear signal of their lack of support/commitment.

I'd like to hear more about your take on those factors that have mostly killed the 260 and which couldn't have been foreseen by Remington. Other than the fairly recent interest in the longer VLD bullets, I can't remember anything that was happening circa 1997/1998 that shouldn't have been on the marketing team's launch checklist.

Savage is the only manufacturer currently selling low and medium priced light barreled sporters in 6.5 Creedmoor, the Axis and 10/11.

I think that a standard, not Predator, style RAR in 6.5 Creedmoor would sell a lot of units. Ruger has a limited run RAR with Cerakoted metal in their on-line catalog, but I have heard that they haven't made any yet because the wholesaler who ordered them is in financial difficulty. The story is that the wholesaler had fronted Gander Mountain several million dollars of inventory that they didn't get paid for when GM declared bankruptcy.

Ruger chambers it in the FTW, supposely due to military interest in the round. 1-8" twist.

The Hodgdon manual shows a little higher speeds on the top end over the CM, but nothing earth-shattering and those focused on long pointy bullets are better off with the trendy kid. Still plenty of room for the .260 in the hunting fields, especially with Partitions and other pingpong balls. Any .308-based round is a pretty safe nvestment due to the plentiful and cheap brass.

If I were looking for a hunting rifle, my choice between the two would be based on which was available in the rifle I liked best.

Pappy,

My Tikka .260 has the standard SAAMI throat and magazine length, and I can't even seat 140-grain Nosler AccuBonds out to the lands. Or at least I couldn't before modifying the magazine to 3". (I tried a long-action Tikka magazine and it wouldn't feed .260's reliably.)

Another factor in the general downfall of the .260 is the suck selection of factory ammo. Remington dropped most loads pretty shortly after introduction, and while the Remington website lists a couple of 120-grain Accutip loads, the 140-grain Core-Lokt is the only load generally found in stores. It shoots OK in my Tikka but doesn't come anywhere close to the listed 2750 fps muzzle velocity, averaging around 2550. Most Campfire members are rifle loonies and therefore handloaders, but average hunters aren't, and for any cartridge to be popular with them there needs to be decent, affordable ammo in stores.

In contrast, Hornady has kept a good variety of 6.5 Creedmoor loads out there from the get-go, and continued to add to their list, especially with lower priced but accurate hunting loads.

Even in the late 1990's Remington should have had their finger on the pulse of shooters enough to foresee the increasing popularity of high-BC bullets. In fact the .260 first became popular among silhouette shooters, which should have provided a clue.

I thought only really cool people bought .260's in the first place! 🆒😎

Of course a guy with two dozen of them might feel a need to support an orphan just to justify that investment.

I'm feeling the .260 love! I could never leave my .260's for a Creedmoor! It's just wrong!

Far be it from me to defend Remington, on pretty much anything. They've screwed the pooch on a bunch of good stuff, even before the fatal acquisition by the Freedom Group. It amazes me that they've managed to keep the doors open. When I start to itch all over for something, I never even consider them anymore.

Hornady, on the other hand, continues to turn out good stuff, and good ideas. Their support for semi-obsolete cartridges with brass and ammo does us all a service. After a couple of missteps, I've settled on their brass for my .243s finding it consistent in quality and weight over several lots. (I've got so much .308 and .270 brass around, mostly older Winchester, I doubt I'll ever need any more of either). I remember your initial (I think) article on the 6.5 and was impressed by good performance of the ammo, and also the fact that they put the load data on the box; a great idea. From stuff I've read here, that initial quality seems to be holding up, and I just checked and found they offer 11 loads, which is amazing.

Might have to rethink my notions about short 6.5s. Anyway, the selection of available .260s is so slim, it's hardly a factor.

How did the silhouette shooters deal with the .260's "issues", just single-loading?